Guy Chamberlin Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 Im saying what happened 2 times in 307 games is inconsequential A true abberation- like getting hit by lightning- just totally out of character Not like Bo where it was common place and often times to teams that werent that great- not National Title contenders like TOs Well technically if you take Tom Osborne's first 7 seasons -- the number of seasons in the Pelini sample and four more than Callahan: 1973 Tied unranked Oklahoma State Lost to #12 Missouri Lost to #3 Oklahoma. Nebraska never snapped the ball in OU territory. (that was a great OU team) 1974 Lost to unranked Wisconsin Lost to unranked Missouri Lost to #1 Oklahoma 28 - 14. 1975 Lost to OU 35 - 10. Nebraska was ranked #2 and OU #7. NU came out jittery and gave up six turnovers Lost to ASU in the Fiesta Bowl on another turnover. NU ranked one spot ahead of ASU. 1976 Tied unranked LSU Lost to #17 Missouri Lost to unranked Iowa State Lost to #8 Oklahoma (but it was close) Won the Bluebonnett Bowl 1977 Lost to unranked Washington State, four fumbles including 3 inside the WSU 10 Beat #4 Alabama the next week. That was pretty nice. Lost to unranked Iowa State Lost to #3 Oklahoma 38 - 7. Another pattern of turnovers and penalties in a big game meltdown. Won the Liberty Bowl. 1978 Lost 20 - 3 to #1 Alabama Beat Oklahoma! Lost to unranked Missouri Lost to Oklahoma 1979 Lost to Oklahoma, ranked below us Lost to Houston, ranked below us (That was a promising season, but losing the last two games of promising seasons was wearing thin.) It got better for a few seasons. Then it got worse. Then it got incredibly great. 25 years into it and Tom Osborne had a legendary career. But there's no need to pretend that Tom Osborne only lost to better teams and never got out-coached. 1 Quote Link to comment
Enhance Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 I guess the end result is it happened once every 153 games So when it did happen, you knew it was a complete aberration- like when someone getting hit by lightning- not common place like Bos teams Under TO I never thought to myself- well it looks like we lose this one by 30+ With Bo- all the meltdowns his teams had- I felt that way often- Here we go again are we going to get blown out yet again? You just never knew There's just very little confidence associated with being a Husker fan right now. Sometimes they'd rally or sometimes they'd make mistake after mistake as it snowballed into an embarrassing loss. I feel like with TO you knew what you were going to get. And if the team lost, it was generally because the opponent was the better team that day. I often felt other teams didn't beat Nebraska under Pelini - Nebraska beat Nebraska. Now, I personally put a bit more weight on some of those TO losses than you do. Losing by 24 points is bad, though not as bad as 31 or more. The calibers of opponents were vastly different as were countless other variables, but TO definitely had more than two bad losses in his career as Nebraska's head coach IMHO. Quote Link to comment
jmfb Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 Im saying what happened 2 times in 307 games is inconsequential A true abberation- like getting hit by lightning- just totally out of character Not like Bo where it was common place and often times to teams that werent that great- not National Title contenders like TOs Well technically if you take Tom Osborne's first 7 seasons -- the number of seasons in the Pelini sample and four more than Callahan: 1973 Tied unranked Oklahoma State Lost to #12 Missouri Lost to #3 Oklahoma. Nebraska never snapped the ball in OU territory. (that was a great OU team) Finished #7 in the Nation Also beat #15 Kansas Beat #8 Texas in Cotton Bowl 1974 Lost to unranked Wisconsin Lost to unranked Missouri Lost to #1 Oklahoma 28 - 14. Finished #8/9 Beat #15 Florida in Sugar Bowl 1975 Lost to OU 35 - 10. Nebraska was ranked #2 and OU #7. NU came out jittery and gave up six turnovers Lost to ASU in the Fiesta Bowl on another turnover. NU ranked one spot ahead of ASU. Lost to #1 Oklahoma Beat OSU- the Fiesta Bowl Winner Finished #8/9 1976 Tied unranked LSU Lost to #17 Missouri Lost to unranked Iowa State Lost to #8 Oklahoma (but it was close) Won the Bluebonnett Bowl Iowa State ended up ranked #19 Beat #14 OSU NU ended up ranked #7/9 1977 Lost to unranked Washington State, four fumbles including 3 inside the WSU 10 Beat #4 Alabama the next week. That was pretty nice. Lost to unranked Iowa State Lost to #3 Oklahoma 38 - 7. Another pattern of turnovers and penalties in a big game meltdown. Won the Liberty Bowl. Ended up ranked 10/12m yet another top 10 ranking by TO Beat #2 Alabama- loudest NU game Ive ever attended 1978 Lost 20 - 3 to #1 Alabama Beat Oklahoma! Lost to unranked Missouri Lost to Oklahoma Lost to #14/15 Missouri Was in National Title Hunt until last conference game Finished #8- another top 10 finish 1979 Lost to Oklahoma, ranked below us Lost to Houston, ranked below us (That was a promising season, but losing the last two games of promising seasons was wearing thin.) Lost to #3 OU by 17-14 late Sooner Magic Lost to #5 Houston on TD in the last 12 seconds Beat #20 Missouri NU ended up #7/9- another top 10 finish NU was 2 last second plays away from another undefeated season In the National Title Hunt until last conference game It got better for a few seasons. Then it got worse. Then it got incredibly great. 