Riding the fence no more

[knapplc]

Does that make us a mediocre team, or a team ravaged by injuries? There are about a million factors that went into this season. Simply saying "we're mediocre" doesn't adequately describe the season. We have exceptional players on this team. A guy who led the Big Ten in sacks and another guy who led the conference in rushing. We had a defense that improved dramatically over the course of the season. We were playing at times our third-string QB, second & third-string O linemen across the line and second and third string WRs.

Looking at the four losses, the crappy nature of some of them and the lucky win against Northwestern is fine, but if we're going to do that, we have to take everything into account. That includes a team ravaged by injuries. That isn't a mediocre team, that's a team that could have played for a conference title without the injuries.

 

[sd'sker]

Looking at the four losses, the crappy nature of some of them and the lucky win against Northwestern is fine, but if we're going to do that, we have to take everything into account. That includes a team ravaged by injuries. That isn't a mediocre team, that's a team that could have played for a conference title without the injuries.

it is also a team that, when healthy at the beginning of the year, struggled against a wyoming team that finished with a losing record and eventually fired their head coach. so it is really hard to say what this team would have done if healthy. you can say our defense improved throughout the year, but the offenses we faced sure did not. and you can say the injuries and youth lead to mistakes and fumbles, but it seems like mistakes and fumbles have plagued this offense for as long as i can remember.

 

[admo]

Depends on how full your glass is. Mediocre implies average, and Pelini is not average by any but the most pessimistic of metrics. He's not winning conference titles, but not winning conference titles doesn't make a coach mediocre.

It's also reactionary - nobody was using this word after Northwestern or Penn State. If we win the bowl game the tide of emotion will swing again and "mediocre" will be shelved for a while - until the next loss.

I disagree. Nebraska is handed several wins per year on a platter. The spoils of being a "football factory" school, I suppose. 8-4 at Nebraska (particularly with the schedule we had this year) is very much mediocre.

When you throw out the tomato can games, you basically have 5 to 8 games against good competition. Including post season. Those are teams that are either similar, better, or slightly below the level of the Huskers talent. Pelini loses 4 of those every year. I think that's less than mediocre.

Go look at the last six years and tell us what games were tomato can games and what games were "good competition." Then give us the W/L record for those games.

Tomato Can Record: 35-2

2013-WYO, Souther Miss, S.Dakota St, Illinois, Purdue

2012-Souther Miss, Arkansas St, Idaho St, Minnesota, Iowa

2011-Chattanooga, Fresno St, WYO, Minnesota, Northwestern, Iowa

2010-Western KY, Idaho, S.Dakota St, KSU, Iowa St, Kansas, Colorado

2009-Fla Atlantic, Arkansas St, La Lafayette, Iowa St, Baylor, KSU, Colorado

2008-Western Mich, San Jose St, New Mexico St, Iowa St, Baylor, KSU, Colorado

Similar / Good Competition Record: 21-22 (all others)

 

[knapplc]

Kudos for doing the research. I was too lazy.

Can't argue with your description of those games as "tomato can," although I've never heard that term. I'm presuming it means the equivalent of "gimme" games.

My only question would be, does that schedule vary greatly to the schedules played by Top 25 teams in those years? If not, the whole thing is a wash because everyone plays those kinds of games, isn't it?

To wit - our schedule this year, according to Sagarin, was the weakest it's been in Bo's tenure.

2008 - 38

2009 - 52

2010 - 39

2011 - 26

2012 - 20

2013 - 56

In 2013, only four of Sagarin's top 25 teams have played a top-ten schedule - Arizona State, Stanford, UCLA and Georgia. The average for the rest? 47.38. Meaning there's a bunch of tomato can games being played by everyone.

 

[True2tRA]

I am not sure why I had to start a new topic but I just had to announce that I am not riding the fence on Bo anymore. I am totally behind him but in hopeful manner that he gets some different assistants in here.

I was watching a 2009 highlight film and I completely forget to realize that the coaching staff hasn't had a chance to have any sort of continuity.

Mike Ekeler gone

Marvin Sanders gone

Shawn Watson gone

Carl Pelini gone

How much has THIS been the issue?

