"I wish I knew." -Bo Pelini 10/6/12

[Count 'Bility]

]

If youre depending upon the opinions of chicken sh#t posters of other team's message boards, and random general message boards, then YOU are the one beyond help. Whatever. And if say that if affects recruiting, then you are full of crap, because again, if an 18 year old is taking the word of perception and message boards over the actual man that comes to his living room, then we dont want that brat either, regardless of his star rating. Boom. Dun.

 

[strigori]

If you remember, there were really only three names that it sounded like TO interviewed. Pelini, Gill and Grobe. For the freaking NEBRASKA JOB. Two guys who never had been had coaches, and the guy from Wake Forest.

Remember Pedersen? Candidates was Callahan, Dan Hawkins, Nutts, 2 NFL DC coaches (KC & Dallas), and I believe Urban (denied, thanks but no thanks thing).

Apples and Oranges for a couple reasons.

At the end of the 2003 season the program was looked at as improving. 9-3 was a big step from the previous year. Very rarely does a program fire a coach after improving several wins over the previous year. Callahan had two losing seasons out of four. Remember the National media in each care? In 2003 it was a universal reaction of "What? Are you guys insane?" And in 2007 is was "Why is he not fired before the season is over?" World of difference.

Pedersen does not have a good rep in the business, and word like that gets around, especially with the above. And Pedy did not use a search firm either, which can make it harder to even contact many guys who have jobs. In 2007 the money alone would limit quality coaches from interviewing. Honestly who the hell wants to come into this pressure cooker for the $1.5mil that TO was looking to pay?

Neither were great searches.

 

[bshirt]

One has to only look at Tom Osborne's poll finishes in his first years as a Nebraska head coach to realize we are not even talking about the same zip code of expectations when we refer to Bo's 9 or 10 win seasons thus far.

I agree with The Dude; on the flip side, I don't think you have to be a total, unmitigated disaster to merit firing. In this case I just think we were poorly set up for this season due in fair measure to Bo's past mistakes recruiting, since turned around. If Bo can continue turning that around, he should have more time to show he can recover from it, almost regardless of how this season turns out.

That's where we differ -- I really haven't seen much progress at all in recruiting during the 5 years Bo has been here. Still barely crack the Top 25 in recruiting each year, and many of the top recruits in the classes leave for one reason or another. Until we can consistently land Top 10 recruiting classes we will never return to prominence.

BS.

TO never had anything close to consistent top 10 recruiting classes but still cranked out 3 NCs with several other close misses (1982, 1983, 1993). It would be nice if everything was as simple as you claim.

 

[T_O_Bull]

Can someone please point out how exactly Bo has "turned it around" on the recruiting front? I just don't see it.

Your negativity and lack of knowledge never cease to amaze.

Tommy Armstrong, Fr ***

Imani Cross, Fr ***

Andy Janoviich, Fr

Taariq Allen, RFr ***

Chris Long, Rfr ****

Ameer Abdulla, So ***

Brion Carnes, So ****

Braylon Heard, So ****

Chase Rome, So

Jamal Turner, So ****

Jason Ankra, Jr ****

Quincy Enunwa, Jr ***

Ciante Evans, Jr ***

Stanley ean-Baptiste, Jr

Taylor Martinez, Jr ***

Rex Burkhead, Sr ****

Seung Hoon Choi, Sr

Will Compton, Sr ****

Brett Maher, Sr **

Don't think I'll ask either LSU or Alabama. You do it and if you like them so much and hate the Huskers so bad I would suggest you transfer I'm sure they will welcome you with open arms.

T_O_B

:throwdabones1:

 

[T_O_Bull]

One has to only look at Tom Osborne's poll finishes in his first years as a Nebraska head coach to realize we are not even talking about the same zip code of expectations when we refer to Bo's 9 or 10 win seasons thus far.

I agree with The Dude; on the flip side, I don't think you have to be a total, unmitigated disaster to merit firing. In this case I just think we were poorly set up for this season due in fair measure to Bo's past mistakes recruiting, since turned around. If Bo can continue turning that around, he should have more time to show he can recover from it, almost regardless of how this season turns out.

That's where we differ -- I really haven't seen much progress at all in recruiting during the 5 years Bo has been here. Still barely crack the Top 25 in recruiting each year, and many of the top recruits in the classes leave for one reason or another. Until we can consistently land Top 10 recruiting classes we will never return to prominence.

While bringing in the big recruits is important, how you coach those recruits is even more important. The general consensus was that Callahan could recruit, but he never did anything with that talent. You have to develop players to be successful and you can do it with 3 and 4 stars it just makes the road a little more difficult. I'd much rather have 3 and 4 star recruits that aren't attention whores and whiners that are hard workers and good kids than 5 stars that may/can trash a program with their antics. Not saying Bo has developed ALOT of talent here, but I think he's done a better job with it than Callahan.

