Undone

I'd attribute this, in this order, to: 1. Lack of drive by the players to step onto the field from the first minute and curb stomp the other team. 2. Completely predictable and not-creative-enough play calling from Langsdorf.

I think the biggest problem we're seeing is Diaco's huge deficiencies in his defensive scheme. Unless he really drastically overhauled his defensive philosophy, which he almost surely wouldn't, I don't ever expect that Riley will be able to beat even Wisconsin. How in the **** do we get so unlucky to have two defensive minds back-to-back with the "bend but don't break" nonsense?!

Agreed. My point though was that Shaw recruits more than just "character" and "drive."

Ted Talks are cool and all, but... Stanford's national recruiting rankings the past six years: -2017 = 14th -2016 = 16th -2015 = 24th -2014 = 13th -2013 = 52nd -2012 = 7th Three of those years are Top 15 and one of those is Top 10. I wish we did that.

I realize that this is "literally what coaching is," Rike. We don't usually get Top 20 classes. We usually get classes in the #20 - #30 rank range. What if we had a coach that could consistently get Top 20 classes? Do we think that getting such a coach and staff that can recruit this well is feasible, or are we resigning ourselves to believing that it's not possible?

+1, good post. I would also take Frost over Venables but could see Venables being a great fit for us. I'd be curious to know what style of offense he'd run and I don't think there's be any real way to know.

I just feel like he wouldn't have the name recognition to pull in recruiting classes that are at least better than Bo & Riley's were. If we want to play Top 10 football, our coaching has to be exceptional if we're going to be in that #20-#30 range of recruiting classes. And I think our fan base still by and large doesn't quite understand this. There's either some kind of resignation that we won't have top 10 recruiting classes because "it's not the Nebraska way" or because Bo & Riley weren't able to do we just assume the next guy can't. What I'm perceiving is that there are a lot of people that believe that Frost has that coaching fairy dust to take the recruiting classes we normally expect to get and turn the final product into a Top 10 team. I'm sorry, I just don't see it. In a scenario where it's Frost or Riley, I want Frost. Absolutely, with no question. But we need much, much better recruiting classes to win titles. I don't feel like our fan base concedes this, but it seems so obvious. And of course...maybe Frost gets those top 15 classes. Maybe. Just doesn't seem likely to me.

Definitely know the feeling: Go to a rager, things get crazy with the ladies, pants get lost. What a life!

That is terribly vague, but I do appreciate your input. It's just interesting because @El Diaco said: I watch highlights of UCF games, and I see a very similar offense. I was told profusely in a different thread that there are many, many differences. I'd like to hear what they are.

ROFL. So good.

I mean this genuinely: Can someone list out the nuances between the offense that Frost helped to coach when he was at Oregon and what Frost does now? One poster had mentioned in another thread that there was less zone blocking and more lineman pulling when run blocking. Anything else?

"jessica" knows all about Scott and Scott's wife's plans for a family. Simply amazing. Would you start at $5M for a base for any other coaches, jessica?

This thread is so great. Ah, so you've heard we'll be paying $4M/year?

I don't know that this would be accurate - but - I totally agree that I would love to build a time machine and have taken Frost over Riley, knowing what we know now.

Yes, and we have such a proven track record of being willing to pony up big cash for a good coach, don't we?

In hindsight, we absolutely should have hired him three years ago. Absolutely. Almost painful to think about how much better that probably would have been. But again...three years ago his resume wasn't even better than Bo's was in 2007 when Osborne brought Bo in. It just wasn't. I'm not saying that a comparison to Bo's resume is any kind of extremely important benchmark but there honestly wasn't any indication three years ago that he was ready to take over one of the most storied programs in college football history even though he is Scott Frost.

+1 for the comedy gold. I lol'd.

Hayseed - Your little emotional outburst is so cute. I'm sure that feels good to accuse someone of being "Riley's biggest fan" when you disagree with a post. I wanted Riley gone after the Rutgers game. His two coordinators and offensive line coach aren't good enough and our talent isn't being developed.

If memory serves, Taylor Martinez was not recruited as a quarterback by any major Power 5 schools. I seem to recall UCLA recruiting him as an "athlete." I could be missing your point but I probably wouldn't put Martinez on the same level as Mayfield, Manziel, & Mariota. The zone read offense is kind of a feast or famine scheme when your dual threat quarterback isn't exactly much of a *threat* when throwing the ball. I remember so many times with Martinez & Armstrong where on first down, when the run option was called, our line would not hold up and then we're at 2nd & 12. Then it's 3rd & long, and your QB just doesn't have the tools to be the guy to sit in the pocket in the shotgun and be expected to throw well. That does not describe Mayfield, Manziel, & Mariota. But it's possible that the final product for us has a better chance at being its best when we're going with the run/pass option scheme. I mean, just look at how much better our offense was statistically when Riley & Langsdorf were coaching Bo's offensive players in the zone read versus what we have now. Obviously there's a marked difference.

Ah, possibly. @zoogs - What did you mean when you said:

Riley has fired a bunch of dudes on the defensive side of the ball to try to improve his program. He hasn't made similar changes on offense to improve the product. What part of that doesn't make sense? *Edited for a typo

Riley has taken strides to build the necessary support staff to a large extent. He's gotten the process rolling with the changes he's made on the defensive side of the ball. But his offensive line coach seems to have been a pretty big hindrance. Would he have made more changes at the end of this season if we wind up going 6-6? Maybe. And maybe the university administration got wind of conversations he had with Eichorst over the last few months in which Riley made it clear that he would not. Those are the types of things that get an AD and head coach fired. Pure speculation on my part, pure speculation. But Riley has a long ways to go before his supporting cast is developing talent to the extent that we're able to compete even just with Wisconsin and Iowa. How long would we have given him to make these changes at 64?

You're listing some very sound rhetorical descriptions of us all, yes. I think that the Riley hire was confusing in large part because of his age. How long would/should we be willing to give a guy that was 62 when his first game was played as head coach just to be competitive at winning the West division? It's a hard question to answer with a lot of specificity, but in my opinion it's not hard to ball park it. Riley's downfall was bringing in his 'average to bad' assistants. And this is not overly critical or condescending of him; he has now fired his secondary coach, his defensive line coach, and his defensive coordinator, correct? He had to - They weren't coaches that could take your team into the Top 10. They weren't even coaches that could take your team into the Top 25! Frost does make sense as the guy we'd *have to* be patient with.

zoogs, can you elaborate on what this fallout will be? Alabama hired six coaches in 10 years prior to brining in Saban (or was it five prior to Saban - I'd have to check for sure). This really is the new reality of college football.

I was waiting for someone to say this. Thank you. I totally agree. In yet, it's not the (completely unreasonable) trend that Osborne set us up for. If Frost is the guy to pay $4.0M+ per year, let's do it. He's the guy then. But look at what the teams who consistently play Top 10 football pay their coaches. You said it - You get what you pay for. Are we going to pony up the cash? Or, does our fan base just assume that Lincoln is sprinkled with fairy dust and Frost will just dash in here and be happy to be paid whatever we offer?