OWH: Bo Pelini insults A.D. Shawn Eichorst in expletive-filled rant during final meeting with players

[NUpolo8]

Tom Osborne routinely told us that Saturday's game against Mother Mary the Blessed Southwest Tech was going to be "tough" and "they're a really good football team." And then we'd beat them 63-7. So the idea that Tom would exaggerate the truth or somehow stretch the truth to make his point isn't completely unbelievable.

However, that he might be stretching the truth in this instance isn't a good enough reason to ignore his words. It lends itself to tinfoil hats and bogeymen.

http://www.huskerboard.com/index.php?/topic/61298-11am-ct-presser-today/page-3&do=findComment&comment=1019561

I can't fathom why you'd quote that, because even in a vacuum it doesn't say what you've been saying in this thread. You also (conveniently) omitted several other posts of mine in that thread, many of which explain what I was concerned with, and why Tom actually retired.LINKLINKLINK

Fine. I misquoted. My apologies.

You should use that backpedal gif you're so fond of.

 

[Saunders]

Actually, no. My "tangent" had to do with a dysfunctional athletic department. Of which he helped create.

Which is based off not one hard fact. It is based off rumor, "insiders" and interpretation.

What about the Pedersen/Callahan, Osborne/Pelini debacle is rumor and speculation?

A groupthinker once the rest of the group has come to their senses and walked away is a tortured soul.

Well that's certainly the stupidest thing I've read today. Congrats on trying to paint me as something I'm not though!

 

[Saunders]

Tom Osborne routinely told us that Saturday's game against Mother Mary the Blessed Southwest Tech was going to be "tough" and "they're a really good football team." And then we'd beat them 63-7. So the idea that Tom would exaggerate the truth or somehow stretch the truth to make his point isn't completely unbelievable.

However, that he might be stretching the truth in this instance isn't a good enough reason to ignore his words. It lends itself to tinfoil hats and bogeymen.

http://www.huskerboard.com/index.php?/topic/61298-11am-ct-presser-today/page-3&do=findComment&comment=1019561

I can't fathom why you'd quote that, because even in a vacuum it doesn't say what you've been saying in this thread. You also (conveniently) omitted several other posts of mine in that thread, many of which explain what I was concerned with, and why Tom actually retired.LINKLINKLINK

Fine. I misquoted. My apologies.

You should use that backpedal gif you're so fond of.

If what you are considering posting doesn’t advance the issue being discussed – if it’s just taking a “shot” at someone – then either don’t post it, or phrase it in a way that meets the rules.

http://www.huskerboard.com/rules.htm

 

[skersfan]

Tom was in place when this hire was announced. The hire was made in mid October, by a big money deal, in part paying the buyouts of both Peterson and Callahan. Tom was brought in to settle the fan base. This was not Tom's choice, just like the firing of Bo. Money made the decision that he had to go, not wins or losses, but state of the program, the image of Nebraska.

All of this same stuff happened before Pelini left the first time, Dillard, Bullocks brothers(the kids did nothing wrong) were all involved with Bo and his continuous actions to undermine Callahan for months after he was gone. Came very close to NCAA infractions, I was told then.

That is why I was so shocked he was hired, and tagged to Coach Osborne. Callahan was to much of nice/smart guy to go after Bo. He knew the fans love for him. Would only make things worse for his program (opinions of people in the program at the time). Tom was aware of these things and wanted to go a different way, but his choice turned him down.

Alas 7 years of the same crap he was doing after he was notified the first time he left. He was poison then and pretty much the same now.

 

[Saunders]

That is why I was so shocked he was hired, and tagged to Coach Osborne. Callahan was to much of nice/smart guy to go after Bo. He knew the fans love for him. Would only make things worse for his program (opinions of people in the program at the time). Tom was aware of these things and wanted to go a different way, but his choice turned him down.

Huh?

 

[kchusker_chris]

Fine. I misquoted. My apologies.

some pretty solid research on your part though. kudos.

 

[Saunders]

Fine. I misquoted. My apologies.

some pretty solid research on your part though. kudos.

 

[sd'sker]

Matthew Hanson from the OWH with some great observations, via twitter.

Matthew Hansen @redcloud_scribe

There are reasons to criticize Harvey Perlman & UNL. There are reasons to praise him. Virtually none of it has anything to do with football.
Matthew Hansen @redcloud_scribe

A plea: Quit looking through lens of football to judge leaders of Nebraska public universities. It makes you look silly and it makes me sad.

He's right. Since Harvey Pearlman was hired in 2001, we've seen Nebraska go from the top of the Collegiate (and Athletic) world, to a middle tier Big Ten school. We've been kicked out of the AAU. We've had a completely disfunctional athletic department for 12 years, have hired/fired/rehired/and fired all sorts of underlings. The last decade plus has been a constant struggle for progress and we've cleaned house three times now, and yet one variable remains...

If we're intent on cleaning house and fixing the problems, there's but one solution.

LOL. We were at the top of the collegiate world before Perlman was hired in 2001?! HAHAHA. Atheltic world? Football, we were close to the top at that point, but obviously slipping. But the collegiate world in terms of everything that goes into a major research university??? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

I stopped reading at that point because literally nothing you say can be taken seriously after that.

Quick, who was the only school to ever get kicked out of the AAU, and who was in charge?

so his worst, actual offense is not football related?

i think that is the point.

Which is why I said "he's right" ...

... then you went on a tangent, the majority of which had to do with athletics, specifically football.

