Do husker fans today have lower expectations?

[commando]

it's almost football season...time for the Bo birds to sing their songs again.

[Saunders]

it's almost football season...time for the Bo birds to sing their songs again.

Oh yes, let's trot out this fallacy again.

 

It's like, there's no room for being 100% Riley or 100% Bo.

 

No room for "Bo should have been fired, but maybe things aren't 100% right now" at all.

[teachercd]

 

it's almost football season...time for the Bo birds to sing their songs again.

Oh yes, let's trot out this fallacy again.

 

It's like, there's no room for being 100% Riley or 100% Bo.

 

No room for "Bo should have been fired, but maybe things aren't 100% right now" at all.

 

I know!

 

I wanted Bo gone. Truth be told the coaching search stuff is a blast to follow. I am just not sold on Riley and I don't think that a 30 year HC gets the old "Give him time" bit that a rookie coach should/would get. Riley wasn't hired at NU to learn how to be a HC and how to run a program. He was hired because he already knew how to do that. Or so we would have thought.

[TonyStalloni]

 

 

It goes like this. If you like having Riley as our coach, you've settled for mediocre. If not, you haven't.

 

(I usually don't like posting such negativity, but everyone is avoiding the issue, intentional or not. And yes, I know a lot will disagree).

Well at least you gave him a fair chance and are ignoring his willingness to make changes .

But that's okay, whatever fits your narrative.

I find it ironic that people forget what was posted here in the past and now, in a complete about face, suggest the opposite (I don't know if that was you or the other posters who replied to my post asserted that but it was the general narrative here). People were mad that Bo "only" won 9 or 10 a season because that wasn't enough, and now if Riley won 9 or 10, it would be viewed as a success.

 

I think winning 9 or 10 games a year was about number four or five on the list of reasons BP needed to go. Here is my list of reasons.

 

1. He was a terrible face of the program.

 

2. He thought he could win with 2nd and 3rd level assistants.

 

3. He and the assistants were hard pressed to recruit top level players and when they did they often didn't last more than a year or two.

 

4. He was a "Defensive" guru but the years he had the most success were with Callahan's recruits.

 

We were never going to be nationally relevant with BP. There is no guarantee we will with MR. I would say the odds are considerably better.

[Enhance]

 

it's almost football season...time for the Bo birds to sing their songs again.

Oh yes, let's trot out this fallacy again.

 

It's like, there's no room for being 100% Riley or 100% Bo.

 

No room for "Bo should have been fired, but maybe things aren't 100% right now" at all.

I believe this where most, or at least a significant portion of fans, are at right now.

 

Opinions like Dagerow's are still somewhat common - you either like HCMR and therefore accept mediocrity, or you don't like him and haven't accepted mediocrity. It's a false dichotomy that bolsters a rather ridiculous narrative.

[Saunders]

 

 

it's almost football season...time for the Bo birds to sing their songs again.

Oh yes, let's trot out this fallacy again.

 

It's like, there's no room for being 100% Riley or 100% Bo.

 

No room for "Bo should have been fired, but maybe things aren't 100% right now" at all.

I believe this where most, or at least a significant portion of fans, are at right now.

 

Opinions like Dagerow's are still somewhat common - you either like HCMR and therefore accept mediocrity, or you don't like him and haven't accepted mediocrity. It's a false dichotomy that bolsters a rather ridiculous narrative.

 

Yeah, his stance is extreme. The jury is still out on how things will shake with with Mike. I see improvement in some areas, regression in others. Some things I would expect a coach with 4 decades of experience not to struggle with, but this is also the biggest job he's ever had. The replacement of Banker with Diaco gives me hope that he knows that he's gotta get it done, so hopefully year 3 is good season we can build on, and not a 5-6 loss forgettable year.

[Enhance]

The replacement of Banker with Diaco gives me hope that he knows that he's gotta get it done, so hopefully year 3 is good season we can build on, and not a 5-6 loss forgettable year.

That's one of my biggest hopes (or projected goals?) for the 2017 season - a clear sense of urgency.

[BigRedBuster]

There are some major mental gymnastics going on in this thread so that people can further their agenda.

 

So.....Bo was fired after winning 9-10 games every year.

 

Mike was hired and had one bad year and then got back to Bo's standard in the second year.

 

So....now.....anyone who supports Mike and is optimistic about the future is somehow lowering their "expectations". Still haven't had anyone exactly tell me what the hell that even means.

 

To summarize.....people were upset that Bo was fired after winning 9-10 games per year. Those same people claim people who support Mike are lowering their expectations if he wins 9-10 games.

