Nebraska mindset needs refinement

[NUinID]

TheSker- Conveniently you didn't answer my question. You listed a brief history of what happened with TO thirtysome years ago. That has absolutely zero bearing on what is or may happen with Pelini.

The thing that confounds me, that I just can't understand, is the constant defense of such mediocre results. Winning nine would be fairly impressive if 7 or 8 weren't gimmes but with our schedule they have been. It also wouldn't be that bad if the handful of annual losses came in a respectable manner, generally they haven't. So, that is why I asked; why do you defend that? What indications do you see that it will ever change? Or are you perfectly satisfied if it never changes?

9 wins is not mediocre and for about the gallizionth time in this thread alone, our schedule is no easier than most years in the past 40. As one example, during Osborne's tenure Kansas State was one of the most awful programs in NCAA history. And to conveniently and directly answer your question, I like Pelini as our coach......and am very very confident those with voting power are not going to make a move to let a coach go that wins over 70% of his games.

You don't have to answer if you don't want to. I really am just trying to understand. This may surprise you but I like Pelini also, really. I just see no indications he is capable of leading this team beyond where they are currently stuck.. I fully agree, nobody that matters is going to make a change as long as the nine wins keep coming. But that disturbs me more than comforts. As far as Osborne's history, can we be reasonable and agree that course of events is never going to repeat, ever, and can we hold Bo accountable for his own results without dragging TO into it? It is just deflecting the real issues.

JJ you are right there is no comparison between TO an BP. But don't defend TO's record and say that BP nine wins a year would be impressive except that he has 7-8 gimmies every year. TO had 7 and usually 8 gimmies most years also. That is a bad comparison.

One other thing, maybe we don't like how NU played against MSU, but in the end it was only a 5 pt loss. You can't call it a blowout loss or embarrassing loss or what ever it just doesn't fit.

My personal opinion about the MSU game is that most truly thought NU was going to go into the game and win. They weren't respecting MSU and they are mad because the team didn't win or even play up to expectations.

This is also what I feel about the NU offense. Going into the game I think the offense really felt they would move the ball fairly easily against MSU and when it didn't happen immediately they lost focus and started scrambling.

I also have to give MSU credit. Their defense really took things personally and wanted to shut NU's run game down, and they did. They wanted it more.

 

[JTrain]

I am aware of the differentiation of blowout losses and AP top 10 finishes. Osborne and Pelini also took over two programs in different conditions.....back to back national titles vs losing record. I was making the point the Big 8 was often a "cupcake" schedule and many expected more out of Osborne around year 7 also. As I mentioned previously, Pelini keeps winning over 70% of his games....he'll be here.

For all the talk of Pelini taking over a losing program, his best teams (2009 and 2010) were anchored by Callahan recruits Suh, Prince, Crick, Hagg and Helu. He was left with a nice cupboard.

Also, the Big 8 simply was NOT a "cupcake schedule". That is a myth. In that span, Osborne played: #12 Missouri, #18 Kansas, #17 Colorado, #13 Kansas, #12 Missouri, #17 Missouri, #13 Oklahoma State, #7 Colorado and #15 Iowa State, in addition to all the games against Oklahoma, who was basically the '70s equivalent of today's Alabama. Not to mention the non-conference schedules back then would make modern ADs cry. There were no I-AA or Sun Belt teams to practice against.

So which of your points remains? That Osborne wasn't meeting fan expectations and was nearly pressured to leave? That's true, and it only shows how insane the expectations once were. And to think today's fans are often thought to be overcritical.

 

[QMany]

Who is "fully satisfied" with nine wins?

 

[NUpolo8]

Year 7 and the guys still can't get pumped for a game.

The same thing might have been said in 1979. Or 1989.

Those have been on the schedule for over 40 years.

look at the teams we beat last year. only like 3, maybe 4 made a bowl. the teams we have beaten this year? they will all struggle to make a bowl. so cupcakes have always been present, but our schedule of late looks more like a bakery.

