Maybe Leitao just liked Herman (+ staff) and texas more than he liked Riley (+ staff) and NU? Not such a groundbreaking revelation.
Leitao
- Thread starter headcard
- Start date
You say it like it's a fact, but at the time (before CCG meltdown) some pretty reliable people were indicating Bo was the frontrunner for that job.
The victim mentality is so freaking old and worn out.
Everybody cheats but Nebraska. If you recruit the city of Houston better than we did you are cheating.
How about he is just a good football coach and kept local kids local. It isn't like Herman was pulling a bunch of 4 and 5 stars from Ohio or Florida. They called it HTown Takeover because he recruited almost exclusively from Houston. He kept kids in town that had been committed to other schools in state and out of state.
We sound like a bunch of pussies whenever we lose and the reason we give is because the other team cheated.
Everybody cheats but Nebraska. If you recruit the city of Houston better than we did you are cheating.
How about he is just a good football coach and kept local kids local. It isn't like Herman was pulling a bunch of 4 and 5 stars from Ohio or Florida. They called it HTown Takeover because he recruited almost exclusively from Houston. He kept kids in town that had been committed to other schools in state and out of state.
We sound like a bunch of pussies whenever we lose and the reason we give is because the other team cheated.
Could be. Yes. Could also just be a fickle kid whose eye was caught by a splash hire coach
Well, they aren't reliable if their information is wrong. Jeff Long, Arkansas's AD targeted Bielema as early as September, and while he couldn't contact him directly at that time, he put out feelers and received mutual interest. The idea that Bo was Arkansas's top target and they suddenly reversed course in a matter of days and Bielema came out of nowhere to be their pick is nonsense.
Fine, you want to argue and show off your Hog insider status, go ahead. The point remains Conference Championship Games are "games of significance" and we have failed to capitalize on being in these games, big time.
Good. Would rather have no CB recruits than recruit this kid
It doesn't take "Hog insider" status to read news articles after Bielema's hiring about how it went down. It was made pretty clear that he was their top target all along. I don't argue the overall point about failing to capitalize on chances in Conference Championship games at all.
Yah I believe I saw it noted somewhere that USC has lost 7 or 8 decommits this year alone. I think they'll be fine, however.
It's the same thing Pennsyhusker, at least in my eyes. Leitao just liked Texas more, for whatever reason, but it doesn't have to be because they're cheating.
If our salesman aren't good enough, then we have to upgrade our salesman. The DWilliams hire appears to be one new step in that direction. The problem (for me) is you can't sit on your hands for years. NU can't just sell itself, we need coaches that can sell NU. The clock is ticking on Riley in terms of his evaluation period, and I would guess the performance expectation has gone up from year one. Is the staff right now the perfect mix for recruiting? We'll have to wait another year now, unless they can close on a monster class.
We just poached DWilliams from Arizona, which I think is an excellent move. We chose not to even talk to Ed Orgeron and instead hired Hank Hughes, not so excellent move. And no I don't want to argue Ed Orgeron. The point is year 3 is coming and the clock is ticking, my how time flies.
So you are denying it? Why would I bother to go waste .5 hrs out of my life, only for you to come back with some sort of sh**** retort?
No thanks. I shouldn't have to "link" every single point, solely because you do not want it to be true. Posters here know it to be fact, [Bracket Man].
I wasn't around so I asked for you to link them. Of course, just as I expected, you won't do it but continue on with your shtick.
All you do is throw crap at the wall, and we're left watching the skid marks.
Shtick? Ok, Tim.
Love it when the witty "skidmarks" comments start flying. Can you please link the evidence of my skidmarks? I wasn't around.
Did you really just post that?
I don't know what is funnier: you acting like a child, or you having to google whatever it was to get thet picture.
Game. Set. Match.
I think it's weak when somebody has success recruiting that they get accused of illegal activity. Some people are born salespeople and have the ability to build trust quickly and paint a picture of the future that is motivating. Every excuse we come up with Bill Callahan destroyed in recruiting. He sucked as a coach, but could get kids to look past the weather, non-exciting town of Lincoln, etc.
