Shatel's Article

[True2tRA]

Bottom line- Winning cures a lot of things. Bo makes a pretty good living coaching a program that has not beaten anyone on significance in the last 5 years, winning no conference titles, and not being in a BCS game. Is Bo developing players? I guess if we count the two that were drafted last year.

Vizsla your right about most of this. Winning does cure all. Bo does make a damn good living here at Nebraska having not won a CC or being in a BCS game. You can't say he hasn't beat anyone of significance though.

In 2009 we beat a ranked Missouri and Oklahoma. Two very significant teams to Nebraskans. 2010 we smoked Washington, poured 51 on Okie State, and beat a number 7 ranked Missouri. 2011 we beat highly ranked Michigan State and Penn State. The Wisconsin and Michigan wins last year were also pretty significant. So I will disagree with you on this point. You can't just think of all the significant losses without giving any credit to the fact that we beat a lot of really good teams to. It's the WHEN we've lost that seems to be the stinger.

Now the other point about player development, you'll get no argument from me.

 

[It'sNotAFakeID]

I agree Bo needs time. And if nine wins and being in the hunt for the conference title every year is his ceiling for the next few years, I can live with that.

What most people are grumbling about isn't just the fact that he hasn't gotten it done, it's that too often when the wheels fall off, they REALLY fall off. Three times in 2012. Three times in 2011. Twice in 2010. Twice in 2009. Those losses weren't just losses, the team looked inept, completely unprepared to play winning football.

And it's not getting better, it's getting worse. UCLA, Ohio State and Wisconsin last year. Wisconsin, Michigan and South Carolina the year before. Those six losses were abysmal in the way the team floundered about, especially on defense, which is what Bo was brought in to fix. Callahan got fired for fielding an historically bad defense. Bo's job was to fix that, and he did for a couple of years. But it got worse in 2010. It got worse again the next year, and last year it was as bad - at times - as 2007.

The argument that Bo is developing talent is interesting. I'd like to see who Bo has developed from raw into something superlative. The quickest, most obvious answer is Ndamukong Suh. But who else? Matty O'Hanlon? He was decent, but hardly an impactful talent. I'm not seeing that angle of this.

I'm willing to give Bo time, but I'm not willing to completely turn a blind eye to the problems we have.

The ineptness came from the offense in 2009 and in 2010. It was a rare sight to see the defense turn in a bad game those two years. I don't think there is any concern of the wheels falling off the offensive side of the ball.

Which is why, and perhaps I should have been clearer about this, that whole post was speaking to the defensive side of the football.

As far as player development (and you can certainly argue that these guys were athletically better--but it won't really help much in context of what I was attempting to say), how about DeJon Gomes, Eric Hagg, Prince Amukamara, Alfonzo Dennard, Lavonte David, and Jared Crick?

 

[It'sNotAFakeID]

hedonic thermometers.

Whoa, whoa, whoa! This is a family-friendly forum, mister.

Hedonic thermometers speaks to the degree to which our experiences drive our expectations and our expectations only lead to dissatisfaction.

 

[The Dude]

Trust no one.

 

[True2tRA]

WARNING! LONG POST AHEAD!
Why does Bo need to earn our trust back? Why is it our trust? I trust the guy completely, because I don't really dwell on the results we've seen on the field; instead, I look for where the program is going. Bo has a track record of winning, or at least being competitive with better talent. We saw that in 2009 when we lost 3 games (albeit one to Iowa State where the football was laced with grease) by a combined 4 points. We saw it in 2010 as well, when we lost 2 games by a combined 10 points (and you could say that we were never really out of the Texas game, and the debacle that was the Texas A&M game--well let's just not talk about that). Both years Nebraska held the lead in the conference championship game; both years Nebraska's offense could not generate the drives (not necessarily points) to close out the ball game.

Recruiting isn't an easy thing for a first time head coach. I would think that, as a player and with all other things being equal, I would want to play for a coach who has more of an established presence being a head coach. I don't think athletes care too much about what a person did as a defensive or offensive coordinator. In their minds, I think the credit for the success of a program lies on the shoulders of its head coach. So if you don't have the experience, I would be hesitant to want to play for you.

