My conclusions after thinking deep... (read all for good perspective))

T_O_Bull said:
I do hope this is the last time I waste my time reading ome of these long winded posts that claim to be well thought out but end up being pure drivel.

first -

People who compare Bo’s years here to the years Osborne had need to stop.

TO's record - 255-49-3 regular season 12-13 bowls

BP's record - 42-18 regular season 3-2 bowls

second -

TO never had any blowouts

YR SCORE OPPONENT

73 27-0 Okla

75 35-10 Okla

77 38-7 Okla

78 20-3 Ala

85 27-7 Okla

88 41-28 UCLA

23-3 Miami

89 41-17 FSU

90 27-12 Colo

45-10 Okla

45-10 G. Tech

91 36-21 Wash

22-0 Miami

92 29-14 Wash

96 19-0 ASU

Form now on do some research before you test your somewhat limited powers of observation.

Now I can get back to something important, watching paint dry.

T_O_B

:bigredn:
Click to expand...
I would also like to add that if you were to translate these scores into today's majority of up-tempo and/or no-huddle offense, some of these scores would have been a 50 spot laid on us. Maybe even a 60 or two.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
T_O_Bull said:
I do hope this is the last time I waste my time reading ome of these long winded posts that claim to be well thought out but end up being pure drivel.

first -

People who compare Bo’s years here to the years Osborne had need to stop.

TO's record - 255-49-3 regular season 12-13 bowls A fair point with the bowl record, although I think TOs teams were generally in more elite bowl games.

BP's record - 42-18 regular season 3-2 bowls

second -

TO never had any blowouts

YR SCORE OPPONENT

73 27-0 Okla Oklahoma was 10-0-1 that year.

75 35-10 Okla Oklahoma was 11-1 that year.

77 38-7 Okla Oklahoma was 10-2 that year with only losses coming to #5 and #6 team in country

78 20-3 Ala Alabama was the AP national champ in 78

85 27-7 Okla Oklahama was the AP national champ in 85

88 41-28 UCLA UCLA lost 2 games that year and was led by Troy Aikman. Certainly no slouch but they did dominate the game.

23-3 Miami Miami lost one game that year, by one point, to the national champion Notre Dame. Yep, they sucked.

89 41-17 FSU Florida State finished #2/#3 in the polls after winning 10 straight games. Extremely fast and talented team. NU was overmatched by athletes.

90 27-12 Colo Colorado was AP national champs that year

45-10 Okla Congrats, TOs team laid an egg against a sh**ty opponent

45-10 G. Tech Georgia Tech was UPI national champs that year

91 36-21 Wash Washington was 12-0 and national champ in multiple polls

22-0 Miami Miami was the AP national champion that year and we already were ranked out of the top 10.

92 29-14 Wash Washington finished #11, not the best team but they were solid and it was at their house.

96 19-0 ASU ASU finished ranked #4 with their only loss being a 3 point decision to Ohio State. We lost on the road and had a new QB that year.

Form now on do some research before you test your somewhat limited powers of observation.

I could say the same of you. TO's blowouts were an exception I would say since you've produced only 15 examples many of which were from truly elite teams and several of them were by 15 - 18 points which I'm not certain I'd consider a blowout given the quality of the opponents. Another point to consider is that TO's teams bigger losses were normally a result of playing games where we played superior athleticism. Not the piss it down your leg turn the ball over multiple times plus 10 penalties types of games that we are so frequently treated with from Bo. Now one could argue that TO and McBride took too damn long to change their defensive philosophy and I'd agree with that, which is why I'm willing to give Bo a little more time.

I'm not calling for his head, but I'm looking at this as potentially a 2002 moment, where he may need to make some staff changes to buy himself more time. On the offensive side of the ball the O-line is the only concern, but on the defensive side of the ball, I'd only feel safe if I was Joseph right now. For the record I was happy with the hire and do think he's an improvement over Callahan, but if we lose our next couple games I could see the wheels coming off this thing and the team quitting on Bo. I say give him 2 more years and re-assess. I think that is enough time for any coach in this era of football.