You asked for a link, I provided a link. "Thet" picture is exactly how you post.
One of the things that does bother me about Riley is that he was hired because he was this veteran coach with kudos from everyone for being a very savvy coach who knew how to run a program. But here we are two years in and he has already fired two assistant coaches. Now, on one level I am fine with that since it shows he has a commitment to winning. But on another level it makes me wonder just how prepared he was to take this job. You would think that a coach with his years of experience would have a list of high quality assistants a mile long to come with him to Nebraska should he ask. Yes, he knew Read and yet Read still turned out to be lousy.
Haha. Love itOh, there you go with your Shawshank Redemption speak. Obtuse indeed!
In the short term, I'm not so concerned. Porcher, Leitao, and whatever happens with Guy Thomas, while not expected, shouldn't be a gigantic surprise. We've already early enrolled some of our class, and I wouldn't expect anything close to a total collapse.
In the long term, I'm still concerned. Two years ago if you stated that Riley might not be taking the steps needed (by bringing everyone from OrSU), you would have people taking a number to get in line to call you names.
I really would like for us to be able to hang on to a successful coach, rather than rinse lather repeat. But, we have a DT dead year, no true TE's with playing time, a redshirt OL class that we couldn't/didn't play when in dire need, and question marks when it comes to RB (imo). Something needs to happen. And I certainly don't have the answers.
Back on topic, sounds like we're in contact with a California TE, recently decommitted from Oregon.
Still denying, I see. That's fine.
And, yes, you shared a link. A link to a picture of what appeared to be poo, smeared on a wall. You literally copied and pasted a url to a picture of poop smeared on a wall.
Good work, Bracket Boy.
You're still looking for something that isn't there. Going on a week or so now.
A picture of your posts, you asked for a link so I gave you one.
Appreciate it, [turd poster].
If you don't want to argue about something (passing on Orgeron), you probably shouldn't use it to make a point.
Oh I don't know about that. You can say that maybe we should have hired Orgeron, making your views known about that debate, without wanting to rehash all of the endless and pointless back and forth arguments that resolve nothing. Kind of like saying "I voted for Clinton and I think she should have been President, but I really don't want to debate that since it won't change anyone's mind"
Lol. Make sure, as you promised before, to have your kids follow their dad's lead when it comes to grammar and everything else. And also let me know when they fail, because, "ain't no teachin' lady gonna tell you how to do good grammar."
I don't want to argue about it because it's in the past and I can't go back in time. And the arguments in the past were that he was too shady or only using NU as a ploy, that's what I don't want to argue about.
If you want to argue whether we should go out and hire any old Joe versus trying to bring in known good recruiters, I will be more than happy to discuss that. But I don't think anyone would have any trouble recognizing whether I think we should hire a) known good recruiters, or b) any old Joe. Maybe I was unclear.
If you could interpret anything, rather than just saying, "Me is right about everything!", you would know why I didn't waste the time linking what you say doesn't exist.
In short, it's because you're a clown who dismisses facts, in lieu of your own little world view. And your reply would likely be riddled with brackets.
Nah, you're not smart enough to realize I just trolled you to waste time responding to non-sense. Time you didn't want to waste, but wasted without realizing it.
There it is, name calling, took you a little longer than usual.
No link, no proof, time is important, but it's not because "I'm gonna show you!" [snickerpoop70 style].
Last edited:
You know I am seriously wondering why the moderators allow threads to be totally hijacked by the kind of adolescent shit we are witnessing here right now. A perfectly legitimate, interesting, civil, and adult conversation is going on in this thread about a solid topic, and it gets ruined by this puerile and childish nonsense. I thought there were board rules about not calling other posters names or getting personal in ad hominem attacks? Seriously mods... this kind of exchange really degrades this board.
So you wasted my time, but not your time. Got it.
"[Snickerpoop70 sytle]." Ouch, dude. And deeming you a clown is hardly name-calling.
Your superior wit will undoubtedly lead to my ultimate demise. I don't even know how to respond to someone calling me, "Snickerpoop."
Similar threads
