Mavric Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 A bunch of Bielema's assistants and staff told Lincoln Journal-Star reporters that they thought they were headed to Lincoln. Note how many assistants were named in the LJS articles. And that means what exactly? It's not exactly uncommon for sources to request anonymity. You think the LJS has some sort of agenda for the story to be true? 1 Quote Link to comment
Red Dead Redemption Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 Pederhorst lied about the reasons for firing Bo, and he lied about the coaching "search". He sold us a bill of goods. Deal with it. Quote Link to comment
knapplc Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 A bunch of Bielema's assistants and staff told Lincoln Journal-Star reporters that they thought they were headed to Lincoln. Note how many assistants were named in the LJS articles. And that means what exactly? It's not exactly uncommon for sources to request anonymity. You think the LJS has some sort of agenda for the story to be true? It means it's not a solid story. Anonymous sources make great offseason fodder for guys on message boards, but they're not to be taken seriously. Further, where did these anonymous sources get their info from? Gil Brandt? There are an awful lot of presumptions being made based on no real information. If you want to believe that Bret Bielema was a candidate at Nebraska, knock yourself out. There's zero proof, the thinnest veil of insinuations, all of which came to us during what is commonly referred to as "the silly season." I'm not going to worry about it, myself. I like proof. Quote Link to comment
Mavric Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 It means it's not a solid story. Anonymous sources make great offseason fodder for guys on message boards, but they're not to be taken seriously. Further, where did these anonymous sources get their info from? Gil Brandt? There are an awful lot of presumptions being made based on no real information. If you want to believe that Bret Bielema was a candidate at Nebraska, knock yourself out. There's zero proof, the thinnest veil of insinuations, all of which came to us during what is commonly referred to as "the silly season." I'm not going to worry about it, myself. I like proof. You're not sure where people on Bielema's staff might have been getting their information from? The real information is that people on Bielema's staff said they thought they were going to Nebraska. Unless you think the LJS was completely fabricating the story, it doesn't make any difference that they didn't list actual names. Why would the LJS completely fabricate the story? Why would people at Arkansas completely fabricate the story? Quote Link to comment
Saunders Posted December 22, 2015 Author Share Posted December 22, 2015 A bunch of Bielema's assistants and staff told Lincoln Journal-Star reporters that they thought they were headed to Lincoln. Note how many assistants were named in the LJS articles. And that means what exactly? It's not exactly uncommon for sources to request anonymity. You think the LJS has some sort of agenda for the story to be true? It means it's not a solid story. Anonymous sources make great offseason fodder for guys on message boards, but they're not to be taken seriously. Further, where did these anonymous sources get their info from? Gil Brandt? There are an awful lot of presumptions being made based on no real information. If you want to believe that Bret Bielema was a candidate at Nebraska, knock yourself out. There's zero proof, the thinnest veil of insinuations, all of which came to us during what is commonly referred to as "the silly season." I'm not going to worry about it, myself. I like proof. So you don't believe most of the bad stuff Bo did while he was here then either, right? Carl left because he got a promotion, right? And Sanders too? And Bill Callahan was Steve Pederson's first choice, too, right? And Solich was only fired because he wasn't winning enough games? Come on man... 2 Quote Link to comment
Mavric Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 Furthermore, why is it such a big deal that people don't want to believe that it's possible that we were talking to Bielema about being a coach here? Eichorst has a history with him. He was successful in the Big Ten running the type of schemes that many of our fans think is the right recipe for our situation. There are multiple reports that it was true and the only two people who deny it are the two people who have the most reason to "lie" about it. Really the only reason to not want to believe this is because of some inflated ego thinking that we absolutely got the first guy on our list and no one would ever turn down the chance to coach here. 2 Quote Link to comment