Totally agree with BRI.

T_O_B

:throwdabones1:

 

[Count 'Bility]

One has to only look at Tom Osborne's poll finishes in his first years as a Nebraska head coach to realize we are not even talking about the same zip code of expectations when we refer to Bo's 9 or 10 win seasons thus far.

I agree with The Dude; on the flip side, I don't think you have to be a total, unmitigated disaster to merit firing. In this case I just think we were poorly set up for this season due in fair measure to Bo's past mistakes recruiting, since turned around. If Bo can continue turning that around, he should have more time to show he can recover from it, almost regardless of how this season turns out.

That's where we differ -- I really haven't seen much progress at all in recruiting during the 5 years Bo has been here. Still barely crack the Top 25 in recruiting each year, and many of the top recruits in the classes leave for one reason or another. Until we can consistently land Top 10 recruiting classes we will never return to prominence.

BS.

TO never had anything close to consistent top 10 recruiting classes but still cranked out 3 NCs with several other close misses (1982, 1983, 1993). It would be nice if everything was as simple as you claim.

Purely the result of intangible advances made in the earily 90's-revolutionary inceptions such as unity council and uncontested strenght and conditioning. Everyone then caught up. It's different now. You still have to have the horses. An offensive unit of 10 Nebraska kids of 11 starters is not going to win a National title in this day and age as it did in 97.

 

[zoogs]

TO's classes weren't that bad. Anyway, enough with living in the past. Our recruiting issues have contributed in no small part to our current troubles on the field. (At least, bad coaching and team management is not something I would like to entertain, yet...) There's no question it must improve, going forward (or that it has lately, but with ways to go.)

 

[melscott62]

I don't want to tear off on tangents, but there is something that bothers me about how we use a teams total number of wins to measure a coaching staff. I don't believe that "baby seal season" should be figured into the team's performance for the year. How does our team fare when we go up against similarly-sized programs?

If we still want to count the baby seals that we joyously club at the beginning of each year, then let's try comparing apples to apples. If 9 wins is the standard set over the decades, shouldn't it now be higher since we play an extra game? An average of 9.75 wins per year for the coaching staff is the equivalent baseline. That would be one 9-win season for every three 10-win seasons.

Edit: Sorry AF, I didn't see where you posted almost the exact same thing.

it it fair or realistic to have TO be the standard? it would be like having tommy be the standard for QB's or Suh the standard for DL.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

Just for the record, Bob Devaney was passionate, in-your-face and foul-mouthed to his players, who loved him.

Bob Devaney also charmed the hell out of the press.

A completely different coach than Bo Pelini.

"Fiery" is typically a good thing. "Hot-headed" not so much.

Bo is hot-headed.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

I don't want to tear off on tangents, but there is something that bothers me about how we use a teams total number of wins to measure a coaching staff. I don't believe that "baby seal season" should be figured into the team's performance for the year. How does our team fare when we go up against similarly-sized programs?

If we still want to count the baby seals that we joyously club at the beginning of each year, then let's try comparing apples to apples. If 9 wins is the standard set over the decades, shouldn't it now be higher since we play an extra game? An average of 9.75 wins per year for the coaching staff is the equivalent baseline. That would be one 9-win season for every three 10-win seasons.

Edit: Sorry AF, I didn't see where you posted almost the exact same thing.

it it fair or realistic to have TO be the standard? it would be like having tommy be the standard for QB's or Suh the standard for DL.

We came very close to running Tom Osborne out of town after his fifth unspectacular season, so maybe the comparison is more apt than you think.

 

[melscott62]

I don't want to tear off on tangents, but there is something that bothers me about how we use a teams total number of wins to measure a coaching staff. I don't believe that "baby seal season" should be figured into the team's performance for the year. How does our team fare when we go up against similarly-sized programs?

If we still want to count the baby seals that we joyously club at the beginning of each year, then let's try comparing apples to apples. If 9 wins is the standard set over the decades, shouldn't it now be higher since we play an extra game? An average of 9.75 wins per year for the coaching staff is the equivalent baseline. That would be one 9-win season for every three 10-win seasons.

Edit: Sorry AF, I didn't see where you posted almost the exact same thing.

it it fair or realistic to have TO be the standard? it would be like having tommy be the standard for QB's or Suh the standard for DL.

We came very close to running Tom Osborne out of town after his fifth unspectacular season, so maybe the comparison is more apt than you think.

and that clearly would have been a terrible decision.

 

[zoogs]

We came very close to running Tom Osborne out of town after his fifth unspectacular season, so maybe the comparison is more apt than you think.