25 years into it and Tom Osborne had a legendary career. But there's no need to pretend that Tom Osborne only lost to better teams and never got out-coached. You cite these seasons and games, but not the whole story Yet NU in those seasons beat some very good teams and lost to some very good teams NU ended up being ranked in the top 10 even in those "bad" seasons- something Pelini or Callahan couldnt do in their very best seasons Im very satisfied with finishing in the top 10 every year, beating ranked teams every year and being mentioned or competing for National titles- even in "down" years Something Pelini or Callahan werent able to do TOs list of "failures" within the context of coaching 307 games is minsiscule- especially when compared to the failures of a Pelini or Callahan Pelini or Callahans very best seasons- might compare is you really stretched it- maybe to the very worst of Osbornes 25 years- think about that When you coach long enough- youre going to have one of those years where everything goes against you- a true abberation- not a pattern Match NUs recruiting rankings in those years against the teams above them in the polls, still was able to compete and be a top 10 team. NU was still in the conversation- relevant. We arent now Im guessing Pelini/Callahan would love to have any one of TOs worst seasons and top 10 rankings 2 Quote Link to comment
Guy Chamberlin Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 Im saying what happened 2 times in 307 games is inconsequential A true abberation- like getting hit by lightning- just totally out of character Not like Bo where it was common place and often times to teams that werent that great- not National Title contenders like TOs Well technically if you take Tom Osborne's first 7 seasons -- the number of seasons in the Pelini sample and four more than Callahan: 1973 Tied unranked Oklahoma State Lost to #12 Missouri Lost to #3 Oklahoma. Nebraska never snapped the ball in OU territory. (that was a great OU team) Finished #7 in the Nation Also beat #15 Kansas Beat #8 Texas in Cotton Bowl 1974 Lost to unranked Wisconsin Lost to unranked Missouri Lost to #1 Oklahoma 28 - 14. Finished #8/9 Beat #15 Florida in Sugar Bowl 1975 Lost to OU 35 - 10. Nebraska was ranked #2 and OU #7. NU came out jittery and gave up six turnovers Lost to ASU in the Fiesta Bowl on another turnover. NU ranked one spot ahead of ASU. Lost to #1 Oklahoma Beat OSU- the Fiesta Bowl Winner Finished #8/9 1976 Tied unranked LSU Lost to #17 Missouri Lost to unranked Iowa State Lost to #8 Oklahoma (but it was close) Won the Bluebonnett Bowl Iowa State ended up ranked #19 Beat #14 OSU NU ended up ranked #7/9 1977 Lost to unranked Washington State, four fumbles including 3 inside the WSU 10 Beat #4 Alabama the next week. That was pretty nice. Lost to unranked Iowa State Lost to #3 Oklahoma 38 - 7. Another pattern of turnovers and penalties in a big game meltdown. Won the Liberty Bowl. Ended up ranked 10/12m yet another top 10 ranking by TO Beat #2 Alabama- loudest NU game Ive ever attended 1978 Lost 20 - 3 to #1 Alabama Beat Oklahoma! Lost to unranked Missouri Lost to Oklahoma Lost to #14/15 Missouri Was in National Title Hunt until last conference game Finished #8- another top 10 finish 1979 Lost to Oklahoma, ranked below us Lost to Houston, ranked below us (That was a promising season, but losing the last two games of promising seasons was wearing thin.) Lost to #3 OU by 17-14 late Sooner Magic Lost to #5 Houston on TD in the last 12 seconds Beat #20 Missouri NU ended up #7/9- another top 10 finish NU was 2 last second plays away from another undefeated season In the National Title Hunt until last conference game It got better for a few seasons. Then it got worse. Then it got incredibly great. 25 years into it and Tom Osborne had a legendary career. But there's no need to pretend that Tom Osborne only lost to better teams and never got out-coached. You cite these seasons and games, but not the whole story Yet NU in those seasons beat some very good teams and lost to some very good teams NU ended up being ranked in the top 10 even in those "bad" seasons- something Pelini or Callahan couldnt do in their very best seasons Im very satisfied with finishing in the top 10 every year, beating ranked teams every year and being mentioned or competing for National titles- even in "down" years Something Pelini or Callahan werent able to do TOs list of "failures" within the context of coaching 307 games is minsiscule- especially when compared to the failures of a Pelini or Callahan Pelini or Callahans very best seasons- might compare is you really stretched it- maybe to the very worst of Osbornes 25 years- think about that When you coach long enough- youre going to have one of those years where everything goes against you- a true abberation- not a pattern Match NUs recruiting rankings in those years against the teams