Should BOTH Frost and Alberts be replaced?

[Guy Chamberlin]

21 minutes ago, krc1995 said:

Get rid of anyone with Nebraska ties. They  are serving their egos

 

 Not a fan of Alberts. So what he might save us some money. He just cost of a year with this stupid a$$ “experiment”   How can you hamstring your coach and think it will work. 

 

As calculated risks go?

 

A substantial number of donors may have bought into the "best 3-9 team in the country" narrative, and there actually are stats to back it up. 

 

Would a new OC, special teams refocus, and immediate portal talent get the Huskers over the hump in a season with an easier schedule?  One last all-in on Frost wasn't that crazy. Especially if it got him to reduce his buyout and accept the stakes. If it works, it works. If Frost can't elevate his team in Season Five, there is not a fan, donor, pundit, potential coach or player who will fault Alberts and the Huskers for lack of patience. 

 

Alberts most likely sent a few quiet feelers out last season, and found zero slam dunk HC candidates. You don't want to end the Scott Frost era when you only have Mike Riley 2.0 options. 

 

The extra season and the new buyout clause creates more money to throw at this season's potential hires, and more time to court them. 

 

And you now have some interesting interim options should the occasion arise. 

 

I don't think Alberts was conducting an experiment or being stupid out of Husker loyalty. I think he's playing a bad hand pretty well. 

[Undone]

I didn't know where to post this in the sea of threads so I put it here.

 

We really don't need to beat Oklahoma at all in order to talk about retaining Frost. We need to be 4-2 by the halfway point in the season. And we can do that.

 

My too early to call prediction is that Frost is retained. The four coaches we brought in during the offseason need to step up and improve the team like they were hired to do, and there's still more than enough time to get it done.

[krc1995]

3 minutes ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

 

As calculated risks go?

 

A substantial number of donors may have bought into the "best 3-9 team in the country" narrative, and there actually are stats to back it up. 

 

Would a new OC, special teams refocus, and immediate portal talent get the Huskers over the hump in a season with an easier schedule?  One last all-in on Frost wasn't that crazy. Especially if it got him to reduce his buyout and accept the stakes. If it works, it works. If Frost can't elevate his team in Season Five, there is not a fan, donor, pundit, potential coach or player who will fault Alberts and the Huskers for lack of patience. 

 

Alberts most likely sent a few quiet feelers out last season, and found zero slam dunk HC candidates. You don't want to end the Scott Frost era when you only have Mike Riley 2.0 options. 

 

The extra season and the new buyout clause creates more money to throw at this season's potential hires, and more time to court them. 

 

And you now have some interesting interim options should the occasion arise. 

 

I don't think Alberts was conducting an experiment or being stupid out of Husker loyalty. I think he's playing a bad hand pretty well. 

Alberts himself called it an experiment. His words not mine. 

[Mavric]

3 minutes ago, krc1995 said:

Alberts himself called it an experiment. His words not mine. 

 

I guess I don't recall him referring to it in those terms.  And Google doesn't seem to either.

[Guy Chamberlin]

33 minutes ago, Nebhawk said:

 He will not fire Frost mid season because that would seperate an already separated fanbase even more.  This has to be done right and with Class.  If we sh!t on one of our own by firing them midseason, who will ever want to coach here again?

 

Just remember, the converse is true: who will ever want to hire Scott Frost as head coach again? This isn't a Nebraska thing. It's a football thing.

 

If Nebraska continues to struggle like they have the first two games, I think every coach and college football observer would consider a midseason firing justified if not overdue. 

 

Honestly? I think coaches are making fun of Scott behind the scenes at this point. He gets outcoached almost every game. They've even gone public with the game plan: just hang in and wait for Nebraska to self-destruct. Scott has started taking potshots of his own. It's not a healthy situation and letting it play out could be detrimental to all parties, including players and fans.

 

But......there is a chance -- I'm going to say a 27% chance -- that this team has the talent to recover, adjust, dig down and play good football down the stretch, including an upset or two of better teams. The tricky part is if they end up 6-6 or even 7-5. It's hard to say what that would mean going forward. A 6-6 season would be exactly what a cruel God would order. 