knapplc Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 So you don't believe most of the bad stuff Bo did while he was here then either, right? Carl left because he got a promotion, right? And Sanders too? And Bill Callahan was Steve Pederson's first choice, too, right? And Solich was only fired because he wasn't winning enough games? Come on man... I believe what I know. I know stuff that doesn't make it to these boards because frankly, nobody needs to know. I take a pretty dim, and skeptical, view of "insiders" who come to message boards with what they know. Too often I've found they didn't have a clue. Quote Link to comment
knapplc Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 So "ego" is the ONLY reason someone would doubt the Bielema-to-Nebraska story? I did not know that. 2 Quote Link to comment
Saunders Posted December 22, 2015 Author Share Posted December 22, 2015 So you don't believe most of the bad stuff Bo did while he was here then either, right? Carl left because he got a promotion, right? And Sanders too? And Bill Callahan was Steve Pederson's first choice, too, right? And Solich was only fired because he wasn't winning enough games? Come on man... I believe what I know. I know stuff that doesn't make it to these boards because frankly, nobody needs to know. I take a pretty dim, and skeptical, view of "insiders" who come to message boards with what they know. Too often I've found they didn't have a clue. Right, and how do you know these things? Likely, because somebody told you, and most likely, it was told to them as well. That's not much different than this situation, except in this scenario, the people doing the reporting are paid to do it. Quote Link to comment
knapplc Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 Right, and how do you know these things? Likely, because somebody told you, and most likely, it was told to them as well. No. Quote Link to comment
Mavric Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 So "ego" is the ONLY reason someone would doubt the Bielema-to-Nebraska story? I did not know that. Why would people not want to believe that we were talking to other coaches about coaching here? Quote Link to comment
knapplc Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 So "ego" is the ONLY reason someone would doubt the Bielema-to-Nebraska story? I did not know that. Why would people not want to believe that we were talking to other coaches about coaching here? Because specifically mentioned coaches weren't approached? I mean... that's kinda a good reason, right? Quote Link to comment
Enhance Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 Journalists of all varieties have relied heavily on the word of "anonymous sources" for as long as I can remember and probably long before I was born. I don't like it in many cases. What makes some of these stories more reliable than others is when the parties directly mentioned in the article come out and corroborate or deny the information. We've mostly seen denial and knapplc is right - there's really no proof to suggest anything actually happened. That said, I personally believe something happened between Bielema and the Nebraska athletic department. Perhaps it wasn't an actual job offer and now both sides can rely on semantics to defend themselves. I do know that a lot of times there's fire where there's smoke, and there was a lot of smoke with this one followed up by a nice contract extension for Bielema. Something doesn't feel normal about what happened. Quote Link to comment
Red Five Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 FootballScoop reported that a "multitude" of sources told them Eichorst approached Bielema first. http://footballscoop.com/news/nebraskas-short-list-played/ This was quickly followed by Perlman scoffing at that report in the quote I provided above. People can choose to believe whatever they want, or whatever suits their worldview. There's a lot of turmoil and one-upsmanship going on between the Roussel brothers. Sun, Nov 30 - Bo Fired Mon, Dec 1 - Eichorst flies to SF Tue, Dec 2 - Eichorst, Perlman, Riley meet in SF. Riley offered job and accepts Wed, Dec 3 - Eichorst flies back to Lincoln, deal is finalized Thurs, Dec 4 - Brandt tweet about Burt "being offered yesterday", Football Scoop linked article above, Riley announced by UNL at 11:30am So if you are to believe that Burt was offered on Wednesday, Dec 3, then why the hell was Eichorst/Perlman in SF negotiating with Riley Tuesday and offering him the job? espn and owh articles with the SF timeline: http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/12009292/behind-scenes-quiet-search-brought-mike-riley-nebraska-cornhuskers http://www.omaha.com/huskers/in-san-francisco-meeting-eichorst-and-perlman-find-our-guy/article_d024a272-7cb1-11e4-97d9-7f8f570d3d6e.html 1 Quote Link to comment
FrankWheeler Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 MOD FIGHT!!! 1 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.