above them in the polls, still was able to compete and be a top 10 team. NU was still in the conversation- relevant. We arent now Im guessing Pelini/Callahan would love to have any one of TOs worst seasons and top 10 rankings Good Lord, JMFB. Let me say it one more time: The Tom Osborne years were far superior to the Pelini/Callahan years. Only an idiot would claim otherwise. No comparison on the whole. But the claim that Tom Osborne only lost to great teams, never suffered clunkers, and did not have a reputation for big game meltdowns is simply not true. You don't seem like a whippersnapper yourself. But we should remind some of our younger viewers that the story of Tom Osborne was vastly enhanced by his last five seasons. The first 20 seasons had plenty of triumphs along with tons of second-guessing from the fanbase. Back then, a 9 - 3 season might still get you a Top 10 finish, but it did not stop Husker fans from doubting Tom Osborne the way they did Beck and Pelini. 1 Quote Link to comment
jmfb Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 I think most fans today would be thrilled with consistent top 10 finishes AND being mentioned in the National Title hunt even in "down years" In the years TO lost- he also beat ranked teams/won Bowl games AND was ranked in the Top 10. Most of us would be thrilled with those results. I for one knew it was just a matter of time before TO got his National Titles. The magic/freaky bad luck like the 79 season, Sooner Magic, Penn State bad calls, Florida State miracle/bad calls was eventually going to run out and NU was going to win it all, just a matter of time. Knocking on the door too many times to NOT eventually being able to claim a National Title. The sample size for TO was 307 games- the sample size for Pelini was 94- LOTS more chances to have an abberation in 307 and even then it was tiny compared to others. Have to have something to compare it to. Of course not perfect record, no one wins 100% of your games. There are millions of lightning strikes a day, but only a tiny handful ever hit anyone. Just like Osbornes "bad years or bad gaames" were tiny enough when you consider what average means- a Pelini or Callahans records. Top 10 is Top 10 doesnt matter how it was done then and now you are one of the Top 10 teams in DI football or you arent TO never got 50,60 70 points dropped on him by 4-6 loss teams or embarrassed himself in front of the fanbase- that is what got Pelini/Callahan booted. Beat some ranked teams, lose to good competition from time to time- not getting blown out, blow out weaker teams, be in the hunt, be relevant and dont embarrass the University and you get to keep the job. TO did that, others didnt. Quoting a season as an example of a failure when the team lost 2 games to top 5 opponents by less than a TD in the last seconds of the game- being 2 plays from an undefeated season- ISNT a bad season. Its a very good one- one most fans were very proud of. I for one LIKE being in the National hunt late, even if we lose. Osborne was never doubted by the majority of fans like Beck and Pelini- you are making a comparison there Were there some loud mouths who knew very little about the game who made some noise? Sure, very small- including my college roommate who never played the game, never got the game and knew just enough about NU football to carry on a conversation- went to a handful of games and was very vocal. The vast majority of the long time season ticket holders supported and appreciated TO. During that time the people I knew who really understood the game and College football were behind TO 100%. I dont think that was the case with BP or BC Quote Link to comment
NUinID Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 I think most fans today would be thrilled with consistent top 10 finishes AND being mentioned in the National Title hunt even in "down years" In the years TO lost- he also beat ranked teams/won Bowl games AND was ranked in the Top 10. Most of us would be thrilled with those results. I for one knew it was just a matter of time before TO got his National Titles. The sample size for TO was 307 games- the sample size for Pelini was 94- LOTS more chances to have an abberation in 307 and even then it was tiny compared to others. Have to have something to compare it to. Of course not perfect record, no one wins 100% of your games. There are millions of lightning strikes a day, but only a tiny handful ever hit anyone. Just like Osbornes "bad years or bad gaames" were tiny enough when you consider what average means- a Pelini or Callahans records. Top 10 is Top 10 doesnt matter how it was done then and now you are one of the Top 10 teams in DI football or you arent TO never got 50,60 70 points dropped on him by 4-6 loss teams or embarrassed himself in front of the fanbase- that is what got Pelini/Callahan booted. Beat some ranked teams, lose to good competition from time to time- not getting blown out, blow out weaker teams, be in the hunt, be relevant and dont embarrass the University and you get to keep the job. TO did that, others didnt. Quoting a season as an example of a failure when the team lost 2 games to top 5 opponents