Crap

[Huskerpapa]

First week of fall ball and we lose three of our top fifteen defenders.  Good grief.  We need to have luck start rolling our way.

[atskooc]

We need to recruit more talented depth.

[HB]

We need to recruit more talented depth.

We've been doing that more recently. 

[atskooc]

We should have been doing it from the get-go.

 

And we shouldn't have had our quarterbacks going live in today's scrimmage.  Armstrong got knocked out today.  After all the injuries we've had already, we're having our QB's go live in a scrimmage?  Not smart.

[HB]

We should have been doing it from the get-go.

 

And we shouldn't have had our quarterbacks going live in today's scrimmage.  Armstrong got knocked out today.  After all the injuries we've had already, we're having our QB's go live in a scrimmage?  Not smart.

So says you, a football expert.  Your Bo hatred is over the top.  Has been on here for years.  Broken record at this point.

[49r]

He'll be fine.

 

"If seeming woozy at first, Armstrong didn't show signs of injury anywhere else as he left the field. Pelini expects him to be fine."

[atskooc]

We should have been doing it from the get-go.

 

And we shouldn't have had our quarterbacks going live in today's scrimmage.  Armstrong got knocked out today.  After all the injuries we've had already, we're having our QB's go live in a scrimmage?  Not smart.

So says you, a football expert.  Your Bo hatred is over the top.  Has been on here for years.  Broken record at this point.

I don't hate Coach Pelini, I just don't think he's good enough at his job.

[Huskerpapa]

Bo has a similar record as Dr. Tom at the same point in time. Bo will be fine. This team will be excellent. Injuries suck...but I want to see a tough team and this is a tough team

[huskerbaseball13]

Injuries suck, but that's what recruiting is for. Recruit quality depth and in year 7 that should be expected under Bo. I guess we will see how the season goes but im expecting another ho hum 4 loss season.

[HuskerActuary]

Bo has a similar record as Dr. Tom at the same point in time. Bo will be fine. This team will be excellent. Injuries suck...but I want to see a tough team and this is a tough team

Please read this...

 

http://m.omaha.com/huskers/blogs/mad-chatter-putting-in-perspective-early-struggles---/article_183c9a6f-9947-5775-818f-e3145da6dcc1.html?mode=jqm

[Huskerpapa]

 

_{Bo has a similar record as Dr. Tom at the same point in time. Bo will be fine. This team will be excellent. Injuries suck...but I want to see a tough team and this is a tough team}

_{Please read this...}

 

_{http://m.omaha.com/huskers/blogs/mad-chatter-putting-in-perspective-early-struggles---/article_183c9a6f-9947-5775-818f-e3145da6dcc1.html?mode=jqm}

 

 

_{I tried to bring the article up with no success.  Can you provide hilights?}

[HB]

_{Bo has a similar record as Dr. Tom at the same point in time. Bo will be fine. This team will be excellent. Injuries suck...but I want to see a tough team and this is a tough team}

_{Please read this...}

 

_{http://m.omaha.com/huskers/blogs/mad-chatter-putting-in-perspective-early-struggles---/article_183c9a6f-9947-5775-818f-e3145da6dcc1.html?mode=jqm}

 

_{I tried to bring the article up with no success.  Can you provide hilights?}

Chatelain's opinion on why he thinks it's bogus to compare TO and Bo's first 6 years.

[Haymarket Husker]

Sorry HB, but it is bogus. This is year 7 no more excuses. Vegas thinks we only win 8. 3rd in our division is garbage. Our two deep isn't deep. And TO finished in the top 10 most of those years. I'm still waiting for Pellllini to get over the hump. I guess I should go f#ck myself like Bo says because I support the program and not our mediocre coach.

