The Tangent Thread, Dec 2014 Edition

[Landlord]

Mediocre success at a disadvantaged school does not precipitate inability to succeed at a higher level. It's really simple.

Doesn't guarantee it either.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

a great.........?

Big a-hole?

Embarassment to another program?

Example of how NOT to lead young men?

You need to clarify, BRV.

I'm more concerned about the new coach for the Nebraska Cornhuskers.

You have every right to be skeptical.

But don't be concerned. Mike Riley will help people forget Bo Pelini.

Unless that's what concerns you.

 

[TheSker]

You have every right to be skeptical.

But don't be concerned. Mike Riley will help people forget Bo Pelini.

Unless that's what concerns you.

Yes, skeptical is the much better word choice.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

You have every right to be skeptical.

But don't be concerned. Mike Riley will help people forget Bo Pelini.

Unless that's what concerns you.

Yes, skeptical is the much better word choice.

Now promise us you're actually rooting for Mike Riley to succeed.

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

You have every right to be skeptical.

But don't be concerned. Mike Riley will help people forget Bo Pelini.

Unless that's what concerns you.

Yes, skeptical is the much better word choice.

Now promise us you're actually rooting for Mike Riley to succeed.

I'm rooting for Mike Riley to succeed. He's a damn likable guy.

Depending on what our definition of succeed is, I have my doubts. If by succeed you mean compete within our division, teams like Iowa and Wisconsin, then he can be successful. If you mean succeed by competing with the nations best teams, Ohio State, Florida State, LSU, etc. then no. Or with the second tier teams, like UCLA, Clemson, Georgia, Michigan State, maybe. We're at least a few seasons away from competing with teams like that on any given week.

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

Mediocre success at a disadvantaged school does not precipitate inability to succeed at a higher level. It's really simple.

Doesn't guarantee it either.

Maybe I should have said: you used the one example where mediocre success at a disadvantaged school didn't mean much and ignored the dozens of examples that say otherwise. In other words, the odds are very, very, very low. The few times it does work is when the school has natural recruiting resources.

 

[knapplc]

You have every right to be skeptical.

But don't be concerned. Mike Riley will help people forget Bo Pelini.

Unless that's what concerns you.

Yes, skeptical is the much better word choice.

I'm skeptical as well. Skeptically sipping my kool-aid is probably the best way to describe my feeling right now.

I mean, even if Riley is an unmitigated disaster I'm still going to be pro-Nebraska, rah-rah-rah all the way.

 

[Landlord]

The few times it does work is when the school has natural recruiting resources.

What kind of resources? Things like, elite facilities? The biggest budget in the conference? Undying fan support? A good sized support staff? Decades of the highest level of tradition and history? Things like that? Or are you only talking about the one single recruiting resource we don't have - lots of talent in our backyard.

 

[StPaulHusker]

The few times it does work is when the school has natural recruiting resources.

What kind of resources? Things like, elite facilities? The biggest budget in the conference? Undying fan support? A good sized support staff? Decades of the highest level of tradition and history? Things like that? Or are you only talking about the one single recruiting resource we don't have - lots of talent in our backyard.

That does appear to be a very important resource to have. Which we don't.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

Boise State built a Top 20 program from a worse position, just by making a commitment to greatness.

Hell, so did Oregon.

Wisconsin and Michigan State are in the same position as Nebraska, and a tick under in terms of facilities and legacy.

Stanford & Notre Dame have to write off half of every recruiting class based on academic standards.

Florida and Texas have every possible advantage we want, and that didn't stop them from going in the crapper.

Alabama has had longer and deeper troughs than Nebraska, and they never stopped being Alabama.

Sometimes it takes years to turn things around. Sometimes it's just a coach. Or that game-changing quarterback.

But there's usually a very disatisfied fanbase and alumni association behind it.

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

The few times it does work is when the school has natural recruiting resources.

What kind of resources? Things like, elite facilities? The biggest budget in the conference? Undying fan support? A good sized support staff? Decades of the highest level of tradition and history? Things like that? Or are you only talking about the one single recruiting resource we don't have - lots of talent in our backyard.