Oh, the one where we finished #10/#12 in the polls?

After a first four years of finishing in the top 10 in both (three times) or at least one of the Coaches/AP polls (year 1)?

 

[knapplc]

We came very close to running Tom Osborne out of town after his fifth unspectacular season, so maybe the comparison is more apt than you think.

Oh, the one where we finished #10/#12 in the polls?

After a first four years of finishing in the top 10 in both (three times) or at least one of the Coaches/AP polls (year 1)?

It was actually worse than that. It was Tom's sixth season, 1978, and we finished in the Top Ten. That's how hair-brained it was. Tom was told that a group of boosters was tired of losing to Oklahoma and that if he didn't beat them, he'd be out. He did - the first time.

This was also the year that Tom, not coincidentally, looked at the Colorado job quite seriously.

 

[zoogs]

Boosters.

ಠ_ಠ

​

 

[4skers89]

I dont post much, I usually just like to read what others think....But, Saturday really bothered me. I am a BOliever but something has to change...Do we lack talent? Maybe....Assistant coaches? Maybe.....Discipline? Maybe.....but most of all i think motivation! I think BO has maybe lost this team a little... Why can a guy like Bill Snyder come back to K-State with NONE of his players or coaches and turn them around so quick? I think he motivates his team and had them believing....Those kids think they are the best on the field and play like it!!!...Put the best kid at that position out there and let them play. Motivate them, encourage them, and believe in them!! The coaching examples could go on and on.... I hate to say it but Urban Meyer....Will muschamp... Brian Kelly...Chip Kelly ...Lane Kiffin....COME ON BO!.....Be the guy, motivate these kids, make them believe!!!

Brett Bielema talked about how detail oriented Bill Snyder was in an inverview. He gave an example in the first coaches meeting that Bill told them he wanted them to be clean shaven when on campus around the players. He told them disposable razors were available in the locker room in case they didn't get a chance to shave at home. He then proceeded to explain in great detail what he discovered were the best way to use the razors to get the best shave. I think after years of coaching Bill knows everything that must be coached to be successful. He probably has a comprehensive list of things to teach and practice each week leading up to the season in order to properly execute on offense and defense. Weekly preparation for an upcoming opponent is probably quite methodical and well thought out. The focus on details guarantees that the players are well prepared and do not make many mistakes. Bo keeps mentioning sticking to the process, a concept I am familiar with. Focusing on a process allows you to theoretically produce the same results each time. By constantly evaluating the process and improving it, the end result will get better. Another tenet of process based development is that your process becomes refined to the point where one person can be replaced with another. One of the problems I see with process based philosophy when applied to a complex system such as a football team is that talent can mask flaws in the process. When that talent goes away the flaws are exposed- but not before. As a made up example, let's assume Bo's process doesn't include teaching and practicing tackling. Year 1 he has players that already are good tacklers and performance on the field during games is good. In Year 2 the Year 1 players have graduated and the current players don't know how to tackle. The process flaw (not teaching tackling) gets exposed in the first game against good competition. Another problem I see with the process concept is that participants that follow the process are usually judged to be superior over those that don't rigorously follow the process. However, the latter ultimately produces a better end result. The problem with the former is that they are somewhat blindly following the process and they don't always do the correct thing either because the process wasn't adequately defined or they simply didn't have the ability to do it the right way to avoid mistakes. One can argue that is a problem in the process which should be fixed, therefore following a process isn't the problem, the process simply has a flaw. Another somewhat related problem is that processes don't take into account the intangibles. As an example applied to football, let's assume that you have a player that really comes to life on the field during a game but doesn't like practicing. Micheal Phelps is like that. If your process determines starters based on practice performance you may not be starting the best players. The intangible (good game day performer) isn't considerd in the process and makes for a worse end product. I'm not saying our current problems are the ones I used as examples. They are just examples of how a process, applied to a football team, can come up short. I'm also not saying processes are necessarily bad or the wrong approach but I do think they have some limitations. One of the refinements Bo did coming into this season was making sure that the players understood the concepts of the defense. He identified that as a flaw and modified the process. I wouldn't say that we're necessarily seeing improvements because of it but theoretically it should produce a better end product. If you asked Bill Snyder what his process is he would probably give you a blank look. The funny thing is he follows a process refined over many years of coaching. It's in the details that he makes sure are done correctly to prepare his team. If Bill retires it would be worth paying him as a consultant to come in and take a look at our process and give advise. He probably wouldn't understand this whole process concept but just by looking at the things we do in practice, how we prepare for games and giving suggestions on what he would do differently would probably be invaluable. Bo can take those suggestions and use them as improvements or refinements to his process.