Does the Pelini Era cast the Callahan Era in a different light?

[AFhusker]

Those 14 starters went 10-3 in 2003. Eric crouch woulda looked pretty bad in that west coast offense in 2004 as well. 2004 wasnt exactly a gauntlet schedule.

2003 was the eaiest schedle NU has had in the last 20-30 years until this past season. So you are now comparing Joe Dailey's "talent" to Eric Crouch? If you think their talent is even remotly close, there is no reasoning with you. If you are, then we will have to agree to disagree and move on becuase you are not thinking logically at all.

 

[AFhusker]

Even as staunch a Pelini guy as I've been until the bitter end, you guys preaching about losing records are missing the point. And let's face it, had Bo been forced to coach a team in one of the top 2 conferences in the country in his last 4 years, it's quite possible, even probably, he'd a had 2, maybe even 3 losing seasons as well.

Now, it didnt happen, so for the sake of this discussion, all I can say is that both failed. Both had to job to do according to the expectations and desires of this program and fanbase, and both failed. But as far as changing my view on the Callahan years, no it doesnt change. I've preached about the lingering effects of that time, and still believe they did linger for a few years, but I never placed the blame on Callahan in a hatred type of manner. He took a job and did it to the best of what he knew. And frankly, while we distinguish experience, Bill was probably less experienced as a college head coach than Bo was. He had only been a head coach in the NFL two whole seasons, and had been out of the college game and atmosphere for years.

the negative callahan effect lingered throughout bo's best years here? and bo seemed to do worse the further he got from the callahan era? that is curious.

Yeah, despite leaving all the talent behind, i always there were some issues that needed to be fixed and weeded out, like most coaching changes deal with. It's not a Callahan only issue. Just a general observation of a coaching change. Obviously as hte years wore on, it became a Bo issue, not a Callahan issue. Bo had to come in and fix some things that were broken. So does Mike Riley. Callahan came in and completely tore down the culture of Nebraska football. Removed a tenured offensive identity known on a national scale for 40 years. No, this is not a "callahan and Petersen purposely ruined nebraska football" crazy man post. it's just an observation of what Bill did by following a plan he feld was best and made him and his staff most comfortable. But it created a division, did it not? How many poeple you think had immediate and lingering angst towards Callahan while he was here simply because his offense "was not Nebraska football". And having losing seasons twice in 4 years and missing bowl games didnt help with that flip of identity. So by the end of 2007, Nebraska football as a program and fanbase really had no sense of what we were anymore, or where we were headed. And as has been documented there were a few folks who didnt agree with the Bo hire from day one to fix it.

Please tell us what tenured offensive identity NU ran for 40 years?

Even Tom Osborne didn't run the same offense for the entire time he was the offensive coordinator at Nebraska. He became the offensive coordinator under Devaney in '69 and we all know he was his own offensive coordinator while he was the head coach.

an offense dedicated to the run. Really as simple as that. When you thought of Nebraska, you thought of tough hardcore power football. Youre talkin sophisticated Xs and Os. Im talking about a national brand. An identity in the eye of national perception. Callahan changed it. 180 degrees.I know. Sometimes the things i say really make you have to think. I apologize for that.

We didn't run an offense dedicated to the run for 40 years. Sorry, it's just not what we did.

you again are missing the point. Youre picking apart playcalling and talking about the National perception of Nebraska football at the time Callahan was hired. There was a cukture and an identity that Nebraska known for. It doesnt matter that the offenses actually did change ir that they threw it more early in Osbornes tenure. Its that the general perception of Nebraska football was that it had always been this hard nosed old fashioned style of football. And a lot of people took pride in that.
Is that understandable? Or am i going to have to rexplain it again by saying the exact same thing again?

Who cares about perception? I hate to sound like Herm Edwards, but you play to win the game, who cares how you win it. We could win by passing for 500 yards or by running it for 500 yards, I would be equally as happy with the result. If you really care about how it is done, then you are nit picking and wasting your energy on something that is irrelevant.

 

[Count 'Bility]

Those 14 starters went 10-3 in 2003. Eric crouch woulda looked pretty bad in that west coast offense in 2004 as well. 2004 wasnt exactly a gauntlet schedule.