I'm not expecting national titles, I just want to be in the conversation once in a while or pick up a conference championship every 5 years. People would be more patient with Bo had we not had to endure the dark ages of the 2000s with Cally. Patience is only going to last so long for a lot of us, particularly those of us who grew up watching the dynasty of the 90s. I'd be way more patient if I saw a team that played with fire for 4 quarters and didn't beat themselves with stupid mistakes. That's the part that rubs me the wrong way. I saw Martinez play his a$$ off until it was over last game despite having a rough outing. I can't say the same of the defense. I just wish we could get our swagger back.

Now I can get back to something important, watching paint dry.

T_O_B

:bigredn:
Click to expand...
 
Beanman,

Please don't make me go back and post my research, I got work to do, but while your observations are worthy, they miss the point.

Tom Osborne teams occasionally got blown out by good teams. Bo Pelini teams have gotten blown out by good teams -- not OU 1973 good, but Wisconsin and Michigan last year good. And we felt pretty much the same way: embarassed. Those Osborne teams either outranked or were in the Top 10 with the opponent, and it felt like we didn't deserve to be on the same field.

Since we were fixated on the blowouts, we didn't mention the games Tom Osborne teams shockingly lost to teams they were supposed to beat, the Iowa State, Iowa and Syracuse kinda losses we might equate with a Northwestern or UCLA loss today.

I'm old enough to remember those games, and I can assure you, they were often of the pissing-down-your leg variety. Turnovers, penalties and panic. Opposing coaches hitting us with schemes we hadn't seen, the team unable to adjust, one player going wild against our vaunted D. Sometimes Osborne's Huskers just came out flat, assuming that being Nebraska was enough to carry the day.

What's worse, those Osborne teams would look great all season, then save their collapse for the end: Oklahoma and Bowl Opponent. There were years where a 10 - 2 record stung, because we'd been 10 - 0 and #1. Fair or not, Osborne took similar heat to Bo during his first 20 years as head coach.

And don't kid yourself: Osborne's Nebraska teams played in their share of Bluebonnet and Liberty bowls.

If I recall correctly, Tom Osborne himself recounted that after the Georgia Tech shellacking in 1990 he surmised that Nebraska would never be able to compete on a national championship level until we started recruiting for defensive speed. The game and athletes had changed, and the grind-you-down offense of Nebraska wouldn't work unless we had a defense that could quickly get the ball back.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Guy Chamberlin said:
Beanman,

Please don't make me go back and post my research, I got work to do, but while your observations are worthy, they miss the point.

Tom Osborne teams occasionally got blown out by good teams. Bo Pelini teams have gotten blown out by good teams -- not OU 1973 good, but Wisconsin and Michigan last year good. And we felt pretty much the same way: embarassed. Those Osborne teams either outranked or were in the Top 10 with the opponent, and it felt like we didn't deserve to be on the same field.

Since we were fixated on the blowouts, we didn't mention the games Tom Osborne teams shockingly lost to teams they were supposed to beat, the Iowa State, Iowa and Syracuse kinda losses we might equate with a Northwestern or UCLA loss today.

I'm old enough to remember those games, and I can assure you, they were often of the pissing-down-your leg variety. Turnovers, penalties and panic. Opposing coaches hitting us with schemes we hadn't seen, the team unable to adjust, one player going wild against our vaunted D. Sometimes Osborne's Huskers just came out flat, assuming that being Nebraska was enough to carry the day.

What's worse, those Osborne teams would look great all season, then save their collapse for the end: Oklahoma and Bowl Opponent. There were years where a 10 - 2 record stung, because we'd been 10 - 0 and #1. Fair or not, Osborne took similar heat to Bo during his first 20 years as head coach.

If I recall correctly, Tom Osborne himself recounted that after the Georgia Tech shellacking in 1990 he surmised that Nebraska would never be able to compete on a national championship level until we started recruiting for defensive speed. The game and athletes had changed, and the grind-you-down offense of Nebraska wouldn't work unless we had a defense that could quickly get the ball back.
Click to expand...
1992 Iowa St. comes to mind. We had just rolled Colorado and Kansas-a pair of top 15 teams-and had moved in rank, and then crapped the pants in Ames. win 52 and 49 to 7 the previous weeks and then lose 19-10 to them. I think that was Iowa St's only win of the season too?

 
beanman said:
T_O_Bull said:
I do hope this is the last time I waste my time reading ome of these long winded posts that claim to be well thought out but end up being pure drivel.

first -

People who compare Bo’s years here to the years Osborne had need to stop.