We saw the effects of hiring a coordinator who would be a first time head coach. There's a whole lot more responsibility which you take on as a head coach than you do as a defensive coordinator. You are more the CEO of your program, and you have to do all the things necessary to maintain the operation, which I'm assuming is a lot. For someone who is new to that role, maybe too much. When on overload, I don't care who you are, you tend to focus too narrowly on one area and as a result other areas slip. In Bo's case, it was recruiting to a certain extent--remember that players would be hesitant to, all other things being equal, play for a first time head coach.

Compounding the problem was the fact that all other things were not equal, and if they weren't, Nebraska was behind the average. We were coming off a 5-7 season, where we lost 5 straight games (including an embarrassing 65-51 loss to Colorado). We didn't play in a bowl game, and the program was unstable. Fast forward a year, with the perception that Nebraska wasn't the school to be if you wanted to win with a first time ever head coach, and the recruits stayed away.

When recruiting, there is only so much that you can legally do to convince a player to come to your school. But in the end, it's the player's choice and in the end, there wasn't a lot of things Bo had an advantage over the next school in line in terms of past success or experience. Our recruiting classes suffered as a result.

Did I mention that Nebraska also made a change from one power conference to another power conference when it moved from the Big XII to the Big Ten? No? Well they did, and you can bet that Bo wasn't recruiting to play in the Big Ten, he was recruiting to play in the Big XII, conferences which are stylistically different; conferences which require a different kind of talent on the defensive side of the ball. Talent that was not only lacking--the low recruiting classes--but that was of the wrong type. Surely this should've spelt disaster for Nebraska and Bo Pelini.

What? We went 9-4 and 10-4 in the Big Ten these past two years? That's not too bad, especially when you consider that we didn't have the level of talent or the type of talent to compete with the Big Ten's style of offense. But we did, and that should speak to Bo's and Co.'s ability to develop players, to mold them into what they need to be to compete and win football games. That's why we managed to reach 9-4 the first year with a win over Ohio State, Penn State, and Michigan State. That's why we were able to go 10-4 with wins over Wisconsin, Michigan, Michigan State, and Penn State. That's why we were able to reach the Big Ten Championship Game. That's why were able to compete with Georgia, who was :05 away from playing Notre Dame in the National Championship. It wasn't out of some sheer luck that we won 9 and 10 games, respectively. Bo can develop talent, but he can only get the players to their ceilings--and the ceilings don't make hyper-dramatic raises.

So despite the losses, Bo--with more experience has a head coach--can give the recruits something to look towards. He can give the recruits the idea that they could be the ones responsible for getting Nebraska back on the national stage. That we are so close to being good again. To some recruits, that is an exciting prospect: to return a school back to former glory. And not a school that is 6 wins a year away from it, but a school that is 1, 2 wins away from it.

The talent is there, the ceilings (athletically) are higher than seasons before. Bo has a track record for developing talent and winning with less. Now, he has more. Why should we not trust him? What has he done differently than any other first time ever head coach would have done? Can that question be answered? I think there needs to be a real appreciation of the circumstances surrounding Bo's first couple of years at Nebraska in order to be able to be okay with where Nebraska currently stands. If anything, we should be trusting Bo and his coaching staff more, not less.

We have in Bo Pelini, a guy that is consistent, a guy that has shown the ability to develop players. We have seen in those players great athletic ability, but athletic ability that was not good enough at times, partly because their respective ceilings weren't off the charts. Now we have players whose ceilings seem (from what Twitter and the local media are reporting) to be much, much higher. Given Bo's ability to develop talent, why should we not be excited? Why should we not trust in his ability to do more with more?

Personally, I'm excited to see what we can get done in the next couple of years. With an easier schedule and better (at least, right now) talent on the defensive side of the ball, these next two years could be very special ones for Bo Pelini, his players, his coaching staff, the media, and the fans.

I understand that you like where we are headed. Me too. I think we are getting there, although I didn't think it would be so ugly at times and I thought we might have a CC or two by now. Close, but not quite.

