Eichorst: Building Football Program is "a Process"

[cm husker]

Except Eichorst, when he had a coach that was 18-7 under his watch, couldn't be found in support of his coach and staff.

Now that he has "his guy," he is laying down all kinds of cover (while taking shots at the last guy).

The problem I have with Pedey, Eichorst and Perlman and the sorts like them is they lack any real integrity. Both of those ADs came in with an agenda and the intent to fire their coaches, and they weren't going to be dissuaded no matter the result. All that could be done in '14 was delay him, unlike the jerk in '03.

Those three couldn't be more of the opposite of TO, who when he was hired had a forthright discussion with his coach about the expectations and benchmarks he needed to hit to retain his job. When he failed to do that, TO acted decisively. None of those meely mouthed garbage. And I have no doubt that if BC had salvaged 8 wins in '07, he would have kept his job.

 

[Landlord]

Except Eichorst, when he had a coach that was 18-7 under his watch, couldn't be found in support of his coach and staff.

Bull. Eichorst has always been publicly complimentary and supportive of his coaches, after the seasons are over.

If Eichorst had an agenda to fire Pelini, he would have done it after Bo dared him too after Iowa 2013.

 

[Red Dead Redemption]

Can't say I agree with Eichorst here:

We were in every ballgame with a chance to win every ballgame, which I think is the standard here.

You may not like the statement, but what he said is true. Of the seven losses that we had the only game I feel they wern't in was Purdue. Whether anyone likes that or not is there opinion. The BYU, Miami, Illinois, Wisconsin, NW, and Iowa games all came down to the wire and Nebraska could have won them. The fact that NU didn't win them sucks, but his statement isn't false.

Nobody said it was false. Good Lord.The issue people have is that it is a narrow, contextual, and trite summation.

Much like defending Bo by saying, "he always won at least 9 games". That statement is also true, huh?

Oh...that's right....that's why I'm still supposed to be freaking out.....

This spinning in circles and flopping my arms is getting really tiring. Could someone please let me know when I'm supposed to stop freaking out????

You can stop freaking out whenever you are capable, if you are capable.I'm not sure who other than you has even started.

NO NO....WE ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO FORGET PUR.... FREAKING..... DUE.........

Can I really trust you that I can stop freaking out about PUR.....FREAKING.....DUE.......??????

Where in the posts you quoted here is there a freak out about purdue? (Other than yours)Are there other things you want to fabricate to draw attention to yourself?

Hey....I read earlier I was supposed to just let it sink in for a minute that WE LOST TO PUR....FREAKING....DUE......
I let it sink in now I'm freaking out......

I guess I had jus never let it sink in before.........

OMG....this spinning and flopping is getting tiring.

Please refrain from sharing with us your masturbation habits

But...we lost to PURDUE!!!!!!

If that is what stimulates you, so be it.

But you are still taking quotes out of context.

Let some blood flow back to your brain so it will work properly

 

[BigRedBuster]

Can't say I agree with Eichorst here:

We were in every ballgame with a chance to win every ballgame, which I think is the standard here.

You may not like the statement, but what he said is true. Of the seven losses that we had the only game I feel they wern't in was Purdue. Whether anyone likes that or not is there opinion. The BYU, Miami, Illinois, Wisconsin, NW, and Iowa games all came down to the wire and Nebraska could have won them. The fact that NU didn't win them sucks, but his statement isn't false.

Nobody said it was false. Good Lord.The issue people have is that it is a narrow, contextual, and trite summation.

Much like defending Bo by saying, "he always won at least 9 games". That statement is also true, huh?

Oh...that's right....that's why I'm still supposed to be freaking out.....

This spinning in circles and flopping my arms is getting really tiring. Could someone please let me know when I'm supposed to stop freaking out????

You can stop freaking out whenever you are capable, if you are capable.I'm not sure who other than you has even started.

NO NO....WE ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO FORGET PUR.... FREAKING..... DUE.........

Can I really trust you that I can stop freaking out about PUR.....FREAKING.....DUE.......??????

Where in the posts you quoted here is there a freak out about purdue? (Other than yours)Are there other things you want to fabricate to draw attention to yourself?

