Carl Crawford Nebraska Quarterback

[BIG ERN]

ERN, the Blaine Gabbert situation would have been hypothetically very interesting in that 2010 season. Hypothetically.

It's funny how we talk about that 2009 Big XII title game about Texas so much, but talk about the 2010 title game so little. We were ahead at half time in that game. We were technically very close to back-to-back conference titles.

That loss to Oklahoma in 2010 still hurts so bad.

I fully agree on 2010...seems like a forgotten game. We blew a 17-0 lead! For the most part shut down their good offense who had DeMarco Murray, Kenny Stills, and Ryan Broyles

 

[Count 'Bility]

Friend of my mom worked in the football offices during that time, and also had a stint managing the husker apparel store across street from the stadium. So I know my inside source I consider reliable. Ive heard the stories of Petersen and some regents in the box being tickled pink of what was taking place against Kansas St in 03, thinking it that much closer to making the decision easier to handle, and their disappointment days later in Boulder when everyone in the country was saying enough was done to save his job. If these things were in fact true, i always thought it was pretty high of Pedersen to at least not publicly divulge into those things, which saved the university and Solich a lot of grief. But the lack of facts also makes it a constantly debateable and divisive topic.

 

[Elf]

Friend of my mom worked in the football offices during that time, and also had a stint managing the husker apparel store across street from the stadium. So I know my inside source I consider reliable. Ive heard the stories of Petersen and some regents in the box being tickled pink of what was taking place against Kansas St in 03, thinking it that much closer to making the decision easier to handle, and their disappointment days later in Boulder when everyone in the country was saying enough was done to save his job. If these things were in fact true, i always thought it was pretty high of Pedersen to at least not publicly divulge into those things, which saved the university and Solich a lot of grief. But the lack of facts also makes it a constantly debateable and divisive topic.

Pedersen couldn't go public with behind the scenes reasons for firing Solich, the University would have been sued.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

As it currently stands, any business that denigrates a former employee to a prospective employer is subject to legal action by said employee.

They might be a perfectly decent person. Or a train wreck you'd be morally obliged to warn against. But if someone calls HR asking about an employee, HR is instructed to only divulge the dates of employment.

 

[Bowfin]

Lord isn't the reason Solich was fired. The issues (if you wanna look at field performance exclusively) were beyond the qb position. Lord was a baller

Few Huskers ever played harder than Jamal Lord. Solich was canned IN SPITE OF Lord's efforts, not because of them.

My guess is the problems were a lot worse than the QB play for Frankie, but I won't even hazard a guess as to what.

 

[OH HSKR FAN]

Never be the guy that has to replace the guy.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

Jamal Lord may have been a baller, but the one-dimensional system he operated didn't help him or the team.

As a Senior, Lord completed 48% of his passes and averaged 4.4 yards a carry on a team that averaged 24 points a game. That was back when our defense could still keep us in a lot of games.

But offensively, our best play that year was often a broken play where Lord was forced to scramble. He was good at that. Made him a baller. But not a good QB.

And yeah, Jamal Lord by himself didn't get Frank fired. But those 2003 - 2004 seasons featured some pretty homely football. Fairly or not, it made a case that Nebraska wasn't geared for 21st Century football.

 

[Cdog923]

Lord isnt the reason Solich was fired. The issues (if you wanna look at field performance exlusively) were beyond the qb position. Lord was a baller

it's like sayin Bubba Starling woulda saved Bo. Jesus. What in the last few years suggests that Starling's presence makes a difference?

So what I'm saying is, one guy doesnt make a different. There were already systemic issues to cause the downfall that was already present.

I don't disagree: the problems under Solich were systemic, However, if Crawford lives up to the hype, 7-7 in 2002 doesn't happen. Nor do our meltdowns against KSU, Missouri or Texas in 2003. He would have bought Frank more time.

 

[Cdog923]

ERN, the Blaine Gabbert situation would have been hypothetically very interesting in that 2010 season. Hypothetically.

It's funny how we talk about that 2009 Big XII title game about Texas so much, but talk about the 2010 title game so little. We were ahead at half time in that game. We were technically very close to back-to-back conference titles.

That loss to Oklahoma in 2010 still hurts so bad.

Texas is still worse for me. So damn close.

 

[Count 'Bility]

Lord isnt the reason Solich was fired. The issues (if you wanna look at field performance exlusively) were beyond the qb position. Lord was a baller

it's like sayin Bubba Starling woulda saved Bo. Jesus. What in the last few years suggests that Starling's presence makes a difference?

So what I'm saying is, one guy doesnt make a different. There were already systemic issues to cause the downfall that was already present.

I don't disagree: the problems under Solich were systemic, However, if Crawford lives up to the hype, 7-7 in 2002 doesn't happen. Nor do our meltdowns against KSU, Missouri or Texas in 2003. He would have bought Frank more time.