Question is, with all of the hurdles we've had to overcome, all of the what some would call "excuses" we've had for recent failures, what happens if in the next two years more hurdles come up? What happens if say.........

Coach Beck takes a HC position elsewhere?

Or coach Joseph leaves the secondary to take a DC job somewhere? What happens then? Do we just add these things to the list of reasons and just keep moving on I guess? I don't know you tell me.

I just want to see the team win a CC, play in a big time bowl and win that. Hell maybe even be in the NC conversation. Right now though, all I can reasonably ask for is progress and my biggest gripe with this staff right now is that we have seen the same thing for five years in a row now. Yep, you listed all your reasons why, and okay, I can accept that. But when do the reasons for failure run out? When do we take that next step?

Can we really ask questions about what hasn't happened?

I just did.

 

[It'sNotAFakeID]

WARNING! LONG POST AHEAD!
Why does Bo need to earn our trust back? Why is it our trust? I trust the guy completely, because I don't really dwell on the results we've seen on the field; instead, I look for where the program is going. Bo has a track record of winning, or at least being competitive with better talent. We saw that in 2009 when we lost 3 games (albeit one to Iowa State where the football was laced with grease) by a combined 4 points. We saw it in 2010 as well, when we lost 2 games by a combined 10 points (and you could say that we were never really out of the Texas game, and the debacle that was the Texas A&M game--well let's just not talk about that). Both years Nebraska held the lead in the conference championship game; both years Nebraska's offense could not generate the drives (not necessarily points) to close out the ball game.

Recruiting isn't an easy thing for a first time head coach. I would think that, as a player and with all other things being equal, I would want to play for a coach who has more of an established presence being a head coach. I don't think athletes care too much about what a person did as a defensive or offensive coordinator. In their minds, I think the credit for the success of a program lies on the shoulders of its head coach. So if you don't have the experience, I would be hesitant to want to play for you.

We saw the effects of hiring a coordinator who would be a first time head coach. There's a whole lot more responsibility which you take on as a head coach than you do as a defensive coordinator. You are more the CEO of your program, and you have to do all the things necessary to maintain the operation, which I'm assuming is a lot. For someone who is new to that role, maybe too much. When on overload, I don't care who you are, you tend to focus too narrowly on one area and as a result other areas slip. In Bo's case, it was recruiting to a certain extent--remember that players would be hesitant to, all other things being equal, play for a first time head coach.

Compounding the problem was the fact that all other things were not equal, and if they weren't, Nebraska was behind the average. We were coming off a 5-7 season, where we lost 5 straight games (including an embarrassing 65-51 loss to Colorado). We didn't play in a bowl game, and the program was unstable. Fast forward a year, with the perception that Nebraska wasn't the school to be if you wanted to win with a first time ever head coach, and the recruits stayed away.

When recruiting, there is only so much that you can legally do to convince a player to come to your school. But in the end, it's the player's choice and in the end, there wasn't a lot of things Bo had an advantage over the next school in line in terms of past success or experience. Our recruiting classes suffered as a result.

Did I mention that Nebraska also made a change from one power conference to another power conference when it moved from the Big XII to the Big Ten? No? Well they did, and you can bet that Bo wasn't recruiting to play in the Big Ten, he was recruiting to play in the Big XII, conferences which are stylistically different; conferences which require a different kind of talent on the defensive side of the ball. Talent that was not only lacking--the low recruiting classes--but that was of the wrong type. Surely this should've spelt disaster for Nebraska and Bo Pelini.

What? We went 9-4 and 10-4 in the Big Ten these past two years? That's not too bad, especially when you consider that we didn't have the level of talent or the type of talent to compete with the Big Ten's style of offense. But we did, and that should speak to Bo's and Co.'s ability to develop players, to mold them into what they need to be to compete and win football games. That's why we managed to reach 9-4 the first year with a win over Ohio State, Penn State, and Michigan State. That's why we were able to go 10-4 with wins over Wisconsin, Michigan, Michigan State, and Penn State. That's why we were able to reach the Big Ten Championship Game. That's why were able to compete with Georgia, who was :05 away from playing Notre Dame in the National Championship. It wasn't out of some sheer luck that we won 9 and 10 games, respectively. Bo can develop talent, but he can only get the players to their ceilings--and the ceilings don't make hyper-dramatic raises.