Hey....I read earlier I was supposed to just let it sink in for a minute that WE LOST TO PUR....FREAKING....DUE......
I let it sink in now I'm freaking out......

I guess I had jus never let it sink in before.........

OMG....this spinning and flopping is getting tiring.

Please refrain from sharing with us your masturbation habits

But...we lost to PURDUE!!!!!!

If that is what stimulates you, so be it.

But you are still taking quotes out of context.

Let some blood flow back to your brain so it will work properly

That right there quite possibly is the most ironic and funny statement since it's in this thread.

Good job.

This entire thread is full of people over reacting to a single quote taken out of context.

 

[Red Dead Redemption]

Can't say I agree with Eichorst here:

We were in every ballgame with a chance to win every ballgame, which I think is the standard here.

You may not like the statement, but what he said is true. Of the seven losses that we had the only game I feel they wern't in was Purdue. Whether anyone likes that or not is there opinion. The BYU, Miami, Illinois, Wisconsin, NW, and Iowa games all came down to the wire and Nebraska could have won them. The fact that NU didn't win them sucks, but his statement isn't false.

Nobody said it was false. Good Lord.The issue people have is that it is a narrow, contextual, and trite summation.

Much like defending Bo by saying, "he always won at least 9 games". That statement is also true, huh?

Oh...that's right....that's why I'm still supposed to be freaking out.....

This spinning in circles and flopping my arms is getting really tiring. Could someone please let me know when I'm supposed to stop freaking out????

You can stop freaking out whenever you are capable, if you are capable.I'm not sure who other than you has even started.

NO NO....WE ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO FORGET PUR.... FREAKING..... DUE.........

Can I really trust you that I can stop freaking out about PUR.....FREAKING.....DUE.......??????

Where in the posts you quoted here is there a freak out about purdue? (Other than yours)Are there other things you want to fabricate to draw attention to yourself?

Hey....I read earlier I was supposed to just let it sink in for a minute that WE LOST TO PUR....FREAKING....DUE......
I let it sink in now I'm freaking out......

I guess I had jus never let it sink in before.........

OMG....this spinning and flopping is getting tiring.

Please refrain from sharing with us your masturbation habits

But...we lost to PURDUE!!!!!!

If that is what stimulates you, so be it.But you are still taking quotes out of context.

Let some blood flow back to your brain so it will work properly

That right there quite possibly is the most ironic and funny statement since it's in this thread.
Good job.

This entire thread is full of people over reacting to a single quote taken out of context.

That may be, but many of your childish rants are responses to my posts.

Care to point out where I over-reacted with an out of context post?

 

[BigRedBuster]

Can't say I agree with Eichorst here:

We were in every ballgame with a chance to win every ballgame, which I think is the standard here.

You may not like the statement, but what he said is true. Of the seven losses that we had the only game I feel they wern't in was Purdue. Whether anyone likes that or not is there opinion. The BYU, Miami, Illinois, Wisconsin, NW, and Iowa games all came down to the wire and Nebraska could have won them. The fact that NU didn't win them sucks, but his statement isn't false.

Nobody said it was false. Good Lord.The issue people have is that it is a narrow, contextual, and trite summation.

Much like defending Bo by saying, "he always won at least 9 games". That statement is also true, huh?

Oh...that's right....that's why I'm still supposed to be freaking out.....

This spinning in circles and flopping my arms is getting really tiring. Could someone please let me know when I'm supposed to stop freaking out????

You can stop freaking out whenever you are capable, if you are capable.I'm not sure who other than you has even started.

NO NO....WE ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO FORGET PUR.... FREAKING..... DUE.........

Can I really trust you that I can stop freaking out about PUR.....FREAKING.....DUE.......??????

Where in the posts you quoted here is there a freak out about purdue? (Other than yours)Are there other things you want to fabricate to draw attention to yourself?

Hey....I read earlier I was supposed to just let it sink in for a minute that WE LOST TO PUR....FREAKING....DUE......
I let it sink in now I'm freaking out......

I guess I had jus never let it sink in before.........

OMG....this spinning and flopping is getting tiring.

Please refrain from sharing with us your masturbation habits

But...we lost to PURDUE!!!!!!

If that is what stimulates you, so be it.But you are still taking quotes out of context.

