Great read for Husker Fans

[HUSKER 37]

I actually read all the posts in what's turned out to be another thread on a tired subject.

Just want some clarification:

Then along came Bill Callahan.
Updated facilities

Was Cally responsible for this? If so..He works fast.

This season, 32 percent of Callahan's projected starters are Frank Solich recruits.

I was a little surprised by this stat until I realized, we probably used to average in the high 40's (percent) of our teams starters being Sr's each year.

At the time, I was a little upset that we got rid of Frank (Although I was a little miffed at him for (caving?)getting rid of longtime coaches to try to save his job.

I'm also willing to admit it was probably for the best. And even though Cally took the Raiders to the SB, he was/is a relative newcomer to Head Coaching..We need to allow him to continue improving..

Oh Yeah..I remember reading Barfn in the 80's..Although I don't remember him being so pessimistic, but we probably need a counterbalance to all the koolaid that's usually on the menu. (Probably why I'll never put anyone on ignore here).

On his views of the rest of the B-12: It's probably a Farm boy thing..Downplaying your own attributes and telling the neighbor how great his corn looks this year...Just so you can get on his good side in case he catches you pleasuring his daughter while the traveling salesman is away.

 

[hack]

i *LIKE* koolaid.

 

[OmahaPoohBear]

I don't know but I bet he would have at least tried to win.

The idea that a coach would not try to win a game has got to be the most ludicrous thing I have ever read.

anyone who thinks that cally wasnt trying to win that game knows nothing about football, or sports in general. this is no different than in basketball a playing a running, pressing team and slowing it down. you do what gives your team the best chance to win. people dont realize how close that game plan was to pure genius.

I'm not saying that the plan to shorten the game was a bad plan, it was how he tried to execute it. It seemed like most of the plays he called ran right into the strength of USC's defense instead of trying to attack its weaknesses. When weaknesses were attacked it was successful. One thing I have noticed about Callahan is that he tends to change things up when he doesn't need to. When things are working, stay with them until the other team stops you. He has shot himself in the foot at times.

Back in the 90's when our strength and conditioning was the best in the country we tried to make every game as long as it possibly could be to destroy the opponent. I do miss that.

 

[OmahaPoohBear]

24-41

9-38

I guess it's OK to look over two glaring problems as long as the numbers work out in the end.

Absolutely not. I was not happy with those peformances either but "losing more closely to top 25 teams" is "as hollow as a tree that has been dead for 30 years."

I heard that somewhere once :thumbs

Would have been done regardless.

You gotta be joking. The focus was far from football when Pederson took the job.

I agree but Callahan had nothing to do with these facilities. Firing Solich may have hindered the financing.

Not that I wanted to get into this discussion, but Solich has won "Coach of the year awards" in 2 different conferences. He won the Big 12 championship, won a BCS game, played in the National Championship game, coached 2 Heisman winners.

Having this discussion in 2007 is dumb. This is the same discussion we were having in 2004.

I agree totally. I try to form my current opinion on the program based on its own merits. Whenever anyone criticizes the current state of the program the usual response is to bash Solich. I'm looking towards the future not in the past.

I agree. But what does that future behold?

Who knows. I'd like to find out without creating a coaching carousel.

Good point, but what if it continues to be 8-4, 9-4, 9-5, winning the North and getting beatup by OU and UT?

Let me know when they live up to the hype. W's, L's, and trophies.

Yea, because there was never any hype before.

All of this is just too familiar. You must have a twin somewhere.

Fair enough. My frustration stems from people totally ignoring what isn't right with the program and believing what they are fed. It should sound familiar because there are many, many people with the same concerns and questions.

 

[melscott62]

I don't know but I bet he would have at least tried to win.

The idea that a coach would not try to win a game has got to be the most ludicrous thing I have ever read.

anyone who thinks that cally wasnt trying to win that game knows nothing about football, or sports in general. this is no different than in basketball a playing a running, pressing team and slowing it down. you do what gives your team the best chance to win. people dont realize how close that game plan was to pure genius.

