Stewart Mandel is not a Boliever

[zoogs]

Look, I'm not happy with where we're at in the CFB pecking order (comments about "standards" aside). I want Nebraska to win, badly. But... I also recognize that it's not a simple black and white situation. I thought Bo should have been let go after the Iowa debacle, but I understand why he wasn't. That's my point.

 

Right back at ya with an agree 100%

[TheSker]

The word standards gets tossed around quite a bit on here. It's a rather vague word, which of course allows plenty of debate.....errr banter. Every coach has pressure every year. That's the nature of college football as the top revenue producer. Coaches like Pelini have an agent putting out feelers behind the scene all the time, and Eichorst has knowledge of what the market condition is for replacing a head coach at Nebraska.

[carlfense]

Look, I'm not happy with where we're at in the CFB pecking order (comments about "standards" aside). I want Nebraska to win, badly. But... I also recognize that it's not a simple black and white situation. I thought Bo should have been let go after the Iowa debacle, but I understand why he wasn't. That's my point.

+1

[NUpolo8]

Look, I'm not happy with where we're at in the CFB pecking order (comments about "standards" aside). I want Nebraska to win, badly. But... I also recognize that it's not a simple black and white situation. I thought Bo should have been let go after the Iowa debacle, but I understand why he wasn't. That's my point.

 

 

Good post.

[kchusker_chris]

you think anyone is calling for his head if he won a bcs game, but then goes 7-6 the next season? i do not think so.

 

the issue is not the floor, it is the ceiling.

Yes. Brady Hoke.

but...but...i thought only Nebraska fans had high standards.

[I am I]

Just will leave this here when the #9wins bugle sounds...

 

Alabama v. BCS opponents over past 6 years: 56-8

 

Oregon v. BCS opponents over the past 6 years: 57-10

 

Nebraska v. BCS opponents over the past 6 years: 39-24

 

Not all 9 win seasons are created equal.

 

Maybe this is beating this thread to death, but the important thing about the 9 win milestone(s) is not the company we share it with, it's the company who didn't make it. Both you and Mandel make the same argument: the statistics lack meaning because the company we share it with is superior to Bo/DONU. There is no doubt about this - nobody is comparing Bo to Osborne and Switzer at this point, and no one is saying DONU has been as successful as Oregon and Alabama over the last few years.

 

The reason why the number(s) are impressive are because of who hasn't achieved it:

 

Guys like Nick Saban, Pete Carroll, Urban Meyer, and Bob Stoops (to name a few) didn't win 9 games each of their first six years as college coaches. These guys are contemporaries of Bo and any program would be happy to have them at the helm - yet Pelini has had more sustained success than any of them at this point in his career. Anytime as a coach you can say that you've done something that none of these guys have done, it's pretty compelling. This is just a fact.

 

Programs like LSU, Georgia, Ohio St., Michigan, Wisconsin, Oklahoma, UCLA, Florida, Stanford, USC, Florida St, and Auburn haven't had the sustained success in terms of winning 9 games as we have over the past few years, despite playing comparable schedules. Just because Oregon and Alabama did it better than us doesn't invalidate the fact that great programs like these have had down years while we've been able to avoid them.

 

I'm not saying I don't want Bo's track record to improve (who doesn't). The point is that these statistics are compelling not because of who else has done them - they're compelling because of who hasn't.

 

Nupolo8 doesnt

[It'sNotAFakeID]

Yes. Brady Hoke.

you think those two situations are analogous in every meaningful way?

In any meaningful way, yes.

bo has had 6 years; brady has had 3. bo has done well, but we may have seen his ceiling; brady has done great, but they may not have seen his floor (they may have though). bo only hires baby coordinators; hoke made a necessary change and filled a need with an experienced oc. neither coach has been fired, so there is that similarity.

 

if bo won a bcs game (or, now, got us to the playoffs) or won a conf. champ., he would have quite a bit of slack.

 

Hoke had experienced coordinators last year, while Bo did not. Who won more games again?

[sd'sker]

Hoke had experienced coordinators last year, while Bo did not. Who won more games again?

not sure what your argument is.

[Count 'Bility]

Brady's also had some pretty awesome recruiting classes, giving him absolutely ZERO excuses. One more year like the last two, and hell, maybe even smidgin better, and his ass will be sent steppin.

 

The keeping of Bo after the Iowa debacle is just proof that Brady's seat is a hell of a lot hotter than Bo's. Brady's feeling a lot more pressure now than Bo is, you can bet on it.

[AFhusker]

I always get a bit sick to my stomach when people try to compare TO's first five or six years to Bo's. TO inherited one of the best teams and programs in the country. We were just one year removed from winning back to back titles. Bo inherited a dumpster fire. Sure, there was some talent inherited by Bo. However, there was also a loser attitude inherited as well. I have no problems with people comparing Bo's first few years to Bob Stoops as they both inherited similar situations. Bo did not inherit they keys to a ferrari like TO did. He inherited the keys to a ford pinto.

 

Then you should direct your frustration at Frank for being in the same situation that TO was and turing this program into a pinto.

[AFhusker]

Brady's also had some pretty awesome recruiting classes, giving him absolutely ZERO excuses. One more year like the last two, and hell, maybe even smidgin better, and his ass will be sent steppin.

 

The keeping of Bo after the Iowa debacle is just proof that Brady's seat is a hell of a lot hotter than Bo's. Brady's feeling a lot more pressure now than Bo is, you can bet on it.

 

As long as Tom still has control of the $$$$, then you are correct. I expect Hoke to be gone in a couple of years at most because they don't have a QB and won't win at the level needed to keep his job.

[Notre Dame Joe]

Hoke is a lot more likely to get stuck in 10 win purgatory than Bo. Problem is the media machine will spin that as Hoke always being on the verge of becoming great whereas it will be another ho hum year in Lincoln.

 

The E-W split of your conference highlights that.

[sd'sker]

The E-W split of your conference highlights that.

i think that is kind of a big deal. those teams have to produce at a lot higher level to have a chance at indy. we will have to beat one, maybe two, teams.

[It'sNotAFakeID]

Hoke had experienced coordinators last year, while Bo did not. Who won more games again?

not sure what your argument is.

 

I'm saying that experienced coordinators don't always equate to success. Everybody seems to think that all we need to do is hired experienced coordinators, and then #BOOM, we'll be awesome. It's wrong. Borges was proven, Mattison was proven. Michigan went 7-6. Papuchis isn't experienced, Beck isn't experienced. Nebraska won 9 games.

 

There's far more than experience which can make up a good coaching staff.

[Count 'Bility]

2 years ago so many ranted and raved about how Bo should/shouldve hired experienced coordinators, and the example that was after was Michigan/Hoke and his two goons. Well, all Bo and his ragtag bunch has done is coach circles around that "experienced" bunch since, and this past year, did it in their house, with a younger team, ravaged by injuries, and arguably much less talente (according to the almighty and sacred recruiting rankings of years prior). Cant have it both ways.