'Natural' referred to local talent. Nebraska has facilities, support, and the recruiting budget. Those resources netted us recruiting classes ranked in the mid 30s each of the last two seasons.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

You have every right to be skeptical.

But don't be concerned. Mike Riley will help people forget Bo Pelini.

Unless that's what concerns you.

Yes, skeptical is the much better word choice.

Now promise us you're actually rooting for Mike Riley to succeed.

I'm rooting for Mike Riley to succeed. He's a damn likable guy.

Depending on what our definition of succeed is, I have my doubts. If by succeed you mean compete within our division, teams like Iowa and Wisconsin, then he can be successful. If you mean succeed by competing with the nations best teams, Ohio State, Florida State, LSU, etc. then no. Or with the second tier teams, like UCLA, Clemson, Georgia, Michigan State, maybe. We're at least a few seasons away from competing with teams like that on any given week.

Bo Pelini's team already competed with UCLA, Georgia and Michigan State. I'd say we were a couple strategic adjustments and a less-frightened coaching staff away from winning those games with the same personnel. Of course we actually BEAT Georgia, but I get your gist.

And just a few weeks ago we looked like the peer of USC, expected to be 1st or 2nd Tier next season.

Patience is a virtue. Riley deserves it.

But there's no reason things can't change overnight.

 

[TheSker]

You have every right to be skeptical.

But don't be concerned. Mike Riley will help people forget Bo Pelini.

Unless that's what concerns you.

Yes, skeptical is the much better word choice.

Now promise us you're actually rooting for Mike Riley to succeed.

I bleed Husker red, so that's a given.

 

[Saunders]

I'm skeptical as well. Skeptically sipping my kool-aid is probably the best way to describe my feeling right now.

I mean, even if Riley is an unmitigated disaster I'm still going to be pro-Nebraska, rah-rah-rah all the way.

Couldn't have said it better my friend!

 

[Count 'Bility]

You have every right to be skeptical.

But don't be concerned. Mike Riley will help people forget Bo Pelini.

Unless that's what concerns you.

Yes, skeptical is the much better word choice.

Now promise us you're actually rooting for Mike Riley to succeed.

I'm rooting for Mike Riley to succeed. He's a damn likable guy.

Depending on what our definition of succeed is, I have my doubts. If by succeed you mean compete within our division, teams like Iowa and Wisconsin, then he can be successful. If you mean succeed by competing with the nations best teams, Ohio State, Florida State, LSU, etc. then no. Or with the second tier teams, like UCLA, Clemson, Georgia, Michigan State, maybe. We're at least a few seasons away from competing with teams like that on any given week.

Bo Pelini's team already competed with UCLA, Georgia and Michigan State. I'd say we were a couple strategic adjustments and a less-frightened coaching staff away from winning those games with the same personnel. Of course we actually BEAT Georgia, but I get your gist.

And just a few weeks ago we looked like the peer of USC, expected to be 1st or 2nd Tier next season.

Patience is a virtue. Riley deserves it.

But there's no reason things can't change overnight.

exactly. Same thing with ESPN propping up USC as NC contenders. What does that say about us? We were a play away from WINNING that game even with all the turmoil the team was going through. So if your gonna put USC on that pedestal automatically, You cant completely write off the 9 win team that probably shouldve beat them. I dont care what the talent disparity is on paper, cuz there's more to it than that. If DPE or Ameer break a tackle on those last plays and scores, is USC still a legit 2015 NC contender? Where does Nebraska stand? Does the narrative change that they were pushing so hard just 20 minutes prior when it was a 17 point game?

And I'm in total agreement with Chamberlain. Folks look at a game like Wisconsin being 59-17, and think we're so far away, yet when you watch the game, and understand the mentality of the team the last few years, and the dynamic of their soft mentality at times, it's actually pretty easy to say that we're just a shift in mentality away from not only winning that game, but probably stepping on their throat up 17-3 and possibly winning going away. Same with the Michigan St game. Maybe the team actually shows up ready for a street fight and plays like they did the last 10 minutes or so for 60 and win the game by 20.

It's what I've been sayin for about 3 years now. We feel so close, yet so far away at the same time.