I Don't Need Your Civil War
I dare you to argue with me that Guns and Roses isn't the greatest rock band in all of the 80's. (And I don't want to hear that Van Halen shit either) In the meantime, a pre-holiday revelation.As a professional hater of all things red, I must admit that sometimes I miss the little things. One not-so-little thing I tend to overlook is the ongoing civil war between Husker fans that is now going into it's 4th season. Yes, much like the blue and gray of the mid 1800's, Husker fan is divided into two distinct groups:
First is the old-school fans known in many circles as "Frank Apologists". These individuals recognize the old-school appeal of Husker football, and the special stature that they had a process and a procedure that was unique to college football. These fans warship the genius of Tom Osborne, Charlie McBride, the triple option, academic all-Americans, Harry Husker and Johnny Rogers. These individuals are generally not happy with change and for the most part despise Steve Pederson and the puppet regime he has installed.
On the other side of the fence is the rabid, self-anointed "experts" who feel that they know so much about college football, that they absolutely had to change their ways in order to continue their favorite activity...telling other people how great they are. These people defend Bill Callahan and "modern" football to the death, and although many still respect Osborne and the old school regime, they turn their backs on it for the greater good. (That, and because other internet fans of other teams make fun of them for running the ball 600 times a game for all those years.) These people embrace Steve Pederson and the changes he made, and despise Frank Solich for trying to continue the archaic ways of Tom Osborne.If hating an entire fan base is a beautiful, under-appreciated and lost art...hating fans of your own team, is a dirty, messy and emotional business. For Husker fans, it is only natural that they would fight among themselves as to how they got to this point...the point of being the envy of everybody else.
Yesterday, on both call-in shows, the topic of the day was the Hildebrand kid and what Clownahan and company said to him to cause him to leave. While old-school "Frank apologists" decried the new coaching staffs tactics (the word "liar" was thrown around a lot), new school Callahan disciples claimed the kid sucked anyway, and never deserved a shot to prove himself because only the best shall play. This sparked hours upon hours of self-analysis and finger pointing...each side going to the ends of the earth to prove they're right. Meanwhile, life rolls on and on, and the argument rages.
So where does a non-biased, completely neutral observer such as my self ring in during this debate? I think you're all crazy.
To the people who think Solich killed your program and Callahan/Peterson will usher in a new era...you're on fucking crack. The ONLY reason you're even doing as well as you are, is because of name recognition. How long would it take an Indiana or Vandy to rebuild? A lot longer than a team that supposedly is the greatest program of all time. In other words...my dog could recruit the guys Callahan is getting, and probably coach them to 6 wins. The guy has done absolutely NOTHING aside from beat 5 shitty North teams this year. If you're all proud of that..then good for you. I certainly see the Frank Apologist's side in that this whole thing is a horrible experiment that will ultimately lead in failure. And don't kid yourself...national "powers" get run into the ground all the time. Alabama, Penn State, Florida State....none of those teams have yet to climb back where they were just a decade or so ago. (Token bowl games not withstanding.)
To the Frank Apologists, you people are insane as well, because you will NEVER EVER have a run like you had in the mid 90's. Osborne and his 400 years of combined assistant coaching are a rarity that will never be duplicated. For you guys to sit back and think the option game and/or recruiting slow white farm boys to run it is the way to go...then you're probably pretty much screwed.
But here's another problem some of you haven't thought of yet in this whole civil war....How soon do we forget that Tom Osborne wasn't winning National Titles with his system. You forget that Tom Osborne went against his best judgment and recruited thugs and criminals to win his titles. Don't believe me? Had any rapists on your team lately? Had anybody shove their hand down Miss Nebraska's pants in the past few years? Tom Osborne sold your soul to the devil for 1 and 2 half National Titles, and now you're chasing that bar that was set so high. As for Callahan, did you actually think a guy that ran the Raiders wasn't going to stretch the truth a bit to get a kid into your program? THE RAIDERS. Does any of that make sense?
The glory days of yesteryear are gone, and the current thinking of a cure-all, end-all coach to fix it up right is a pipe dream as well. The fact of the matter is...you're all wrong on pretty much everything. Steve Pederson and Bill Callahan have made sure you don't ever have another stretch run like you did in the 90's. At the same time, you were never really that good to begin with until you started to bend your principles and recruit thugs and criminals.So you see...you both lose. You're all still wrong, and you'll be stuck in a perpetual 3-5 loss cycle from now until the end of time. Why? Because that's the way college football is now, and from what I understand, a time machine hasn't been developed by researchers just yet.
Keep thinking otherwise, and beating the shit out of each other in the meantime. I enjoy it.
AJ
posted by A J at 12:03 PM
12 Comments:
...zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.... The "Frank apologists" are nothing more than uneducated fans and you know that AJ. I agree, they are morons, but I never, and I mean NEVER waste my breath arguing with them. Why would I? They wouldnt understand what I was talking about anyway. I just laugh at them and enjoy college athletics for what they are, entertainment. I dont get into fights with Frank lovers because well, they are a lot like you, not educated enough to argue with. I will never argue anything with you, just make fun of you, and enjoy reading your blog because it is free entertainment and always brings a smile to my face when you say some of the most off the wall shit I have ever seen. In fact AJ, I like you more than Frank lovers because you hate the Huskers, and dont represent the Husker Nation like a moron. Anyways, we still on for the Mizzou-Fightin Doc Sadlers basketball game?