by less than a TD in the last seconds of the game- being 2 plays from an undefeated season- ISNT a bad season. Its a very good one- one most fans were very proud of. I for one LIKE being in the National hunt late, even if we lose. Osborne was never doubted by the majority of fans like Beck and Pelini- you are making a comparison there jmfb you seem to be arguing to try and get Guy, myself and whoever else to believe something that I don't think there is an argument about. TO record is not in dispute. Nor, is the fact that he had way fewer bad games where his teams got outclassed or manhandled or beaten by a certain number of points. It is not about statistics or a statistical analysis of TO vs. BP vs. BC. I know you are very fond of the stat part of the game you bring them up a lot. The whole argument was about someone saying that TO never got manhandled by teams. Which is not true. Yes statistically we would say that it was way less than BP or BC. I would even say significantly less. But he did lose some games by a lot of points and was outclassed in some games. That is the point. 3 Quote Link to comment
jmfb Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 I think most fans today would be thrilled with consistent top 10 finishes AND being mentioned in the National Title hunt even in "down years" In the years TO lost- he also beat ranked teams/won Bowl games AND was ranked in the Top 10. Most of us would be thrilled with those results. I for one knew it was just a matter of time before TO got his National Titles. The sample size for TO was 307 games- the sample size for Pelini was 94- LOTS more chances to have an abberation in 307 and even then it was tiny compared to others. Have to have something to compare it to. Of course not perfect record, no one wins 100% of your games. There are millions of lightning strikes a day, but only a tiny handful ever hit anyone. Just like Osbornes "bad years or bad gaames" were tiny enough when you consider what average means- a Pelini or Callahans records. Top 10 is Top 10 doesnt matter how it was done then and now you are one of the Top 10 teams in DI football or you arent TO never got 50,60 70 points dropped on him by 4-6 loss teams or embarrassed himself in front of the fanbase- that is what got Pelini/Callahan booted. Beat some ranked teams, lose to good competition from time to time- not getting blown out, blow out weaker teams, be in the hunt, be relevant and dont embarrass the University and you get to keep the job. TO did that, others didnt. Quoting a season as an example of a failure when the team lost 2 games to top 5 opponents by less than a TD in the last seconds of the game- being 2 plays from an undefeated season- ISNT a bad season. Its a very good one- one most fans were very proud of. I for one LIKE being in the National hunt late, even if we lose. Osborne was never doubted by the majority of fans like Beck and Pelini- you are making a comparison there jmfb you seem to be arguing to try and get Guy, myself and whoever else to believe something that I don't think there is an argument about. TO record is not in dispute. Nor, is the fact that he had way fewer bad games where his teams got outclassed or manhandled or beaten by a certain number of points. It is not about statistics or a statistical analysis of TO vs. BP vs. BC. I know you are very fond of the stat part of the game you bring them up a lot. The whole argument was about someone saying that TO never got manhandled by teams. Which is not true. Yes statistically we would say that it was way less than BP or BC. I would even say significantly less. But he did lose some games by a lot of points and was outclassed in some games. That is the point. My point is out of 307 games, the number is so tiny- it is nearly insignificant, not important, a true aberration when put in context to all the great stuff happening over the long haul and even within those same "down" seasons. The greatest coaches of all time- didnt win 100% of their games and out of 307, one could expect a small insignificant number of not so great games The BP apologists like to bring up TOs "bad" seasons to make themselves feel better- when put into context, no comparison at all. To think TO was disliked by a majority of fans, like some would lead us to believe- was never the case at any time during his tenure. Quote Link to comment
Guy Chamberlin Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 Our expectation level has dropped considerably. Absolutely. It worked against Osborne that he inherited a team that was #1/#1/#4 over the previous three seasons. It worked in Pelini's favor that Nebraska totally dropped off the map in 2007. Of course we would be happy with one of Osborne's 10 - 2 seasons today, although when those two losses came in the last two games, marked by poor performances and miscues, there wasn't much celebrating. Trust me. In 1976, Nebraska ended the season ranked #7, which sure sounds great today, but the team was 9-3-1 and finished tied for fourth in the Big 8. Maybe we didn't appreciate it enough at the time. Then again, I'm not sure how much more we would appreciate it today. Seven seasons into Tom