What Bo Pelini taking YSU to a title game means for NU...

[MyBloodIsRed16]

If anyone thinks what OSU did to us this year is worse than what Wisconsin did to Bo a few years back you can go jump off a bridge

 

[Redux]

If anyone thinks what OSU did to us this year is worse than what Wisconsin did to Bo a few years back you can go jump off a bridge

It's only worse because it's more recent.

 

[Redux]

It means nothing...

Sadly...so does the current hire

Yet he's one win away from having a better season than Bo did in 7 years....even with two blowout losses.See how easy that was?

Bo had a 10 win season. Are we just going to ignore his success to prop up a coach that hasn't done any better to win an internet argument?

Mike Riley has been here 2 seasons. If you're going to be "fair" about comparing the two, then Riley would need to be given 5 more years.

I'm just gonna stop you there.

Riley lost 7 games, Bo never lost more than 4. This line of argument holds zero water. If Mike had lost only 4 games I'd be right beside you saying give him time. I said that of Bo too.

But you guys with your Pellllini and #9wins bullsh#t don't have a leg to stand on when it comes to comparing records. At least not yet.

Riley needs to compete for championships, and that needs to start next year or his seat is gonna get pretty warm.

In 4 years in the Big Ten Bo played for exactly 1 conference title, that gives Riley 2 more years to equal Bo's 1 division title, granted Bo did it in his 2nd year in the league.

And more cherry picking here, but in 2 tries Riley has at least made us look like we can compete with Wisconsin.

 

[jaws]

If anyone thinks what OSU did to us this year is worse than what Wisconsin did to Bo a few years back you can go jump off a bridge

Are you talking about the beat down in the CCG to an 8-6 Wisconsin team?

 

[TheSker]

It means nothing...

Sadly...so does the current hire

Yet he's one win away from having a better season than Bo did in 7 years....even with two blowout losses.See how easy that was?

Bo had a 10 win season. Are we just going to ignore his success to prop up a coach that hasn't done any better to win an internet argument?

Mike Riley has been here 2 seasons. If you're going to be "fair" about comparing the two, then Riley would need to be given 5 more years.

I'm just gonna stop you there.

Riley lost 7 games, Bo never lost more than 4. This line of argument holds zero water. If Mike had lost only 4 games I'd be right beside you saying give him time. I said that of Bo too.

But you guys with your Pellllini and #9wins bullsh#t don't have a leg to stand on when it comes to comparing records. At least not yet.

Riley needs to compete for championships, and that needs to start next year or his seat is gonna get pretty warm.

In 4 years in the Big Ten Bo played for exactly 1 conference title, that gives Riley 2 more years to equal Bo's 1 division title, granted Bo did it in his 2nd year in the league.

And more cherry picking here, but in 2 tries Riley has at least made us look like we can compete with Wisconsin.

An issue under Riley is the gap between us and the top of the west is getting wider, not narrowing. Pelini couldn't get past Wisconsin. Now Riley can't get past Wisconsin or Iowa (you know, that program Eichorst "evaluated"......).

 

[84HuskerLaw]

Both Riley and Pelini have coached Husker teams in embarrassingly bad losses. OSU and Iowa this fall are both awful - this is just not questionable. Injuries may have put us in a tough position where a LOSS was more than likely in both games. But, we should NEVER, NEVER, EVER lose 62-3 absent some kind of incredibly unlikely set of circumstances such as a team wide medical illness or some outrageous scandal outbreak (such as the Penn State debacle or three fourths of the coaches end up in jail over a gambling scheme or perhaps proven 'cheating' like what may have happened at Wake Forest this year. As far as I am aware, there are NO such excuses (call them reasonable justifications if you will) for why a team simply failed to show up and didn't try.

Neither Bo or Mike have something of this kind of magnitude of circumstances which can be fairly offered to rationalize a complete team beatdown.

Riley needs more time certainly. He has to take a program with great potential and turn it into a producing powerhouse again. Bo had a similar challenge. When you step back and look at both coaches' circumstances and the obstacles and challenges presented in taking over the program there are very comparable and rougly equivalent conditions to overcome to rebuild the program. At this point, the only difference, in general, is that Riley is just finishing year 2 while Bo finished 7. Bo would have been given more years if he had demonstrated the strong commitment to making Nebraska great again. Instead, it appeared to many fans and some within the NU administration and so on that he was just not 'all in' in the sense needed to give the overall fan base and others concerned the faith in him to eventually get it done.

