sd'sker Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 the point of this discussion, for me anyways, is that bo is not held accountable to the standard he set himself, which is to win championships. and he is not because everyone falls back on the 9 wins and mostly overlook the 4 losses. people are trying to re-imagine the past to cut bo some slack and change our perspective to give bo more credit. fact is, we have seen what he can put on the field with elite talent. he is the one who has created this angst because we know, we can see, that his teams and his staff are underperforming. that is the issue. 9 wins is a smokescreen hiding the reality of the situation. 9 wins is nice, but 9 wins alone proves nothing. we have all watched the past 4 seasons now and know that we should have been doing better. heck, i would be happier with 9 wins if it meant we overperformed and played some quality football, but just lost to some quality opponents. but we are not. we are losing to teams we have more talent than and getting embarrassed by any team in the top 20. frankly, 2009 was the last season that gave me hope. since then, the seasons have been disappointing and now hope is running dry. but, hey, 9 wins. 5 Quote Link to comment
NUpolo8 Posted January 17, 2014 Author Share Posted January 17, 2014 the point of this discussion, for me anyways, is that bo is not held accountable to the standard he set himself, which is to win championships. and he is not because everyone falls back on the 9 wins and mostly overlook the 4 losses. people are trying to re-imagine the past to cut bo some slack and change our perspective to give bo more credit. fact is, we have seen what he can put on the field with elite talent. he is the one who has created this angst because we know, we can see, that his teams and his staff are underperforming. that is the issue. 9 wins is a smokescreen hiding the reality of the situation. 9 wins is nice, but 9 wins alone proves nothing. we have all watched the past 4 seasons now and know that we should have been doing better. heck, i would be happier with 9 wins if it meant we overperformed and played some quality football, but just lost to some quality opponents. but we are not. we are losing to teams we have more talent than and getting embarrassed by any team in the top 20. frankly, 2009 was the last season that gave me hope. since then, the seasons have been disappointing and now hope is running dry. but, hey, 9 wins. I'm curious if the other programs that share this distinction (Bama, Oregon and ?????) use it as some sort of benchmark. I'm guessing not, as there are other, tangible things like BCS bowl appearances/wins, and championships to point to. It's only used at Nebraska it's the only method of comparison to those programs where Nebraska looks to be comparable. Quote Link to comment
NUinID Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 Just to be clear... Just because I am not happy with the current progress, or lack thereof, doesn't necessarily mean I want a major change or Bo's head on a platter. I just want people, Bo included, to realize and question how we are doing everything. Why do the turnovers continue to plague us, why can't we be halfway decent on ST, why do tight games turn into blowout losses more times than not, why are we 5th-7th in B1G recruiting year in, year out, why do we have one of the least experienced staffs in America, what is our identity??? I want little things that are holding us back to be changed. We aren't terribly far from relevant, we proved that against Texas, Oklahoma, etc...BUT things need to be explored and changed, processes examined, challenged and changed! The bolded section to me is a ridiculous statement. Your working from assumption that BP or his assistants think nothing should change in their program. Which is just silly. Self evaluation goes on all the time. In season and especially out of season things are evaluated and steps are taken to make changes. Just because they aren't coming out and telling you what they are trying to do to get better doesn't mean they aren't trying. Most of the statements in that paragraph aren't really correct. The only one of our ST that was bad last year was Punt return, not all of them. Punting was average and Kick off and kick return were actually above average. NU more times than not close games don't turn into blowout losses, check your scores and facts. Do blowout loses stand out, yes but most of our close games do not turn into blow out loses. We do not have the least experienced staff in the nation and having experienced staff members is not guarantee of success (see Michigan). I also believe our recruiting class was rated 3rd in conference the last 2 years. Quote Link to comment
cornhuskers4ever Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 I always remember that it took Tom Osborne 22 years to win the National Championship. It doesn't matter if Nebraska wins 9, 10, or wins them all. What matters is winning the right way. In the deed the glory. Quote Link to comment
Junior Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 I always remember that it took Tom Osborne 22 years to win the National Championship. It doesn't matter if Nebraska wins 9, 10, or wins them all. What matters is winning the right way. In the deed the glory. And that's great... but it also didn't take Osborne 6 years to win a conference championship. So, it isn't an apples to apples comparison. Quote Link to comment