Osborne's career, there was talk about him having reached his "ceiling." Barry Switzer owned him. He was getting a reputation for losing big games. The offense was criticized for being too predictable. This wasn't from a handful of cranks and loudmouths, either. A loud and small minority may have wanted Osborne out -- a ridiculous over-reation -- but there was some serious grumbling among the loyal fanbase, too, including people who understand football. I don't know how old you are, JMFB, but the criticism/defense of Tom Osborne and the criticism/defense of Beck/Pelini had more in common than it didn't, minus the concern that Pelini was a raging a-hole who presented a negative impression of UNL to the world. There were a lot of plusses in Tom's corner, but when fans here say "that never would have happened to a Tom Osborne team" it's often wishful thinking. I for one knew it was just a matter of time before TO got his National Titles. I guess the question is if you knew that "matter of time" would be 20 seasons, would you have been cool with that? Again, and hopefully for the last time, I can assure you that the Tom Osborne years were far more preferable than the Callahan/Pelini years, but some of the Osborne memories around here aren't accurate enough for some of the claims folks are making. 1 Quote Link to comment
NUinID Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 I think most fans today would be thrilled with consistent top 10 finishes AND being mentioned in the National Title hunt even in "down years" In the years TO lost- he also beat ranked teams/won Bowl games AND was ranked in the Top 10. Most of us would be thrilled with those results. I for one knew it was just a matter of time before TO got his National Titles. The sample size for TO was 307 games- the sample size for Pelini was 94- LOTS more chances to have an abberation in 307 and even then it was tiny compared to others. Have to have something to compare it to. Of course not perfect record, no one wins 100% of your games. There are millions of lightning strikes a day, but only a tiny handful ever hit anyone. Just like Osbornes "bad years or bad gaames" were tiny enough when you consider what average means- a Pelini or Callahans records. Top 10 is Top 10 doesnt matter how it was done then and now you are one of the Top 10 teams in DI football or you arent TO never got 50,60 70 points dropped on him by 4-6 loss teams or embarrassed himself in front of the fanbase- that is what got Pelini/Callahan booted. Beat some ranked teams, lose to good competition from time to time- not getting blown out, blow out weaker teams, be in the hunt, be relevant and dont embarrass the University and you get to keep the job. TO did that, others didnt. Quoting a season as an example of a failure when the team lost 2 games to top 5 opponents by less than a TD in the last seconds of the game- being 2 plays from an undefeated season- ISNT a bad season. Its a very good one- one most fans were very proud of. I for one LIKE being in the National hunt late, even if we lose. Osborne was never doubted by the majority of fans like Beck and Pelini- you are making a comparison there jmfb you seem to be arguing to try and get Guy, myself and whoever else to believe something that I don't think there is an argument about. TO record is not in dispute. Nor, is the fact that he had way fewer bad games where his teams got outclassed or manhandled or beaten by a certain number of points. It is not about statistics or a statistical analysis of TO vs. BP vs. BC. I know you are very fond of the stat part of the game you bring them up a lot. The whole argument was about someone saying that TO never got manhandled by teams. Which is not true. Yes statistically we would say that it was way less than BP or BC. I would even say significantly less. But he did lose some games by a lot of points and was outclassed in some games. That is the point. My point is out of 307 games, the number is so tiny- it is nearly insignificant, not important, a true aberration when put in context to all the great stuff happening over the long haul and even within those same "down" seasons. The greatest coaches of all time- didnt win 100% of their games and out of 307, one could expect a small insignificant number of not so great games The BP apologists like to bring up TOs "bad" seasons to make themselves feel better- when put into context, no comparison at all. To think TO was disliked by a majority of fans, like some would lead us to believe- was never the case at any time during his tenure. Man you are still arguing to argue. I don't recall anyone saying TO was disliked by a majority of fans? Personally I think he is top 3 all time college FB coaches. Quote Link to comment