I'm not saying that the plan to shorten the game was a bad plan, it was how he tried to execute it. It seemed like most of the plays he called ran right into the strength of USC's defense instead of trying to attack its weaknesses. When weaknesses were attacked it was successful. One thing I have noticed about Callahan is that he tends to change things up when he doesn't need to. When things are working, stay with them until the other team stops you. He has shot himself in the foot at times.

Back in the 90's when our strength and conditioning was the best in the country we tried to make every game as long as it possibly could be to destroy the opponent. I do miss that.

what an absurd comment. that was one of the greatest dynasties of all time. clearly thats what we should strive for, but using that as a measuring stick is unrealistic. your rarely going to be happy. it took TO 20 years to get to that point, and he inherited a program that won back to back NT.

I'm not saying that Cally didnt make mistakes in that game, clearly he did. but he came very close to a perfect game plan, and very nearly embarrassed carrol when he home field advantage and superior talent

 

[melscott62]

He merely has lacked some fundamental execution in places and at certain inoppurtune moments.

you absolutely hit the nail right on the head there. that is what made osborne such a great in game coach(he was a great coach period) he new when to pull out the trick plays and knew whne to take his shots. that is all that game plan last year needed. he just needed to take his shots a little earlier. and by shots I mean just a a couple of plays thats it. a trick play and maybe a deep ball. he did the same thing in the auburn game. I kept expecting a trick play of some type but it never came. the good news is I really think that Cally took bug steps last year, and I think he will again this year

we gave TO 20 years and he inherited a better program then cally

 

[OmahaPoohBear]

i actually see some of poopbear's points. he makes a little sense in his arguments, and has stayed pretty consistent with most of his talking points. it doesn't change my mind about the change and the progress we needed and have made.

i just think a little reality HAS to play a role in dealing with our current situation. plain and simple: something happened that night in Boulder when CU trounced us. a cosmic shift in the football world occured. "mike tyson was beat by buster douglas." we just have not been the same since. everyone kicked the top dog while it was down.

but now the dog has a new owner. and to teach an old dog new tricks, it takes time, patience, repition, cadence, and language. we are learning to piss in the neighbors yard instead of our own (see ya Beck & Co.). we have quit chasing our tail and now are ready to establish some turf. we were ALL loyal to our former owners, that's what makes this state special. we are being fed with top recruits, a new dog house, fresh grass, and let off the rope. we will still sniff the wrong butt sometimes, but mostly are hunting the right prey.

Good points, I guess I don't see the overall progress that I would have hoped for.

poopbear--you have every right to feel how you do and be pessimistic about the future (and the past) but, i think people here just want to be positive and have a bright outlook. especially since we're undefeated right now. we realize you have some valid points and just want to be level-headed about your assesment (some things i actually agree with you) but damn kid, nearly every post you write is negative. how about a few things you do like about the program every once in a while?

How is that interesting, where is the fun in that? There is enough of that talk going on. 99% of what is posted here is a love fest and I don't see the need in repeating what everyone else has already said.

PS-nice name calling. Very mature.

 

[OmahaPoohBear]

what an absurd comment. that was one of the greatest dynasties of all time. clearly thats what we should strive for, but using that as a measuring stick is unrealistic. your rarely going to be happy.

I guess that is where I differ from everyone else. I am a pefectionist. I don't half-a$$ things and accept them to be good enough.

We may not get the best talent but there is NO reason why we cannot be the best conditioned team in football. I guess I'm not as eager to settle for just being okay (like Trev Alberts has pointed out).

it took TO 20 years to get to that point, and he inherited a program that won back to back NT.

No they didn't. TO's first year was 73. Devaney didn't win the title in 72. Again, Tom never went under .500.

I'm not saying that Cally didnt make mistakes in that game, clearly he did. but he came very close to a perfect game plan, and very nearly embarrassed carrol when he home field advantage and superior talent

Your opinion is different from almost anyone else I have heard. Again the thought to shorten the game was a good idea, but the plan he drew up did not take advantage of USC.

Embarrassed? The embarrassing thing was the reaction to Callahan's gameplan. He was widely criticized for it.

