Undone

Given that our expectations will be for Frost to essentially take us back to playing Top 10 football within 3 seasons, I'd consider "a lower salary" to be in teh $3.5M - $4.0M range. As of 2016's numbers, James Franklin and Kirk Ferentz made $4.5M-ish and were the 10th & 11th highest paid coaches last years, respectively. So, with that as somewhat of a benchmark, what do you expect Frost to be paid?

You make a good argument, Ern. The upshot of bringing in Frost at a lower salary would be if we then have the budget to bring in some good coordinators. Doing that would also be very encouraging.

Ern - Nobody said $7M. Nobody in this thread has put any numbers up until you just did. Dabo makes $5.3M.

Agreed, and Rivals agrees as well. They put out an article this last week saying he's on the top of their list as the next up-and-comer to take over a Power 5 gig. I will be happy with Frost, but I still maintain that in 20 years our program has not done this - We have not ponied up huge money to bring in a head coach of a Power 5 school that had won or consistently competed for conference titles in the last 5-8 years. To me, this seems like the very first thing that we'd do, but Osborne didn't want it that way when he had his two opportunities to name a new head coach (Solich and Pelini).

We would "strike out" because they wouldn't leave their current gigs because we wouldn't offer them enough money, or we'd strike out because we don't have the funds to buy out their current contracts? Please answer that question. I know who your choices are, as I'm relatively confident that I know who you are.

This is the chicken s*** attitude that has put us where we're at. Our boosters have the money. If Frost is the best we can do, there's a very good chance he can do better than Riley but in my opinion we have to go big or go home.

I have now named two coaches two different times on this page of this thread - David Shaw and Mark Dantonio.

Pump the breaks on your straw men. I have never been a Riley fan. We all want the best coach available. It is not crazy in the slightest to believe that Frost is not the best guy we can get. If we get him, I'll still be very happy. Remember: We have to recruit from the warm-weather meccas to do this thing. The bigger the name, the more pull in recruiting. This is a very basic concept.

As I said a few replies up, David Shaw or Mark Dantonio. I wanted Dantonio to come in after Bo was fired.

Thank you for that data, Isle of View. You're making a good point. Still, in all seriousness I want the proven veteran head coach over Frost. Would I take Frost over Riley? Absolutely, yes. So if Frost is actually the best we can do I'll be happy to have him. I just don't think he's the best we can do, and 18 seasons without any conference titles is a long time. Time to turn it around as sensibly as we can.

You're absolutely correct in terms of head coaching experience. And I am serious. But Pelini had been around football as a coach (in any capacity) much longer than Frost. The two things are roughly a wash, IMO. Again, Frost is not at the top of my list. A proven trophy-winning head coach is.

Plenty of college football coaches struggle right out of the gate in the NFL. You're saying he's terrible based on his NFL performance, I assume. Kelly's at the top of my list personally. David Shaw and Mark Dantonio come in at 2 & 3, not necessarily in that order. Frost is probably 4th for me, honestly. I can't take another unproven coach, no matter how good Frost feels in this moment.

He's the hire that "feels good." That's not what we need. We don't need the hire that feels good. The Bo Pelini hire felt good but didn't bring any titles. Frost's resume is roughly the same as Bo's was back when we hired Bo in 2007. We need the hire that gives the greatest chance of success and I feel very confident that there's a guy out there with a higher chance of success than Frost.

I hope we're not hiring Frost. We need the Big Name out there to really bring in top 10 talent. We need a proven college football head coach. Frost is not that guy. I genuinely predict disappointment if we bring in Frost. Spend the money on the biggest name that's willing to come. This cannot be this hard and we cannot keep repeating this cycle.

On that third touchdown where their slot receiver crossed into an empty middle of the field and then just trotted into the end zone I said to myself, "Why don't we have a play like that in our playbook?" But yeah, as far as defense goes, I will say this over and over: Our next coach HAS TO take a look at what the top five teams in the conference do on defense, and then just do that. Iowa essentially never gets blown out. As I said in a couple other threads, in the past 15 seasons Iowa has never allowed more than 34 points to Wisconsin (but we've been blown out by Wisconsin multiple times). Diaco is very similar to Bo in his defensive philosophies. Which is bad, because Bo's defenses SUCKED in big games once we got into the B1G. This cannot be this hard, can it?

I still very much don't believe that this is true. Correlation isn't causation. We've seen some correlation here with this but it doesn't mean that "it doesn't work at Nebraska." Imagine a scenario where: A) Our offensive line is Wisconsin's offensive line. -and- B) Tre Bryant has zero knee issues and is 100% healthy. Completely different offensive outlook this season. Completely different. Tre is rumbling for over 125 yards every single game and Lee has time to throw the ball.

I would take Chip Kelly over Frost, 11 times out of 10. Please, please, PLEASE bring in Chip...

The arguments you're making are pretty much saying that it's correct to ignore the vast library of examples showing objectively that sports psychology is a thing. I don't think you really believe that. There are so many examples and analogies to pick from it's hard to know where to start. Possibly anything written by John Wooden might be good, though.

Now if we want to make the argument that a power run offense is the best way to go based on factors such as: -It's easier to recruit for -It's cold here in November then I'm listening. And Wisconsin is a pretty shining example of someone who's doing it and overachieves. Scheme might be a problem on defense for us right now (probably too early to say for sure). But I don't think scheme is the problem on offense.

+1. Agreed. If our tackles and tight ends were blocking well we'd be talking about how we run the power sets so well. How we resemble Shaw's stuff at Stanford, etc., etc. But there's bad coaching that leads to poor execution. There's poor play calling (which @Mavric has pointed out well many times) that contributes to failed scoring attempts. There is not a thing wrong with Riley's offense. Pining for the old days is not a bad thing but there's so much muddying the waters by our fan base over why things don't work when they're not working.

@Mavric - Seeing Frost top that list is pretty eye-opening. His stock is going up week by week, there is no arguing that. I see the pros outweighing the cons each time I consider firing Riley for Frost at the end of this season. I still think the key is whether or not he can bring in the supporting cast to really churn out the product we're expecting. And I also still think the main factor that trumps this entire discussion is what our regular season record winds up being this year.

It's just insane though how we've allowed to blow us out since entering the Big 10. I posted this in another thread: Going back to 2001, Iowa has never allowed Wisconsin to score more than 34 points. Get your head around that. Iowa, in 15 straight seasons, never allowed Wisconsin to score more than 34. We need a defensive coordinator that crafts a defense to stop the run. Period. That's it. All we have to do in order to take the next step is to create a defense that could stop Wisconsin & Iowa's power run offenses. I think Diaco is capable of this, but by the time this season is over I'll quite possibly believe otherwise.

Bo then replaces him with unproven "Mr. Tape Fingers." That didn't go well. `

/thread

No, none.