Controversy goes National

[bugeater17]

how about the possibility bo tried to handle this with class by not fireing watson and ruining his reputation while watson was in the running for head coaching jobs... i would bet that there was some understanding watson would be/will be let go but the announcement was put off so save face for watson in his pursuit of another job

 

[AFhusker]

What are you 12? It's really Watson's fault that Bo tied his hands by making him run an offense he knows nothing about and made him use a QB that he didn't want to use and was crippled because of our crappy OL for half the season?
Now it's better for both that he moves on, but look at the facts.

Facts? Do you mean facts like the fact that Watson was told the offense we were going to run prior to the bowl game last year, was given a chance to find another job if he couldn't get on board, tried very hard to find said job, could not find said job, and was then allowed to remain on staff while we changed offensive schemes, all the while knowing what was coming down the pike?

You mean those kinds of facts?

Because if we're not talking about those kinds of facts, we may as well not be talking about this. Watson's hands were not tied. Watson knew full well what was going on, and he opted in. The decision was his - find a new gig, step down, or stay at Nebraska in 2010 and run an offense geared more toward a running game than a WCO.

Shawn Watson wanted a paycheck in 2010, and when he couldn't get it anywhere else, he took the one Bo offered him. Watson has nobody to blame for that but himself. If he didn't want to run this offense and he didn't want to use the QB we used, the door was available.

The decision was not Watson's, it was Bo's. Bo is the head coach and makes all of the decisions. If Bo wanted to change the offense that drastically in a way we didn't have the talent, nor the experience to run, is on him. He should have found a different OC last year.

To quote a famous American, what are you, 12? Welcome to football, where the Head Coach calls the shots. Watson knew full well what kind of offense we were running in 2010 back in January. He had every opportunity to move on, in whatever capacity, and he didn't. If you're going to fault Bo because he trusted Watson when Watson told him, "I want to run your offense," then you have problems with Bo that have nothing to do with this situation.

The decision to stay at Nebraska belonged to one guy, and one guy only. Shawn Watson.

Nice try, but your lame attempt makes no sense. Bo is the HC, he's in charge and is responsible for the results end of story. It doesn't matter how much Watson wanted to coach his offense if he's the wrong fit.

 

[knapplc]

Nice try, but your lame attempt makes no sense. Bo is the HC, he's in charge and is responsible for the results end of story. It doesn't matter how much Watson wanted to coach his offense if he's the wrong fit.

So, your fault with Bo is that he didn't fire Watson this time last year?

 

[HuskerBruin]

There’s nothing in the N.C.A.A. rulebook that prohibits a team from doing just this after signing day, of course. The only people hurt in this case are the prospects who felt misled and the coaches who opted to take one for the team — like Watson or Gilmore — while they could have been shopping their resumes for a job at another program. Yes, Nebraska’s behavior was a bit shady, a bit unsettling and a bit out of character, but it was nonetheless within the rules of conduct, if not the rules of etiquette.

This is mostly trash. He makes two critical mistakes, IMO.

First, he seems to be mixing the Sanders and Watson/Gilmore issues together, which is a huge mistake. Watson/Gilmore is about on-the-job performance; Sanders is about extra-curricular stuff. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I haven't heard any offensive recruits come out and say they were mislead about the impending coaching changes on that front. Indeed, did not Jamaal Turner and/or Ameer Abdullah state that they understood coaching changes were underway? As for Sanders, there are many perfectly good reasons to keep things under wraps. For one, if you believe the rumors coming out about this, it appears that Sanders may have transgressed in a way that is embarrassing if not illegal. I think it's not unreasonable that Bo might have wanted to keep quiet about that situation.

Should Bo have advised CJ that Sanders was likely going to resign and that they were bringing in a replacement? Probably. But this was almost a lose-lose scenario. If you tell him that Sanders is resigning, he's going to want to know why. If you don't tell him, it is going to look shady and he will think you aren't being straight with him. If you don't tell him anything and he finds out Sanders has left after he send his LOI, then he thinks you aren't being straight with him. So, again, it was a lose-lose. And, in any event, CJ has already indicated that the loss of Sanders has not impacted his decision to come to Nebraska.

The second mistake this article makes is to suggest that anyone was actually injured in this. We all know Watson has been applying for every coaching position that's been open. And, as said before, no recruits other than CJ have indicated they felt misled, and even he is said that he would have come to Nebraska anyway.

This makes this whole ordeal much ado about nothing. It absolutely could have and should have been handled better and I think Bo takes the secrecy thing too far for his own good, but it is being blown WAY out of proportion.