Army Husker Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 Our expectation level has dropped considerably. Absolutely. It worked against Osborne that he inherited a team that was #1/#1/#4 over the previous three seasons. It worked in Pelini's favor that Nebraska totally dropped off the map in 2007. Of course we would be happy with one of Osborne's 10 - 2 seasons today, although when those two losses came in the last two games, marked by poor performances and miscues, there wasn't much celebrating. Trust me. In 1976, Nebraska ended the season ranked #7, which sure sounds great today, but the team was 9-3-1 and finished tied for fourth in the Big 8. Maybe we didn't appreciate it enough at the time. Then again, I'm not sure how much more we would appreciate it today. Seven seasons into Tom Osborne's career, there was talk about him having reached his "ceiling." Barry Switzer owned him. He was getting a reputation for losing big games. The offense was criticized for being too predictable. This wasn't from a handful of cranks and loudmouths, either. A loud and small minority may have wanted Osborne out -- a ridiculous over-reation -- but there was some serious grumbling among the loyal fanbase, too, including people who understand football. I don't know how old you are, JMFB, but the criticism/defense of Tom Osborne and the criticism/defense of Beck/Pelini had more in common than it didn't, minus the concern that Pelini was a raging a-hole who presented a negative impression of UNL to the world. There were a lot of plusses in Tom's corner, but when fans here say "that never would have happened to a Tom Osborne team" it's often wishful thinking. I for one knew it was just a matter of time before TO got his National Titles. I guess the question is if you knew that "matter of time" would be 20 seasons, would you have been cool with that? Again, and hopefully for the last time, I can assure you that the Tom Osborne years were far more preferable than the Callahan/Pelini years, but some of the Osborne memories around here aren't accurate enough for some of the claims folks are making. I'll age myself a few years...Wasn't there a joke back in the late 80's early 90's of: Why does Tom Osborne eat his cereal out of the box or on a plate? He lost all of his bowls. I was kind of young at the time, but definitely remember frustration with the events at hand. Not sure it adds to the discussion, but maybe a different perspective? Quote Link to comment
jmfb Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 Our expectation level has dropped considerably. Absolutely. It worked against Osborne that he inherited a team that was #1/#1/#4 over the previous three seasons. It worked in Pelini's favor that Nebraska totally dropped off the map in 2007. Of course we would be happy with one of Osborne's 10 - 2 seasons today, although when those two losses came in the last two games, marked by poor performances and miscues, there wasn't much celebrating. Trust me. In 1976, Nebraska ended the season ranked #7, which sure sounds great today, but the team was 9-3-1 and finished tied for fourth in the Big 8. Maybe we didn't appreciate it enough at the time. Then again, I'm not sure how much more we would appreciate it today. Seven seasons into Tom Osborne's career, there was talk about him having reached his "ceiling." Barry Switzer owned him. He was getting a reputation for losing big games. The offense was criticized for being too predictable. This wasn't from a handful of cranks and loudmouths, either. A loud and small minority may have wanted Osborne out -- a ridiculous over-reation -- but there was some serious grumbling among the loyal fanbase, too, including people who understand football. I don't know how old you are, JMFB, but the criticism/defense of Tom Osborne and the criticism/defense of Beck/Pelini had more in common than it didn't, minus the concern that Pelini was a raging a-hole who presented a negative impression of UNL to the world. There were a lot of plusses in Tom's corner, but when fans here say "that never would have happened to a Tom Osborne team" it's often wishful thinking. I for one knew it was just a matter of time before TO got his National Titles. I guess the question is if you knew that "matter of time" would be 20 seasons, would you have been cool with that? Again, and hopefully for the last time, I can assure you that the Tom Osborne years were far more preferable than the Callahan/Pelini years, but some of the Osborne memories around here aren't accurate enough for some of the claims folks are making. TO had some close calls for National Titles even early in his career- 78 and 79- 79 one play from playing in National Title game- 2 plays from being undefeated As to 2 near misses, no I wasnt celebrating either- I was disappointed we were so close- but I appreciated we were good enough in the big picture to be that close I had ZERO problem with 20 years, because we were often times in the hunt, even very late in the season Lots of near misses, bad breaks, bad calls etc- it was going to happen, just a matter of time I would be more than happy to wait 20 years again, no problem at all- if we were consistently top 10 and doing a bunch of near misses like TOs teams did in his day. By my count about a dozen near misses on National Titles out of 25 years of coaching, TO I went to almost every home game in TOs career, Bowl Games, 3 KO Classics, worked in a big Corp office, was around lots of HS football coaches and sat amongst very long time season ticket holders during that era. A tiny minority were anti TO, nothing like the waves