SIAP: Just saw a stat on ESPN

[Nebraska Gator II]

Pelini in 7 seasons only blew the lead (when leading in the 4th quarter) 3 times in 7 seasons. Mike Riley led Nebraska has blown the lead 4 times in 8 games (this season).

This is not mean to be a Pelini or Riley is better thread. It is an interesting stat and makes you wonder where this staff is coming up short at the end of games.

 

[redfanusa]

That is because, in his losses, Pelini was usually behind by 30 points. There wasn't a 4th quarter lead to blow.

 

[scarletred]

That is because, in his losses, Pelini was usually behind by 30 points. There wasn't a 4th quarter lead to blow.

So by doing the math Pelini's 25 of the 28 losses were already behind.

 

[jimbosc]

You know TO had a reputation for not being able to come from behind..................

 

[huskerbux]

Pelini in 7 seasons only blew the lead (when leading in the 4th quarter) 3 times in 7 seasons. Mike Riley led Nebraska has blown the lead 4 times in 8 games (this season).

This is not mean to be a Pelini or Riley is better thread. It is an interesting stat and makes you wonder where this staff is coming up short at the end of games.

Not meant to be a Pelini/Riley thread? Yet you referenced only those two coaches......

 

[Nebraska Gator II]

Not meant to be a Pelini/Riley thread? Yet you referenced only those two coaches......

I put up a stat that was on ESPN...they compared the two coaches. It is not meant to be a Pelini is better than Riley or vice versa is what I said in the OP.

 

[TheBeav815]

Is it just impossible for people to understand that maybe they are BOTH mediocre coaches?

 

[newAD]

You know TO had a reputation for not being able to come from behind..................

Or be able to win the big one for a looooooong time.

His first 8 years or so were ugly enough with the fans. I'd bet if the internet existed when he applied for the Colorado job, he'd probably have taken it. After all, for the longest time, he was no "Bob Devaney."

 

[the_hermanator]

Or be able to win the big one for a looooooong time.

His first 8 years or so were ugly enough with the fans. I'd bet if the internet existed when he applied for the Colorado job, he'd probably have taken it. After all, for the longest time, he was no "Bob Devaney."

Exactly. He would have taken it to avoid being fired. Tom Osborne and his accomplishments would never exist in today's world. Ever. He would be fired long before competing for, then losing the big games, and long, long, long before eventually winning his three national championships. The days of patience are over.

Kirk Ferentz is proving this year that a University can get a new head coach by keeping the same person. Tom Osborne did that himself in 1992 and you saw the results. Bo needed to change. He didn't need fired. Nobody is going to want to come to Lincoln in the near future. And when I say nobody, I mean a head coach who has proven he can win big.

Hell, "The U" can't even get anyone to take them serious.

THE HERMENATOR

 

[headcard]

Exactly. He would have taken it to avoid being fired. Tom Osborne and his accomplishments would never exist in today's world. Ever. He would be fired long before competing for, then losing the big games, and long, long, long before eventually winning his three national championships. The days of patience are over.

Kirk Ferentz is proving this year that a University can get a new head coach by keeping the same person. Tom Osborne did that himself in 1992 and you saw the results. Bo needed to change. He didn't need fired. Nobody is going to want to come to Lincoln in the near future. And when I say nobody, I mean a head coach who has proven he can win big.

Hell, "The U" can't even get anyone to take them serious.

THE HERMENATOR

Don't you think Bo was given a chance to change? This argument could be applied to Solich, but not Pelini. Pelini was given multiple chances to "change" and refused.

 

[HuskerTimOmaha]

Tom Osborne and his accomplishments would never exist in today's world. Ever.

Top 10 finishes and major bowl games laugh at your ridiculous claim.

 

[sparky62]

Exactly. He would have taken it to avoid being fired. Tom Osborne and his accomplishments would never exist in today's world. Ever. He would be fired long before competing for, then losing the big games, and long, long, long before eventually winning his three national championships. The days of patience are over.

Kirk Ferentz is proving this year that a University can get a new head coach by keeping the same person. Tom Osborne did that himself in 1992 and you saw the results. Bo needed to change. He didn't need fired. Nobody is going to want to come to Lincoln in the near future. And when I say nobody, I mean a head coach who has proven he can win big.

Hell, "The U" can't even get anyone to take them serious.

THE HERMENATOR

Bo was given numerous chances to change. He just chose not to.

