[Husker] Michigan v Huskers

[Alan Siporin]

For anybody feeling defensive, this is not an attack on anybody's position.
This is a question I've wondered for some time. The recent discussions
finally prompted me to ask.

Nebraska beat Michigan in the bowl. We had a lot of returning players on
both sides of the ball including a senior qb and several top defensive
stars. I don't follow Michigan closely enough to know how many starters they
returned, but I wonder why they are so much better then we are this year.
(I'll toss out one answer to my own question: the injury to Bowman is that
big). Still, seems like a stretch to be that much worse with the loss of one
player, especially when we had another top JC db coming in to help out.

One of the reasons I ask is because there seems to be this vague timetable
rationale about rebuilding the program (from a 10-3 team) to a championship
contender. Seems like we were right there with Michigan a year ago and they
are number two, now, contending for the national title, and that's why a lot
of people are upset. I know the argument about transitioning from option
offense athletes to the WCO system, but, again, we had made the transition
by the bowl game, and should only be better with another Spring and Fall and
half a season, too.

Don't misinterpret this as an argument for firing Callahan. I think that
would be premature. We should have given Solich more than a year after he
installed his new staff and recruiters, and we need to give Callahan more
time, too. But we need to think about holding Pedersen accountable. He said
he would not tolerate mediocrity, implying that 10-3 is mediocre. So what's
the timetable, chief?

Alan Siporin