We had major problems defensively as well. That's why im of the opionion that even much better qb play may not have helped any.

62

37

40

36

49

41

31

38

These are number of points given up in what I call ugly losses in 2001-2003. Which is actually 8 of the 12 losses. Which is disturbing in itself. And if you go back and check them games in which we only scored....

36

14

7

14

13

24

7

9

.....I come to the conclusion that our opponents couldve easily scored more out of necessity.

Just my thoughts. Like I said. Issues were far beyond qb play. I cant buy in to saying one much better qb wouldve made any difference whatsoever.

We were essentially plug and play at qb in 94. probably couldve been in 95 too. Not that there wasnt a drop off. But the point is, that even in a qb driven sport, there's still much more solid pieces you have to have across the field.

 

[NUinID]

All I know about the whole situation with Solich and Peterson is that they didn't like each other as underlings and the hiring of SP as the AD didn't make FS job all that secure. I think he would have had to win the B12 North to have held on to his job. I have no evidence of any of the other things that have ever been brought up about Solich's behavior with the ladies or alcohol.

 

[junior4949]

Lord isnt the reason Solich was fired. The issues (if you wanna look at field performance exlusively) were beyond the qb position. Lord was a baller

it's like sayin Bubba Starling woulda saved Bo. Jesus. What in the last few years suggests that Starling's presence makes a difference?

So what I'm saying is, one guy doesnt make a different. There were already systemic issues to cause the downfall that was already present.

I don't disagree: the problems under Solich were systemic, However, if Crawford lives up to the hype, 7-7 in 2002 doesn't happen. Nor do our meltdowns against KSU, Missouri or Texas in 2003. He would have bought Frank more time.

We had major problems defensively as well. That's why im of the opionion that even much better qb play may not have helped any.

62

37

40

36

49

41

31

38

These are number of points given up in what I call ugly losses in 2001-2003. Which is actually 8 of the 12 losses. Which is disturbing in itself. And if you go back and check them games in which we only scored....

36

14

7

14

13

24

7

9

.....I come to the conclusion that our opponents couldve easily scored more out of necessity.

Just my thoughts. Like I said. Issues were far beyond qb play. I cant buy in to saying one much better qb wouldve made any difference whatsoever.

We were essentially plug and play at qb in 94. probably couldve been in 95 too. Not that there wasnt a drop off. But the point is, that even in a qb driven sport, there's still much more solid pieces you have to have across the field.

Solich was in a no win situation. Given what has transpired from then to now, he'd probably have been fired on the spot for several things that have happened post 03'. If he'd have lost to half the teams we did last year, he would have been fired as soon as the game got over. If he'd have got blown up like we did against Wisconsin a few years back, the same can be said. In 01', the CU team that crushed us makes the four team playoff of today. The same can be said the 03' KState team. I give Frank a pass with everything Texas because isn't he the only one to actually beat Texas since the Big 12 was formed?

Make no mistake about it, we had slipped some in the national scene by the time Solich was dismissed. However, we were bound to. It's not like we'd have continued the mid-90's run forever. It was inevitable. Considering how good the rest of the Big 12 teams got, it more than likely happens even if TO stays on another 5-10 years. Who would have thought 20 years ago that the likes of Baylor and TCU would be one loss teams bitching about not making the four team playoffs?

 

[Huskers19911]

As it currently stands, any business that denigrates a former employee to a prospective employer is subject to legal action by said employee.

They might be a perfectly decent person. Or a train wreck you'd be morally obliged to warn against. But if someone calls HR asking about an employee, HR is instructed to only divulge the dates of employment.

If I'm correct, it isnt illegal if the statements are true to the new employer. If it was illegal to tell different perspective employers about the employee interviewing, why would you bother contacting the previous employer?

 

[Elf]

As it currently stands, any business that denigrates a former employee to a prospective employer is subject to legal action by said employee.

They might be a perfectly decent person. Or a train wreck you'd be morally obliged to warn against. But if someone calls HR asking about an employee, HR is instructed to only divulge the dates of employment.

If I'm correct, it isnt illegal if the statements are true to the new employer. If it was illegal to tell different perspective employers about the employee interviewing, why would you bother contacting the previous employer?

To verify that you actually worked at the places you said you did.

 

[NUance]

The biggest loss to a commit was Blaine Gabbert IMO. I honestly think we would have played in the NC game if he came here...only thing we were missing with that amazing defense in 2009 or 2010. Could also throw in Josh Freeman....thanks Joe Ganz.

Two starting NFL QBs who de-committed within a year of each other.

Haloti Ngata might've been our worst recruit loss. At least that's what I've always thought. Now I'm getting bummed out thinking about what could have been.

: