B1GRED
New member
I think it's funny as hell. May they get what they have coming to them, smug bastards.
Last edited by a moderator:
Who should our next HC be?
- Thread starter SE 0F RD
- Start date
- Status
I think it's funny as hell. May they get what they have coming to them, smug bastards.
Interesting insight from Callahan:
Aranda turned down LSU and USC last year. Might be fine at Baylor, especially with Texas and OU leaving they have a great shot at the playoffs every year.
Wisconsin has seven games left and they are all against unranked teams. Very well set up for Leonard to succeed.
Aranda turned down LSU and USC last year. Might be fine at Baylor, especially with Texas and OU leaving they have a great shot at the playoffs every year.
Wisconsin has seven games left and they are all against unranked teams. Very well set up for Leonard to succeed.
BigRedBuster
Well-known member
It will be interesting to see how conference realignment affects coach's decisions. Yes, if Texas and OU leave for the SEC, it makes it easier for Baylor to make the playoffs. However, is that really a long term realistic idea? I don't see the Big 12 being a viable conference with them leaving and no other changes happen. So, if the remnants of the Pac 12 join the remnants of the Big 12, does that make it as easy to get to the playoffs for Baylor as it might seem right now? I don't think so. Meanwhile, coaching in a conference like the Big 10, even though it might be tougher competition, you have way more resources due to the higher income from the conference.
It will be interesting to see.
Also interesting that Riley must not have been USC's first pick?
Last edited by a moderator:
That is true. One would think they would be looking to add. But I think it's probably a foregone conclusion that what they add will be relatively lesser-powered than Texas & Oklahoma. So I think it's probably pretty valid.
I was wondering about that as well. Perhaps they were talking to both and Aranda declined???
Guy Chamberlin
Well-known member
I always wonder about the behind the scenes outreach to gauge interest and avoid public embarrassment. Wonder if Alberts did any preliminaries last year, and wondering how many coaches (or agents) you could approach while they're still employed mid-season.
You want him to be coach because he played here. Falling into the same BS trap.
Huskerfollower4life
Active member
No I want to be the coach if he earns that right to be the coach. Get your sh** straight if he makes the team better why shouldn't he not be the head coach. I have my own group of coaches I'd like to see but it has to start in house first and if there is any indication what your going to see from this team you know the players will be fighting for MJ to coach them next year. You can't tell me why other then not having the experience as a head coach as to why he shouldn't be the head coach.
teachercd
Well-known member
Wait...so USC and LSU got their SECOND choices...who just happen to be coaches that have won big games and made it to the CFB playoff?
I am thinking that Callahan might be just a little bit wrong on that one.
teachercd
Well-known member
I think this is probably pretty true.
If MJ had played college ball at Our Lady of the Worthless Miracle, some small NAIA school...no fans would be drooling over him.
Dogs In A Pile
Active member
I'd heard he rebuffed overtures from LSU & USC which are better jobs than NU. Seems to be happy at Baylor. From what people say he is a lower key type coach who might not enjoy the fishbowl here (or at LSU or USC). And these guys make enough money now that for some of them it probably isn't worth sacrificing their quality of life for more money. Most of them make more in a year than the average Joe will make in a lifetime.
Last edited by a moderator:
The reporting and circumstances say that Riley wasn't available when they fired Clay but became available after they'd started their search.
It's been reported that they offered Aranda and Fickell but it's understood that Riley's agent approached the USC search team midway or toward the end of their process. There wasn't a list he was third on, perse
Don't get this logic. Why does this need to be in house first? Give me the guy with fresh philosophies, with experience evaluating scheme and skill on both sides of the ball and a track record of setting and achieving organizational objectives over years, not weeks.
And why should we settle for the closest guy to the situation? This team just lost a 10,000lb backpack they were playing with week-in and week-out. They would have played better no matter who the interim was. Credit to Mickey, the guy is highly respected for a reason, but I'd rather he be where his skills are maximized, which is teaching WR's, building the relationships necessary to keep kids out of the portal, and recruiting in-home, which HC's have limitations on per NCAA rules.
Last edited by a moderator:
Guy Chamberlin
Well-known member
Sure. But both statements can be true. And why would you make it a small NAIA school for the purposes of comparison?
If Mickey Joseph had played at say Kansas State, and immediately gone into coaching, working his way up to become a successful position coach and a successful Assistant Head Coach at a premier LSU program, then came to Nebraska as an assistant, bringing with him some high-grade recruits from his football rich home turf and an overall reputation as a players coach and a recruiting ace, and just for kicks you find out his brother is an NFL head coach with all the connections that affords.........you just might say "Hmmmm. That could work."
The fact that he has Husker ties and wants to be here? Why would that not be a plus, given that it's not the determinant?
I think you mistake "drooling" for just giving the guy an honest chance if he does at all well in the interim. The assumption that Matt Campbell is preferable isn't something I'd hang my hat on, either.
- Status