In which we bellyache about Bo and/or Riley some more.

[BigRedBuster]

The thing is, Epley evaluated THIS team. Not last years, or the year before.

There is nothing that says Bo would have won more than 5 games this year with the same team and schedule.

There is plenty of evidence and history that says Pelini would've won at least 9 games this season. I'm quite certain he would've been undefeated and in the middle of the playoff talks going into the B1G championship game. 10-2 regular season at the worst.

You have absolutely no evidence that he could have gone through the regular season with only two losses.

 

[HuskerNBigD]

I didn't want this to turn into Bo vs Riley but it has. So I will chime in.

I firmly 100% believe with Ameer, Kenny, and Gregory we are at least 9-4 this year. Ameer alone might get you that.

/ end thread. The rest should all be filed under December tangent, as an almost identical argument I had caused the creation of the damn thing to begin with.

 

[HuskerNBigD]

The thing is, Epley evaluated THIS team. Not last years, or the year before.

There is nothing that says Bo would have won more than 5 games this year with the same team and schedule.

There is plenty of evidence and history that says Pelini would've won at least 9 games this season. I'm quite certain he would've been undefeated and in the middle of the playoff talks going into the B1G championship game. 10-2 regular season at the worst.

Did he have a losing record with Youngstown state this year? If he's that great of a coach, he should've been undefeated in a weaker football division.

 

[StPaulHusker]

The thing is, Epley evaluated THIS team. Not last years, or the year before.

There is nothing that says Bo would have won more than 5 games this year with the same team and schedule.

Well, there were a lot of the same players playing.

Sure there were. But just because Pelini went 9/10-4 for 7 straight years doesn't mean he was automatically entitled to get to 8 in a row.

 

[GBRedneck]

The thing is, Epley evaluated THIS team. Not last years, or the year before.

There is nothing that says Bo would have won more than 5 games this year with the same team and schedule.

There is plenty of evidence and history that says Pelini would've won at least 9 games this season. I'm quite certain he would've been undefeated and in the middle of the playoff talks going into the B1G championship game. 10-2 regular season at the worst.

You have absolutely no evidence that he could have gone through the regular season with only two losses.

Yes, I have plenty of evidence to say that. The only thing I don't have is a time machine to prove it.

 

[StPaulHusker]

The thing is, Epley evaluated THIS team. Not last years, or the year before.

There is nothing that says Bo would have won more than 5 games this year with the same team and schedule.

There is plenty of evidence and history that says Pelini would've won at least 9 games this season. I'm quite certain he would've been undefeated and in the middle of the playoff talks going into the B1G championship game. 10-2 regular season at the worst.

You have absolutely no evidence that he could have gone through the regular season with only two losses.

Yes, I have plenty of evidence to say that. The only thing I don't have is a time machine to prove it.

What you have is 7 years of history. That doesn't mean the 8th year was going to be the same.

 

[GBRedneck]

The thing is, Epley evaluated THIS team. Not last years, or the year before.

There is nothing that says Bo would have won more than 5 games this year with the same team and schedule.

There is plenty of evidence and history that says Pelini would've won at least 9 games this season. I'm quite certain he would've been undefeated and in the middle of the playoff talks going into the B1G championship game. 10-2 regular season at the worst.

You have absolutely no evidence that he could have gone through the regular season with only two losses.

Yes, I have plenty of evidence to say that. The only thing I don't have is a time machine to prove it.

What you have is 7 years of history. That doesn't mean the 8th year was going to be the same.

Why do I get the feeling that you were one of the guys claiming that 7 years of history was proof that Pelini would never win more than 9 games?

 

[Husker Psycho]

/ end thread. The rest should all be filed under December tangent, as an almost identical argument I had caused the creation of the damn thing to begin with.

No, it should not.

This is exactly the type of topic that should be discussed here. It's totally pertinent to our team and it's future.

 

[StPaulHusker]

The thing is, Epley evaluated THIS team. Not last years, or the year before.

There is nothing that says Bo would have won more than 5 games this year with the same team and schedule.

There is plenty of evidence and history that says Pelini would've won at least 9 games this season. I'm quite certain he would've been undefeated and in the middle of the playoff talks going into the B1G championship game. 10-2 regular season at the worst.