So despite the losses, Bo--with more experience has a head coach--can give the recruits something to look towards. He can give the recruits the idea that they could be the ones responsible for getting Nebraska back on the national stage. That we are so close to being good again. To some recruits, that is an exciting prospect: to return a school back to former glory. And not a school that is 6 wins a year away from it, but a school that is 1, 2 wins away from it.

The talent is there, the ceilings (athletically) are higher than seasons before. Bo has a track record for developing talent and winning with less. Now, he has more. Why should we not trust him? What has he done differently than any other first time ever head coach would have done? Can that question be answered? I think there needs to be a real appreciation of the circumstances surrounding Bo's first couple of years at Nebraska in order to be able to be okay with where Nebraska currently stands. If anything, we should be trusting Bo and his coaching staff more, not less.

We have in Bo Pelini, a guy that is consistent, a guy that has shown the ability to develop players. We have seen in those players great athletic ability, but athletic ability that was not good enough at times, partly because their respective ceilings weren't off the charts. Now we have players whose ceilings seem (from what Twitter and the local media are reporting) to be much, much higher. Given Bo's ability to develop talent, why should we not be excited? Why should we not trust in his ability to do more with more?

Personally, I'm excited to see what we can get done in the next couple of years. With an easier schedule and better (at least, right now) talent on the defensive side of the ball, these next two years could be very special ones for Bo Pelini, his players, his coaching staff, the media, and the fans.

I understand that you like where we are headed. Me too. I think we are getting there, although I didn't think it would be so ugly at times and I thought we might have a CC or two by now. Close, but not quite.

Question is, with all of the hurdles we've had to overcome, all of the what some would call "excuses" we've had for recent failures, what happens if in the next two years more hurdles come up? What happens if say.........

Coach Beck takes a HC position elsewhere?

Or coach Joseph leaves the secondary to take a DC job somewhere? What happens then? Do we just add these things to the list of reasons and just keep moving on I guess? I don't know you tell me.

I just want to see the team win a CC, play in a big time bowl and win that. Hell maybe even be in the NC conversation. Right now though, all I can reasonably ask for is progress and my biggest gripe with this staff right now is that we have seen the same thing for five years in a row now. Yep, you listed all your reasons why, and okay, I can accept that. But when do the reasons for failure run out? When do we take that next step?

Can we really ask questions about what hasn't happened?

I just did.

Okay. Is it any bit reasonable to ask questions about what hasn't happened?

 

[knapplc]

Were DeJon Gomes, Eric Hagg, Prince Amukamara, Alfonzo Dennard, Lavonte David, and Jared Crick "developed" by Pelini or were they just good players who got better? When I think of developing players I think of under-the-radar guys who surprised us, much like Osborne did throughout his career with walk-on offensive linemen and fullbacks. I don't recall anyone who wasn't already highly-regarded flourishing unexpectedly under Bo. We all felt like Hagg, Gomes, Amukamara, Dennard, David & Crick were something special when they walked in the door.

 

[It'sNotAFakeID]

That's not what I'm saying though. I'm saying Pelini did more with less, and now that he potentially has more, why can't he do even more? Especially considering the fact that he did do more when he had more.

 

[StPaulHusker]

Were DeJon Gomes, Eric Hagg, Prince Amukamara, Alfonzo Dennard, Lavonte David, and Jared Crick "developed" by Pelini or were they just good players who got better? When I think of developing players I think of under-the-radar guys who surprised us, much like Osborne did throughout his career with walk-on offensive linemen and fullbacks. I don't recall anyone who wasn't already highly-regarded flourishing unexpectedly under Bo. We all felt like Hagg, Gomes, Amukamara, Dennard, David & Crick were something special when they walked in the door.

Spencer Long?

 

[Landlord]

Were DeJon Gomes, Eric Hagg, Prince Amukamara, Alfonzo Dennard, Lavonte David, and Jared Crick "developed" by Pelini or were they just good players who got better? When I think of developing players I think of under-the-radar guys who surprised us, much like Osborne did throughout his career with walk-on offensive linemen and fullbacks. I don't recall anyone who wasn't already highly-regarded flourishing unexpectedly under Bo. We all felt like Hagg, Gomes, Amukamara, Dennard, David & Crick were something special when they walked in the door.