 

[melscott62]

what an absurd comment. that was one of the greatest dynasties of all time. clearly thats what we should strive for, but using that as a measuring stick is unrealistic. your rarely going to be happy.

I guess that is where I differ from everyone else. I am a pefectionist. I don't half-a$$ things and accept them to be good enough.

We may not get the best talent but there is NO reason why we cannot be the best conditioned team in football. I guess I'm not as eager to settle for just being okay (like Trev Alberts has pointed out).

it took TO 20 years to get to that point, and he inherited a program that won back to back NT.

No they didn't. TO's first year was 73. Devaney didn't win the title in 72. Again, Tom never went under .500.

I'm not saying that Cally didnt make mistakes in that game, clearly he did. but he came very close to a perfect game plan, and very nearly embarrassed carrol when he home field advantage and superior talent

Your opinion is different from almost anyone else I have heard. Again the thought to shorten the game was a good idea, but the plan he drew up did not take advantage of USC.

Embarrassed? The embarrassing thing was the reaction to Callahan's gameplan. He was widely criticized for it.

well I am a realist. I realize that teams like that dont just appear or everyone would be that good.

there is a difference between excepting failure and understanding what it take to build a program.

Ok so he inherited a program one year after back to back NT. that is WAY different :sarcasm . its still much better than what cally inherited, not to mention that callly was installing a totally different offense.

and yes TO was never below .500. but that doesnt mean anything!! your a perfectionist remember!! but ever being the greatest college coach of all time he still took him over 20 years to win a NT

as for the game plan, I have met tons of people that understood what he was doing(most coaches) I was just talking to a HS coach in Omaha about it the other day. as a former athlete, and a person born in a Coaching family I understand that it doesn't matter what people think, just what people that know what they are talking about think. most people (and sports writers) dont have a clue anyway.

 

[I am I]

poopbear, i'm not just calling you names. i feel like it's appropriate to call you that cuz you sh#t all over this board with your negativity. it's one thing to play devil's advocate and another to not even see a bright side to ANYthing.

to keep arguing that TO never went below .500 is a little short sighted to the fact that the game has changed sooo much since the 70's and 80's: fewer scholarships, more NCAA oversight, more teams, better facilities, longer schedules, everyone works out year round now, more money, more expectations, higher salaries, better competition, different ranking system, more bowl games, hell! we're not even in the same gawd dang conference!! etc..etc..etc..etc..etc...the game has changed!! to see what we did in the 90's and what SC is doing now--there may be one team per decade who has a great run and then everyone catches up.

like your some damn perfectionist? i have lived my whole life (30yrs) and not seen us lose to KU, OSU, mizzery, 9 wins, bowl games, et al. i wish those records were still intact but they're not. it was time for a change. we were certainly behind the curve in recruiting and philosophy. you CANNOT argue that. even TO knew it!! we are going to be fine and you need to show some patience and take the lumps with everyone else. it's not like any one of us are bigger Cornhusker fans than anyone else. and if your 'perfectionist expectations' aren't met with this team, then jump on someone else's band wagon. i'm going to stick it out for better or worse. and have a good, positive attitude about it.

 

[BIGREDIOWAN]

poopbear, i'm not just calling you names. i feel like it's appropriate to call you that cuz you sh#t all over this board with your negativity. it's one thing to play devil's advocate and another to not even see a bright side to ANYthing.

to keep arguing that TO never went below .500 is a little short sighted to the fact that the game has changed sooo much since the 70's and 80's: fewer scholarships, more NCAA oversight, more teams, better facilities, longer schedules, everyone works out year round now, more money, more expectations, higher salaries, better competition, different ranking system, more bowl games, hell! we're not even in the same gawd dang conference!! etc..etc..etc..etc..etc...the game has changed!! to see what we did in the 90's and what SC is doing now--there may be one team per decade who has a great run and then everyone catches up.

like your some damn perfectionist? i have lived my whole life (30yrs) and not seen us lose to KU, OSU, mizzery, 9 wins, bowl games, et al. i wish those records were still intact but they're not. it was time for a change. we were certainly behind the curve in recruiting and philosophy. you CANNOT argue that. even TO knew it!! we are going to be fine and you need to show some patience and take the lumps with everyone else. it's not like any one of us are bigger Cornhusker fans than anyone else. and if your 'perfectionist expectations' aren't met with this team, then jump on someone else's band wagon. i'm going to stick it out for better or worse. and have a good, positive attitude about it.