Let some blood flow back to your brain so it will work properly

That right there quite possibly is the most ironic and funny statement since it's in this thread.
Good job.

This entire thread is full of people over reacting to a single quote taken out of context.

That may be, but many of your childish rants are responses to my posts.

Care to point out where I over-reacted with an out of context post?

Hey...sorry man.....

I was lead to believe I was supposed to freak out about PUR....FREAKING....DUE.......

You got caught up in the storm when you started asking me why I was freaking out..

Shewwwwww..........glad I can stop.

 

[Red Dead Redemption]

Can't say I agree with Eichorst here:

We were in every ballgame with a chance to win every ballgame, which I think is the standard here.

You may not like the statement, but what he said is true. Of the seven losses that we had the only game I feel they wern't in was Purdue. Whether anyone likes that or not is there opinion. The BYU, Miami, Illinois, Wisconsin, NW, and Iowa games all came down to the wire and Nebraska could have won them. The fact that NU didn't win them sucks, but his statement isn't false.

Nobody said it was false. Good Lord.The issue people have is that it is a narrow, contextual, and trite summation.

Much like defending Bo by saying, "he always won at least 9 games". That statement is also true, huh?

Oh...that's right....that's why I'm still supposed to be freaking out.....

This spinning in circles and flopping my arms is getting really tiring. Could someone please let me know when I'm supposed to stop freaking out????

You can stop freaking out whenever you are capable, if you are capable.I'm not sure who other than you has even started.

NO NO....WE ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO FORGET PUR.... FREAKING..... DUE.........

Can I really trust you that I can stop freaking out about PUR.....FREAKING.....DUE.......??????

Where in the posts you quoted here is there a freak out about purdue? (Other than yours)Are there other things you want to fabricate to draw attention to yourself?

Hey....I read earlier I was supposed to just let it sink in for a minute that WE LOST TO PUR....FREAKING....DUE......
I let it sink in now I'm freaking out......

I guess I had jus never let it sink in before.........

OMG....this spinning and flopping is getting tiring.

Please refrain from sharing with us your masturbation habits

But...we lost to PURDUE!!!!!!

If that is what stimulates you, so be it.But you are still taking quotes out of context.

Let some blood flow back to your brain so it will work properly

That right there quite possibly is the most ironic and funny statement since it's in this thread.
Good job.

This entire thread is full of people over reacting to a single quote taken out of context.

That may be, but many of your childish rants are responses to my posts.

Care to point out where I over-reacted with an out of context post?

Hey...sorry man.....
I was lead to believe I was supposed to freak out about PUR....FREAKING....DUE.......

You got caught up in the storm when you started asking me why I was freaking out..

Shewwwwww..........glad I can stop.

Don't forget to clean up with a tissue

 

[BigRedBuster]

Don't forget to clean up with a tissue

Thanks man.....I sometimes forget.

 

[cm husker]

Except Eichorst, when he had a coach that was 18-7 under his watch, couldn't be found in support of his coach and staff.

Bull. Eichorst has always been publicly complimentary and supportive of his coaches, after the seasons are over.

If Eichorst had an agenda to fire Pelini, he would have done it after Bo dared him too after Iowa 2013.

A. No Bo didn't dare him. That's a gross mischaracterization of Bo's exchange with that reporter. Bo said "the speculation had been a distraction, that he did not apologize for anything his team or coaches had done because he was proud of their performance, and said if they want to fire him, that wouldn't change how and why he felt proud of his guys." Go back and watch the PC. The "dared to fire him" was an invented narrative designed as click bait.

B. Eichorst wanted to fire him in '13. Hell, he was hired for that purpose. but TO and some regents got directly intervened to delay that.

C. Eichorst was only here for one post season with Bo and his letter (not interview) in support of Bo was about as bland and lawyerly as it gets.

The guy is two faced. You can agree with and support his decisions but you should acknowledge that basic fact. He changed his policy about in season support when it benefited him. He either lied in his PC about why Bo was fired or he's lying now.

The man is a liar.

