cornstar

I agree with much of what you said, but don't forget about last year. It was totally unacceptable and if we see a couple more .500ish records the next two years, 2016 will be an anomaly and should have no bearing on his employment at NU. I agree about last year being unacceptable and I'm certainly not saying we need to accept mediocrity. We are in a sticky situation though and need to let this play out some. The folks that want Riley fired now though never wanted him in the first place. Firing him now simply isn't a good option. I'm certain I haven't called for Riley to be fired at this point, and I know that he will be here next year, probably two or 3 more years barring a disastrous season next year.

Bravo.That being said, I've yet to see one person not say that Nate was at fault for this. Not one.I guess you didn't read TheSkers comments, he thinks this is all on Riley for not babysitting every one of his players.Of course Gerry is responsible for his decision. "Babysitting" is a word you're using in an attempt to distract from the basic responsibility Riley has to have basic systems in place regarding the academics of his players. Riley is not the only coach on staff. Perhaps Brian Stewart or Mark Banker should have the responsibility to know where their smaller number of players are academically. After all, it affects eligibility of scholarship, right? My bigger point is Riley should have been aware of this well before December. It's more than slightly ironic that Riley can thank Pelini's accountability for Riley making the bowl game last season. At this point, who's at fault matters less than it showing Riley may not exactly be the "leader" Eichorst keeps referring to.At what point do you let players who are grown men, be responsible for themselves? At what point do you stop "checking up" on them? (And that IS babysitting them.)I'd bet Riley has told the team repeatedly that not only is it THEIR responsibility to to get to class and get their schoolwork done but also that the coaches wouldn't be following up because they ARE grown men. This staff keeps telling these guys to "do the right thing" and Gerry not going to class is him NOT doing the right thing, it's Gerry NOT doing what his coaches are telling him....again.Your last line reveals your agenda yet again. It's all about the coaches and their failures (both real and imagined) for you. And this is one of those imagined failures because the coaches are teaching these guys to be responsible adults and all you can see is failure.I pity people like you who are so negative they can't enjoy the things they profess to love. At pretty much every company the superiors are ultimately responsible for the performance of their subordinates. If the subordinates aren't doing their job satisfactorily its up to the superiors to ensure that the job performance improves, somehow, some way.

I'm fairly certain that we beat Ohio state the year before Meyer took over. They didn't look that much more athletic than we did that day.They were kicking the crap out of us until they lost their starting quarterback to injury. So you're saying we won.

The new staff has been aware of the talent level, or allegedly lack thereof, since taking the job two years ago. Check out Clemson's two deep on the defensive line.How many scholarships do you think we can hand out each year?Fixing the depth issues WILL take time because of scholarship limitations. And you can't just go out and recruit nothing but linemen one year to "fix" the problem because not only will you end up in the same position 4 years down the road when that group graduates but you also are robbing other positions of bodies so those positions begin suffering from depth issues as well.The best way to fix this imo, is by hiring more ace recruiters. We'll have to endure some pain but life is like a bed of roses, some beauty and pain.I agree about the need for ace recruiters. That is not unique to Nebraska. Now, if you would, please take a look at the Clemson two deep DL. You'll see they have one senior and are loaded with underclassmen. If the problem was identified two years ago........I see you completely ignore the fact that we have recruiting limitations. Since when? I just thought that recruiting failures were due to lazy coaches.

Bravo. That being said, I've yet to see one person not say that Nate was at fault for this. Not one. I guess you didn't read TheSkers comments, he thinks this is all on Riley for not babysitting every one of his players. Did he say that Nate is not at fault?

Pelini players? Aren't they playing in a championship game next weekend?

I agree with much of what you said, but don't forget about last year. It was totally unacceptable and if we see a couple more .500ish records the next two years, 2016 will be an anomaly and should have no bearing on his employment at NU.

Perlman.

This 9-4 feels the same as the Pelini yrs...decent number on paper but blown out by good teams. Yeah, that is pretty true. I feel less optimistic about this year.

You did well, but I made a small change.

I thought I heard either on the radio or on the news that Nebraska was having some tough, spirited practices prior to the bowl. That made it seem like the team was into this game.

Announcers called Osborne the Ultimate Stoic many, many times over the years. He gave the dullest interviews, a short smile was A LOT from him. "He did a pretty good job" was pretty big praise, it was pretty darn rare for him to show emotion on the sideline. He used to chew Big Red gum during games. And he turned out ok in the end. Are you intimating with a straight face that will happen with Mike and crew? comeone man We don't know Marko - the point is it took Tom MANY years to get the program to a place that people thought was acceptable, and it only was there for a few years. He wasn't the hero you all are making him out to be now looking back in retrospect. But he was winning conference championships, finishing ranked normally in the top 10, and was playing in meaningful bowl games often with national championship implications. He didn't have a losing season and just above .500 overall winning percentage. True. They aren't, actually. This is what some people HOPE to be true. The only similarities is that they are both polite and soft spoken in public.