 

[otismotis08]

I think we need to stop the obsession with Bo.

 

[newAD]

Bo was given numerous chances to change. He just chose not to.

Most people when they find themselves in a hole are smart enough to stop digging. It seemed Bo at times looked for a bigger shovel.

 

[Lincoln100]

Exactly. He would have taken it to avoid being fired. Tom Osborne and his accomplishments would never exist in today's world. Ever. He would be fired long before competing for, then losing the big games, and long, long, long before eventually winning his three national championships. The days of patience are over.

Kirk Ferentz is proving this year that a University can get a new head coach by keeping the same person. Tom Osborne did that himself in 1992 and you saw the results. Bo needed to change. He didn't need fired. Nobody is going to want to come to Lincoln in the near future. And when I say nobody, I mean a head coach who has proven he can win big.

Hell, "The U" can't even get anyone to take them serious.

THE HERMENATOR

Understatement of the year. Does anyone on this planet, other than you, think that Bo thought that he needed to change, or that he wasn't given every opportunity to do so?

 

[nebcountry]

Pelini in 7 seasons only blew the lead (when leading in the 4th quarter) 3 times in 7 seasons. Mike Riley led Nebraska has blown the lead 4 times in 8 games (this season).

This is not mean to be a Pelini or Riley is better thread. It is an interesting stat and makes you wonder where this staff is coming up short at the end of games.

It is an interesting stat, but I don't see a significance or relationship.

 

[jay-cheese]

I don't think the days of patience are over...I mean they are still selling out the stadium and it's been 14 years since we've played in a big game.

GBR

 

[the_hermanator]

Top 10 finishes and major bowl games laugh at your ridiculous claim.

You mean like when he lost seven bowl games in a row, most of them not very close? And this coming after numerous conference championships? And yet he still felt the pressure to change his entire way of running the program...back in 1991, which was light years before the world we live in today?

If there was a guy who equaled Dr. Tom's accomplishments from 1986-1992, he would be run out of town in today's world of Husker fans. That's just the world we live in. If Bo had won a conference championship (or maybe even two), do you think that would have saved him? I don't. Nebraska fans, right or wrong, want nothing short of national championship caliber teams.

Which is why I can't believe there is one single person on the Mike Riley bandwagon.

THE HERMENATOR

 

[the_hermanator]

Bo was given numerous chances to change. He just chose not to.

I think you're probably right on that one. What I don't understand is....when Bo departed, he didn't take Papuchis with him...yet Bo refused to part ways with him when it was demanded the year before his firing. Bo had his assistants' back, only to further help him lose his own.

THE HERMENATOR

 

[Soda Popinski]

You mean like when he lost seven bowl games in a row, most of them not very close? And this coming after numerous conference championships? And yet he still felt the pressure to change his entire way of running the program...back in 1991, which was light years before the world we live in today?

If there was a guy who equaled Dr. Tom's accomplishments from 1986-1992, he would be run out of town in today's world of Husker fans. That's just the world we live in. If Bo had won a conference championship (or maybe even two), do you think that would have saved him? I don't. Nebraska fans, right or wrong, want nothing short of national championship caliber teams.

Which is why I can't believe there is one single person on the Mike Riley bandwagon.

THE HERMENATOR

Bo would still be here if he wasn't an embarrassment to the University, his family and himself. Tom was none of those. Do people really think that Bo was gone if he wasn't a mental patient?

 

[the_hermanator]

Bo would still be here if he wasn't an embarrassment to the University, his family and himself. Tom was none of those. Do people really think that Bo was gone if he wasn't a mental patient?

Bo wasn't fired because of his embarrassing tactics. He could have acted just like he did and had he won a national championship, he would still be around with a contract extension. He didn't lose his job because of his poor public relations skill set. He lost his job because he couldn't take Nebraska to a national championship level. Bo's not a mental case. He's what Nick Saban would be if he lost four games every year.

THE HERMENATOR

 

[94husker]

Fail.

 

[HuskerTimOmaha]

Conference titles, top 10 finishes, something your boy Peelini knows nothing about. National title seekers my ass, take that crap somewhere else, it won't fly here.

 

[BornNBredRed]

Bo wasn't fired because of his embarrassing tactics. He could have acted just like he did and had he won a national championship, he would still be around with a contract extension. He didn't lose his job because of his poor public relations skill set. He lost his job because he couldn't take Nebraska to a national championship level. Bo's not a mental case. He's what Nick Saban would be if he lost four games every year.