It appears Riley is fully committed but I guess we won't know that for sure for another 18 months. By time 2018 is over, we'll know I think. At this time, it is fair to say that with Riley's Huskers, the glass is half full and half empty. We will soon know which way things are going to go.

 

[Redux]

It means nothing...

Sadly...so does the current hire

Yet he's one win away from having a better season than Bo did in 7 years....even with two blowout losses.See how easy that was?

Bo had a 10 win season. Are we just going to ignore his success to prop up a coach that hasn't done any better to win an internet argument?

Mike Riley has been here 2 seasons. If you're going to be "fair" about comparing the two, then Riley would need to be given 5 more years.

I'm just gonna stop you there.

Riley lost 7 games, Bo never lost more than 4. This line of argument holds zero water. If Mike had lost only 4 games I'd be right beside you saying give him time. I said that of Bo too.

But you guys with your Pellllini and #9wins bullsh#t don't have a leg to stand on when it comes to comparing records. At least not yet.

Riley needs to compete for championships, and that needs to start next year or his seat is gonna get pretty warm.

In 4 years in the Big Ten Bo played for exactly 1 conference title, that gives Riley 2 more years to equal Bo's 1 division title, granted Bo did it in his 2nd year in the league.

And more cherry picking here, but in 2 tries Riley has at least made us look like we can compete with Wisconsin.

An issue under Riley is the gap between us and the top of the west is getting wider, not narrowing. Pelini couldn't get past Wisconsin. Now Riley can't get past Wisconsin or Iowa (you know, that program Eichorst "evaluated"......).

Yet we are closing in on basically just as good if not better Wisconsin, yet falling at the end of the year with most our starters hurt to a much better Iowa team than Bo faced.

#Perspectives

#Blahblahblah

 

[MyBloodIsRed16]

If anyone thinks what OSU did to us this year is worse than what Wisconsin did to Bo a few years back you can go jump off a bridge

Are you talking about the beat down in the CCG to an 8-6 Wisconsin team?

I've tried to block it from my memory but if that's the game when Wisconsin rushed for 1000 yrds and scored 70 points then yes

 

[commando]

means nothing for nebraska unless it gets Bo a better paying job somewhere.

 

[Count 'Bility]

It means nothing...

Sadly...so does the current hire

Yet he's one win away from having a better season than Bo did in 7 years....even with two blowout losses.See how easy that was?

Bo had a 10 win season. Are we just going to ignore his success to prop up a coach that hasn't done any better to win an internet argument?

Mike Riley has been here 2 seasons. If you're going to be "fair" about comparing the two, then Riley would need to be given 5 more years.

I'm just gonna stop you there.

Riley lost 7 games, Bo never lost more than 4. This line of argument holds zero water. If Mike had lost only 4 games I'd be right beside you saying give him time. I said that of Bo too.

But you guys with your Pellllini and #9wins bullsh#t don't have a leg to stand on when it comes to comparing records. At least not yet.

Riley needs to compete for championships, and that needs to start next year or his seat is gonna get pretty warm.

In 4 years in the Big Ten Bo played for exactly 1 conference title, that gives Riley 2 more years to equal Bo's 1 division title, granted Bo did it in his 2nd year in the league.

And more cherry picking here, but in 2 tries Riley has at least made us look like we can compete with Wisconsin.

An issue under Riley is the gap between us and the top of the west is getting wider, not narrowing. Pelini couldn't get past COMPETE WITH Wisconsin OR GET BY NORTHWESTERN OR MINNESOTA.. Now Riley can't get past Wisconsin or Iowa (you know, that program Eichorst "evaluated"......).

I fixed your comment.

 

[TheSker]

It means nothing...

Sadly...so does the current hire

Yet he's one win away from having a better season than Bo did in 7 years....even with two blowout losses.See how easy that was?

Bo had a 10 win season. Are we just going to ignore his success to prop up a coach that hasn't done any better to win an internet argument?

Mike Riley has been here 2 seasons. If you're going to be "fair" about comparing the two, then Riley would need to be given 5 more years.

I'm just gonna stop you there.

Riley lost 7 games, Bo never lost more than 4. This line of argument holds zero water. If Mike had lost only 4 games I'd be right beside you saying give him time. I said that of Bo too.

But you guys with your Pellllini and #9wins bullsh#t don't have a leg to stand on when it comes to comparing records. At least not yet.