Very well said. You just saved me some time in writing a lengthy post. Anyone who has followed Nebraska recruiting even somewhat closely these last couple of months has known for a while that (1) at least Watson was out, (2) the offense was going in an Oregon spread direction, and (3) the affected recruits were well aware of these changes and some of them even let it slip in their interviews.

The article's author clearly didn't do his homework on this. I certainly don't think Bo handled this very well at all, but this is just sloppy journalism.

 

[redblooded]

I don't have a problem with firing coaches. Heck, I've been calling for the firing of Watson for as long as anyone on this board. My problem is that recruits apparently signed with Nebraska without being informed that their position coaches would not be here. I do not think that is fair to them, in fact I think it reeks of dishonesty and a lack of integrity. If my son had signed with Nebraska to be coached specifically by Marvin Sanders, and the coaches hid the fact that he would not be here until after he signed his LOI, I would be disgusted.

Maybe I just expect a higher standard of conduct.

YOU

DON'T

KNOW

WHAT

ACTUALLY

HAPPENED.

Here's what we DO know.

Charles Jackson believed/was led to believe that Marvin Sanders would be his position coach after signing his LOI with Nebraska. That information was absolutely incorrect.

Where we differ is the conclusions that we draw from those facts.

From what I've heard Pelini couldn't talk due to legal reasons. If that was the case I think Pelini made lemon shots out of lemons. If your told by the University lawyers to keep your trap shut I think Pelini did the right thing by focusing on doing his job and and getting his class signed.

Pelini could have easily given the kid a heads up without rising to the level of a legal disclosure.

I'm not seeing a lot of sympathy for a kid that basically signed a contract under false pretenses and has no recourse. But hey . . . he's locked into NU so that's all that matters, right?

I believe you are missing the part of the whole thing where the original article said "Had the Sanders news come out before signing day, Jackson said he probably still would have signed with Nebraska." So in the end, he said himself he'd likely be locked into Nebraska anyways.

I have sympathy for the kid that his position coach couldn't continue with the program. I don't think anyone wanted to see Sanders gone based on his coaching. How much sympathy is really needed when he stated himself it wouldn't have made a difference in the original article? If he was asking for a release and NU wasn't granting it that'd be a different story. Why are we supposed to be up in arms about this towards the program when all we really know officially is the OWH baited and took a gut reaction from a kid out of context in order to write a hatchet job article so they could try and get more hits for their content? Cripes.

 

[zoogs]

Watson knew full well what kind of offense we were running in 2010 back in January.

If I might chime in, the kind of offense were running in 2010 was going to be the stuff we saw in the Holiday Bowl, something which has been more or less confirmed by Niles Paul (and I think Watson himself spoke on it). Plainly, it is not the offense we actually ran in 2010. A change occurred and you could argue how major it was, I'd say it is fairly significant.

 

[macroboy]

I always find it interesting when someone's assumptions align with his or her wishes.

Likewise.

NO....DOUBT.

Carlfense how much longer are you gonna keep pumping this broken story.

Somehow a blog that no one will even remember in 3 days is better support than the recruit's father?

I'm sorry your faith has been shaken....but I'm not sure most of it was real anyways.

 

[knapplc]

Watson knew full well what kind of offense we were running in 2010 back in January.

If I might chime in, the kind of offense were running in 2010 was going to be the stuff we saw in the Holiday Bowl, something which has been more or less confirmed by Niles Paul (and I think Watson himself spoke on it). Plainly, it is not the offense we actually ran in 2010. A change occurred and you could argue how major it was, I'd say it is fairly significant.

Again, NOTHING we ran in 2010 was not in our playbook in 2009. Niles may not have liked the direction we went in, but it was there, in 2009's Holiday Bowl, for everyone to see.

 

[HuskerBruin]

Watson knew full well what kind of offense we were running in 2010 back in January.

If I might chime in, the kind of offense were running in 2010 was going to be the stuff we saw in the Holiday Bowl, something which has been more or less confirmed by Niles Paul (and I think Watson himself spoke on it). Plainly, it is not the offense we actually ran in 2010. A change occurred and you could argue how major it was, I'd say it is fairly significant.

Niles even said recently on 1620 (USC) that they were all set to run the Holiday Bowl offense this season until the end of fall camp, when the coaches (he didn't specify Bo or Wats) suddenly changed it to suit Taylor. It was obvious that Niles was pissed about this and how it affected him and the other WRs.

 

[zoogs]

Watson knew full well what kind of offense we were running in 2010 back in January.

If I might chime in, the kind of offense were running in 2010 was going to be the stuff we saw in the Holiday Bowl, something which has been more or less confirmed by Niles Paul (and I think Watson himself spoke on it). Plainly, it is not the offense we actually ran in 2010. A change occurred and you could argue how major it was, I'd say it is fairly significant.