During the decade of the 1980s, only 3 teams in the Big 8 had records above .500 for the decade. OU and Nebraska were two of them. Oklahoma State was the third. Barely. You can decide what baking reference to use for that.

So, we can agree that you are happy with beating completely terrible teams and nearly always losing to good teams, often in embarrassing fashion.

And you appear to be content with crapping on Tom Osborne's legacy to defend Bo.

This might be a new addendum to the "terrible fan/extraordinarily low bar" discussion.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

I am just not seeing the BO=TO.

It has not been said anywhere that BO=TO.

True. But when Tom Osborne went up against the best defense in the conference, or a legitimate bowl opponent, the result was a lot like Saturday's MSU game. Sometimes much worse. Those offenses also feasted on early season cupcakes, then looked flustered when they lined up against more physically talented teams. The glory days of '93 - '97 we like to remember came with great players and killer mindsets no doubt, but the big change over previous years -- by Osborne's own admission -- was to recruit for defensive speed, the thing that had been flustering Husker offenses. We had horses on the OL and top shelf running backs, but they had the luxury of starting slow, keeping it on the ground and wearing the opponent down because our speedy new defense didn't let the other team put us in the hole early.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

Quick addendum: I'm not satisfied. The above post wasn't making excuses. Whether mindset or talent level, it's a head coaching issue. I have no problem shaking my head sadly at Bo Pelini.

 

[NUpolo8]

Yes, the winning percentage will keep Pelini around a long time. The reason for the "comparisons" to Osborne are more about what happened during Osborne's tenure. Osborne struggled to win the conference title in his first decade. Osborne was chatting with Boulder Colorado realtors in the late 70's......ironically around his 7 year mark. And yes, Osborne did suffer blowouts. Two of them to end the 1990 season......year 17....yikes!! Osborne's ultimate legacy is because of his last five years. In many ways, his first 20 years had their share of "struggles".

The only way these Osborne comparisons survive is by being incredibly vague. Once you bring up the actual detailed facts, the absurdity of them gets exposed pretty quickly.

In his first six seasons, Tom had four losses by more than two touchdowns (15+ points):

@ #3 Oklahoma

@ #7 Oklahoma

@ #3 Oklahoma

@ #1 Alabama

In his first six seasons, Bo had ten losses by more than two touchdowns:

vs. #4 Missouri

@ #4 Oklahoma

vs. unranked Texas Tech

@ #7 Wisconsin

@ #20 Michigan

vs. #10 South Carolina

@ #12 Ohio State

vs. unranked Wisconsin

vs #16 UCLA

vs. unranked Iowa

In his first six seasons, Tom played 25 teams ranked in the AP Top 25 (34.2% of his total games were vs. ranked teams). His record was 15-10 (60%).

In his first six seasons, Bo played 23 teams ranked in the AP Top 25 (27.7% of his total games were vs. ranked teams). His record was 9-14 (39.1%).

In his first six seasons, Tom finished in the AP Top 10 five times. (The other year he finished 12th.)

In his first six seasons, Bo finished in the AP Top 10 zero times. (His best finish was 14th.)

I am aware of the differentiation of blowout losses and AP top 10 finishes. Osborne and Pelini also took over two programs in different conditions.....back to back national titles vs losing record. I was making the point the Big 8 was often a "cupcake" schedule and many expected more out of Osborne around year 7 also. As I mentioned previously, Pelini keeps winning over 70% of his games....he'll be here.

If Bo cannot get to Indy he will not be retained. I'd put a substantial amount of money on that.

 

[Chaddyboxer]

Yes, the winning percentage will keep Pelini around a long time. The reason for the "comparisons" to Osborne are more about what happened during Osborne's tenure. Osborne struggled to win the conference title in his first decade. Osborne was chatting with Boulder Colorado realtors in the late 70's......ironically around his 7 year mark. And yes, Osborne did suffer blowouts. Two of them to end the 1990 season......year 17....yikes!! Osborne's ultimate legacy is because of his last five years. In many ways, his first 20 years had their share of "struggles".

