Early expectations for this year.

[carlfense]

I don't think anyone is advocating firing Bo. It's more of a "what if" conversation. At least, that's how I read it.

Oh. Well, I don't think that Bo should be fired either now or in the near future.

It seemed like a one-sided argument to me. People were horrified that others wanted Bo fired . . . when no one actually said that that they wanted Bo fired. Sort of a strange circle the wagons type of scenario.

Well duh......just maybe if you actually read some of the posts on this thread you might get another idea. Some are claiming he's "already" on the hot seat. Other's state if he doesn't win a conference championship soon he needs to be re-evaluated. Other's claim nine wins a years doesn't hack it. Etc. etc.

So you agree that no one wants him fired right now? Cool. :thumbs

You seem angry. I'm not sure why.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

Hate to defend Pedersen, but I'm forced to remind you that Frank Solich was fired because he had an alcohol and young girl problem that was always threatening a scandal, half of which came to pass his first season at Ohio. Don't know if Frank overseeing the first non-winning season in 40 years was harder to overlook, but his firing went beyond 9 win seasons. The administration had two bad options for explaining the dismissal and chose the least embarrassing.

Before Solich, Nebraska had two coaches over the course of 37 years. Following Solich, they fired Bill Callahan after four years, with few complaints that he wasn't given enough time. No one knows better than Tom Osborne that championships don't come quick or easy, but if there's a downturn in performance combined with the sense that Bo Pelini is a less than desirable representative of the University of Nebraska, TO would definitely start considering his options. The pundits would cluck about the impossibly high standards at Nebraska, but they wouldn't necessarily disagree with the move. If Husker fans seem impatient, so does the rest of college football. The storyline around Nebraska is whether or not they can return to relevance.

I don't think relevance is too much to ask for.

 

['SkersRule]

I don't think anyone is advocating firing Bo. It's more of a "what if" conversation. At least, that's how I read it.

Oh. Well, I don't think that Bo should be fired either now or in the near future.

It seemed like a one-sided argument to me. People were horrified that others wanted Bo fired . . . when no one actually said that that they wanted Bo fired. Sort of a strange circle the wagons type of scenario.

The reaction, at least from my perspective, is that of bewilderment. I simply can not even begin to understand why some people even want to have a "what if" Bo were fired conversation. Because if they're bringing it up "hypothetically" then they've already considered it and are simply testing the waters to see how much support they'd have to cause dissent and in-fighting. To even speak "hypothetically" about getting rid of a coach who has won an average of 9.5 games all four years he's been here is beyong ignorant. Some of our fans act like we went 0-12 last season.

 

[RedDenver]

If you fire a coach who consistently brings in 9 wins a season, you're a fool.

If you fire a coach who wins 9 games a season but consistently loses to your conference rivals, you're not a fool

Wait, wait, wait. You're argument completely unravels when you violate basic logic:

If A, then B. => If A and anything, then B.

If A and C, then not B. <contradiction>

That's a contradiction and fundamentally flawed. What you should have said was, "If you fire a coach who wins 9 games a season but consistently loses to your conference rivals, you're a fool." Then we'd all agree, and there's no point in continuing the discussion.

 

[carlfense]

I don't think anyone is advocating firing Bo. It's more of a "what if" conversation. At least, that's how I read it.

Oh. Well, I don't think that Bo should be fired either now or in the near future.

It seemed like a one-sided argument to me. People were horrified that others wanted Bo fired . . . when no one actually said that that they wanted Bo fired. Sort of a strange circle the wagons type of scenario.

The reaction, at least from my perspective, is that of bewilderment. I simply can not even begin to understand why some people even want to have a "what if" Bo were fired conversation. Because if they're bringing it up "hypothetically" then they've already considered it and are simply testing the waters to see how much support they'd have to cause dissent and in-fighting. To even speak "hypothetically" about getting rid of a coach who has won an average of 9.5 games all four years he's been here is beyong ignorant. Some of our fans act like we went 0-12 last season.