You have absolutely no evidence that he could have gone through the regular season with only two losses.

Yes, I have plenty of evidence to say that. The only thing I don't have is a time machine to prove it.

What you have is 7 years of history. That doesn't mean the 8th year was going to be the same.

Why do I get the feeling that you were one of the guys claiming that 7 years of history was proof that Pelini would never win more than 9 games?

I would never claim that it was proof. But I just didn't believe he was a good enough coach to get us to the next level. I reserved that judgement until about year 5 or so. Whether he would have won 11 games one year or 12. I didn't think he was capable of sustaining long term success.

I based it off the views that his recruiting style didn't change. His coaching style didn't change. His lack of hiring more seasoned coaches. Losing in high profile games. Losing control of himself on the sidelines. Stuff like that.

 

[GBRedneck]

So Bo Pelini can win 9-10 games a year with no talent, but Riley will need 1.5 years to get the talent needed to get passed 6 wins?

Any way you slice it, it's hard to get past this point.

Why do you guys consistently try to misrepresent the talent that Bo had on the team and act like we won't notice?
He had NFL caliber running backs EVERY YEAR he was here. He had Suh and some of the nastiest DBs early on and one of the best LBs in the NFL. He won 9 games last year and had three most talented players on the team drafted. Three cornerstone players the offense and defense were absolutely built around.

But by all means, continue to act like Bo coached with no talent.

Can't give Bo credit for winning 9-10 games every year, but we can sure blame him for only a 5 win team that he didn't even coach.

Can't make this stuff up. Some of you actually think this way.

^^^This^^^

You guys sound surprised about this stuff. I mean, you have guys like RADAR on here who unabashedly claim that Solich was a horrible coach while they're busy slobbering all over Riley.

I don't understand how people can function under such cognitive dissonance, but we see it here every day. It shouldn't be surprising any more.

 

[GBRedneck]

The thing is, Epley evaluated THIS team. Not last years, or the year before.

There is nothing that says Bo would have won more than 5 games this year with the same team and schedule.

There is plenty of evidence and history that says Pelini would've won at least 9 games this season. I'm quite certain he would've been undefeated and in the middle of the playoff talks going into the B1G championship game. 10-2 regular season at the worst.

You have absolutely no evidence that he could have gone through the regular season with only two losses.

Yes, I have plenty of evidence to say that. The only thing I don't have is a time machine to prove it.

What you have is 7 years of history. That doesn't mean the 8th year was going to be the same.

Why do I get the feeling that you were one of the guys claiming that 7 years of history was proof that Pelini would never win more than 9 games?

I would never claim that it was proof. But I just didn't believe he was a good enough coach to get us to the next level. I reserved that judgement until about year 5 or so. Whether he would have won 11 games one year or 12. I didn't think he was capable of sustaining long term success.

I based it off the views that his recruiting style didn't change. His coaching style didn't change. His lack of hiring more seasoned coaches. Losing in high profile games. Losing control of himself on the sidelines. Stuff like that.

And that explains why you can't accept the fact that Pelini would've likely had a really good season this year.

 

[BigRedBuster]

The thing is, Epley evaluated THIS team. Not last years, or the year before.

There is nothing that says Bo would have won more than 5 games this year with the same team and schedule.

There is plenty of evidence and history that says Pelini would've won at least 9 games this season. I'm quite certain he would've been undefeated and in the middle of the playoff talks going into the B1G championship game. 10-2 regular season at the worst.

You have absolutely no evidence that he could have gone through the regular season with only two losses.

Yes, I have plenty of evidence to say that. The only thing I don't have is a time machine to prove it.

No you don't. You have done data that makes it possible to say he COULD have. You have nothing that said he WOULD have. If you did, you wouldn't be in need of a time machine.
Bo has lost games before that he shouldn't have. There is no evidence that wouldn't have happened this year.

 

[StPaulHusker]

The thing is, Epley evaluated THIS team. Not last years, or the year before.

There is nothing that says Bo would have won more than 5 games this year with the same team and schedule.