The only way these Osborne comparisons survive is by being incredibly vague. Once you bring up the actual detailed facts, the absurdity of them gets exposed pretty quickly.

In his first six seasons, Tom had four losses by more than two touchdowns (15+ points):

@ #3 Oklahoma

@ #7 Oklahoma

@ #3 Oklahoma

@ #1 Alabama

In his first six seasons, Bo had ten losses by more than two touchdowns:

vs. #4 Missouri

@ #4 Oklahoma

vs. unranked Texas Tech

@ #7 Wisconsin

@ #20 Michigan

vs. #10 South Carolina

@ #12 Ohio State

vs. unranked Wisconsin

vs #16 UCLA

vs. unranked Iowa

In his first six seasons, Tom played 25 teams ranked in the AP Top 25 (34.2% of his total games were vs. ranked teams). His record was 15-10 (60%).

In his first six seasons, Bo played 23 teams ranked in the AP Top 25 (27.7% of his total games were vs. ranked teams). His record was 9-14 (39.1%).

In his first six seasons, Tom finished in the AP Top 10 five times. (The other year he finished 12th.)

In his first six seasons, Bo finished in the AP Top 10 zero times. (His best finish was 14th.)

I am aware of the differentiation of blowout losses and AP top 10 finishes. Osborne and Pelini also took over two programs in different conditions.....back to back national titles vs losing record. I was making the point the Big 8 was often a "cupcake" schedule and many expected more out of Osborne around year 7 also. As I mentioned previously, Pelini keeps winning over 70% of his games....he'll be here.

If Bo cannot get to Indy he will not be retained. I'd put a substantial amount of money on that.

Got some reliable sources on that, eh?.... It wouldn't bother me if he didn't make it and got canned....just curious.With the talent Neb has, no excuse to not make it to Indy.

 

[Street Novelist]

If Bo cannot get to Indy he will not be retained. I'd put a substantial amount of money on that.

God I hope so.

 

[Street Novelist]

And it's not so much the 4 losses ever year, but the lack of progress. I don't see any at all.

 

[NUinID]

I am just not seeing the BO=TO.

It has not been said anywhere that BO=TO.

True. But when Tom Osborne went up against the best defense in the conference, or a legitimate bowl opponent, the result was a lot like Saturday's MSU game. Sometimes much worse. Those offenses also feasted on early season cupcakes, then looked flustered when they lined up against more physically talented teams. The glory days of '93 - '97 we like to remember came with great players and killer mindsets no doubt, but the big change over previous years -- by Osborne's own admission -- was to recruit for defensive speed, the thing that had been flustering Husker offenses. We had horses on the OL and top shelf running backs, but they had the luxury of starting slow, keeping it on the ground and wearing the opponent down because our speedy new defense didn't let the other team put us in the hole early.

Now that is just crazy talk, Osborne's teams could run on anybody.

Again no comparing of TO and BP. It was a bad night of running the ball. But to say it never happens to any running team would be a miss representation.

NU lost didn't look good offensively for about 3 quarters. They did finish well though, and it is not all about MSU not being in the game at that point.

Time to move on, if NU loses 4 games then by all means fire Pelini, but let it play out.

 

[Joe_5700]

Yes, the winning percentage will keep Pelini around a long time. The reason for the "comparisons" to Osborne are more about what happened during Osborne's tenure. Osborne struggled to win the conference title in his first decade. Osborne was chatting with Boulder Colorado realtors in the late 70's......ironically around his 7 year mark. And yes, Osborne did suffer blowouts. Two of them to end the 1990 season......year 17....yikes!! Osborne's ultimate legacy is because of his last five years. In many ways, his first 20 years had their share of "struggles".