"Hypothetically," how long will you be satisfied with these results? Solid 9-10 win seasons. Win against a few good teams. Lose to a few bad teams. No conference championships. No BCS games. Win every other mid-level bowl game at the end of each season.

When is it ok with you to raise that sort of hypothetical question?

 

[Saunders]

I don't think anyone is advocating firing Bo. It's more of a "what if" conversation. At least, that's how I read it.

Oh. Well, I don't think that Bo should be fired either now or in the near future.

It seemed like a one-sided argument to me. People were horrified that others wanted Bo fired . . . when no one actually said that that they wanted Bo fired. Sort of a strange circle the wagons type of scenario.

I do think it has become bigger than reality. Then again, so has the amount "sunshine pumpers" who think Bo Pelini and Martinez can do no wrong. I know for a fact that there are people on this board and others who have said they don't like Bo or don't think he's the right for Nebraska. That means they want him gone.

 

[Saunders]

I don't think anyone is advocating firing Bo. It's more of a "what if" conversation. At least, that's how I read it.

Oh. Well, I don't think that Bo should be fired either now or in the near future.

It seemed like a one-sided argument to me. People were horrified that others wanted Bo fired . . . when no one actually said that that they wanted Bo fired. Sort of a strange circle the wagons type of scenario.

The reaction, at least from my perspective, is that of bewilderment. I simply can not even begin to understand why some people even want to have a "what if" Bo were fired conversation. Because if they're bringing it up "hypothetically" then they've already considered it and are simply testing the waters to see how much support they'd have to cause dissent and in-fighting. To even speak "hypothetically" about getting rid of a coach who has won an average of 9.5 games all four years he's been here is beyong ignorant. Some of our fans act like we went 0-12 last season.

"Hypothetically," how long will you be satisfied with these results? Solid 9-10 win seasons. Win against a few good teams. Lose to a few bad teams. No conference championships. No BCS games. Win every other mid-level bowl game at the end of each season.

When is it ok with you to raise that sort of hypothetical question?

The fans (barely) gave Tom Osborne 6 years to beat the only Big 8 team with equal/better talent (Oklahoma). They also gave him 9 years to win the conference outright.

 

So...... barring a disaster season, I think it's only fair we do the same with Bo.

http://www.huskerboard.com/index.php?/topic/59129-early-expectations-for-this-year/page__st__250__p__960967#entry960967

 

[MLB 51]

Bo ain't goin' nowhere any time soon.

 

[carlfense]

I don't think anyone is advocating firing Bo. It's more of a "what if" conversation. At least, that's how I read it.

Oh. Well, I don't think that Bo should be fired either now or in the near future.

It seemed like a one-sided argument to me. People were horrified that others wanted Bo fired . . . when no one actually said that that they wanted Bo fired. Sort of a strange circle the wagons type of scenario.

The reaction, at least from my perspective, is that of bewilderment. I simply can not even begin to understand why some people even want to have a "what if" Bo were fired conversation. Because if they're bringing it up "hypothetically" then they've already considered it and are simply testing the waters to see how much support they'd have to cause dissent and in-fighting. To even speak "hypothetically" about getting rid of a coach who has won an average of 9.5 games all four years he's been here is beyong ignorant. Some of our fans act like we went 0-12 last season.

"Hypothetically," how long will you be satisfied with these results? Solid 9-10 win seasons. Win against a few good teams. Lose to a few bad teams. No conference championships. No BCS games. Win every other mid-level bowl game at the end of each season.

When is it ok with you to raise that sort of hypothetical question?

The fans (barely) gave Tom Osborne 6 years to beat the only Big 8 team with equal/better talent (Oklahoma). They also gave him 9 years to win the conference outright.

So...... barring a disaster season, I think it's only fair we do the same with Bo.

http://www.huskerboa...967#entry960967

You post as both saunders45 and as 'SkersRule?

 

[Saunders]

The fans (barely) gave Tom Osborne 6 years to beat the only Big 8 team with equal/better talent (Oklahoma). They also gave him 9 years to win the conference outright.

So...... barring a disaster season, I think it's only fair we do the same with Bo.

http://www.huskerboa...967#entry960967

You post as both saunders45 and as 'SkersRule?