 

[BigRedBuster]

The Husker football team is taking on an image under Riley where a middle of the pack finish in the league and a bowl game of any kind represent high times and a win in the bowl is icing on the cake. Forget the notion of playing for a national title for a second. High times for this program for me represented competing for, but not always winning the conference title, and more often that not, making a bowl game like one of the non semifinal New Year's Six.

Please show where anyone thinks this is..."high times".???

 

[NUinID]

Can't say I agree with Eichorst here:

We were in every ballgame with a chance to win every ballgame, which I think is the standard here.

You may not like the statement, but what he said is true. Of the seven losses that we had the only game I feel they wern't in was Purdue. Whether anyone likes that or not is there opinion. The BYU, Miami, Illinois, Wisconsin, NW, and Iowa games all came down to the wire and Nebraska could have won them. The fact that NU didn't win them sucks, but his statement isn't false.

NU will never get back to the point where the team is competing for conference championships on an annual basis until there aren't 7 games that can go down to the wire. The truly dominant programs have 2 or 3 "close games" a year. Close games can turn on a single play or even luck. Riley was probably unlucky to go 1-6 in "close games" this past year, but it would be nearly impossible to go 6-1 or 7-0 in those "close games". In order for NU to be dominant, the coaches can't be happy with close games. The coaches need to demand 8 or 9 a$$-whippings, and then 3 or 4 close games.

Did I say they would? I don't think anywhere I said they would get back to being dominant with 7 close games a year. I said it was a true statement. We could have won all those games. That is all. Everyone pines for the glory days, there is a 3 page thread going on about this right now. I would love to see it happen, but the most important ingredient in the glory days is almost 80 years old. I think NU can win CCG and play for and win national championships, but it just not going to happen every year like the glory years. Unless your team is Alabama or OSU and you are coached by Sabin or Meyer winning 12 every year is very hard. You are going to have the 4 and sometimes 5 loss years mixed into it.

 

[NUinID]

Can't say I agree with Eichorst here:

We were in every ballgame with a chance to win every ballgame, which I think is the standard here.

You may not like the statement, but what he said is true. Of the seven losses that we had the only game I feel they wern't in was Purdue. Whether anyone likes that or not is there opinion. The BYU, Miami, Illinois, Wisconsin, NW, and Iowa games all came down to the wire and Nebraska could have won them. The fact that NU didn't win them sucks, but his statement isn't false.

Nobody said it was false. Good Lord.The issue people have is that it is a narrow, contextual, and trite summation.

Much like defending Bo by saying, "he always won at least 9 games". That statement is also true, huh?

Oh...that's right....that's why I'm still supposed to be freaking out.....

This spinning in circles and flopping my arms is getting really tiring. Could someone please let me know when I'm supposed to stop freaking out????

You can stop freaking out whenever you are capable, if you are capable.I'm not sure who other than you has even started.

NO NO....WE ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO FORGET PUR.... FREAKING..... DUE.........

Can I really trust you that I can stop freaking out about PUR.....FREAKING.....DUE.......??????

Where in the posts you quoted here is there a freak out about purdue? (Other than yours)Are there other things you want to fabricate to draw attention to yourself?

Hey....I read earlier I was supposed to just let it sink in for a minute that WE LOST TO PUR....FREAKING....DUE......
I let it sink in now I'm freaking out......

I guess I had jus never let it sink in before.........

OMG....this spinning and flopping is getting tiring.

Please refrain from sharing with us your masturbation habits

But...we lost to PURDUE!!!!!!

If that is what stimulates you, so be it.

But you are still taking quotes out of context.

Let some blood flow back to your brain so it will work properly

That right there quite possibly is the most ironic and funny statement since it's in this thread.

Good job.

This entire thread is full of people over reacting to a single quote taken out of context.

You speak the truth Buster

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

Except Eichorst, when he had a coach that was 18-7 under his watch, couldn't be found in support of his coach and staff.

Bull. Eichorst has always been publicly complimentary and supportive of his coaches, after the seasons are over.

If Eichorst had an agenda to fire Pelini, he would have done it after Bo dared him too after Iowa 2013.

A. No Bo didn't dare him. That's a gross mischaracterization of Bo's exchange with that reporter. Bo said "the speculation had been a distraction, that he did not apologize for anything his team or coaches had done because he was proud of their performance, and said if they want to fire him, that wouldn't change how and why he felt proud of his guys." Go back and watch the PC. The "dared to fire him" was an invented narrative designed as click bait.