that came out against BP and BC- not remotely close. In those days I never went into a game thinking we would most likely lose or get blown out. As to 2007 vs 1973- yes NU was on top in 72, but Bo inherited some pretty well ranked recruiting classes, maybe better ranked than what TO got Taking over from a legend like Devaney wasnt easy- TO lost his DC too As to "never happening" Never means always NO coach had a "never" career. Extremely rare- aberration- insignificant statistically/historically would be spot on accurate. People ARE making comparisons, that is why this was brought up. TOday very few reasonalby informed people would scoff at an NU coach who consistently finished in the top 10, was consistently in the conversation, relevant, graduating players and repping the University well. Crazies dont count. Quote Link to comment
Enhance Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 My point is out of 307 games, the number is so tiny- it is nearly insignificant, not important, a true aberration when put in context to all the great stuff happening over the long haul and even within those same "down" seasons. By comparison, yes, the number is small. But, this does not change the facts - he lost some bad games. It doesn't matter how often they happened in comparison to someone else. If someone asked you "was a TO team beaten badly," the answer would have to be YES. The greatest coaches of all time- didnt win 100% of their games and out of 307, one could expect a small insignificant number of not so great gamesThe BP apologists like to bring up TOs "bad" seasons to make themselves feel better- when put into context, no comparison at all. Again, there's really no need to bring Pelini into this. Nobody is comparing the two. Refer to part one of my post. To think TO was disliked by a majority of fans, like some would lead us to believe- was never the case at any time during his tenure. Negativity harnesses a powerful voice, even if it is a minority. But, nobody here is trying to discredit TO. We're just trying to provide a clearer picture of his tenure as head coach. It wasn't always blue skies and red roses. You may have been patient and understanding but that does not mean everyone else felt this way. Quote Link to comment
jmfb Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 I think most fans today would be thrilled with consistent top 10 finishes AND being mentioned in the National Title hunt even in "down years" In the years TO lost- he also beat ranked teams/won Bowl games AND was ranked in the Top 10. Most of us would be thrilled with those results. I for one knew it was just a matter of time before TO got his National Titles. The sample size for TO was 307 games- the sample size for Pelini was 94- LOTS more chances to have an abberation in 307 and even then it was tiny compared to others. Have to have something to compare it to. Of course not perfect record, no one wins 100% of your games. There are millions of lightning strikes a day, but only a tiny handful ever hit anyone. Just like Osbornes "bad years or bad gaames" were tiny enough when you consider what average means- a Pelini or Callahans records. Top 10 is Top 10 doesnt matter how it was done then and now you are one of the Top 10 teams in DI football or you arent TO never got 50,60 70 points dropped on him by 4-6 loss teams or embarrassed himself in front of the fanbase- that is what got Pelini/Callahan booted. Beat some ranked teams, lose to good competition from time to time- not getting blown out, blow out weaker teams, be in the hunt, be relevant and dont embarrass the University and you get to keep the job. TO did that, others didnt. Quoting a season as an example of a failure when the team lost 2 games to top 5 opponents by less than a TD in the last seconds of the game- being 2 plays from an undefeated season- ISNT a bad season. Its a very good one- one most fans were very proud of. I for one LIKE being in the National hunt late, even if we lose. Osborne was never doubted by the majority of fans like Beck and Pelini- you are making a comparison there jmfb you seem to be arguing to try and get Guy, myself and whoever else to believe something that I don't think there is an argument about. TO record is not in dispute. Nor, is the fact that he had way fewer bad games where his teams got outclassed or manhandled or beaten by a certain number of points. It is not about statistics or a statistical analysis of TO vs. BP vs. BC. I know you are very fond of the stat part of the game you bring them up a lot. The whole argument was about someone saying that TO never got manhandled by teams. Which is not true. Yes statistically we would say that it was way less than BP or BC. I would even say significantly less. But he did lose some games by a lot of points and was outclassed in some games. That is the point. My point is out of 307 games, the number is so tiny- it is nearly insignificant, not important, a true aberration when put in context to all the great stuff happening over the long haul and even within those same "down" seasons. The greatest coaches of all time- didnt win 100% of their games and out of 307, one could expect a small insignificant number of not so great games The BP apologists like to bring up TOs "bad" seasons to make themselves feel better- when put into context, no comparison at all. To think TO was disliked by a majority of fans, like some would lead us to believe- was never the case at any time during his tenure. Man you are still arguing to argue. I don't recall anyone saying TO was disliked by a majority of fans? Personally I think he is top 3 all time college FB coaches. Comparing where Bo Pelini and BC were in relation to TO Thats why it was brought up- to show that hey BP wasnt that bad look even TO had a couple "bad" games. Many here werent alive or attending games at that time- dont know or dont understand the context. Quote Link to comment
