Solich Bonus

[ZRod]

well there are still some on here that goal is still too lofty.

 

[Saunders]

http://www.sportingn...rentz-bo-pelini

Sweet Jesus, this guy is gonna get Pelini fired with his kiss of death.

It considers what you think Nebraska is? Are we a top program that should be competing with other top programs? He gets paid millions of dollars every year. He has to eventually start performing. I would say Bo needs to have 1 of 3 things done soon. 1.top 10 finish. 2. conference championship win. 3. bcs bowl appearance.

Not to be a smartass because lord knows we have a few guys here at Huskerboard that keep the smartass thing covered X10 for all of us. But I would say at this point your statement is almost a captain obvious thing by now and not even worth debating. In other words, I agree with you, but I don't know anyone that isn't an absolute PPP that doesn't agree.

well there are still some on here that goal is still too lofty.

Give us names and quotes.

 

[kchusker_chris]

i dont think it is they feel that goal is too lofty, they just understand the asininity of firing a coach that is producing 9-10 wins a year. you'd think that after seeing what nebraska got after firing their last coach who won 9 games in season, people would be more hesitant about clamoring for a new coach.

yes, but the concept of 9 wins is slightly dated - and the way in which the 4 losses that accompany those wins is what is going against Pelini. 25 or so teams had 10 or more wins, another 10 or so with 9. Even Vanderbilt in the SEC can find 9 wins, or a rebuilding UCLA team. Is that the standard? A top 35ish or so team? Because 9 wins will barely get you into the top 25 now. 25 years ago 9 wins was almost a guaranteed top 10 finish.

 

[NUance]

i dont think it is they feel that goal is too lofty, they just understand the asininity of firing a coach that is producing 9-10 wins a year. you'd think that after seeing what nebraska got after firing their last coach who won 9 games in season, people would be more hesitant about clamoring for a new coach.

yes, but the concept of 9 wins is slightly dated - and the way in which the 4 losses that accompany those wins is what is going against Pelini. 25 or so teams had 10 or more wins, another 10 or so with 9. Even Vanderbilt in the SEC can find 9 wins, or a rebuilding UCLA team. Is that the standard? A top 35ish or so team? Because 9 wins will barely get you into the top 25 now. 25 years ago 9 wins was almost a guaranteed top 10 finish.

Yeah, 10 wins today is about like 9 wins back in the 80s. The measuring stick should be 10 wins, not 9. That said, Pelini has three 10-win years and two nine-win years.

 

[Landlord]

i dont think it is they feel that goal is too lofty, they just understand the asininity of firing a coach that is producing 9-10 wins a year. you'd think that after seeing what nebraska got after firing their last coach who won 9 games in season, people would be more hesitant about clamoring for a new coach.

yes, but the concept of 9 wins is slightly dated - and the way in which the 4 losses that accompany those wins is what is going against Pelini. 25 or so teams had 10 or more wins, another 10 or so with 9. Even Vanderbilt in the SEC can find 9 wins, or a rebuilding UCLA team. Is that the standard? A top 35ish or so team? Because 9 wins will barely get you into the top 25 now. 25 years ago 9 wins was almost a guaranteed top 10 finish.

Close but not quite:

1986:

1) Penn State 12-0

2) Miami-Florida 11-1

3) Oklahoma 11-1

4) Arizona State 10-1-1

5) Nebraska 10-2

6) Auburn 10-2

7) Ohio State 10-3

8) Michigan 11-2

9) Alabama 10-3

10) Louisiana State 9-3

11) Arizona 9-3

12) Baylor 9-3

13) Texas A&M 9-3

14) UCLA 8-3-1

15) Arkansas 9-3

16) Iowa 9-3

17) Clemson 8-2-2

18) Washington 8-3-1

19) Boston College 9-3

20) Virginia Tech 9-2-1

1987:

1) Miami-Florida 12-0

2) Florida State 11-1

3) Oklahoma 11-1

4) Syracuse 11-0-1

5) Louisiana State 10-1-1

6) Nebraska 10-2

7) Auburn 9-1-2

8) Michigan State 9-2-1

9) UCLA 10-2

10) Texas A&M 10-2

11) Oklahoma State 10-2

12) Clemson 10-2

13) Georgia 9-3

14) Tennessee 10-2-1

15) South Carolina 8-4

16) Iowa 10-3

17) Notre Dame 8-4

18) Southern Cal 8-4

19) Michigan 8-4

20) Arizona State 7-4-1

1988:

