How miserablely smug is Hawk going to be if we win this game?

[leftybuff]

I just don't subject myself to him in anymore. Press conferences, interviews, t.v. shows...don't even bother checking to see what he has to say. I've literally heard everything he has to say a hundred times over. He is just too much like nails scraping on a chalkboard these days.

+1...I started to listen to his coaches show on the radio, but turned it off after the first 25 minutes or so. Same thing on the radio, just hit another preset buttion if HaLk droppings ae heard. I don't even watch Buffalo Stampede anymore.

 

[92Buff]

I'll preface this by saying that I've grown really tired of Hawk and his "Hawkisms." They do grate on my nerves. So, the joke would be on me too IF that happened. And I still stand behind my "even if he wins 8 games, he should be gone" stance of late. Prior to the first game I said he needed to win 8 games to stay. But if he somehow got this thing turned in a BIG WAY, I'm not sure what I'd think or say.

Totally agree DBT. I am not sure there is anything he can do to win me back at this point. I hope we are faced with this dilemma since it would mean that we did a pretty good job of sticking it to our conference on the way out...just can't imagine/stomach having this coach lead us into the Pac.

Of course, I know deep down he will take care of this for us since he hasn't done one thing in his tenure here to point to that kind of sustained success.

 

[Ruckus]

Well, my point was that W's and L's were NOT the "first filter" when Solich was fired. By your logic, I guess, he should have been retained. Right?

No. The first filter is W/Ls. If you fail there, you should be fired. If you pass there, then you go on to the next filter, whether it is recruiting, academics, clean program, clear improvement, etc and if he passes or fails in that, you decide accordingly.

 

[sackman]

No. The first filter is W/Ls. If you fail there, you should be fired. If you pass there, then you go on to the next filter, whether it is recruiting, academics, clean program, clear improvement, etc and if he passes or fails in that, you decide accordingly.

While I agree, there also comes into play some outside issues that may force the hand of an administration. Stuff like locking a kid in a shed, slapping a kid, betting on an NCAA football pool, taking money from agents, setting up your star running back with a sweet pad, that kind of stuff.

Most of the time, though, you're absolutely correct. If a coach doesn't win games, he needs to go. That's job #1. Fail at that, and you're a failure. The rest of the stuff isn't as important as winning.

 

[Corn_Fan]

Frank Solich went 10-2 or something the year before he got axed. And do you know why the axed him? Because he wasn't recruiting the the 'braska standards. Now, I don't know if they were right or wrong in firing him. But I think a lot more should go into evaluating Hawk than wins and losses. Saying that and thinking about it, academics DOES matter to me. I doubt that 'braska had "academics" in their formula. But its complex.

We didn't have academics in our formula because the football team's academics have always been good over the years no matter the coach. Frank Solich was letting the program slip and it was pretty obvious to NU fans. He went 7-7 in 2002 and was crushed multiple times. In 2003 he had an absolutely easy schedule playing only two ranked teams (#24 OSU and #16 Texas) all year yet he got crushed by Texas, Missouri and KSU. The team was about half as good as the teams were in the mid/late 90's we were getting to be pretty average under his watch. We did not want to let the slide continue. Now we then hired the wrong coach in Callahan of course, but a change needed to be made. Sometimes you have to take a step back before taking a step forward.

You mention that there is more to go into evaluating Hawk than wins and losses. Interesting you say that you should practice what you preach regarding Solich then. There was more to it than the wins and losses. For Solich he had the wins but was having trouble keeping the program at a certain level (plus the wins were coming against only the bad teams on our schedule and we seemed to have a lot of bad teams on our schedule. Then Solich would get blown out by any team with a pulse). Hawk has the losses to be canned, but you, DBT, seem to think Hawk has other qualities worth keeping. That is fine with me that is your perogative. Just pointing out there was more to it than wins and losses with Solich as well.

 

[DBT]

We didn't have academics in our formula because the football team's academics have always been good over the years no matter the coach. Frank Solich was letting the program slip and it was pretty obvious to NU fans. He went 7-7 in 2002 and was crushed multiple times. In 2003 he had an absolutely easy schedule playing only two ranked teams (#24 OSU and #16 Texas) all year yet he got crushed by Texas, Missouri and KSU. The team was about half as good as the teams were in the mid/late 90's we were getting to be pretty average under his watch. We did not want to let the slide continue. Now we then hired the wrong coach in Callahan of course, but a change needed to be made. Sometimes you have to take a step back before taking a step forward.

You mention that there is more to go into evaluating Hawk than wins and losses. Interesting you say that you should practice what you preach regarding Solich then. There was more to it than the wins and losses. For Solich he had the wins but was having trouble keeping the program at a certain level (plus the wins were coming against only the bad teams on our schedule and we seemed to have a lot of bad teams on our schedule. Then Solich would get blown out by any team with a pulse). Hawk has the losses to be canned, but you, DBT, seem to think Hawk has other qualities worth keeping. That is fine with me that is your perogative. Just pointing out there was more to it than wins and losses with Solich as well.

I think you totally misunderstood me. I said that even if Hawk somehow pulled out a great year, he is not the guy to lead this program forward. He has lost a lot of respect among the fans and he has let recruiting slip way below where it should be. So, even if he somehow pulls out a, say, 10 win season, we should make the change just as 'braska did with Solich. I was complementing 'braska for disregarding his W/L record the year they fired him.

I didn't mean to dis 'braska by saying "academics was not in their formula." What I meant was that they were concerned about other things other than wins. They were concerned about the direction of the program in areas such as recruiting.

 

[Buffsoldier]

Well, my point was that W's and L's were NOT the "first filter" when Solich was fired. By your logic, I guess, he should have been retained. Right?

And I submit that he WAS fired vis-a-vis that first filter, as it applied to nebraska's standards of the day. Yes, he was fired after a 9-3 season, but the year previously he was 7-7, nU's worst record (at the time) since 1961. He won only one North and one Conference title in his six years. And he was 1-9 on the road against ranked opponents (0-9 in conference). By the nU standards of the day, this was a positively ****ty W-L record. Hell, Steve Pederson said it himself when he fired Solich: He stated that he would not "let Nebraska gravitate into mediocrity" and would not "surrender the Big 12 to Oklahoma and Texas." Sounds like W's and L's was the first filter there to me.