[HuskerActuary]

 

 

_{Bo has a similar record as Dr. Tom at the same point in time. Bo will be fine. This team will be excellent. Injuries suck...but I want to see a tough team and this is a tough team}

_{Please read this...}

 

_{http://m.omaha.com/huskers/blogs/mad-chatter-putting-in-perspective-early-struggles---/article_183c9a6f-9947-5775-818f-e3145da6dcc1.html?mode=jqm}

 

 

_{I tried to bring the article up with no success.  Can you provide hilights?}

 

“How would TO’s career have looked on social media after yr 6, 11, or year 20?” — Matt Simms (@Simba_Simms)

 

 

“Bo is very close. It took TO over 20 years for it to work exactly right. It is a much tougher league than Big 12/8.” — Shawn Lietz (@Leetsee36)

 

“Your rantings and data gathering about Pelini’s accomplishments could just as easily have been said about Dr Tom Osborne and his first six years (actually even longer). He didn’t win a conference championship during those early years either.” — reader Richard Hand

 

“Look how long T.O. took to win a National title, how many seasons in a row that he did not win a bowl game…” — reader Wallis Glassmyer

 

“In the glory days of Tom Osborne and the Big 8, we generally had 2-3 games we really needed to worry about. The competitive nature of football and our conference has totally changed. Osborne in no way coached in the weekly environment we play in now!” — reader Dale Spencer

 

* * *

 

The debate over the Pelini era grows more intense by the week, as today’s story in USA Today illustrates. I can appreciate some of the arguments on behalf of Bo (more on those later). But I can’t go any longer without addressing their No. 1 talking point.

 

Somebody needs to stick up for young Tom Osborne. Specifically, somebody needs to confront this narrative that Tom’s growing pains = Bo’s growing pains.

 

The essence of that argument goes like this: It took Osborne six years to beat Oklahoma and share a conference title. And from 1973-81, he won nine or 10 games every year — no more, no less. Against weaker competition than Pelini faces.

 

Why is the argument flawed? Where do we begin.

 

>> In six years, Pelini’s best AP poll finish is 14th (2009). From ’73-89, Osborne’s worst AP poll finish was 12th. Big, big difference.

 

>> Nebraska played 11 regular-season games in the 70s. Now the Huskers play 12, thus changing the prestige of nine wins.

 

In 1977, 26 college football teams won nine games — only 14 won 10-plus games. In 2012, the exact same number — 26 — had 10 wins or more. And 38 reached nine. That’s one-third of the country.

 

>> How ’bout big games?

 

From ’08-’13, Pelini’s record against teams that finish in the Top-20 is 4-15. If we throw out 2008, an obvious rebuilding year, the record is 4-11.

 

From ’73-’77, Osborne was 11-8 against Top-20 teams. Nebraska beat as many Top-20 teams in 1973 — four — as it has the past six years.

 

(At the bottom of the blog, you’ll find Osborne’s and Pelini’s complete record against Top-20 teams. It isn’t intended to ridicule Bo’s record, but rather to show how great Osborne was even when he was “struggling.”)

 

>> What about the schedule?

 

You may notice in those five-year runs that Osborne faced four more Top-20 teams. That suggests a tougher slate.

 

We like to think the Big Eight was OU, NU and six dwarves back then. But in ’73, half the conference finished in the Top 20. In ’76, five of eight teams cracked the postseason Top 20 — take that, SEC. And Nebraska’s non-conference schedules were consistently more difficult.

 

There is certainly more parity in college football today. Several factors — scholarship limits, more games on TV, etc. — have closed the gap between a conference’s best teams and worst teams.

 

But one reason more games seem “losable” is that Nebraska simply isn’t as good. Does it look like Alabama, Florida State, Ohio State and Baylor are struggling with the “weekly grind”?

 

>> Don’t forget how good Oklahoma was back then. Yes, it took Osborne until ’78 to beat Barry Switzer. But the Sooners’ postseason rankings from ’73-’80 are ridiculously good — 3rd, 1st, 1st, 5th, 7th, 3rd, 3rd, 3rd.

 

The fact that Nebraska continually lost nail-biters to the best program in the country isn’t quite the same as losing 70-31 to unranked Wisconsin, or losing 41-28 at home to Michigan State.

 

For all those reasons, comparing Pelini 2008-13 to Osborne 1973-77 is a stretch. But it’s not as wacky as comparing the past six years to Osborne’s second notable slump — the early 90s.

 

Yes, it is fact that Osborne was hearing criticism then. I can dig through the World-Herald archives and find a few “Voices from the Grandstand” calling for a coaching change.

 

But to compare that period to this period is absurd. Why? Because from 1973-92, the five winningest college football programs went like this:

 

5 — Penn State (184-54-2)

 

4 — Michigan (184-47-8)

 

3 — Alabama (192-47-2)

 

2 — Oklahoma (186-43-6)

 

1 — Nebraska (195-46-3)

 

That’s right, Osborne’s program had won more games than anybody in the country before initiating the greatest five-year run in modern history.