sd'sker Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 I always remember that it took Tom Osborne 22 years to win the National Championship. It doesn't matter if Nebraska wins 9, 10, or wins them all. What matters is winning the right way. In the deed the glory. And that's great... but it also didn't take Osborne 6 years to win a conference championship. So, it isn't an apples to apples comparison. i guess the reason people incessantly bring up TO is because since he won an mnc, it is inevitable for bo to win one someday for some reason. Quote Link to comment
StPaulHusker Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 I always remember that it took Tom Osborne 22 years to win the National Championship. It doesn't matter if Nebraska wins 9, 10, or wins them all. What matters is winning the right way. In the deed the glory. And that's great... but it also didn't take Osborne 6 years to win a conference championship. So, it isn't an apples to apples comparison. i guess the reason people incessantly bring up TO is because since he won an mnc, it is inevitable for bo to win one someday for some reason. I am not sure about that. No one knew if he was going to win one. The point was the AD's and most of the fan base stuck with him for a while without winning one. Quote Link to comment
JTrain Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 I wasn't around for TO's first six. I don't deny that there was a good deal of dissatisfaction among the fans. But when I look at the final rankings (finished top 10 five of the six years, and 12th the other year) it sure seems like it is not equal (zero top 10 finishes in Bo's first six). 1 Quote Link to comment
Guy Chamberlin Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 If we only win 9 wins forever, that is bad. The fact we have had 9+ wins the last 6 years shows a consistent base to build off of considering where we were before. Absolutely...and making a jump to 13 or 14-0 is easier from 9 wins per season than it is from only having 3-5 wins per season. Or not. As per the Auburn example. Which is admittedly rare. But if you could tough out a 3 - 9 rebuilding and coach-removing season, put together a season of miracle finishes and be playing for the national championship the next season, it would be pretty damn fun. You'd also be only two years removed from a National Championship and nine years removed from another unbeaten season. To put it another way, if you went swaggering into an Auburn fan site brandishing Nebraska's string of 9+ win seasons, absolutely no one would be jealous of you. Nor should they be. Quote Link to comment
The Dude Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 Can't we just bump all these threads from previous years? Ain't sh#t changin' as long as Bo's runnin' the show. 2 Quote Link to comment
Junior Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 I always remember that it took Tom Osborne 22 years to win the National Championship. It doesn't matter if Nebraska wins 9, 10, or wins them all. What matters is winning the right way. In the deed the glory. And that's great... but it also didn't take Osborne 6 years to win a conference championship. So, it isn't an apples to apples comparison. i guess the reason people incessantly bring up TO is because since he won an mnc, it is inevitable for bo to win one someday for some reason. I am not sure about that. No one knew if he was going to win one. The point was the AD's and most of the fan base stuck with him for a while without winning one. But would they have stuck with him if he hadn't won those conference titles? Quote Link to comment
StPaulHusker Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 I wasn't around for TO's first six. I don't deny that there was a good deal of dissatisfaction among the fans. But when I look at the final rankings (finished top 10 five of the six years, and 12th the other year) it sure seems like it is not equal (zero top 10 finishes in Bo's first six). There was discussion somewhere on here about the Top 10 finishes and it was basically that the "historic" programs seemed to get favorable rankings based on name. Not saying its right or wrong. Quote Link to comment
StPaulHusker Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 I always remember that it took Tom Osborne 22 years to win the National Championship. It doesn't matter if Nebraska wins 9, 10, or wins them all. What matters is winning the right way. In the deed the glory. And that's great... but it also didn't take Osborne 6 years to win a conference championship. So, it isn't an apples to apples comparison. i guess the reason people incessantly bring up TO is because since he won an mnc, it is inevitable for bo to win one someday for some reason. I am not sure about that. No one knew if he was going to win one. The point was the AD's and most of the fan base stuck with him for a while without winning one. But would they have stuck with him if he hadn't won those conference titles? The beauty is we didn't have to find out. Quote Link to comment
Guy Chamberlin Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 The OP, the thread title and the subsequent discussion are anything but "childish." We've had the discussion before, and by "before" I mean near constantly, but using the gauge of how Nebraska fares against other 9+ win teams is a pretty honest and disciplined way of getting at the lack of enthusiasm some fans feel regarding Bo Pelini's consistency. I don't want to feel that way. But I do. As an adult. It's the off-season. Is there something you'd prefer us to talk about, Knapp? Quote Link to comment
Count 'Bility Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 A win is a win. "Well we only beat so and so, and this and that beat us by..........." bullsh#t. A win's a win. Ask Auburn, since we seem so consumed with wanting to trade places with them. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.