[Guy Chamberlin]

19 minutes ago, krc1995 said:

Alberts himself called it an experiment. His words not mine. 

 

That was a pretty lengthy post of mine. Is this your only point of disagreement? 

[krc1995]

15 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

I guess I don't recall him referring to it in those terms.  And Google doesn't seem to either.

He did. When the details were announced last year. “ there is no data to suggest this experiment will work”. I’ve seen it referenced several times on twitter’s this week. 
 

I’ll find it, but I’m at a movie theater right now so it’ll be later. 

[krc1995]

2 minutes ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

 

That was a pretty lengthy post of mine. Is this your only point of disagreement? 

I don’t really see anything else in your post except opinion.    

[Mavric]

6 minutes ago, krc1995 said:

He did. When the details were announced last year. “ there is no data to suggest this experiment will work”. I’ve seen it referenced several times on twitter’s this week. 
 

I’ll find it, but I’m at a movie theater right now so it’ll be later. 

 

Pretty sure you added the "experiment" part.  So, your words, not his.

 

Quote

"It's no secret that I've always wanted this to work," Alberts said. "It would be unfair to say that I wasn't looking for a way to keep Scott as our coach.

 

"I don't think there is a clear definition — there's not a lot of empirical data out there to suggest this will work, let's be honest. But I also think, if there's a decision point — whether it's football or anything else — Scott's a brother, he's a Husker, and he's a Nebraskan."

 

OWH

[The Whale]

2 hours ago, Hilltop said:

I haven't seen a single thing you have posted that is remotely worth discussing.   Go piss up a rope.

And yet you posted in this thread. Have a great day, big guy.

[The Whale]

3 hours ago, C-4 said:

Ur stupid

Really? (BTW, I love the personal attacks, keep showing who you are)

 

Trev Alberts was AD at tiny UNO, AND he played for TO, so OF COURSE he’s qualified to lead a Big Ten athletic department. (No other Big Ten school would have hired him).

 

Scott Frost was Head Coach at nothing UCF, AND he played for TO, so OF COURSE he’s qualified to lead a Big Ten football program. (Maybe 2-3 of the Big Ten bottom dwellers would have hired him, but none in the top 70% of the conference would have).

 

We might actually have the dumbest f***ing fanbase, donor class, and regents in the nation (on a relative basis) if people still don’t get that both Frost and Alberts are COMPLETELY out of their respective elements. Nebraska is a big time school in a big time conference with a football program history that is STILL revered by most who follow college football.

 

Bottom line, we deserve the best for our state’s #1 entertainment export — and stewards who understand and embrace this.

[Undone]

12 minutes ago, The Whale said:

...if people still don’t get that both Frost and Alberts are COMPLETELY out of their respective elements.

 

We brought in a supporting cast of coaches to help fix the problem. We've played two games and won one of them. There are 10 more to see if the plan will work.

 

12 minutes ago, The Whale said:

Nebraska is a big time school in a big time conference with a football program history that is STILL revered by most who follow college football.

 

You're wrong. I'm positive that almost none of the 18-23 year old kids on the roster care that Nebraska was once great. Only us lifelong fans do. And we are not "STILL revered by most who follow college football." That's your own fan fiction; we're washed up. We're trying to start over from scratch.

 

Who we used to be 20+ years ago is revered by those who follow college football - but our program is not "revered." We're on a five year skid of losing seasons; nobody "reveres Nebraska football" nationally. Nobody.

[krc1995]

47 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

Pretty sure you added the "experiment" part.  So, your words, not his.

 

 

OWH

You got me. What can I say?  I was wrong you are so technically right.   He said experiment without saying experiment. 
 

riddle me this, why go semantics on me when i was even conversing with you?    Lots of free time today? 

[Dogs In A Pile]

Don't feed this troll.

[Mavric]

11 minutes ago, krc1995 said:

You got me. What can I say?  I was wrong you are so technically right.   He said experiment without saying experiment. 
 

riddle me this, why go semantics on me when i was even conversing with you?    Lots of free time today? 

 

Make indignant claims and then get pissy when it's pointed out that you're wrong.  Good effort.

 

I don't think you know what the word semantics means, if you want to get into semantics.