Riley needs to compete for championships, and that needs to start next year or his seat is gonna get pretty warm.

In 4 years in the Big Ten Bo played for exactly 1 conference title, that gives Riley 2 more years to equal Bo's 1 division title, granted Bo did it in his 2nd year in the league.

And more cherry picking here, but in 2 tries Riley has at least made us look like we can compete with Wisconsin.

An issue under Riley is the gap between us and the top of the west is getting wider, not narrowing. Pelini couldn't get past COMPETE WITH Wisconsin OR GET BY NORTHWESTERN OR MINNESOTA.. Now Riley can't get past Wisconsin or Iowa (you know, that program Eichorst "evaluated"......).

I fixed your comment.

Stabs at humor are fine. The reality the gap is widening isn't fine.

 

[GBRHouston]

Both Riley and Pelini have coached Husker teams in embarrassingly bad losses. OSU and Iowa this fall are both awful - this is just not questionable. Injuries may have put us in a tough position where a LOSS was more than likely in both games. But, we should NEVER, NEVER, EVER lose 62-3 absent some kind of incredibly unlikely set of circumstances such as a team wide medical illness or some outrageous scandal outbreak (such as the Penn State debacle or three fourths of the coaches end up in jail over a gambling scheme or perhaps proven 'cheating' like what may have happened at Wake Forest this year. As far as I am aware, there are NO such excuses (call them reasonable justifications if you will) for why a team simply failed to show up and didn't try.

Neither Bo or Mike have something of this kind of magnitude of circumstances which can be fairly offered to rationalize a complete team beatdown.

Riley needs more time certainly. He has to take a program with great potential and turn it into a producing powerhouse again. Bo had a similar challenge. When you step back and look at both coaches' circumstances and the obstacles and challenges presented in taking over the program there are very comparable and rougly equivalent conditions to overcome to rebuild the program. At this point, the only difference, in general, is that Riley is just finishing year 2 while Bo finished 7. Bo would have been given more years if he had demonstrated the strong commitment to making Nebraska great again. Instead, it appeared to many fans and some within the NU administration and so on that he was just not 'all in' in the sense needed to give the overall fan base and others concerned the faith in him to eventually get it done.

It appears Riley is fully committed but I guess we won't know that for sure for another 18 months. By time 2018 is over, we'll know I think. At this time, it is fair to say that with Riley's Huskers, the glass is half full and half empty. We will soon know which way things are going to go.

This is rare. I actually agree with 100% of what you're saying!

Embarrassing beatdowns were a yearly occurrence for the Bo squad. I cannot think of one year with a non-humiliating loss under him. Sure, we have had humiliating losses in both years under MR so far. But, he is buying into the Nebraska tradition, something we never saw Pelini do. They are two completely different coaches, and I don't just mean the attitude. You can't just say "SEE?!?!?!?!?!1!?!111ONE!!?! BO WOULD HAVE BEEN GOOD IF WE KEPT HIM!!!!!1" without gauging the fact that he is at home now. He knows Ohio, because he is from there. YSU is a good fit for him, and I was secretly hoping Cincinnati would hire him because I felt he would have been good there. He just was not the right fit for here.

 

[BoNeyard]

Bo's best moments were a 1 second loss to Texas in the Big 12 title game and a Holiday Bowl win.

He had ample time to prove himself at Nebraska and he couldn't get past 9-4 with the typical big game losses and blowouts. He wasn't getting any better, he wasn't suddenly going to win a conference title, especially when (regardless if you agree with how it got leaked) his true feelings towards many of the things at Nebraska were found out.

 

[cornstar]

It means nothing...

Sadly...so does the current hire

Yet he's one win away from having a better season than Bo did in 7 years....even with two blowout losses.See how easy that was?

10-3 without a conference championship game is not better than 10-4 with a conference championship loss.That said this is Riley's 2nd season.

Better is a relative term. In this example, is it better to eat a dog turd from Labrador or from a Golden Retriever? 10-3 without a CCG or 10-4 and embarrassingly blown out in CCG.......I might take the 10-3 personally. So Labrador turd it is.

Yeah, but Bo also had 10-4 seasons with agonizingly close losses in Big 12 championship games. I would say those are both better than the best Riley season so far.

2009 and 2010 were hands down his best seasons.Yet, in both years we saw a complete embarassment of a loss to both Iowa State and Texas Tech in 2009, then a complete embarassment of a loss to Texas and Texas A&M and Washington in 2010.