TO's record - 255-49-3 regular season 12-13 bowls A fair point with the bowl record, although I think TOs teams were generally in more elite bowl games.

BP's record - 42-18 regular season 3-2 bowls

second -

TO never had any blowouts

YR SCORE OPPONENT

73 27-0 Okla Oklahoma was 10-0-1 that year.

75 35-10 Okla Oklahoma was 11-1 that year.

77 38-7 Okla Oklahoma was 10-2 that year with only losses coming to #5 and #6 team in country

78 20-3 Ala Alabama was the AP national champ in 78

85 27-7 Okla Oklahama was the AP national champ in 85

88 41-28 UCLA UCLA lost 2 games that year and was led by Troy Aikman. Certainly no slouch but they did dominate the game.

23-3 Miami Miami lost one game that year, by one point, to the national champion Notre Dame. Yep, they sucked.

89 41-17 FSU Florida State finished #2/#3 in the polls after winning 10 straight games. Extremely fast and talented team. NU was overmatched by athletes.

90 27-12 Colo Colorado was AP national champs that year

45-10 Okla Congrats, TOs team laid an egg against a sh**ty opponent

45-10 G. Tech Georgia Tech was UPI national champs that year

91 36-21 Wash Washington was 12-0 and national champ in multiple polls

22-0 Miami Miami was the AP national champion that year and we already were ranked out of the top 10.

92 29-14 Wash Washington finished #11, not the best team but they were solid and it was at their house.

96 19-0 ASU ASU finished ranked #4 with their only loss being a 3 point decision to Ohio State. We lost on the road and had a new QB that year.

Form now on do some research before you test your somewhat limited powers of observation.

I could say the same of you. TO's blowouts were an exception I would say since you've produced only 15 examples many of which were from truly elite teams and several of them were by 15 - 18 points which I'm not certain I'd consider a blowout given the quality of the opponents. Another point to consider is that TO's teams bigger losses were normally a result of playing games where we played superior athleticism. Not the piss it down your leg turn the ball over multiple times plus 10 penalties types of games that we are so frequently treated with from Bo. Now one could argue that TO and McBride took too damn long to change their defensive philosophy and I'd agree with that, which is why I'm willing to give Bo a little more time.

I'm not calling for his head, but I'm looking at this as potentially a 2002 moment, where he may need to make some staff changes to buy himself more time. On the offensive side of the ball the O-line is the only concern, but on the defensive side of the ball, I'd only feel safe if I was Joseph right now. For the record I was happy with the hire and do think he's an improvement over Callahan, but if we lose our next couple games I could see the wheels coming off this thing and the team quitting on Bo. I say give him 2 more years and re-assess. I think that is enough time for any coach in this era of football.

I'm not expecting national titles, I just want to be in the conversation once in a while or pick up a conference championship every 5 years. People would be more patient with Bo had we not had to endure the dark ages of the 2000s with Cally. Patience is only going to last so long for a lot of us, particularly those of us who grew up watching the dynasty of the 90s. I'd be way more patient if I saw a team that played with fire for 4 quarters and didn't beat themselves with stupid mistakes. That's the part that rubs me the wrong way. I saw Martinez play his a$$ off until it was over last game despite having a rough outing. I can't say the same of the defense. I just wish we could get our swagger back.

Now I can get back to something important, watching paint dry.

T_O_B

:bigredn:
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Beanman,

While I think you have some valid points here, I think you may be overlooking a couple things, 1) TO's didnt inherit a program in its darkest days, and 2) When TO was coaching Nebraska was almost always considered a National Championship Caliber team and yet they would get blown out against someone who should not have blown them out from time to time.

Bo has yet to have a team that has been considered the same caliber of the teams that TO had. And that's because Bo is trying to resurrect the once great and feared Nebraska program, that TO inherited. TO had to make sure to keep it going, and imo thats easier than trying to start it up.

 
Back
Top