The only way these Osborne comparisons survive is by being incredibly vague. Once you bring up the actual detailed facts, the absurdity of them gets exposed pretty quickly.

In his first six seasons, Tom had four losses by more than two touchdowns (15+ points):

@ #3 Oklahoma

@ #7 Oklahoma

@ #3 Oklahoma

@ #1 Alabama

In his first six seasons, Bo had ten losses by more than two touchdowns:

vs. #4 Missouri

@ #4 Oklahoma

vs. unranked Texas Tech

@ #7 Wisconsin

@ #20 Michigan

vs. #10 South Carolina

@ #12 Ohio State

vs. unranked Wisconsin

vs #16 UCLA

vs. unranked Iowa

In his first six seasons, Tom played 25 teams ranked in the AP Top 25 (34.2% of his total games were vs. ranked teams). His record was 15-10 (60%).

In his first six seasons, Bo played 23 teams ranked in the AP Top 25 (27.7% of his total games were vs. ranked teams). His record was 9-14 (39.1%).

In his first six seasons, Tom finished in the AP Top 10 five times. (The other year he finished 12th.)

In his first six seasons, Bo finished in the AP Top 10 zero times. (His best finish was 14th.)

I am aware of the differentiation of blowout losses and AP top 10 finishes. Osborne and Pelini also took over two programs in different conditions.....back to back national titles vs losing record. I was making the point the Big 8 was often a "cupcake" schedule and many expected more out of Osborne around year 7 also. As I mentioned previously, Pelini keeps winning over 70% of his games....he'll be here.

If Bo cannot get to Indy he will not be retained. I'd put a substantial amount of money on that.

I'll take that bet, unfortunately I am not a big gambler and I'd hate to take even $20 from you.

 

[NUpolo8]

Yes, the winning percentage will keep Pelini around a long time. The reason for the "comparisons" to Osborne are more about what happened during Osborne's tenure. Osborne struggled to win the conference title in his first decade. Osborne was chatting with Boulder Colorado realtors in the late 70's......ironically around his 7 year mark. And yes, Osborne did suffer blowouts. Two of them to end the 1990 season......year 17....yikes!! Osborne's ultimate legacy is because of his last five years. In many ways, his first 20 years had their share of "struggles".

The only way these Osborne comparisons survive is by being incredibly vague. Once you bring up the actual detailed facts, the absurdity of them gets exposed pretty quickly.

In his first six seasons, Tom had four losses by more than two touchdowns (15+ points):

@ #3 Oklahoma

@ #7 Oklahoma

@ #3 Oklahoma

@ #1 Alabama

In his first six seasons, Bo had ten losses by more than two touchdowns:

vs. #4 Missouri

@ #4 Oklahoma

vs. unranked Texas Tech

@ #7 Wisconsin

@ #20 Michigan

vs. #10 South Carolina

@ #12 Ohio State

vs. unranked Wisconsin

vs #16 UCLA

vs. unranked Iowa

In his first six seasons, Tom played 25 teams ranked in the AP Top 25 (34.2% of his total games were vs. ranked teams). His record was 15-10 (60%).

In his first six seasons, Bo played 23 teams ranked in the AP Top 25 (27.7% of his total games were vs. ranked teams). His record was 9-14 (39.1%).

In his first six seasons, Tom finished in the AP Top 10 five times. (The other year he finished 12th.)

In his first six seasons, Bo finished in the AP Top 10 zero times. (His best finish was 14th.)

I am aware of the differentiation of blowout losses and AP top 10 finishes. Osborne and Pelini also took over two programs in different conditions.....back to back national titles vs losing record. I was making the point the Big 8 was often a "cupcake" schedule and many expected more out of Osborne around year 7 also. As I mentioned previously, Pelini keeps winning over 70% of his games....he'll be here.

If Bo cannot get to Indy he will not be retained. I'd put a substantial amount of money on that.