 

In ’90 and ’91, the argument for getting rid of Osborne was that he’d gone stale, not that he wasn’t elite. In today’s landscape, it’d be like Oklahoma fans turning up the heat on Bob Stoops.

 

Would anyone compare Stoops’ current situation to Pelini’s? Of course not.

 

Osborne is one of the five greatest college football coaches of all-time. To cite his early struggles on behalf of Bo is like telling a struggling president, “Hey, Abraham Lincoln had a rough first term, too.” Or telling your son, who’s struggling with his jump shot: “Michael Jordan missed plenty of shots. You’re right on track!”

 

Let me be clear, as I wrote a year ago: “There is a legitimate argument for patience with Bo Pelini. It includes the high-character kids he’s recruited. It includes the inherent challenges Nebraska (and other northern schools) face in recruiting. It includes the swiftness with which he turned around the program. It includes inheriting Callahan’s offensive coordinator, which set back his offensive vision three years. …

 

“It includes the ridiculous cost of firing coaches — and how you better be confident the replacement will be more successful. It might even include the unquantifiable notion that he’s growing into the job.”

 

A year later, I’ll add a few more reasonable talking points: Pelini’s team dealt with more injuries than normal this year. The young talent on defense is intriguing. Memorial Stadium is still full and the money is still rolling in. Most of all, how do you fire a guy who’s never finished worse than 9-4?

 

I’ll listen to all those arguments. But the Tom Osborne comparisons need to stop.

 

We should study history, Husker fans. Not rewrite it.

[HB]

Sorry HB, but it is bogus. This is year 7 no more excuses. Vegas thinks we only win 8. 3rd in our division is garbage. Our two deep isn't deep. And TO finished in the top 10 most of those years. I'm still waiting for Pellllini to get over the hump. I guess I should go f#ck myself like Bo says because I support the program and not our mediocre coach.

No need to apologize to me for your opinions. Have at 'em. I have mine, and they are much more positive toward our program and our coaches, but those are just opinions and they don't make me a better fan or supporter of the program. I see definite improvement recently in many facets, most noticeably recruiting. To those whose best retort is essentially "well he should have been awesome from the start, so I refuse to look at whether we are making progress and getting better", well, there isn't much anyone could say, your minds are completely made up. I know this: Regardless of what Dirk says, or anyone else, T.O. got better throughout his tenure. And way after he had been here 7 years. It happens with first time head coaches, and maybe was even exacerbated with a conference shift early in Bo's tenure. Thank goodness most people allow for imperfection, improvement and growth over time, in most areas of employment. Call them excuses, that's your right; I'll call it the real world.

I think having to blow it up again and lose the recruiting momentum with the 2015 commitments would be a bad thing, and I hope it doesn't happen. I could be wrong as rain on all this, we lose a bunch of games and have to blow it up and start over again. Maybe we'll get that great coach to come in and it will be like the 90s again. I'll be the first to say I was wrong. But the whole world in college football has changed since the early 70s, and the mid 90s, and I think Bo may be better than mediocre or worse like many think. Just one guy's opinion; I'm looking forward to the season, and I like what I'm seeing with parts of the program. Time will sort it out on wins and losses. Lose a bunch and the commitments start dropping like flies and we're looking for a coach. Maybe there's a Tim Miles out there.

Honestly, I have as much chance about being dead wrong in thinking that we're better off sticking with Bo now than going through another coaching change as I do being right. There are legitimate concerns about the program and degree of progress. But I do get riled up when people think it's 100 to nothing, Bo sucks, has no redeeming qualities and everything is his fault. The classic example are those who blame Bo and/or Dobson for the injuries being the same folks who bitch about practices not being physical enough, thus we don't tackle well. No matter what you do, it's wrong.

[Haymarket Husker]

Sorry HB, but it is bogus. This is year 7 no more excuses. Vegas thinks we only win 8. 3rd in our division is garbage. Our two deep isn't deep. And TO finished in the top 10 most of those years. I'm still waiting for Pellllini to get over the hump. I guess I should go f#ck myself like Bo says because I support the program and not our mediocre coach.