So, are they REALLY better? Yeah, we got to the dance. But at the dance we pissed ourselves on the dance floor both times.

I guess a division title is still a division title even if it is a sh**ty division.

I mean, here we go with the semantics again. The 2009 game may be kind of embarrassing in hind site. But considering where we were two years previous, I wouldn't go that far. And a one score loss to a Texas team that perpetually has some of the most talent in the country and a one score loss on the road with an injured QB don't really fit the definition of embarrassing in my book. Not even close. Disappointing and maddening probably. But not embarrassing.

-Iowa State went 7-6 in 2009, we lost to them 7-9 at home because of almost a dozen fubles. Embarassing.
-Texas Tech went 9-4 in 2009, we lost to them at home 31-10 one of the most embarassing fumble run backs I can recall.

-Texas went 5-7 in 2010, we lost to them 20-13 at home after reaching #5 and never trailing that season until that game that had more motivation than you can shake a stick at.

-Texas A&M went 9-4 in 2010, we lost to them 6-9 on the road in one of the ugliest offensive showings I can remember. Cap it off with one of the ugliest sideline tirades in history. We can make appologies for not having depth at QB in year 2 of Bo but we can't do that for Riley I guess?

-Washington went 7-6 in 2010, we lost to them in a bowl game 7-19 after thrashing them on the road 56-21.

In my opinion, during those two seasons, these were all embarassing losses. By all means argue otherwise. I could care less what kind of talent Texas had or where Nebraska was in 2007. These losses were embarassments. Hind sight my fanny, these were embarassing then, and even more so now.

By this metric every one of the 10 losses over the past 2 years have been embarrassing.

And let's not get into the non-football stuff.

 

[Redux]

It means nothing...

Sadly...so does the current hire

Yet he's one win away from having a better season than Bo did in 7 years....even with two blowout losses.See how easy that was?

10-3 without a conference championship game is not better than 10-4 with a conference championship loss.That said this is Riley's 2nd season.

Better is a relative term. In this example, is it better to eat a dog turd from Labrador or from a Golden Retriever? 10-3 without a CCG or 10-4 and embarrassingly blown out in CCG.......I might take the 10-3 personally. So Labrador turd it is.

Yeah, but Bo also had 10-4 seasons with agonizingly close losses in Big 12 championship games. I would say those are both better than the best Riley season so far.

2009 and 2010 were hands down his best seasons.Yet, in both years we saw a complete embarassment of a loss to both Iowa State and Texas Tech in 2009, then a complete embarassment of a loss to Texas and Texas A&M and Washington in 2010.

So, are they REALLY better? Yeah, we got to the dance. But at the dance we pissed ourselves on the dance floor both times.

I guess a division title is still a division title even if it is a sh**ty division.

I mean, here we go with the semantics again. The 2009 game may be kind of embarrassing in hind site. But considering where we were two years previous, I wouldn't go that far. And a one score loss to a Texas team that perpetually has some of the most talent in the country and a one score loss on the road with an injured QB don't really fit the definition of embarrassing in my book. Not even close. Disappointing and maddening probably. But not embarrassing.

-Iowa State went 7-6 in 2009, we lost to them 7-9 at home because of almost a dozen fubles. Embarassing.-Texas Tech went 9-4 in 2009, we lost to them at home 31-10 one of the most embarassing fumble run backs I can recall.

-Texas went 5-7 in 2010, we lost to them 20-13 at home after reaching #5 and never trailing that season until that game that had more motivation than you can shake a stick at.

-Texas A&M went 9-4 in 2010, we lost to them 6-9 on the road in one of the ugliest offensive showings I can remember. Cap it off with one of the ugliest sideline tirades in history. We can make appologies for not having depth at QB in year 2 of Bo but we can't do that for Riley I guess?

-Washington went 7-6 in 2010, we lost to them in a bowl game 7-19 after thrashing them on the road 56-21.

In my opinion, during those two seasons, these were all embarassing losses. By all means argue otherwise. I could care less what kind of talent Texas had or where Nebraska was in 2007. These losses were embarassments. Hind sight my fanny, these were embarassing then, and even more so now.

By this metric every one of the 10 losses over the past 2 years have been embarrassing.

And let's not get into the non-football stuff.

This year we had 2 very embarassing losses.

Last year, I only felt embarassed by Miami and Purdue. The rest we were winning until something stupid happened. By the time we lost to Iowa it was clear Iowa was on a run and we still outplayed them. This year, not so much.