Actually, no. My "tangent" had to do with a dysfunctional athletic department. Of which he helped create.

and the tweet you agreed with:

Matthew Hansen @redcloud_scribe

There are reasons to criticize Harvey Perlman & UNL. There are reasons to praise him. Virtually none of it has anything to do with football.

then you specifically mention football and the athletic department. which other than football, is in pretty good shape. and even considering football is still in pretty good shape. whatever problems have been with the football program seem solely the fault of bo. i do not get the impression that any other coach has the same problems as bo did with eichorst.

and i think eichorst has been doing the best he can giving the circumstances. i also very much agree with this sentiment:

Matthew Hansen @redcloud_scribe

A plea: Quit looking through lens of football to judge leaders of Nebraska public universities. It makes you look silly and it makes me sad.

I'm not talking about today. I'm talking about the last 12 years.

so you are talking about athletics again, which are in the best shape they have been in awhile. or just:

 

[Saunders]

So, is it ok to want Bo gone, and question the leadership at the top. Because they aren't mutually exclusive.

 

[kchusker_chris]

^ serious. you pulled that thing out of the depths of the board.

 

[NUpolo8]

Wanting a change at the top for widespread athletic dept dysfunction when only one coach was dysfunctional is absolutely hilarious.

 

[sd'sker]

when criticizing perlman, it seems like it is hard not to go back to athletics. and the point is that you should not do that.

but, what? was hiring pederson so bad? it certainly made sense at the time. didn't tom even bless it? and it did not work out. that happens. just like it happened with bo. just because it makes sense at the time does not mean it is infallible.

but, what legitimate gripes with perlman are there? and if they are athletics related, does he not deserve credit for the shape they are in now?

 

[Saunders]

Wanting a change at the top for widespread athletic dept dysfunction when only one coach was dysfunctional is absolutely hilarious.

So, you've been sleeping for a decade. I see.

 

[Saunders]

Matthew Hanson from the OWH with some great observations, via twitter.

Matthew Hansen @redcloud_scribe

There are reasons to criticize Harvey Perlman & UNL. There are reasons to praise him. Virtually none of it has anything to do with football.
Matthew Hansen @redcloud_scribe

A plea: Quit looking through lens of football to judge leaders of Nebraska public universities. It makes you look silly and it makes me sad.

He's right. Since Harvey Pearlman was hired in 2001, we've seen Nebraska go from the top of the Collegiate (and Athletic) world, to a middle tier Big Ten school. We've been kicked out of the AAU. We've had a completely disfunctional athletic department for 12 years, have hired/fired/rehired/and fired all sorts of underlings. The last decade plus has been a constant struggle for progress and we've cleaned house three times now, and yet one variable remains...

If we're intent on cleaning house and fixing the problems, there's but one solution.

LOL. We were at the top of the collegiate world before Perlman was hired in 2001?! HAHAHA. Atheltic world? Football, we were close to the top at that point, but obviously slipping. But the collegiate world in terms of everything that goes into a major research university??? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

I stopped reading at that point because literally nothing you say can be taken seriously after that.

Quick, who was the only school to ever get kicked out of the AAU, and who was in charge?

so his worst, actual offense is not football related?

i think that is the point.

Which is why I said "he's right" ...

... then you went on a tangent, the majority of which had to do with athletics, specifically football.

Actually, no. My "tangent" had to do with a dysfunctional athletic department. Of which he helped create.

and the tweet you agreed with:

Matthew Hansen @redcloud_scribe

There are reasons to criticize Harvey Perlman & UNL. There are reasons to praise him. Virtually none of it has anything to do with football.

then you specifically mention football and the athletic department. which other than football, is in pretty good shape. and even considering football is still in pretty good shape. whatever problems have been with the football program seem solely the fault of bo. i do not get the impression that any other coach has the same problems as bo did with eichorst.

and i think eichorst has been doing the best he can giving the circumstances. i also very much agree with this sentiment:

Matthew Hansen @redcloud_scribe

A plea: Quit looking through lens of football to judge leaders of Nebraska public universities. It makes you look silly and it makes me sad.

I'm not talking about today. I'm talking about the last 12 years.

so you are talking about athletics again, which are in the best shape they have been in awhile. or just:

 

[beorach]

Tom was in place when this hire was announced. The hire was made in mid October, by a big money deal, in part paying the buyouts of both Peterson and Callahan. Tom was brought in to settle the fan base. This was not Tom's choice, just like the firing of Bo. Money made the decision that he had to go, not wins or losses, but state of the program, the image of Nebraska.

All of this same stuff happened before Pelini left the first time, Dillard, Bullocks brothers(the kids did nothing wrong) were all involved with Bo and his continuous actions to undermine Callahan for months after he was gone. Came very close to NCAA infractions, I was told then.

That is why I was so shocked he was hired, and tagged to Coach Osborne. Callahan was to much of nice/smart guy to go after Bo. He knew the fans love for him. Would only make things worse for his program (opinions of people in the program at the time). Tom was aware of these things and wanted to go a different way, but his choice turned him down.

Alas 7 years of the same crap he was doing after he was notified the first time he left. He was poison then and pretty much the same now.

This is very interesting. I touched on this elsewhere but the sad truth of recent events is "we" hired BP because we knew him. We didn't just go for the best DC out of the SEC (as I think that would have meant at least giving Charlie Strong an interview) at the time. If we really knew BP, as I think we ALL do now, the hire's a real head-scratcher. The guy knows defense and can motivate the kids. The last part of that was a judgment from a short period of time in our backyard (and a longer period spent under greater head coaches).