I agree and disagree. I mean, Prince was an athletic freak (we all knew that) who didn't have a place. I don't care how athletic you are, it takes good development to turn you into a top-10 caliber draft pick.

I don't remember having much thought about Gomes other than knowing he existed until he took everyone by surprise in the Missouri game.

Crick was another I didn't have much thought towards until 2009. What happened with him - he played sparingly in 9 games with 2 total tackles in 2008, then exploded in 2009.

 

[Blackshirt96]

As my mother often told me, "Trust is a difficult thing to lose. And, it is the single most difficult thing to gain back." Hopefully, Husker fans will have gained that trust back this year. If not, Bo will most likely be available to another program.

So we can hire Scott Frost, right?!

Duh.

No. Everyone knows that TO left the AD job so if Bo failed this year he could come back and coach. Frank & Turner are coming back too. Milt's undecided.

 

[knapplc]

Were DeJon Gomes, Eric Hagg, Prince Amukamara, Alfonzo Dennard, Lavonte David, and Jared Crick "developed" by Pelini or were they just good players who got better? When I think of developing players I think of under-the-radar guys who surprised us, much like Osborne did throughout his career with walk-on offensive linemen and fullbacks. I don't recall anyone who wasn't already highly-regarded flourishing unexpectedly under Bo. We all felt like Hagg, Gomes, Amukamara, Dennard, David & Crick were something special when they walked in the door.

I agree and disagree. I mean, Prince was an athletic freak (we all knew that) who didn't have a place. I don't care how athletic you are, it takes good development to turn you into a top-10 caliber draft pick.

I don't remember having much thought about Gomes other than knowing he existed until he took everyone by surprise in the Missouri game.

Crick was another I didn't have much thought towards until 2009. What happened with him - he played sparingly in 9 games with 2 total tackles in 2008, then exploded in 2009.

I would maybe put Hagg in the "developed by Pelini" category by those standards, too. Hagg was athletically gifted but he didn't have a natural fit. Too small for a linebacker and a bit too big/slow for a Safety. So Bo created a position for him and fired up his Peso Defense.

 

[B.B. Hemingway]

Were DeJon Gomes, Eric Hagg, Prince Amukamara, Alfonzo Dennard, Lavonte David, and Jared Crick "developed" by Pelini or were they just good players who got better? When I think of developing players I think of under-the-radar guys who surprised us, much like Osborne did throughout his career with walk-on offensive linemen and fullbacks. I don't recall anyone who wasn't already highly-regarded flourishing unexpectedly under Bo. We all felt like Hagg, Gomes, Amukamara, Dennard, David & Crick were something special when they walked in the door.

It would be hard to argue that Bo didn't develop Prince. He was a WR when Pelini arrived at Nebraska, so without question Bo saw his potential at CB, and developed him there.....If you give Bo the athletes he needs, I still believe he knows what to do with them (2009 defense)....

 

[Mavric]

Were DeJon Gomes, Eric Hagg, Prince Amukamara, Alfonzo Dennard, Lavonte David, and Jared Crick "developed" by Pelini or were they just good players who got better? When I think of developing players I think of under-the-radar guys who surprised us, much like Osborne did throughout his career with walk-on offensive linemen and fullbacks. I don't recall anyone who wasn't already highly-regarded flourishing unexpectedly under Bo. We all felt like Hagg, Gomes, Amukamara, Dennard, David & Crick were something special when they walked in the door.

So if you recruit too well you get blamed for not developing talent?

There are way too many factors for anyone not at practice every day to say a coach can't develop talent. Is it the coaches fault for not pressing them? The player doesn't care enough to work hard? Player was already as good as they were going to be? How can you tell? Case in point - Vincent Valentine (so far).

 

[knapplc]

So if you recruit too well you get blamed for not developing talent?

The blanket statement was made that Bo has "developed talent." It's a fair question to ask who was developed.