Thank goodness most people allow for imperfection, improvement and growth over time, in most areas of employment. Call them excuses, that's your right; I'll call it the real world.

You know I dont often dhare my opinions very publically let alone on the.message boards but......The only thing I have much of an issue with what you said is above. The difference is as you climb the ladder of leadership in the real world there is less room for people with imperfections, and there is less time for growth. It boils down to who produces and who doesn't. People are expected to hit the ground running. If I was made head of a sales division at some fortune 20 company and paid 4X my current salary I would fully expect to be held to a higher standard. I highly doubt my employer is going to allow 7 years for growth. That is real life. If I behaved like Bo does professionally I wouldn't last a week. The way he behaves behind the scenes is most likely even worse. (I've seen enough smoke to know there is fire). If you want a big boy job then you either perform like a big boy or you can go sit at the little kids table. If we finish in the top 15 this season and don't get embarrassed again I'll give him some slack but I have a hard time believing that is going to happen. I hope you are right and I am wrong but you know what they say about leopards. 4 loses = Bo's spots. Good luck changing them.

Also let me know when your in the Haymarket and want to meet for a beer. We need to talk some hoops soon.

[Huskerpapa]

...and now another injury...tough loss, but thankfully we have quality depth at RB.

 

Coaches are going to be loved and hated.  That is the nature of the beast. 

[Norm Peterson]

Husker Actuary, I agree that you simply cannot compare Osborne's first six years to Pelini's first six years.

 

Osborne took over a program coming off of back-to-back national championships.  His cupboard was stocked full of great players.  We didn't have the scholarship limitations that we have today.  We didn't have the academic eligibility requirements that we have today.  The NCAA hadn't made a push toward "parity" in college football when Osborne took over from Bob Devaney.  There wasn't the kind of money in college football back then because so few games were televised, which allowed the top level programs to remain on top much more easily.

 

In the 10 years before Bo took over, our final AP rank was ...

 

'07 -- Unranked

'06 -- Unranked

'05 -- 24th

'04 -- Unranked

'03 -- 19th

'02 -- Unranked

'01 -- 8th

'00 -- 8th

'99 -- 3rd

'98 -- 19th

 

In the 10 years before Tom Osborne took over, our final AP rank was ...

 

'72 -- 4th

'71 -- #1 National Champions

'70 -- #1 National Champions

'69 -- 11th

'68 -- Unranked (poll only went to 20 teams)

'67 -- Unranked (poll only went to 10 teams)

'66 -- 6th

'65 -- 5th

'64 -- 6th

'63 -- 6th

 

So, yes, I absolutely agree.  You cannot compare Osborne's first 6 years with Pelini's.

[huskerbaseball13]

So the question should be...how many years should Bo get to win something of note? Or now...make the playoffs? Is 7 not enough? Seven years should be enough time to recruit to your system and overcome the previous staff....right? Although, I'm not so sure we are as talented now as to what Cally and his staff left Bo. I guess we will see how this year goes, but right now I don't see why I should expect anything different than 9-10 wins and 4 losses.

[hhcmatt]

[atskooc]

And of those schools, which one has yet to play for a national championship, or play in a BCS game, or ended a season ranked in the top ten, or had a season with fewer than four losses?

 

Putting us in the same category of those three schools doesn't say a whole lot, as those schools have accomplished a heck of a lot more than we have in that time frame. 

[49r]

We'll take any hype from ESPN we can.  Like it or not, they drive public opinion in sports, particularly college sports.

[atskooc]

We'll take any hype from ESPN we can.

I think you've summed up the current state of our program pretty well.

[huskerbaseball13]

 

I agree with Eichorst we are stable.  I don't ever forsee us tanking with Pelini at the helm...with that said, can we do better?  Should we be satisfied with 9-10 wins every year and no championships? Maybe.  But I would hope we would strive for more considering our prestige and history.  Going on 14 years now without a conference title.....this is Bo's seventh year.  Something has to give...soon. 

[hhcmatt]

Putting us in the same category of those three schools doesn't say a whole lot, as those schools have accomplished a heck of a lot more than we have in that time frame. 

 

I was thinking more about the 120+ teams not on this list.

 

We've certainly done better and certainly have done worse.  It's probably going to take one or the other for a coaching change to happen.