B. Eichorst wanted to fire him in '13. Hell, he was hired for that purpose. but TO and some regents got directly intervened to delay that.

C. Eichorst was only here for one post season with Bo and his letter (not interview) in support of Bo was about as bland and lawyerly as it gets.

The guy is two faced. You can agree with and support his decisions but you should acknowledge that basic fact. He changed his policy about in season support when it benefited him. He either lied in his PC about why Bo was fired or he's lying now.

The man is a liar.

A. Bo said the things he was expected to say in that position. Shawn Eichorst said the things he was expected to say in that position. You don't understand "click bait."

B. Some fans and influential alums wanted to fire Bo in 2013, too. If Eichorst wanted to fire him after Iowa 2013 it would hardly have been a maverick agenda, and history ended up justifying it anyway. As it was, Shawn Eichorst did what a clear majority of fans (and Tom) wanted: alerted Bo that the status quo was unacceptable, gave him the recruiting budget and resources to improve his situation, and another season to prove himself on the field.

C. That means Eichorst's tepid and conditional "support" of Bo wasn't a lie, and actually reflected a significant portion of the fanbase. Even after the Wisconsin debacle, Bo probably could have stuck it to Eichorst by beating Minnesota the next week. He didn't. And if Eichorst's "support" of Bo was as "bland and lawyerly" as it gets, you'd have to note that Bo Pelini's "support" of Nebraska was as childish and unprofessional as it gets. It doesn't take much imagination to believe that Bo said even worse sh#t behind the scenes, and the reason Eichorst chose his words like a lawyer is because that was the smart thing to do.

So where exactly is the lie? I mean holy hell, read this board. Virtually every Riley critic starts off by saying "Don't get me wrong, it was time for Bo to go but...."

Either those are lies, or you agree that Eichorst did the right thing.

Hey, how 'bout that Women's Volleyball team!

 

[Red Dead Redemption]

A. Bo said the things he was expected to say in that position. Shawn Eichorst said the things he was expected to say in that position. You don't understand "click bait."

B. Some fans and influential alums wanted to fire Bo in 2013, too. If Eichorst wanted to fire him after Iowa 2013 it would hardly have been a maverick agenda, and history ended up justifying it anyway. As it was, Shawn Eichorst did what a clear majority of fans (and Tom) wanted: alerted Bo that the status quo was unacceptable, gave him the recruiting budget and resources to improve his situation, and another season to prove himself on the field.

C. That means Eichorst's tepid and conditional "support" of Bo wasn't a lie, and actually reflected a significant portion of the fanbase. Even after the Wisconsin debacle, Bo probably could have stuck it to Eichorst by beating Minnesota the next week. He didn't. And if Eichorst's "support" of Bo was as "bland and lawyerly" as it gets, you'd have to note that Bo Pelini's "support" of Nebraska was as childish and unprofessional as it gets. It doesn't take much imagination to believe that Bo said even worse sh#t behind the scenes, and the reason Eichorst chose his words like a lawyer is because that was the smart thing to do.

So where exactly is the lie? I mean holy hell, read this board. Virtually every Riley critic starts off by saying "Don't get me wrong, it was time for Bo to go but...."

Either those are lies, or you agree that Eichorst did the right thing.

Hey, how 'bout that Women's Volleyball team!

Careful...BigRedBuster will think he's supposed to still be freaking out about that loss!

 

[cm husker]

Amazing. Gave him the recruiting budget to fix things.... In one year (and not even a full recruiting cycle).

Even the lip service paid to the "support" the admin gave doesn't stand up to even light scrutiny.

The lie is in the explanation for the firing (at the time it was about "winning games that matter"; now it's apparently because Bo was a bad representative of the U... Yet between the previous november and November '14, Bo had significantly rehabilitated his image and had controlled his temper very well.

So that's why it was hard to believe Eichorst didn't have the agenda from day 1.

The other obvious lie is that he had a policy about not voicing opinions during a season. Clearly that's only employed when it's self-serving.

Like I said, you can agree with his decision but don't try to pretend the guy has integrity or is a real leader.