I'm fairly certain that we beat Ohio state the year before Meyer took over. They didn't look that much more athletic than we did that day.

I think year 4 and beyond is where we find out what this staff will be doing for us. Riley seems to be planning for the future, and that is a strategy I don't disagree with but that means we aren't going to have any instant gratification.Instant gratification? I don't think that many of us expected conference championships and a payoff berth in the first two seasons. But, with our favorable schedules and having the best talent in the division, competing for division titles and, at the very least, not getting blown out by Purdue and Iowa are not unreasonable expectations. We had at least one improvement this year beyond our overall record.Zero credit for having a better record than 2015. And it's still no better than the last coach. Another zero credit quote. But I guess it is an improvement for our current coach. It was 42-16 going into the 4th. That's a blowout. I realize you're big on garbage time points, both for this staff and for Crapahan's, but most that know football don't care about those garbage points. Wasn't that their first B1G win in 2 or 3 years? Didn't Hazel get fired? That may well be the worst loss in program history. Is it still a blowout if we end up winning after being down 42-16? Of course not, only the final score matters in cases like these. How many times in sports have we seen miracle comebacks? We were having one against Purdue, we just ran out of time. But if it makes you feel better to keep calling it a blowout, then by all means, have at it.We'll have to agree to disagree. You mentioned the 07 offense as not being bad, but iirc we were getting boat raced in the USC game that year, they subbed in late and our starters made a little hay and made the final score look not so terrible. Iirc, against Kansas that same year there was a similar situation. I call that garbage time. You? Opponents used to do that against us back in the 80s and 90s, but of course we would be up by 40+ and our 4th, 5th, and 6th teamers were facing their 1sts and 2nds. How is this "garbage time" for either team? We're up by 40+ and our backups are getting valuable playing time. Their backups are getting valuable playing time. Yes those reps are important but the game has been decided. Some of the guys still playing may be giving half effort, and their reps won't determine the outcome of the game. Garbage time, it's a pretty common term.

Bravo. That being said, I've yet to see one person not say that Nate was at fault for this. Not one.

The new chancellor may fire Eichorst. If the sellout streak ends there will be consequences.Why would he fire Eichorst? How has Eichorst failed in his job?Well, he's fired two more successful coaches and endorsed two under-performing ones. So.....For some of us, it's always been about more than just the W/L columns. And you're smart enough to know that at least one of those coaches wasn't fired simply for his W/L record so why keep acting like he was? OMG. Steve Pederson agrees with you. Funny thing about Steve Pedersen, he wasn't fired because he hired Callahan. He was fired because he was an a-hole to work for and had the entire AD in disarray. (paraphrashing again.)To the bolded, you may want to revisit that time period. Okay, did that. Your point remains an enigma wrapped in a conundrum. Was Osborne the chancellor? Or was the chancellor brainless and did whatever the Representative told him to do? The chancellor was never a fav of mine, but I'll put his brains up against yours, mine and Zoogs (combined) any day of the week. You missed my point. I'm not saying that he wasn't or isn't intelligent, but the poster I responded to seemed to lay blame for the Pederson hire on Osborne. Osborne didn't make that decision, Perlman did it on his own.

Riley had lots of 1,000 yard rushers at OSU. Jacquizz Rodgers 4 times. Yvenson Bernard 4 times. Ken Simonton once. "Mike Riley is a passer" and "Mike Riley seems incapable to leaning that" is total BS based on HIS HISTORY. His HISTORY has shown that when he has the horses, he uses them. As for UNL's running backs, neither Newby nor Ozigbo would have started at OSU when Rodgers, Bernard or Simonton were there. In fact, neither of those guys would have started at OSU this season. I'm sure some Stanford and Oregon fans would laugh at your assessment that rushing is an after thought in that league, not to again mention that Riley had 9 seasons where he had a 1,000 yard rusher. Wait.....he had TWO different backs have four 1000 yard rushing seasons each? If true, that's an impressive stat. I can't imagine that happening anywhere.