2003 was the eaiest schedle NU has had in the last 20-30 years until this past season. So you are now comparing Joe Dailey's "talent" to Eric Crouch? If you think their talent is even remotly close, there is no reasoning with you. If you are, then we will have to agree to disagree and move on becuase you are not thinking logically at all.

Daily never got a chance to play in a system that fit his skillset. You brought up the running out of bounds against Southern Miss which I find laughable cuz he wasnt gonna score anyway, and protecting yourself as a qb is what he was coached to too. Callahan installed his system and uninstalled the previous system cold turkey. There was not trasnsition stage. Our lineman couldnt pass pro. Our receivers were glorified fullbacks asked to read and run route trees. The terminology changed. And most of all, like you said, we didnt have a qb. Im just sayin. You dont go from 10-3 to 5-7 against essentially the same schedule (trading Texas, A&M, and Ok St for OU, Baylor, and Tech. And looking at those team at that time, that trade was pretty much a wash) on only lack of talent.

Frank Solich leads Nebraska to 9-10 wins in 2004. I know we'll never know, but I'd be happily willing to bet everything I own on it.

 

[Count 'Bility]

Even as staunch a Pelini guy as I've been until the bitter end, you guys preaching about losing records are missing the point. And let's face it, had Bo been forced to coach a team in one of the top 2 conferences in the country in his last 4 years, it's quite possible, even probably, he'd a had 2, maybe even 3 losing seasons as well.

Now, it didnt happen, so for the sake of this discussion, all I can say is that both failed. Both had to job to do according to the expectations and desires of this program and fanbase, and both failed. But as far as changing my view on the Callahan years, no it doesnt change. I've preached about the lingering effects of that time, and still believe they did linger for a few years, but I never placed the blame on Callahan in a hatred type of manner. He took a job and did it to the best of what he knew. And frankly, while we distinguish experience, Bill was probably less experienced as a college head coach than Bo was. He had only been a head coach in the NFL two whole seasons, and had been out of the college game and atmosphere for years.

the negative callahan effect lingered throughout bo's best years here? and bo seemed to do worse the further he got from the callahan era? that is curious.

Yeah, despite leaving all the talent behind, i always there were some issues that needed to be fixed and weeded out, like most coaching changes deal with. It's not a Callahan only issue. Just a general observation of a coaching change. Obviously as hte years wore on, it became a Bo issue, not a Callahan issue. Bo had to come in and fix some things that were broken. So does Mike Riley. Callahan came in and completely tore down the culture of Nebraska football. Removed a tenured offensive identity known on a national scale for 40 years. No, this is not a "callahan and Petersen purposely ruined nebraska football" crazy man post. it's just an observation of what Bill did by following a plan he feld was best and made him and his staff most comfortable. But it created a division, did it not? How many poeple you think had immediate and lingering angst towards Callahan while he was here simply because his offense "was not Nebraska football". And having losing seasons twice in 4 years and missing bowl games didnt help with that flip of identity. So by the end of 2007, Nebraska football as a program and fanbase really had no sense of what we were anymore, or where we were headed. And as has been documented there were a few folks who didnt agree with the Bo hire from day one to fix it.

Please tell us what tenured offensive identity NU ran for 40 years?

Even Tom Osborne didn't run the same offense for the entire time he was the offensive coordinator at Nebraska. He became the offensive coordinator under Devaney in '69 and we all know he was his own offensive coordinator while he was the head coach.

an offense dedicated to the run. Really as simple as that. When you thought of Nebraska, you thought of tough hardcore power football. Youre talkin sophisticated Xs and Os. Im talking about a national brand. An identity in the eye of national perception. Callahan changed it. 180 degrees.I know. Sometimes the things i say really make you have to think. I apologize for that.

We didn't run an offense dedicated to the run for 40 years. Sorry, it's just not what we did.

you again are missing the point. Youre picking apart playcalling and talking about the National perception of Nebraska football at the time Callahan was hired. There was a cukture and an identity that Nebraska known for. It doesnt matter that the offenses actually did change ir that they threw it more early in Osbornes tenure. Its that the general perception of Nebraska football was that it had always been this hard nosed old fashioned style of football. And a lot of people took pride in that.
Is that understandable? Or am i going to have to rexplain it again by saying the exact same thing again?