Huh? I linked to my own post.

 

[carlfense]

The fans (barely) gave Tom Osborne 6 years to beat the only Big 8 team with equal/better talent (Oklahoma). They also gave him 9 years to win the conference outright.

So...... barring a disaster season, I think it's only fair we do the same with Bo.

http://www.huskerboa...967#entry960967

You post as both saunders45 and as 'SkersRule?

Huh? I linked to my own post.

. . . I had asked 'SkersRule. I did read and recall your timeline from earlier. Sounds reasonable to me. I don't know that I will be that patient but you've definitely set your goals.

 

[Saunders]

The fans (barely) gave Tom Osborne 6 years to beat the only Big 8 team with equal/better talent (Oklahoma). They also gave him 9 years to win the conference outright.

So...... barring a disaster season, I think it's only fair we do the same with Bo.

http://www.huskerboa...967#entry960967

You post as both saunders45 and as 'SkersRule?

Huh? I linked to my own post.

. . . I had asked 'SkersRule. I did read and recall your timeline from earlier. Sounds reasonable to me. I don't know that I will be that patient but you've definitely set your goals.

I didn't realize we weren't allowed to discuss questions being asked on a public message board.



All I'm saying, is that if we can give the greatest coach in the history of the program that long (even with the massive advantages we had), then it's only fair to give Pelini the same benefit, barring disaster.

 

[carlfense]

The fans (barely) gave Tom Osborne 6 years to beat the only Big 8 team with equal/better talent (Oklahoma). They also gave him 9 years to win the conference outright.

So...... barring a disaster season, I think it's only fair we do the same with Bo.

http://www.huskerboa...967#entry960967

You post as both saunders45 and as 'SkersRule?

Huh? I linked to my own post.

. . . I had asked 'SkersRule. I did read and recall your timeline from earlier. Sounds reasonable to me. I don't know that I will be that patient but you've definitely set your goals.

I didn't realize we weren't allowed to discuss questions being asked on a public message board.

I didn't mean to make it sound like you weren't. I found myself wondering why you quoted an earlier post by yourself in reply to a question specifically asked of another.

Discuss away. :thumbs

 

[Saunders]

I didn't realize we weren't allowed to discuss questions being asked on a public message board.

I didn't mean to make it sound like you weren't. I found myself wondering why you quoted an earlier post by yourself in reply to a question specifically asked of another.

Discuss away. :thumbs

Gotcha!!!

 

['SkersRule]

I don't think anyone is advocating firing Bo. It's more of a "what if" conversation. At least, that's how I read it.

Oh. Well, I don't think that Bo should be fired either now or in the near future.

It seemed like a one-sided argument to me. People were horrified that others wanted Bo fired . . . when no one actually said that that they wanted Bo fired. Sort of a strange circle the wagons type of scenario.

The reaction, at least from my perspective, is that of bewilderment. I simply can not even begin to understand why some people even want to have a "what if" Bo were fired conversation. Because if they're bringing it up "hypothetically" then they've already considered it and are simply testing the waters to see how much support they'd have to cause dissent and in-fighting. To even speak "hypothetically" about getting rid of a coach who has won an average of 9.5 games all four years he's been here is beyong ignorant. Some of our fans act like we went 0-12 last season.

"Hypothetically," how long will you be satisfied with these results? Solid 9-10 win seasons. Win against a few good teams. Lose to a few bad teams. No conference championships. No BCS games. Win every other mid-level bowl game at the end of each season.

When is it ok with you to raise that sort of hypothetical question?

To be guaranteed 9-10 wins every season? I'd take that in a heartbeat.

Further, your assumption, or rather "hypothetical scenario," that there wouldn't be any conference championships or BCS bowl wins to accompany some of those 9-10 wins is ludicrous.

Finally, it took Tom Osborne 9 years to win a conference title and 20+ years to win his 1st national championship with a few heart-breaking losses/close calls along the way. It's funny how many people seem to forget that--all they "remember" is the 90's.

Bo is the right coach to lead this program.