Riley had lots of 1,000 yard rushers at OSU. Jacquizz Rodgers 4 times. Yvenson Bernard 4 times. Ken Simonton once. "Mike Riley is a passer" and "Mike Riley seems incapable to leaning that" is total BS based on HIS HISTORY. His HISTORY has shown that when he has the horses, he uses them. As for UNL's running backs, neither Newby nor Ozigbo would have started at OSU when Rodgers, Bernard or Simonton were there. In fact, neither of those guys would have started at OSU this season. I'm sure some Stanford and Oregon fans would laugh at your assessment that rushing is an after thought in that league, not to again mention that Riley had 9 seasons where he had a 1,000 yard rusher. First, the Pac-10 (at the time) has never been known for their outstanding defenses. Second, if Riley was calling plays here, that would be applicable. Since he's not calling plays - nor designing the offense - it doesn't really make much difference what they did at Oregon State. I kind of doubt they were mainly an Inside Zone team during those seasons. If it was up to me, and I understand its not, I'd run traps, counters and sweeps as my bread and butter running plays. Plays that can assist in negating a "more athletic/talented" defensive front........That would be my choice as well...Yep. And you can use those plays to help create favorable matchups also. Holy crap, we agree again. Haha. Seriously though, are the OL now and in the future athletic enough to run the traps and pass block effectively?

I think year 4 and beyond is where we find out what this staff will be doing for us. Riley seems to be planning for the future, and that is a strategy I don't disagree with but that means we aren't going to have any instant gratification.Instant gratification? I don't think that many of us expected conference championships and a payoff berth in the first two seasons. But, with our favorable schedules and having the best talent in the division, competing for division titles and, at the very least, not getting blown out by Purdue and Iowa are not unreasonable expectations. We had at least one improvement this year beyond our overall record.Zero credit for having a better record than 2015. And it's still no better than the last coach. Another zero credit quote. But I guess it is an improvement for our current coach. It was 42-16 going into the 4th. That's a blowout. I realize you're big on garbage time points, both for this staff and for Crapahan's, but most that know football don't care about those garbage points. Wasn't that their first B1G win in 2 or 3 years? Didn't Hazel get fired? That may well be the worst loss in program history. Is it still a blowout if we end up winning after being down 42-16? Of course not, only the final score matters in cases like these. How many times in sports have we seen miracle comebacks? We were having one against Purdue, we just ran out of time. But if it makes you feel better to keep calling it a blowout, then by all means, have at it.We'll have to agree to disagree. You mentioned the 07 offense as not being bad, but iirc we were getting boat raced in the USC game that year, they subbed in late and our starters made a little hay and made the final score look not so terrible. Iirc, against Kansas that same year there was a similar situation. I call that garbage time. You? Opponents used to do that against us back in the 80s and 90s, but of course we would be up by 40+ and our 4th, 5th, and 6th teamers were facing their 1sts and 2nds.

Those were good teams we got beat by. Purdue was not. That's like losing to Iowa St, or Kansas St. I think we can agree to agree on this. All bad losses, terrible actually. That loss to Purdue sticks in my craw.

I think year 4 and beyond is where we find out what this staff will be doing for us. Riley seems to be planning for the future, and that is a strategy I don't disagree with but that means we aren't going to have any instant gratification.Instant gratification? I don't think that many of us expected conference championships and a payoff berth in the first two seasons. But, with our favorable schedules and having the best talent in the division, competing for division titles and, at the very least, not getting blown out by Purdue and Iowa are not unreasonable expectations. We had at least one improvement this year beyond our overall record. Zero credit for having a better record than 2015. And it's still no better than the last coach. Again zero credit. But I guess it is an improvement for our current coach. It was 42-16 going into the 4th. That's a blowout. I realize you're big on garbage time points, both for this staff and for Crapahan's, but most that know football don't care about those garbage points. Wasn't that their first B1G win in 2 or 3 years? Didn't Hazel get fired? That may well be the worst loss in program history.

The new chancellor may fire Eichorst. If the sellout streak ends there will be consequences.Why would he fire Eichorst? How has Eichorst failed in his job?Well, he's fired two more successful coaches and endorsed two under-performing ones. So.....For some of us, it's always been about more than just the W/L columns. And you're smart enough to know that at least one of those coaches wasn't fired simply for his W/L record so why keep acting like he was? OMG. Steve Pederson agrees with you. Funny thing about Steve Pedersen, he wasn't fired because he hired Callahan. He was fired because he was an a-hole to work for and had the entire AD in disarray. (paraphrashing again.) To the bolded, you may want to revisit that time period. Was Osborne the chancellor? Or was the chancellor brainless and did whatever the Representative told him to do?

Lol

Come back Bo! (Sarcasm)

If his job performance depends on it, he should be checking on the academic status of his players.Riley's doesn't. Maybe that explains his poor coaching record and his Nebraska team's under-performing.