Mickey could be our Dabo
- Thread starter Natty1
- Start date
Are you really serious about the loss to Oklahoma. He had no time to prepare as Frost was just fired. You take away that loss and the others were to be expected. Minnesota has #2 scoring defense in Big 10 and Illinois has #1 scoring defense in Big 10. It would have been tough to win games against these two with our starting quarterback and we know what happened to him when he got knocked out.
No. Dabo went 4-2 as an interim coach. Mickey Joseph is 2-4 this far with our three toughest games coming up. Highly unlikely he will finish with a winning record. Don't want him if he finishes with a losing record.
These last 3 weren’t our toughest games.Michigan no question about that but Illinois and Oklahoma were tougher games than Wisky and Ioway..
For Pete’s sake, if you hire Joseph, it’s time shut the damn thing down. Get serious, our fans are the stupidest in college football sometimes. We need an experienced coach that is a program builder not a damn recruiter.
How to start building a program? That’s be recruiting top notch kids for 500 Alex
I know the Dabo story pretty well and there's a lot more to it than that.
Wrong, it is to develop kids. We have been getting our ass kicked by schools that we out recruit on a yearly basis We have never been a recruiting juggernaut, we won with development with a few elites mixed in. We need a damn builder not a recruiter.
I like realistic winning football. Not dream world football
I'm being realistic as I toss you in the Ignore hopper.
I think it's pretty clear we need both. We can't expect to recruit with the big boys, at least not unless we get this thing rolling again, so we have to find kids that fit a system and develop them.
Why? Callahan had a success in his first year, he had guys that were going to be grinders on the recruiting trail. If I am not mistaken he had a top 5 class. It is just a mindset.
Every coach has a system, what I am talking about is the guys like Ferentz, who only recruit a certain type of OL or DL or RB, typically they are middle rated guys that they want to spend 4 years to develop. They do not take chances on recruiting top players. Their offensive system is boring so they don't typically get WRs or QBs that are difference makers.
Secondly, guys like Ferentz, Fitz, Leipold, Klieman aren't ever going to recruit the top of the line player. It isn't in their DNA. So even with a modicum of success, they don't change who and what they are. That is why places like Iowa, Kansas, Kansas St and Northwestern are never in the top 20 recruiting rankings and are never in the picture for a national title, and rarely win a Big Ten title.
Last edited:
I'm glad it's not my job to find the new coach
Kansas and K-State aren't in the B1G, so there is a zero percent chance of them winning a B1G title, at least until they get invited to join.
fair enough. For Kansas and Kansas St, they rarely win conference titles and never compete for national titles. Does that work for you?
Kansas St last shared a conference title in 2012 and hadn't won a division title since 2003
Kansas last shared a conference title in 1968 and shared a division title in 2007.
You understand that Kansas and Kansas State are not at our level and do not have our history correct? It's not apples to apples.
So coaches that coach there shouldn’t be at our level either.
Also, read all of my post on this subject. Not just a clarification because of a smart ass poster
We're likely to get one of those guys as our coach and get on to winning a lot of games. When that happens, you'll need to show yourself to the door.
Actually the coaches at Kansas and K-State are better than our last 2 coaches.
Dabo is a great example of a position coach being elevated to head coach at a major program and doing very well. Who are the others? There had to have been more than 1 guy in all of the history of college football that has pulled this off.
He's probably the only one who has had the level of success that he has had over the years.
So better than 2 of the worst coaches in Nebraska history. Not sure that says what you wanted it to.
Also you have about as much clue as to who is likely to be the next coach as I do.
so if it isn't Klieman or Leipold will you also show yourself the door?
Kind of funny that you quoted yourself. I'm going to support whoever they hire until I can no longer support them. We've got different opinions as to how our team can reach the desired goals. I consider myself an optimistic realist. 25 years ago is ancient history. It's the equivalent of Minnesota bragging about national championships from the 1940s. It's actually a hindrance to us at times because we feel entitled. I think we're at a point where we need to break it down to the ground level and build it back up. Talking about BCS is silly and premature. I get why other fan bases think we are delusional. Step one is to win games and go to bowls through maximizing our strengths and focusing on development. Step two is to win the division, although those won't exist for us much longer. Step 3 is to recruit at a sufficiently high level to compete with the best in our conference. Getting to step 3 is extremely difficult, especially when you consider disadvantages such as proximity to talent. And I don't want anybody to tell me about how we're just going to buy the best players. Texas can't win anything of relevance despite being in the middle of a hot bed of talent and paying some of their guys millions. Same for Florida, Florida State, Oklahoma, Miami, and a few others. Hiring a hot coach to take you to the top is not a simple proposition. As a matter of fact it could backfire. This is a multiple year turnaround which will require a tremendous amount of effort and patience.
Your characterization that Klieman and Leipold would not want to recruit the best players is inaccurate and unfair. Alabama recruits the very best, and they still have to develop them. Quite a few high four star and five star players wash out from great programs for a variety of reasons.
Once again you are one that thinks it is either or. Of course you have to develop players. But you seem to be ok with developing the middle of the road guy rather than top or upper middle of the road guys.
For whatever reason, you think these two guys don't care about talent. Their default is purely developmental. My argument is that that is out of necessity. Scott Frost recruited some highly regarded players based on his sexy tenure at UCF. He was a monumental failure at development. So a guy better prove he can develop what he has. I'd argue it's easier to move up the recruiting rankings, then it is to truly be a good coach. The best do both well. But the best are also in the middle of rich talent fields. We are not, so do the best you can in recruiting while being the best at development. Because in the best regions, with rare exception are we going to even get the 5th best player. Sure, we'll get some good guys, but there's little reason to come to Nebraska when you can stay closer to home, get on tv, get on the field, and make some nil
Again, they recruit the same way that Iowa and Wisconsin do.
This is the defeatist and inferiority complex that most Nebraska fans have. We can't recruit at a high level because we aren't in talent rich area. We will never recruit with the big boys because insert any of 100 whiny ass reasons here. If he can't recruit to one midwestern town, why do you think he will be able to recruit to another?
Someone who has proven something as a head coach. This is a complex issue for you apparently.
So they can come in and suck and trev will survive?
First day on earth or something?
Have you never been to Manhattan Kansas?
Give me one example of a coach winning at a very high level for a sustained period that wasn't in the middle of a talent hotbed. And even if you come up with one, is that the norm or an outlier?. Everyone knows this (except you two chuckleheads) it's not defeatist. It's fact. I deal in facts. Have you forgotten how Tom Osborne did it? Was he lucky? He built a foundation of hard-working local guys that didn't see the field until their junior year. Then he went to the coasts to bring the majority of his speed and skill guys, none of whom were very good passers. What you are asking is nearly impossible. Hoping you can recruit better than most teams is not a strategy.
Time will not tell because he will not be our head coach for much longer. If he's a great head coach, take that act down to the lower division and set the world on fire like Deion Sanders. For whatever reason, he didn't try to become the head coach at Florida State, even though he was a star player there and Hall of famer in the NFL. Pretty good resume I'd say.
Stop making sense, these guys are the Steve Pedersen's of the Nebraska fan base. We will NEVER out recruit Michigan, Ohio State, the majority of the SEC etc. It is simply the facts, I don't care who you bring in here. You have to find an experienced coach that knows how to win with less and can build talent period. I like a guy like Leipold that has won at all levels with less but instead many want a guy that just recruits and has no experience building anything.
