• He hired Bo Pelini over Turner Gill because, simply, he felt Nebraska’s defense needed more attention than the offense. “Telling Turner that I was not going to hire him was one of the hardest things I have had to do,’’ Osborne wrote. “I know that Turner wanted the job, understood the culture at Nebraska and was someone who was a great person and a great role model.’’
I don't want to turn this into a Bo vs. Turner, but just the decision process--doesn't that seem a bit short-sighted? I mean, you're looking at hiring a young guy, probably hoping to keep him in the job for 20 years, right? Do you really do that based on an immediate weakness in the program?
I suppose if it was dead even, that's a reasonable tie-breaker.
Actually I think it was the opposite of shortsighted. Look at it the other way, there's always that possibility that whoever Osborne hires, it just simply wouldn't work out. So if it doesn't work out, between Gill and Pelini which was most likely to still be available in 4-5 years?
I think it's much more likely if Bo doesn't work out that Turner Gill will still be the next coach, if Gill had gotten the job I'm not nearly as confident that Bo would still be available down the line had Turner not worked out. Hiring Bo, while likely the best choice anyways, gives you a potential fallback option later.