1) Notre Dame 12-0

2) Miami-Florida 11-1

3) Florida State 11-1

4) Michigan 9-2-1

5) West Virginia 11-1

6) UCLA 10-2

7) Southern Cal 10-2

8) Auburn 10-2

9) Clemson 10-2

10) Nebraska 11-2

11) Oklahoma State 10-2

12) Arkansas 10-2

13) Syracuse 10-2

14) Oklahoma 9-3

15) Georgia 9-3

16) Washington 9-3

17) Alabama 9-3

18) Houston 9-3

19) Louisiana State 8-4

20) Indiana 8-3-1

1989:

1) Miami-Florida 11-1

2) Notre Dame 12-1

3) Florida State 10-2

4) Colorado 11-1

5) Tennessee 11-1

6) Auburn 10-2

7) Michigan 10-2

8) Southern Cal 9-2-1

9) Alabama 10-2

10) Illinois 10-2

11) Nebraska 10-2

12) Clemson 10-2

13) Arkansas 10-2

14) Houston 9-2

15) Penn State 8-3-1

16) Michigan State 8-4

17) Pittsburgh 8-3-1

18) Virginia 10-3

19) Texas Tech 9-3

20) Texas A&M 8-4

21) West Virginia 8-3-1

22) Brigham Young 10-3

23) Washington 8-4

24) Ohio State 8-4

25) Arizona 8-4

 

[Chimalli]

You went back in time, that link has Ron Zook listed as head coach of Florida.

 

[desertshox]

i dont think it is they feel that goal is too lofty, they just understand the asininity of firing a coach that is producing 9-10 wins a year. you'd think that after seeing what nebraska got after firing their last coach who won 9 games in season, people would be more hesitant about clamoring for a new coach.

yes, but the concept of 9 wins is slightly dated - and the way in which the 4 losses that accompany those wins is what is going against Pelini. 25 or so teams had 10 or more wins, another 10 or so with 9. Even Vanderbilt in the SEC can find 9 wins, or a rebuilding UCLA team. Is that the standard? A top 35ish or so team? Because 9 wins will barely get you into the top 25 now. 25 years ago 9 wins was almost a guaranteed top 10 finish.

i understand reading comprehension is optional on a message board. i am not arguing a standard or a goal. i am stating that things have to get worse before something drastic can be done. firing a coach that has been producing 9-10 win seasons is pretty much going to limit your options for a replacement. we saw that with what happened replacing solich.

 

[HUSKER 37]

i dont think it is they feel that goal is too lofty, they just understand the asininity of firing a coach that is producing 9-10 wins a year. you'd think that after seeing what nebraska got after firing their last coach who won 9 games in season, people would be more hesitant about clamoring for a new coach.

yes, but the concept of 9 wins is slightly dated - and the way in which the 4 losses that accompany those wins is what is going against Pelini. 25 or so teams had 10 or more wins, another 10 or so with 9. Even Vanderbilt in the SEC can find 9 wins, or a rebuilding UCLA team. Is that the standard? A top 35ish or so team? Because 9 wins will barely get you into the top 25 now. 25 years ago 9 wins was almost a guaranteed top 10 finish.

Yeah, 10 wins today is about like 9 wins back in the 80s. The measuring stick should be 10 wins, not 9. That said, Pelini has three 10-win years and two nine-win years.

I can't help wondering what that works out to in Dog years..wins...

 

[The Dude]

Pelini has three 53-win years and two 49-win years. In dog wins.

 

[husker_99]

http://www.sportingn...rentz-bo-pelini

Sweet Jesus, this guy is gonna get Pelini fired with his kiss of death.

It considers what you think Nebraska is? Are we a top program that should be competing with other top programs? He gets paid millions of dollars every year. He has to eventually start performing. I would say Bo needs to have 1 of 3 things done soon. 1.top 10 finish. 2. conference championship win. 3. bcs bowl appearance.

Not to be a smartass because lord knows we have a few guys here at Huskerboard that keep the smartass thing covered X10 for all of us. But I would say at this point your statement is almost a captain obvious thing by now and not even worth debating. In other words, I agree with you, but I don't know anyone that isn't an absolute PPP that doesn't agree.

well there are still some on here that goal is still too lofty.

i dont think it is they feel that goal is too lofty, they just understand the asininity of firing a coach that is producing 9-10 wins a year. you'd think that after seeing what nebraska got after firing their last coach who won 9 games in season, people would be more hesitant about clamoring for a new coach.

