Jump to content


Poll: Should Frost be fired?


Kentmick

Should Frost be fired at the end of the season?  

203 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

50 minutes ago, Husker_Bohunk said:

Agreed.

 

When Osborne retired he should not have been able to name his replacement since he was no longer an employee of the University. And it wasn't his place to do so before stepping down and in naming his own successor he overstepped the bounds of his authority.

TBF, at that point in time TO had no bounds and he was the program. Only in hindsight can we say that maybe Frank wasn’t the best choice. But at the time TO wanted to assure program continuity and had the authority and credibility to name his successor. Anybody who would’ve claimed otherwise in 1997 would’ve been labeled a raving lunatic.

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment

Two of Frank Solich's seasons were below Husker standards at the time.

 

Three of Frank Solich's seasons would have ranked in the Top 10 of Tom Osborne's career. 

 

Just to be clear. 

 

Recruiting. Coeds. Alcohol. New AD looking to modernize. Take your pick. But Frank did some good coaching with relatively modest Husker rosters. 

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
3 hours ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

Two of Frank Solich's seasons were below Husker standards at the time.

 

Three of Frank Solich's seasons would have ranked in the Top 10 of Tom Osborne's career. 

 

Just to be clear. 

 

Recruiting. Coeds. Alcohol. New AD looking to modernize. Take your pick. But Frank did some good coaching with relatively modest Husker rosters. 

 

He beat the teams of lesser talent. When I look at his losses. Early on, we may have had more raw talent and lost to more experienced teams but we took care of business. The issue was our talent graduated for the most part after 2001. We didn't have the coaching to coach around our lack of talent. 

 

 

It sure was nice beating the teams we were supposed to beat.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

10 hours ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

 

Do you honestly believe people thinking for themselves can't arrive at a variety of conclusions? 

 

45% is a pretty large number. No doubt a lot of the 55% remain concerned. I'm among the latter.

 

Some people claim they've seen all they need to see. Most still have questions that may or may not be answered in the next four games. Won't know who's right for awhile, if ever. 

 

I'd say it's been a pretty valid discussion all around. 

 

If we took a poll about whether ndobney adds to or detracts from every discussion, you might not like those numbers. 

That's a completely incoherent response. Clearly I said in the comment that I still wanted to see more at some point improvement needs to start translating to wins. 

 

Actually forget it speak to me when your competent seriously. Read more than the first line before you respond that way you can avoid over reaction.

Link to comment
10 hours ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

 

Do you honestly believe people thinking for themselves can't arrive at a variety of conclusions? 

 

45% is a pretty large number. No doubt a lot of the 55% remain concerned. I'm among the latter.

 

Some people claim they've seen all they need to see. Most still have questions that may or may not be answered in the next four games. Won't know who's right for awhile, if ever. 

 

I'd say it's been a pretty valid discussion all around. 

 

If we took a poll about whether ndobney adds to or detracts from every discussion, you might not like those numbers. 

I mean you literally made the same argument as I did. I said people overreact after games we lose and was just pointed that out you than literally said and I quote. Most still have questions and won't know for a while. Which I said the same thing but at some point we need to start winning.

 

You said the exact same thing I said different and then bashed me for not adding anything to the conversation. Meaning that if I add nothing you add less for saying after me.

 

Can't even describe that logic. I'm just going to call that a Guy Chamberlin

  • Oh Yeah! 2
Link to comment
11 hours ago, Hedley Lamarr said:

My take is Frank never should have been given the reins in the first place. 

 

Yes, and the situation was exacerbated significantly by TO hamstringing Frank by not wanting him to hire and fire as he saw fit. When Frank finally did it anyway after the crappy '02 season it was against the urgings of TO and McBride. 

Link to comment

I am still in the boat that Frank solich would have worked out Had he been given the proper amount of time with Bo Pelini as his defensive coordinator. Now Bo more than likely would have moved on as well as some other assistant coaches. However, I think Frank eventually would have picked up Scott Frost as an offensive coordinator / coach in waiting. And it would have worked out just fine

  • Plus1 2
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

15 hours ago, Kentmick said:

 

He beat the teams of lesser talent. When I look at his losses. Early on, we may have had more raw talent and lost to more experienced teams but we took care of business. The issue was our talent graduated for the most part after 2001. We didn't have the coaching to coach around our lack of talent. 

 

 

It sure was nice beating the teams we were supposed to beat.

 

Well you beat teams of lesser talent because you have better talent. You're expected to beat teams when everyone knows you're a good team. And Frank Solich's 1999, 2000, and 2001 teams spent most of their time in the Top 5. The worst of those three teams played for the National Championship. The best of those teams was 12-1 and finished #3, having beaten the #5, #6, #12, #18 and #21 teams in the country. 

 

The P5 game may have started to pass Solich by, but my saying three out of Frank's five seasons would have fit near the top of Tom Osborne's resume is a stone cold fact. No revisionist history required. 

 

It's also likely that by 2002, college football itself had caught up with Nebraska, and the team no longer enjoyed the advantages that made our 40 year run possible and incredibly hard to duplicate. Maybe this isn't the curse of Solich, just the odds catching up.

 

Some of our younger posters may not remember how Husker fans totally s#!t the bed over Frank Solich's 7-7 recored in 2002.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
12 hours ago, ndobney said:

That's a completely incoherent response. Clearly I said in the comment that I still wanted to see more at some point improvement needs to start translating to wins. 

 

Actually forget it speak to me when your competent seriously. Read more than the first line before you respond that way you can avoid over reaction.

 

Read these two sentences again. Slowly. 

 

Then get back to me about incoherent. 

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.





×
  • Create New...