Who cares about perception? I hate to sound like Herm Edwards, but you play to win the game, who cares how you win it. We could win by passing for 500 yards or by running it for 500 yards, I would be equally as happy with the result. If you really care about how it is done, then you are nit picking and wasting your energy on something that is irrelevant.

I give up. you need a lesson on reading comprehension. Everything you just said, literally has absolutely nothing to do with my point.

This is what I get for getting into this discussions with you. It's hopeless. I thought I learned the last umpteen times. Apparently not.

 

[Redux]

I understand the posters who feel Bo ruined Nebraska, well I understand it to a point. He battled the administration, and he lost. He got blown out numerous times on a national stage. He instilled an us vs the fans, media and university attitude in his players. None of these things are accomplishments to be proud of.

All of those things are embarrassing but they wont haunt Nebraska for years to come like some seem to think. Bo got fired by the administration he fought with, that solves itself. The blowouts go on Nebraskas record but they will be attributed to Bo himself more so than us. The players overly loyal to Bo and his attitude towards SE are either gone, will be gone, or will get over Bo.

So for those of us who want to preach how big of a black eye the Pelini era was on Nebraska, feel free. There was harm done, no denying it. Yet why are there coaches scratching their heads over his firing? Why is a good portion of the fanbase upset over his firing? Because those people can see through the bullcrap. Sure Bo was hot headed. But he did win. Make the excuse all you want of he won when he was supposed to, more than Callahan can say. Like it or not he was loyal to his players and their families. He was an outstanding humanitarian off the field. Take the good with the bad, this isnt a new concept. Preach on here all you want about him being a horrible coach, but the battle is over. He is gone. His lasting impact on the program will not forever be a bad one, I dont feel that it is now.

 

[Count 'Bility]

I dont know Blitz. I'm starting to think that the effects of the Callahan era are a little exaggerated. I'll agree that to a point, Pelini did seem to stabilize the program to a level of winning seasons and conference championship game appearences early on, but in the last 4 years, it was pretty dicey. With blowout losses and the constant edge of our seat play in which we as fans were constantly waiting for the wheels to come off much more so than we were to take the next step, it's really hard now that we've moved on to distinguish the failures of one era from the other. Like I said in my first post in this thread. The bottom line is that both failed in regards to the expectations and desires of the program and fanbase. It wasnt gonna work. For either of them.

If anything, Callahan can take a little credit for modernizing the offensive style of play. This is probably a stretch in using that word to describe, for Osborne was quite a bit ahead of the curve in his style. TO was using spread concepts and using an uptempo style (huddling close to the ball. Often time when they were in go mode, they were breaking the huddle before the officials even had the ball spotted) long before college football knew what spread and tempo was. But it still seemed so, by introducing us to pocket qbs, long pass-pro lineman, multiple receivers, complex passing routes, the multiple shifts, etc.

 

[NUinID]

Sorry AF, i just happen to think youre a little wrong on it. When you flip it and install a west coast offense with all option/ power personel, 5-7 is what you get. And again, Daily gets a bad rap. He became very out of place and probably ruined him from a psychological standpoint. Also, Nebraska returned 7 starters on both side of the ball from a 10-3 2003 team. And thats not including Stewart Bradly and Carriker who did start and did play a significant role in the Callahan years, recruited by Solich. So dont tell me ut was lack of talent and not a change of systems.

I have a friend that had a nephew on the team in 2004. He says that BC came to Turner Gill about halfway through the season and asked him to install some option into the offense, realizing he needed something more compatible with his personnel. The story goes Gill told him that to do it well it would require more time than he would want to spend on it. So they didn't put it back into the offense.

Don't know if it is true on not, just a story I heard.

It is amazing to me how everyone can have such a different view on things.

It does amaze me when people always get so upset that Solich took a Ferrari and turned it into a Pinto. I really don't even know why he wanted the job. Nebraska was at the pinnacle of its power when he took over, the only place he could go was down. Hell even TO knew that Nebraska was not going stay on top forever. Only fans thought we would.

Solich's recruiting wasn't as good as it needed to be, but it wasn't that bad. He didn't recruit QB and RB very well. But, he did recruit Carl Crawford who turned to baseball. That turned out OK for Carl.

He barely missed on Zibakowski to ND etc.