I know....right? I mean, it just hasn't been fair. No other program deals with coaching changes. Especially not the successful programs. , their staffs are the last to be sky hawked by other programs right? Then throw in the media scrutiny and fan expectations, and your talking about a whole group of problems that only Nebraska faces. I just wish other programs had to deal with this stuff, but nope it's just here at ole Nebraska.

Forgive me, but f#*k this. So sick and tired of excuses I can't help myself anymore. My eleven year old daughter doesn't make so many excuses when her grade drops to a B in Social Studies.....and she's eleven. Man up, and stfu. Time for excuses is over for these coaches, andmthemfans shouldn't be making excuses for them either.

 

[admo]

Kudos for doing the research. I was too lazy.

Can't argue with your description of those games as "tomato can," although I've never heard that term. I'm presuming it means the equivalent of "gimme" games.

My only question would be, does that schedule vary greatly to the schedules played by Top 25 teams in those years? If not, the whole thing is a wash because everyone plays those kinds of games, isn't it?

To wit - our schedule this year, according to Sagarin, was the weakest it's been in Bo's tenure.

2008 - 38

2009 - 52

2010 - 39

2011 - 26

2012 - 20

2013 - 56

In 2013, only four of Sagarin's top 25 teams have played a top-ten schedule - Arizona State, Stanford, UCLA and Georgia. The average for the rest? 47.38. Meaning there's a bunch of tomato can games being played by everyone.

You are welcome. I did because as a Huskerboarder, I'm part of the ship, part of the crew

You are definitely correct that every team has their share. The point is that when the Huskers line up against a team with a talent level that is the same, better, or slightly lower, we're not very good. And that's what I'm concerned about, how the Huskers du. You, me, everyone that's a Husker fan. GBR

 

[307husker]

Unrealistic expectations cause a lot of angst and whining.

 

[kchusker_chris]

Unrealistic expectations cause a lot of angst and whining.

pretty soon we'll be going 7-5, whining about it and those will be unrealistic expectations. should we just set it at like 4-8? what's your number? or are you just yet another poster that would rather whine about the fans than discuss the team. Don't worry, you're not alone.

 

[True2tRA]

Unrealistic expectations cause a lot of angst and whining.

I think this upcoming season will finally be the end if that crap. I highly doubt anybody is still foolish enough to allow their hopes to be built up like they have been every other off season the past few years.

I think everyone kows exactly what to expect.

 

[Redux]

Next year my number is 12, this year I may have been happy with 10.

 

[True2tRA]

Unrealistic expectations cause a lot of angst and whining.

I think this upcoming season will finally be the end if that crap. I highly doubt anybody is still foolish enough to allow their hopes to be built up like they have been every other off season the past few years.

I think everyone kows exactly what to expect.

Next year my number is 12, this year I may have been happy with 10.

I stand corrected.

 

[Redux]

Damn skippy. KOOL AID FOR ALL!!!!

12 as in I wont be nearly as butthurt if we let Bo go if he cant win 12.

 

[zoogs]

Unrealistic expectations cause a lot of angst and whining.

I don't think there's anything unrealistic about having elite level expectations, and it doesn't need to cause angst, either. Everyone should understand that college football is cyclical and you can't be at the top forever. There will be down years.

When you recognize that the program is in the midst of one of those down cycles, I think it can be entirely reasonable as well as angst-free to expect a regime change or changes until we find a guy who can pull us out of it. We may or may not have found that guy in Bo but boy, he's got a lot to prove next season. And if he's still the guy that lashes out win or lose and can't find a way to present a face of class and sportsmanship to the world, ... well, you know what they say about Nebraska. It's 'more than winning.'

 

[sd'sker]

Unrealistic expectations cause a lot of angst and whining.

we can see the team on the field and realize they are under-performing. is it unrealistic to expect to beat iowa and minny? is it unrealistic to expect to not get blown out by ucla, wiscy (two years in a row, even though we did manage to beat them after being down, i think, 17), or osu?

what are the unrealistic expectations you assume we have? who is calling for bo's head because we have not won an mnc? almost everyone calling for bo's head are doing so because his teams have under-performed and we see the same mistakes and deficiencies since his second year.

 

[Junior]

Unrealistic expectations cause a lot of angst and whining.

Please define what is a realistic expectation for this program.