WAY TOO EARLY PREDICTION
Nebraska 71 Mizzou 56
Wait a second..you guys bitched that I didn't find a new angle....I go out and find one...and now you're saying it's not an issue?
I beg to differ. Ask Mike..he is a Husker fan, running a Husker blog, and he probably gets as much hate mail as I do. Hell, even radio station guys are sending him hate mail.
And don't get too giddy with Doc Sadler just yet. (No, I didn't mention Rutgers either) His best player is out and you know what happens when he's out.....
Hey sprintcar message board nerds. I see you lurking. Pretty ironic that you're calling me out for having no life. Hell, at least follow formula 1 or something...necks.
PS - Yes..I'm a Husker fan...you got me.
PPS - Sorry if nobody else knows what I'm talking about.
OHF,
"Frank apologists are nothing more than uneducated fans". If that statement isn't a retard calling a moron, "stupid".
The Callahan/Pederson apologists have been using that line since Callahan hasn't panned out as advertised. "and I mean never waste my breath arguing with them", that is a statement from a person that has an undefendable position. I don't think I argue, I like poking holes in their comments though.
If Callahan apologists tell me what a great recruiter he is, I ask why the talent isn't showing up on game day. (No lineman, linebackers, quarterbacks, and running backs in contention for post-season honors.)
If Callahan apologists tell me that it takes time, I ask how much time is enough. I then point out we gave Franks new staff one year.
If Callahan apologists tell me how smart Callahan is, I ask, why then limit the number of the walk-on program. (I then remind them that Callahan said there were too many kids to manage. Maybe he's better suited for high school.)
If Callahan apologists tell me that Callahan is getting used to the college game, I ask why was Pederson so stupid to hire somebody that didn't know what he was doing, and why didn't he learn it when he was in the college game.
I see Callahan apologists like the kid that got a krappy toy for his birthday, and knows it, but doesn't want his friends to know it, so he brags the living daylights out of the gift. In my book, Callahan has this year to prove his worth, he was sold to us as a recruiter and a master mind, which neither have been proven to be true. (Although we've been told over and over and over again by Jim Rose that a loss throwing the ball is just as good as a win running the ball.) By proof, I mean if the programs biggest win in three years is a win against an under motivated Michigan team, then you have problems. Callahan has been tested three times to see if he is ready for prime time, and failed each time. USC- failed (poor management of the offense), Texas- failed (poor managment of the game clock), Oklahoma- failed (offense wasn't able to compete against a better than average Oklahoma defense, and no defense to stop a poor Oklahoma offense). Callahan gets his fourth test this season in Auburn, and we'll see if the kids get prepared, but how many more times do we let Jim Rose tell us what a great loss that was before we get tired of it.
I've shared some criticism of how Frank manged the program under his watch.
You guys have a Merry Christmas!!!
THERE's the venom I was looking for. Sheesh..where have you guys been?
:)
Let us now bow our heads and pray to the gods at Rivals.com and hope that they bless the program.
Isn't it amazing that the "recruting retards" are all so hyped on the ones the Huskers sign, but when these recruits leave the program, they "weren't any good anyway". It continues to amaze me that the Pederson proclaimed KING OF RECRUITERS, recruits kids that "weren't that good anyway". (That fricking logic is always screwing up the Callahan apologists arguements.)
Is Callahans recruiting so good that we're worried that our talent is going to leave early for the NFL? (JP, that's a rhetroical question, so don't strain yourself coming up with an answer.)
Now comes the Callahan apologists long list loaded with stars to "prove" everyone wrong. How many times do we have to hear about "impact players", we've been hearing about the "impact players" since the day Callahan was introduced as the smartest man in the universe, how many Freshman started last year? (I find it hilarious that some of Frank's recruits that were so bad, according to the apologists, yet they still started.) If in fact these recruits walk on water and can leap buildings in a single bound, it would be like owning a race car and never getting over 75 on the interstate. Question for the Callahan apologists, for arguements sake, let's say all these kids are as talented as the apologists say, that being true, where is the production on the field? Texas A & M is the biggest win this program has this year (and that one had to be pulled out late with luck). Texas and USC turned out to not be the power house programs that we believed at the time, so those losses aren't the moral victories the apologists claimed. The Oklahoma game showed just how ineffective all of our "talent" was against a better than average Oklahoma defense, and poor offense.
For the Callahan apologists and Rivals retards, it's much easier to say you're good vs. proving it on the field. Did anyone expect Watson to say anything but we've the got best guys on the planet. But the Callahan apologists are going and preaching the gospel of Steve Watson because he said it. (Cripes has this Watson guy even turned water in wine, or not.)
JP please check for grammatical errors.
larry asante, while a good player, wasn't even the top safety on his team. that distinction would got to gary chandler. chandler is widely considered the best player in the KJCCC.