 

To summarize #2......some how if Mike wins 9-10 games, the people who support him are some how completely satisfied and don't have any desire to get even better and win a championship.....even though the people saying that still support Bo after 7 years of 9-10 win seasons.

 

I think Nebraska has to be one of the only fan bases that argue over coach firings years down the road. First it was Solich....now it's Bo.

 

Good Lord....coaching changes happen all the time in college football for many reasons.

[Mavric]

I don't see anyone saying 9-10 wins would be lowering expectations. Expecting us to win 7-8 games would be lower than 9-10.

[BigRedBuster]

I don't see anyone saying 9-10 wins would be lowering expectations. Expecting us to win 7-8 games would be lower than 9-10.

People were mad that Bo "only" won 9 or 10 a season because that wasn't enough, and now if Riley won 9 or 10, it would be viewed as a success.

Written by the same person who wrote this.

It goes like this. If you like having Riley as our coach, you've settled for mediocre. If not, you haven't.

 

[Mavric]

 

I don't see anyone saying 9-10 wins would be lowering expectations. Expecting us to win 7-8 games would be lower than 9-10.

People were mad that Bo "only" won 9 or 10 a season because that wasn't enough, and now if Riley won 9 or 10, it would be viewed as a success.

 

 

Exactly. If people are only expecting us to win 7-8 games they would think it's a pretty good success for us to win 9-10.

[BigRedBuster]

 

 

I don't see anyone saying 9-10 wins would be lowering expectations. Expecting us to win 7-8 games would be lower than 9-10.

People were mad that Bo "only" won 9 or 10 a season because that wasn't enough, and now if Riley won 9 or 10, it would be viewed as a success.

 

 

Exactly. If people are only expecting us to win 7-8 games they would think it's a pretty good success for us to win 9-10.

 

Point out where anyone is saying this and that this is all that they ever expect Nebraska football to accomplish.

 

 

And....thank you for including yourself in the group that you claimed didn't exist.

[Mavric]

 

 

 

I don't see anyone saying 9-10 wins would be lowering expectations. Expecting us to win 7-8 games would be lower than 9-10.

People were mad that Bo "only" won 9 or 10 a season because that wasn't enough, and now if Riley won 9 or 10, it would be viewed as a success.

 

 

Exactly. If people are only expecting us to win 7-8 games they would think it's a pretty good success for us to win 9-10.

 

Point out where anyone is saying this and that this is all that they ever expect Nebraska football to accomplish.

 

And....thank you for including yourself in the group that you claimed didn't exist.

 

I didn't include myself in any group. I was just speaking to the text you quoted. You quoted a poster saying 9-10 wins isn't viewed the same way it used to be. The fact that it is viewed (by some) to be more of a success now than it used to be would be a pretty good argument for lowering expectations.

 

I didn't include myself in that group. I have no idea how you come up with that. I'm said repeatedly that I think that 9-10 win range should be a pretty good expectation. Eight wins would be understandable but a bit disappointing. Sever or fewer is pretty bad.

 

The mental gymnastics you go through are quite impressive.

[BigRedBuster]

 

 

 

 

I don't see anyone saying 9-10 wins would be lowering expectations. Expecting us to win 7-8 games would be lower than 9-10.

People were mad that Bo "only" won 9 or 10 a season because that wasn't enough, and now if Riley won 9 or 10, it would be viewed as a success.

 

 

Exactly. If people are only expecting us to win 7-8 games they would think it's a pretty good success for us to win 9-10.

 

Point out where anyone is saying this and that this is all that they ever expect Nebraska football to accomplish.

 

And....thank you for including yourself in the group that you claimed didn't exist.

 

I didn't include myself in any group. I was just speaking to the text you quoted. You quoted a poster saying 9-10 wins isn't viewed the same way it used to be. The fact that it is viewed (by some) to be more of a success now than it used to be would be a pretty good argument for lowering expectations.

 

I didn't include myself in that group. I have no idea how you come up with that. I'm said repeatedly that I think that 9-10 win range should be a pretty good expectation. Eight wins would be understandable but a bit disappointing. Sever or fewer is pretty bad.

 

The mental gymnastics you go through are quite impressive.

 

Soooo....you you just included yourself in the group that you claimed didn't exist.....again......

 

I don't see anyone saying 9-10 wins would be lowering expectations. Expecting us to win 7-8 games would be lower than 9-10.

 

[teachercd]

BRB, I don't think I understand what you are asking.