:clap :clap :clap

 

[HUSKER 37]

PooBear, I Am I..

I actually agree with both of you on some points (if I'm allowed).

The reason (at least for me) that most of us were ok with Osborn taking so long to win "the Big one" against OU or 20 years to win a MNC, was that EACH year, we felt this could be the year we'd win it all. And more often than not, we did it the right way.

It was hard on our tickers going through most of each season unbeaten/untied then lose to a couple of Oklahoma flea-flickers in the 4th quarter or to a Florida school in the Orange Bowl...We'd take solace in the fact that we led the nation in Academic All Americans or how we were perceived to be great fans to opposing teams.

It may have taken too long to get "over the hump", but there was never a time where any of us would think we'd get blown out or would be that over matched and most of us could watch our friends play even if they were 3rd or 4th string.

Where was I going?..Oh yeah..

We're now probably a little more spoiled/jaded and wouldn't give ANYone more than 10 years to win a MNC if we knew that ahead of time. but most of the fun in football is the process of getting there.

Championships are nice but the real memories are built on the relationships of the coaches and players and maybe the Fans a little (vicariously).

"More Than Winning".

 

[FriscoTXHusker]

perfectonist? angry unhappy person?

Whatever, most folks don't enjoy being in the basement all the time, and especially over things that will never change, such as the past. There's also not a whole lot more that can be said about it that has not been said already.

 

[FriscoTXHusker]

How is that interesting, where is the fun in that? There is enough of that talk going on. 99% of what is posted here is a love fest and I don't see the need in repeating what everyone else has already said.

So some fans (I think 99% is high) are blindly fanatical. What's the point in being the 1% who think it's their mission to be angry and who enjoy being contrary? All that does is make people wonder what's wrong with you.

 

[huskered17]

Lot of good arguments going on here. We are a passionate bunch when it comes to our Huskers and our former coaches and players. Most of us it seems to me, never looked ahead to the day when someone other than a former player or assistant coach wouldn't be coaching this team. We were spoiled for a long time. Starting with Bob. D.

I also never thought ahead to that day either, and why would I? 40 years of just waiting for the next season of greatness, that was a given as far as I was concerned. Thinking at the start of each season that we are a lock to get another shot at a National Championship. Sounds like a few of you think those days are gone for ever, and maybe we will never get back to year after year of that type of enthusiasm. I also missed the old guards running the show, but I forced myself to move on and I'm ready to back the new coaches. They are trying to win just as hard as any of the ones before them.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I think we are moving in the right direction and I'm starting to get that excitement back again as each recruiting year seems to be getting better and better. They had a shot at beating a couple of top teams last year [had Texas by the ....., beat Auburn every way but the score board] and showed a lot of improvement over the year before, in hanging there till the end.

Callahan like him or not is going to get this team back to a BCS contender again year after year. You can tell by the players he is bring in and by some of the ones we don't get, who probably wouldn't have given us a second thought just a few years ago.

If T.O. wasn't a Nebraska boy how long would he would have lasted. The 71 and 72 teams that Bob D. won the N/C with were Tom's offence. If he kicked the F/G against Miami instead of going for the win he would have had his first N/C in the 80's.

It takes time to build back up a program that was in decline, admit it or not we were. I want the glory days back just like the rest of you, but it takes time.

Coach C is going to get us back there if hes given the right amount of time. Some coaches get lucky and every thing falls right for them in the first couple of years and some it takes longer. Yeah it took T.O. 20 plus years, but he had some great seasons on the way and I think Callahan can do the sames thing if given the time. I wasn't complaining back in the day with the 9 and 10 win seasons just because we couldn't finish it off with a N/C. I was just glad that we had a chance to win one very season or two. It nice to see the Huskers with a chance to win every game they now play. The 9,10 win season are coming again and hopefully a N/C or two along the way, if we just give it time.

GBR!!!