Nebraska's biggest problem was having a lot of high star guys not panning out due to injuries or what ever. Lots of linemen never seeing the field that were suppose to be pretty good out of the gate. I remember a TE from Millard West that was rated top 10 in the nation that never played a down because he was always hurt, cant remember his name.

Lots of guys not panning out is what I remember about Solich, and the fact that his older staff wasn't recruiting like the should anymore. Milt wasn't going on the road to recruit anymore that's got to hurt.

 

[AFhusker]

Even as staunch a Pelini guy as I've been until the bitter end, you guys preaching about losing records are missing the point. And let's face it, had Bo been forced to coach a team in one of the top 2 conferences in the country in his last 4 years, it's quite possible, even probably, he'd a had 2, maybe even 3 losing seasons as well.

Now, it didnt happen, so for the sake of this discussion, all I can say is that both failed. Both had to job to do according to the expectations and desires of this program and fanbase, and both failed. But as far as changing my view on the Callahan years, no it doesnt change. I've preached about the lingering effects of that time, and still believe they did linger for a few years, but I never placed the blame on Callahan in a hatred type of manner. He took a job and did it to the best of what he knew. And frankly, while we distinguish experience, Bill was probably less experienced as a college head coach than Bo was. He had only been a head coach in the NFL two whole seasons, and had been out of the college game and atmosphere for years.

the negative callahan effect lingered throughout bo's best years here? and bo seemed to do worse the further he got from the callahan era? that is curious.

Yeah, despite leaving all the talent behind, i always there were some issues that needed to be fixed and weeded out, like most coaching changes deal with. It's not a Callahan only issue. Just a general observation of a coaching change. Obviously as hte years wore on, it became a Bo issue, not a Callahan issue. Bo had to come in and fix some things that were broken. So does Mike Riley. Callahan came in and completely tore down the culture of Nebraska football. Removed a tenured offensive identity known on a national scale for 40 years. No, this is not a "callahan and Petersen purposely ruined nebraska football" crazy man post. it's just an observation of what Bill did by following a plan he feld was best and made him and his staff most comfortable. But it created a division, did it not? How many poeple you think had immediate and lingering angst towards Callahan while he was here simply because his offense "was not Nebraska football". And having losing seasons twice in 4 years and missing bowl games didnt help with that flip of identity. So by the end of 2007, Nebraska football as a program and fanbase really had no sense of what we were anymore, or where we were headed. And as has been documented there were a few folks who didnt agree with the Bo hire from day one to fix it.

Please tell us what tenured offensive identity NU ran for 40 years?

Even Tom Osborne didn't run the same offense for the entire time he was the offensive coordinator at Nebraska. He became the offensive coordinator under Devaney in '69 and we all know he was his own offensive coordinator while he was the head coach.

an offense dedicated to the run. Really as simple as that. When you thought of Nebraska, you thought of tough hardcore power football. Youre talkin sophisticated Xs and Os. Im talking about a national brand. An identity in the eye of national perception. Callahan changed it. 180 degrees.I know. Sometimes the things i say really make you have to think. I apologize for that.

We didn't run an offense dedicated to the run for 40 years. Sorry, it's just not what we did.

you again are missing the point. Youre picking apart playcalling and talking about the National perception of Nebraska football at the time Callahan was hired. There was a cukture and an identity that Nebraska known for. It doesnt matter that the offenses actually did change ir that they threw it more early in Osbornes tenure. Its that the general perception of Nebraska football was that it had always been this hard nosed old fashioned style of football. And a lot of people took pride in that.
Is that understandable? Or am i going to have to rexplain it again by saying the exact same thing again?

Who cares about perception? I hate to sound like Herm Edwards, but you play to win the game, who cares how you win it. We could win by passing for 500 yards or by running it for 500 yards, I would be equally as happy with the result. If you really care about how it is done, then you are nit picking and wasting your energy on something that is irrelevant.

I give up. you need a lesson on reading comprehension. Everything you just said, literally has absolutely nothing to do with my point.

This is what I get for getting into this discussions with you. It's hopeless. I thought I learned the last umpteen times. Apparently not.