The Difference between Solich and Pelini is that Solich's resume has some accomplishments on it as well.

1. Won a Conference Championship

2. Played and Won a BCS bowl.

3, Played for the National Championship.

4. Finished in the Top 10 3 times.

after going 7-7 he fired both of his OC's.

Bo has none of those. The only thing Bo has got is won bowl games and winning the division. I don't think Solich turning it around and getting fired put off coaches as more as his body of work as a coach was.

 

[NUance]

The Difference between Solich and Pelini is that Solich's resume has some accomplishments on it as well.

1. Won a Conference Championship

2. Played and Won a BCS bowl.

3, Played for the National Championship.

4. Finished in the Top 10 3 times.

after going 7-7 he fired both of his OC's.

Bo has none of those. The only thing Bo has got is won bowl games and winning the division. I don't think Solich turning it around and getting fired put off coaches as more as his body of work as a coach was.

All true. Except Solich followed Osborne. Bo followed Callahan. The ship was headed in a different direction when Bo took over.

 

[husker_99]

The Difference between Solich and Pelini is that Solich's resume has some accomplishments on it as well.

1. Won a Conference Championship

2. Played and Won a BCS bowl.

3, Played for the National Championship.

4. Finished in the Top 10 3 times.

after going 7-7 he fired both of his OC's.

Bo has none of those. The only thing Bo has got is won bowl games and winning the division. I don't think Solich turning it around and getting fired put off coaches as more as his body of work as a coach was.

All true. Except Solich followed Osborne. Bo followed Callahan. The ship was headed in a different direction when Bo took over.

Callahan had talent, he couldn't develop it. Callahan could win except he rather d*** around half the time playing keep away.

 

[Mierin]

The Difference between Solich and Pelini is that Solich's resume has some accomplishments on it as well.

1. Won a Conference Championship

2. Played and Won a BCS bowl.

3, Played for the National Championship.

4. Finished in the Top 10 3 times.

after going 7-7 he fired both of his OC's.

Bo has none of those. The only thing Bo has got is won bowl games and winning the division. I don't think Solich turning it around and getting fired put off coaches as more as his body of work as a coach was.

All true. Except Solich followed Osborne. Bo followed Callahan. The ship was headed in a different direction when Bo took over.

Callahan had talent, he couldn't develop it. Callahan could win except he rather d*** around half the time playing keep away.

How is this a valid response to anything Nuance said? You completely missed his point or you're pretending you did.

 

[sd'sker]

The Difference between Solich and Pelini is that Solich's resume has some accomplishments on it as well.

1. Won a Conference Championship

2. Played and Won a BCS bowl.

3, Played for the National Championship.

4. Finished in the Top 10 3 times.

after going 7-7 he fired both of his OC's.

Bo has none of those. The only thing Bo has got is won bowl games and winning the division. I don't think Solich turning it around and getting fired put off coaches as more as his body of work as a coach was.

All true. Except Solich followed Osborne. Bo followed Callahan. The ship was headed in a different direction when Bo took over.

Callahan had talent, he couldn't develop it. Callahan could win except he rather d*** around half the time playing keep away.

How is this a valid response to anything Nuance said? You completely missed his point or you're pretending you did.

is his point that osborne did not have talent? i do not think it is, but that is the only way his response would be relevant.

 

[husker_99]

The Difference between Solich and Pelini is that Solich's resume has some accomplishments on it as well.

1. Won a Conference Championship

2. Played and Won a BCS bowl.

3, Played for the National Championship.

4. Finished in the Top 10 3 times.

after going 7-7 he fired both of his OC's.

Bo has none of those. The only thing Bo has got is won bowl games and winning the division. I don't think Solich turning it around and getting fired put off coaches as more as his body of work as a coach was.

All true. Except Solich followed Osborne. Bo followed Callahan. The ship was headed in a different direction when Bo took over.

Callahan had talent, he couldn't develop it. Callahan could win except he rather d*** around half the time playing keep away.

How is this a valid response to anything Nuance said? You completely missed his point or you're pretending you did.

Solich still has to coach those teams he just wasn't handed his achievements. Just like Bo had to coach. both were first time head coaches. The year before Callahan's last we made the conference championship game so you can't blame 1 bad year on the program in a horrible state and no doubt would've happened if Callahan had stayed.