Enhance Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 Yes, TO lost, but he was never beaten. Bo's team flat out got road killed. Osborne teams were flat out road killed on a fairly regular basis by Oklahoma and our ranked opponent in the bowl game. In one OU game, the Nebraska offense never crossed the 50 yard line. In other big games we were held to under 200 yards total offense, our bread and butter running game sniffed out and shut down, and the in-game adjustments -- more passing and a few trick plays -- were panicky failures. Defense got gashed pretty well too, if not quite at the Wisconsin levels. I honestly wish I didn't remember this. But I do. And a painful visit to the statistical record confirms it. Comparing where Bo Pelini and BC were in relation to TO Thats why it was brought up- to show that hey BP wasnt that bad look even TO had a couple "bad" games. Many here werent alive or attending games at that time- dont know or dont understand the context. Your statement here is not true. I included Guy's post from Page 2. That was the reason it was brought up. As you can see, at no point in time was Bo Pelini or Bill Callahan brought up. Quote Link to comment
jmfb Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 My point is out of 307 games, the number is so tiny- it is nearly insignificant, not important, a true aberration when put in context to all the great stuff happening over the long haul and even within those same "down" seasons. By comparison, yes, the number is small. But, this does not change the facts - he lost some bad games. It doesn't matter how often they happened in comparison to someone else. If someone asked you "was a TO team beaten badly," the answer would have to be YES. The greatest coaches of all time- didnt win 100% of their games and out of 307, one could expect a small insignificant number of not so great gamesThe BP apologists like to bring up TOs "bad" seasons to make themselves feel better- when put into context, no comparison at all. Again, there's really no need to bring Pelini into this. Nobody is comparing the two. Refer to part one of my post. To think TO was disliked by a majority of fans, like some would lead us to believe- was never the case at any time during his tenure. Negativity harnesses a powerful voice, even if it is a minority. But, nobody here is trying to discredit TO. We're just trying to provide a clearer picture of his tenure as head coach. It wasn't always blue skies and red roses. The number of games does matter If someone coached 100,000 games and had 2 losses over 31- that would be pretty insignificant especially if say he won 99,998 of the rest of the games Context- and the bigger picture matters OTOH if you get blown out by 31 say 5 times in 94 games or 15 times beaten by more than 11 in same 94 games- it's a totally different environment- situation. Of course most reasonably informed people are going to judge those 2 situations much differently. There was little comparison. I dont recall any booing of TO or the team. Yes as fans some of those losses were crushing in TOs day- but I dont remember anyone I knew saying- " we would be better off with coach X at the helm". It never got to that level and like today- I was no sunshine pumper then, we were realists that figured the moons would eventually align, the bad breaks couldnt consistently happen and instead of being top 10 every year, NU would win that elusive National Championship., I was confident we would be deserving of several before TO left. Too many close calls not to. Guy said: Osborne teams were flat out road killed on a fairly regular basis by Oklahoma and our ranked opponent in the bowl game I just disagree with that In 25 years OU beat NU by 20 - 5 times one in 5, so depends on what your definition of road killed on a regular basis is. NU also beat OU by more than 20 points 5 times under TO. so 5-5 on that one. NU under TO lost just 2 games by more than 31 in 307 attempts while consistently being ranked in top 10. NU won, beat plenty of ranked OPs and was competitive and won plenty of Bowl games during that tenure as well. Enough to help fans understand NU was close and relevant. At that time OU was often times ranked 1,2,3, which is important Context is important NU of today is getting boat raced by teams that arent ranked in the top 5, much different deal than in TOs day 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.