No, my comprehension is fine, you are talking about sh#t such as the perceptions that Nebraska fans identified and took pride with the three yards and a cloud of dust offense. And I am telling you that the fans perceptions doesn't (and shouldn't) ever matter. Once you start running the program based on how the fan base wants it to run, then that program is going to fail, and fail miserably. You hire a coaching staff, give them at least six years and if they pan out you keep them, if they don't, you move on to the next staff.

 

[AFhusker]

I dont know Blitz. I'm starting to think that the effects of the Callahan era are a little exaggerated. I'll agree that to a point, Pelini did seem to stabilize the program to a level of winning seasons and conference championship game appearences early on, but in the last 4 years, it was pretty dicey. With blowout losses and the constant edge of our seat play in which we as fans were constantly waiting for the wheels to come off much more so than we were to take the next step, it's really hard now that we've moved on to distinguish the failures of one era from the other. Like I said in my first post in this thread. The bottom line is that both failed in regards to the expectations and desires of the program and fanbase. It wasnt gonna work. For either of them.

If anything, Callahan can take a little credit for modernizing the offensive style of play. This is probably a stretch in using that word to describe, for Osborne was quite a bit ahead of the curve in his style. TO was using spread concepts and using an uptempo style (huddling close to the ball. Often time when they were in go mode, they were breaking the huddle before the officials even had the ball spotted) long before college football knew what spread and tempo was. But it still seemed so, by introducing us to pocket qbs, long pass-pro lineman, multiple receivers, complex passing routes, the multiple shifts, etc.

.

Now this we can agree on. If anything Bill took too much crap for the stuff that Frank did. Of the three coaches, Bill's was the hardest job to fix of the three as the expectations were still at the MNC level, with Ohio level talent on the roster. Yes Frank had those expectations, but he also took over the program with Tom's MNC talent filled roster, which gave him a nice record after four years, but once Tom's players left, it was over. The same goes on the defensive side after Charlie retired in 1999, which is why the defense had two more good years in them. But the expectations part for Bill was the fault of SP, you don't give a speech about "letting OU and UT take over the conference" when you are in a rebuilding mode. That is what Tom did best when he introduced Bo, he tempered fan expectations to give Bo some rope, too bad he still ended up hanging himself.

 

[Count 'Bility]

Even as staunch a Pelini guy as I've been until the bitter end, you guys preaching about losing records are missing the point. And let's face it, had Bo been forced to coach a team in one of the top 2 conferences in the country in his last 4 years, it's quite possible, even probably, he'd a had 2, maybe even 3 losing seasons as well.

Now, it didnt happen, so for the sake of this discussion, all I can say is that both failed. Both had to job to do according to the expectations and desires of this program and fanbase, and both failed. But as far as changing my view on the Callahan years, no it doesnt change. I've preached about the lingering effects of that time, and still believe they did linger for a few years, but I never placed the blame on Callahan in a hatred type of manner. He took a job and did it to the best of what he knew. And frankly, while we distinguish experience, Bill was probably less experienced as a college head coach than Bo was. He had only been a head coach in the NFL two whole seasons, and had been out of the college game and atmosphere for years.

the negative callahan effect lingered throughout bo's best years here? and bo seemed to do worse the further he got from the callahan era? that is curious.

Yeah, despite leaving all the talent behind, i always there were some issues that needed to be fixed and weeded out, like most coaching changes deal with. It's not a Callahan only issue. Just a general observation of a coaching change. Obviously as hte years wore on, it became a Bo issue, not a Callahan issue. Bo had to come in and fix some things that were broken. So does Mike Riley. Callahan came in and completely tore down the culture of Nebraska football. Removed a tenured offensive identity known on a national scale for 40 years. No, this is not a "callahan and Petersen purposely ruined nebraska football" crazy man post. it's just an observation of what Bill did by following a plan he feld was best and made him and his staff most comfortable. But it created a division, did it not? How many poeple you think had immediate and lingering angst towards Callahan while he was here simply because his offense "was not Nebraska football". And having losing seasons twice in 4 years and missing bowl games didnt help with that flip of identity. So by the end of 2007, Nebraska football as a program and fanbase really had no sense of what we were anymore, or where we were headed. And as has been documented there were a few folks who didnt agree with the Bo hire from day one to fix it.

Please tell us what tenured offensive identity NU ran for 40 years?