Got some reliable sources on that, eh?.... It wouldn't bother me if he didn't make it and got canned....just curious.With the talent Neb has, no excuse to not make it to Indy.

Yep, powerful, seeeeeecret insider sources.

It's just a feeling I have. I see a lot of tone in articles and just things that the staff are saying that makes this year feel like a watershed, indy or bust type year.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

I am just not seeing the BO=TO.

It has not been said anywhere that BO=TO.

True. But when Tom Osborne went up against the best defense in the conference, or a legitimate bowl opponent, the result was a lot like Saturday's MSU game. Sometimes much worse. Those offenses also feasted on early season cupcakes, then looked flustered when they lined up against more physically talented teams. The glory days of '93 - '97 we like to remember came with great players and killer mindsets no doubt, but the big change over previous years -- by Osborne's own admission -- was to recruit for defensive speed, the thing that had been flustering Husker offenses. We had horses on the OL and top shelf running backs, but they had the luxury of starting slow, keeping it on the ground and wearing the opponent down because our speedy new defense didn't let the other team put us in the hole early.

Now that is just crazy talk, Osborne's teams could run on anybody.

Oh Lord. Don't make me relive the years when Tom Osborne's Huskers had less than 200 yards total offense against Oklahoma. In one of those games, Nebraska never snapped the ball in Oklahoma territory. Several of the ranked teams, like Miami, Florida State, Colorado and Georgia Tech held us to 2 - 3 yards per carry. Just saying that for some of us who lived through those first 20 TO years, the Michigan State performance wasn't unfamiliar for a "big game."

Unless I'm misunderstanding your emoji. That's always possible.

In other news, it's easy to envision several scenarios where Bo Pelini doesn't get to Indy but remains hard to fire. I wouldn't put money on it myself.

My bet has always been that Bo Pelini will engineer his own departure, probably with the blessing of the AD.

Maybe that's the same thing.

I wouldn't put money on it, either.

 

[NUinID]

I am just not seeing the BO=TO.

It has not been said anywhere that BO=TO.

True. But when Tom Osborne went up against the best defense in the conference, or a legitimate bowl opponent, the result was a lot like Saturday's MSU game. Sometimes much worse. Those offenses also feasted on early season cupcakes, then looked flustered when they lined up against more physically talented teams. The glory days of '93 - '97 we like to remember came with great players and killer mindsets no doubt, but the big change over previous years -- by Osborne's own admission -- was to recruit for defensive speed, the thing that had been flustering Husker offenses. We had horses on the OL and top shelf running backs, but they had the luxury of starting slow, keeping it on the ground and wearing the opponent down because our speedy new defense didn't let the other team put us in the hole early.

Now that is just crazy talk, Osborne's teams could run on anybody.

Oh Lord. Don't make me relive the years when Tom Osborne's Huskers had less than 200 yards total offense against Oklahoma. In one of those games, Nebraska never snapped the ball in Oklahoma territory. Several of the ranked teams, like Miami, Florida State, Colorado and Georgia Tech held us to 2 - 3 yards per carry. Just saying that for some of us who lived through those first 20 TO years, the Michigan State performance wasn't unfamiliar for a "big game."

Unless I'm misunderstanding your emoji. That's always possible.

In other news, it's easy to envision several scenarios where Bo Pelini doesn't get to Indy but remains hard to fire. I wouldn't put money on it myself.

My bet has always been that Bo Pelini will engineer his own departure, probably with the blessing of the AD.

Maybe that's the same thing.

I wouldn't put money on it, either.

I was trying to be sarcastic.

I lived through a lot of the games you are describing myself. I was at the 88 OB and watched Miami hold NU to something like 140 in total offence.

Most people felt 10-2 was what we should see this season. I guess I am not sure why this is still not possible. Not saying we are going to win them all the rest of the way, but no one left on the schedule is even close to MSU.

As far as BP getting fired I doubt it. I don't think they lose 4 this year. The year still feels different.