There is plenty of evidence and history that says Pelini would've won at least 9 games this season. I'm quite certain he would've been undefeated and in the middle of the playoff talks going into the B1G championship game. 10-2 regular season at the worst.

You have absolutely no evidence that he could have gone through the regular season with only two losses.

Yes, I have plenty of evidence to say that. The only thing I don't have is a time machine to prove it.

What you have is 7 years of history. That doesn't mean the 8th year was going to be the same.

Why do I get the feeling that you were one of the guys claiming that 7 years of history was proof that Pelini would never win more than 9 games?

I would never claim that it was proof. But I just didn't believe he was a good enough coach to get us to the next level. I reserved that judgement until about year 5 or so. Whether he would have won 11 games one year or 12. I didn't think he was capable of sustaining long term success.

I based it off the views that his recruiting style didn't change. His coaching style didn't change. His lack of hiring more seasoned coaches. Losing in high profile games. Losing control of himself on the sidelines. Stuff like that.

And that explains why you can't accept the fact that Pelini would've likely had a really good season this year.

I don't know if he would or he wouldn't. Every year is different.

 

[Enhance]

The thing is, Epley evaluated THIS team. Not last years, or the year before.

There is nothing that says Bo would have won more than 5 games this year with the same team and schedule.

There is plenty of evidence and history that says Pelini would've won at least 9 games this season. I'm quite certain he would've been undefeated and in the middle of the playoff talks going into the B1G championship game. 10-2 regular season at the worst.

You have absolutely no evidence that he could have gone through the regular season with only two losses.

Yes, I have plenty of evidence to say that. The only thing I don't have is a time machine to prove it.

What you have is 7 years of history. That doesn't mean the 8th year was going to be the same.

Why do I get the feeling that you were one of the guys claiming that 7 years of history was proof that Pelini would never win more than 9 games?

I would never claim that it was proof. But I just didn't believe he was a good enough coach to get us to the next level. I reserved that judgement until about year 5 or so. Whether he would have won 11 games one year or 12. I didn't think he was capable of sustaining long term success.

I based it off the views that his recruiting style didn't change. His coaching style didn't change. His lack of hiring more seasoned coaches. Losing in high profile games. Losing control of himself on the sidelines. Stuff like that.

And that explains why you can't accept the fact that Pelini would've likely had a really good season this year.

Combining your post from above, you think it's a "fact" that Pelini likely would've been in the playoff discussion heading into the B1G title game with a 10-2 record at worst? That's with losing Abdullah and Gregory?

I don't find anything that makes that likelihood a provable fact. Your projection is a possibility, at best, but I don't know see what makes it the most likely one. The loss of two massively significant players and seven years of data suggest the most likely outcome was another 9 win season.

 

[RedDenver]

So Bo Pelini can win 9-10 games a year with no talent, but Riley will need 1.5 years to get the talent needed to get passed 6 wins?

Any way you slice it, it's hard to get past this point.

Why do you guys consistently try to misrepresent the talent that Bo had on the team and act like we won't notice?
He had NFL caliber running backs EVERY YEAR he was here. He had Suh and some of the nastiest DBs early on and one of the best LBs in the NFL. He won 9 games last year and had three most talented players on the team drafted. Three cornerstone players the offense and defense were absolutely built around.

But by all means, continue to act like Bo coached with no talent.

Can't give Bo credit for winning 9-10 games every year, but we can sure blame him for only a 5 win team that he didn't even coach.

Can't make this stuff up. Some of you actually think this way.

^^^This^^^

You guys sound surprised about this stuff. I mean, you have guys like RADAR on here who unabashedly claim that Solich was a horrible coach while they're busy slobbering all over Riley.

I don't understand how people can function under such cognitive dissonance, but we see it here every day. It shouldn't be surprising any more.

You do realize it's possible to think Riley is a good coach while Solich was not? It's perfectly logically to think Solich, Callahan, Pelini, and Riley are good or bad coaches in any combination. This whole notion that people must be on certain "sides" of the debate is false.

For example, I think Pelini had a decent record but was an a-hole, bad representative of the university, and therefore needed to be fired. I also think Riley is good at the CEO type activities but was an uninspired hire and has a bad record, and think we'll fire him in a couple seasons (although I wish we'd never hired him).