JP hope you had a great Christmas, and appreciate you proving my point.
Callahan apoloigists, which I would classify JP as, are willing to tell me that my arguement is full of holes but unwilling to attempt to prove it.
Proof is ultimately on the field and the Callahan apologists have a win over Texas A & M to hang their hats on, with a Big 12 North trophy (poor division) as a kicker.
Dam good thing Nebraska had all those "impact players" that Rivals retards have been preaching for the past THREE years. The impact has been outstanding? I mean the defense and offense is tops in the country, oh wait, it's not. We could play with the big boys like USC and Texas, oh wait, .500 teams beat those two programs and we didn't. Well at least our Air Callahan lit up Oklahoma, oh wait, you mean the impact players didn't impact that game either.
Let's concede that this talent is so much better than the previous regime (a la arguement from Callahan apologists). Why the inconsistent play on the field? If you have talent, and they aren't performing, that leaves coaching and preparation, which falls at the feet of the head coach. So is the coaching staff lazy (not motivated to prepare for an opponent), or too stupid (not having the mental capacity) to prepare a competent game plan.
We heard from Callahan that the loss to Oklahoma was "execution". So by Callahans own admission he either was unable to get his players motivated to perform, or he recruited lazy "impact players".
JP,
Someone should have told USC that you're supposed to wait for "full" recruiting classes to be competitive and put together some meaningful wins.
You're trying to make a cause & effect relationship out of recruiting and at best it would be a correlation arguement.
Thanks for the standard Callahan apologists arguement, it proves my point.
So JP that would be a big, "I don't have any proof that Callahan is the smartest man on the planet, but because I say so, it has to be, because I heard Jim Rose and Steve Pedersen said it on the radio, so it must be true" arguement.
For those Callahan apoligists and Rivals retards, I'd like you take a moment and think about one of your most prized arguements. "You have to have good recruits to have a good team." Unfortunately for your arguement that is not the rule, how else would you explain what Bo P. did with Craig B. players? (JP that's a rhetorical question so don't bother answering.)
Callahan apologists have to blind themselves with the excuse that Frank killed the program otherwise they would get a clear picture of Callahan and company.
15 years down the road, the Callahan apologists after losing to Iowa State by 24 for the 6th year in a row will still be telling us that Frank killed the program, and the Rivals retards will still be winning national championships on paper with all the "impact players".
The 2003 team, myopic on offense, (I'm certain that it was a widely known fact but apparently it escaped JP's notice), so the defense had to not only stop opposing teams from scoring, but set up the offense in short field situations because of the lack of production.
So exactly what is your point? Are your trying to say that Cosgrove was left with less talent? Are you saying that 2003 is exactly like 2006? Are you trying to tell us that 10-3 is worse than 7-7?
Putting up three scores means what?, following through and make a point. Most Callahan apologists provide arguements just like this. "Well Nebraska has 300 yards passing", but they don't include that we were playing catch-up, the running game had less than 100 yards, turned the ball over 4 times, and lost the game by three touchdowns!!!
"Well Bo P. lost three games", and those were to bowl teams, Brad Smith played for one of those teams, and K-State did not have a bad team in 2003, and I beleive their running back off that team is playing in the NFL. What the Callahan apologists fail to tell you is that defense was vastly improved over the previous campaign, with primarily the same personnel.
Cripes, if Callahan apologists want to point to a score look at the blessed Texas Tech game in 2004. (and how many defenseive backs got drafted from that squad?) What was even better was when Cosgrove talked about the game, "when it was 42-0 we stopped watching film, we didn't think we could learn anymore". If you stop and think about it though, Cosgrove was probably right, as a retard your capacity to learn is limited.
Hey, how did the Big 12 do in 2003 bowl games vs. 2006? Didn't Kansas State hand it to OU that year in the Big 12 Championship? How many unranked teams did we lose to in 2003? I believe Nebraskas defense overall was #1 in the conference. (Where'd our defense rank in the league this year?) I think that year the Big 12 had two BCS teams, and one played for the national championship. (Having two teams from the Big 12 in the BCS made Pedersens reasoning about why Frank got turned loose very illogical. What kills me is that the same logic Pedersen used to let Frank go, is not being used to measure Callahans performance. So the logic that applied yesterday does not apply today, that is what hypocrites are made of.)
What is embarassing about the arguement you throw up is that the Big 12 was a more worthy league in 2003 vs. today. (I will concede that the 2006 pre-season was tougher with USC, but we got dominated on both sides of the ball in that game.) Listen for the Callahan apologists arguement, "Well, 9-5 is a great record considering who we played.", but Callahan apoloigsts say the 10-3 record was against patsies. Like I've stated before, the Callahan apologists are great at SAYING the Huskers are improved, but very little to show for it.
I didn't receive any comments about Cosgrove and the Texas Tech slaughter. How did the defense improve, oh yeah, Cosgrove went out and got Grixby to play corner for him, tremendous forethought.
Callahan apologists have little more than rhetroic to argue with.
Post a Comment
<< Home