THE HERMENATOR

Not true. The fact that he created a cult-like atmosphere with his sociopathic behavior and the fact that he and his antics became THE story each and every week was a significant factor in him losing his job. It becomes difficult to recruit when the entire nation sees you for the sociopath that you are. Recruiting would have only got worse and worse. What mother in her right mind would ever send there kid to be coached by him?

 

[Rocky Mtn Husker]

You mean like when he lost seven bowl games in a row, most of them not very close? And this coming after numerous conference championships? And yet he still felt the pressure to change his entire way of running the program...back in 1991, which was light years before the world we live in today?

If there was a guy who equaled Dr. Tom's accomplishments from 1986-1992, he would be run out of town in today's world of Husker fans. That's just the world we live in. If Bo had won a conference championship (or maybe even two), do you think that would have saved him? I don't. Nebraska fans, right or wrong, want nothing short of national championship caliber teams.

Which is why I can't believe there is one single person on the Mike Riley bandwagon.

THE HERMENATOR

No, not even close. If someone came in and did what Osborne did between 86-92 he'd be around a long, long time. You see, a funny thing happened during that period of time. Osborne LEARNED what it was going to take to reach the pinnacle. He needed to recruit speed on defense and that's exactly what he did. You have to give Dr. Tom credit, he figured it out. He was a student of the game. Smart, smart man. Don't play him in chess. We could use a T.O. In the worst way right now. GBR.

 

[JHball]

Conference titles, top 10 finishes, something your boy Peelini knows nothing about. National title seekers my ass, take that crap somewhere else, it won't fly here.

Not as a head coach anyway

 

[Soda Popinski]

Bo wasn't fired because of his embarrassing tactics. He could have acted just like he did and had he won a national championship, he would still be around with a contract extension. He didn't lose his job because of his poor public relations skill set. He lost his job because he couldn't take Nebraska to a national championship level. Bo's not a mental case. He's what Nick Saban would be if he lost four games every year.

THE HERMENATOR

 

[Mr Guy]

It is an interesting stat, but I don't see a significance or relationship.

It obviously shows that in .75 years as HC at Nebraska, Riley has eclipsed what it took Pelini 7 years to "accomplish."

For Riley supporters, this stat will be deemed irrelevant.

For anti-Riley folk, this stat is yet another embarrassing addition in the dossier that has come to define Riley's career as a head coach.

 

[WestCoastCornhusker]

Pelini in 7 seasons only blew the lead (when leading in the 4th quarter) 3 times in 7 seasons. Mike Riley led Nebraska has blown the lead 4 times in 8 games (this season).

This is not mean to be a Pelini or Riley is better thread. It is an interesting stat and makes you wonder where this staff is coming up short at the end of games.

Stop loving on Pelini. I hate him. I want Riley fired but would still take MR over Bo.

 

[donahues17]

The Pelini vs Riley stats are a reason for debate only. Why would anybody want a coach fired after 8 games? I agree that as a Husker fan, we want to win. But I give 2 years minimum. Besides that, Nebraska would not pay 2 coaches for not being employed plus paying a new coach. It won't happen. So plan on Riley being here 5 years unless he retires early.

 

[nebcountry]

It obviously shows that in .75 years as HC at Nebraska, Riley has eclipsed what it took Pelini 7 years to "accomplish."

For Riley supporters, this stat will be deemed irrelevant.

For anti-Riley folk, this stat is yet another embarrassing addition in the dossier that has come to define Riley's career as a head coach.

I think losses to unranked opponents is a significant stat, and someone posted those not too long ago.

Whether a coach loses in the last quarter, last half, last minute, they're all losses. If I were to self reflect, was it better to lose to Illinois (this year) or was it better to lose against UCLA (a few years back), I would say to myself "don't be a effin idiot they were both bad". Collapsing and losing is bad, independent of the point in the game when the collapse happens.

 

[BornNBredRed]

Riley's system is dependent on having a QB who has a 100% different skill set than what we have on the roster. It is illogical to judge Riley until you have "his" QB in a second year of starting. That, along with the poor offensive line explains the offensive woes. As much as we would love to, our offensive line is not strong enough to just run smash mouth all day against quality teams. The reasons for the defensive woes are obvious to everyone.....besides a couple of DTs, there are NO playmakers on defense.....none! There may not be any players amongst the other nine positions who would be top three on a depth chart of any Top 25 team.