Even Tom Osborne didn't run the same offense for the entire time he was the offensive coordinator at Nebraska. He became the offensive coordinator under Devaney in '69 and we all know he was his own offensive coordinator while he was the head coach.

an offense dedicated to the run. Really as simple as that. When you thought of Nebraska, you thought of tough hardcore power football. Youre talkin sophisticated Xs and Os. Im talking about a national brand. An identity in the eye of national perception. Callahan changed it. 180 degrees.I know. Sometimes the things i say really make you have to think. I apologize for that.

We didn't run an offense dedicated to the run for 40 years. Sorry, it's just not what we did.

you again are missing the point. Youre picking apart playcalling and talking about the National perception of Nebraska football at the time Callahan was hired. There was a cukture and an identity that Nebraska known for. It doesnt matter that the offenses actually did change ir that they threw it more early in Osbornes tenure. Its that the general perception of Nebraska football was that it had always been this hard nosed old fashioned style of football. And a lot of people took pride in that.Is that understandable? Or am i going to have to rexplain it again by saying the exact same thing again?

Who cares about perception? I hate to sound like Herm Edwards, but you play to win the game, who cares how you win it. We could win by passing for 500 yards or by running it for 500 yards, I would be equally as happy with the result. If you really care about how it is done, then you are nit picking and wasting your energy on something that is irrelevant.

I give up. you need a lesson on reading comprehension. Everything you just said, literally has absolutely nothing to do with my point.
This is what I get for getting into this discussions with you. It's hopeless. I thought I learned the last umpteen times. Apparently not.

No, my comprehension is fine, you are talking about sh#t such as the perceptions that Nebraska fans identified and took pride with the three yards and a cloud of dust offense. And I am telling you that the fans perceptions doesn't (and shouldn't) ever matter. Once you start running the program based on how the fan base wants it to run, then that program is going to fail, and fail miserably. You hire a coaching staff, give them at least six years and if they pan out you keep them, if they don't, you move on to the next staff. [/size]

No. Its not. Cuz you still dont get it. And id bet youre probably the only one, cuz youre still the only one arguing it.

 

[Saunders]

Without Steve Pedersen, there is no Callahan or Pelini.

 

[sd'sker]

Without Steve Pedersen, there is no Callahan or Pelini.

i didn't know callahan and pelini were brothers?

 

[junior4949]

Clownahan's biggest mistake was taking the Nebraska job. It was an extremely poor fit from the word go. One really didn't have to look any further than the 2004 game against Texas Tech to know this just wasn't going to work out. The Clownahan era was just a mistake.

The BP era wasn't a mistake. It ended horribly, but it wasn't a mistake.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

My guess is someday, BC will be welcomed back to Nebraska, BO Pelini will never be invited back for any reason. Snakes never change.

Knapp's original post made me think, no. No real change. BC and BP are cast in their own light.

But now skersfan has me wondering.

The notion of Callahan being welcomed back and Bo Pelini shunned like a snake was unthinkable six months ago, even though Bo was the same guy he'd been for years.

I don't think anyone really wants to rehabilitate and welcome back Callahan, but I don't think we have room for more than one mortal enemy in our brains.

Bo Pelini was given a lot of space because we wanted a lot of distance from Callahan. Give Bo credit for 2008 and 2009. There's nothing more a coach can do than get better results from someone else's recruits.

When Bo started looking less like a savior, we started looking for excuses. The closest excuse was Callahan. Bo was still cleaning up his mess. The Callahan leftover was Shawn Watson. Watson was replaced with Tim Beck. Like Watson, Beck tried to build an offense around the mercurial talents of an oft-injured quarterback. The easiest way to support Bo was to blame the offense, somehow ignoring that as both a head coach and defensive specialist, Nebraska's problems could be easier traced to Pelini.

Then when Bo Pelini proves himself a self-serving bad guy, willing to blame the fans instead of himself, we're finally willing to blame him, even though he's pretty much the same guy he's been for years.

Have you ever dumped or gotten dumped by a girlfriend? And you start fantasizing about the girlfriend you had before her? Who was pretty hot, and you can't remember why you broke up?

Bill Callahan wasn't that pretty.

 

[Count 'Bility]

That was absolutely awesome Chamberlain. Well done.