Again, NOTHING we ran in 2010 was not in our playbook in 2009. Niles may not have liked the direction we went in, but it was there, in 2009's Holiday Bowl, for everyone to see.

Most of what we ran in 2010 probably was in our playbook in 2009. In the subsection marked "Wildcat package."

Whether you want to talk about scope or philosophy, there was a shift that led in two frontrunners for the QB position being less qualified than another guy, to operate the offense. How we did things last year and going forward, are different in a significant way compared to how we did things in the Holiday Bowl against Arizona. Most would argue for the better, but it's different, is all.

 

[BIGREDIOWAN]

It could have been handled better by Bo and company and I think we all know that. Is it as big of a deal as the media is gonna make it? No..........but that's all the media is good for these days.

 

[Hercules]

Watson knew full well what kind of offense we were running in 2010 back in January.

If I might chime in, the kind of offense were running in 2010 was going to be the stuff we saw in the Holiday Bowl, something which has been more or less confirmed by Niles Paul (and I think Watson himself spoke on it). Plainly, it is not the offense we actually ran in 2010. A change occurred and you could argue how major it was, I'd say it is fairly significant.

Again, NOTHING we ran in 2010 was not in our playbook in 2009. Niles may not have liked the direction we went in, but it was there, in 2009's Holiday Bowl, for everyone to see.

Most of what we ran in 2010 probably was in our playbook in 2009. In the subsection marked "Wildcat package."

Whether you want to talk about scope or philosophy, there was a shift that led in two frontrunners for the QB position being less qualified than another guy, to operate the offense. How we did things last year and going forward, are different in a significant way compared to how we did things in the Holiday Bowl against Arizona. Most would argue for the better, but it's different, is all.

The only possible "shift" that could have occurred in our offense was simply an acceleration towards what Bo has wanted to run since he came here, which is the spread option. That acceleration would have occurred because we actually found a QB who could run that offense.

 

[foul1]

Soooo will the schools that lose their coaches to come work for BO get berated aswell for lieing to their recruits?

 

[EZ-E]

There’s nothing in the N.C.A.A. rulebook that prohibits a team from doing just this after signing day, of course. The only people hurt in this case are the prospects who felt misled and the coaches who opted to take one for the team — like Watson or Gilmore — while they could have been shopping their resumes for a job at another program. Yes, Nebraska’s behavior was a bit shady, a bit unsettling and a bit out of character, but it was nonetheless within the rules of conduct, if not the rules of etiquette.

This is mostly trash. He makes two critical mistakes, IMO.

First, he seems to be mixing the Sanders and Watson/Gilmore issues together, which is a huge mistake. Watson/Gilmore is about on-the-job performance; Sanders is about extra-curricular stuff. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I haven't heard any offensive recruits come out and say they were mislead about the impending coaching changes on that front. Indeed, did not Jamaal Turner and/or Ameer Abdullah state that they understood coaching changes were underway? As for Sanders, there are many perfectly good reasons to keep things under wraps. For one, if you believe the rumors coming out about this, it appears that Sanders may have transgressed in a way that is embarrassing if not illegal. I think it's not unreasonable that Bo might have wanted to keep quiet about that situation.

Should Bo have advised CJ that Sanders was likely going to resign and that they were bringing in a replacement? Probably. But this was almost a lose-lose scenario. If you tell him that Sanders is resigning, he's going to want to know why. If you don't tell him, it is going to look shady and he will think you aren't being straight with him. If you don't tell him anything and he finds out Sanders has left after he send his LOI, then he thinks you aren't being straight with him. So, again, it was a lose-lose. And, in any event, CJ has already indicated that the loss of Sanders has not impacted his decision to come to Nebraska.

The second mistake this article makes is to suggest that anyone was actually injured in this. We all know Watson has been applying for every coaching position that's been open. And, as said before, no recruits other than CJ have indicated they felt misled, and even he is said that he would have come to Nebraska anyway.

This makes this whole ordeal much ado about nothing. It absolutely could have and should have been handled better and I think Bo takes the secrecy thing too far for his own good, but it is being blown WAY out of proportion.

Post of the day my friend.

 

[knapplc]

Agreed. Good post, Hujan. :thumbs

I will say this, though - this blog, errant though it is, does show that this is not a dead issue "out there." There are things which may happen in the future which may make this crop up again, and in an ugly light for Nebraska. It doesn't matter how flawed this blog is, this situation could definitely have been handled better on our end.

Let's hope it blows over. I would never be more happy to be wrong about this. But we cannot ignore the potential for damage in future recruiting.