Red Silk Smoking Jacket

Name some examples in the last 10-20 years and I'll listen. The game has changed substantially. I'm not saying it can't happen, but it is an extreme extreme extreme outlier in today's environment.

How about we let the new Head Coach decide all of that! I keep seeing "they have to keep MJ and Busch." That's not how these things work. If we're going to tie the hands of our new coach with who they have to keep on their staff, we are likely not getting a very good coach. Sorry, I like MJ and Busch as much as anyone, but these things just don't work that way. Any coach at the level we all expect wants the right to control damn near everything. And if you're not willing to give it to them, they'll go somewhere else for similar money where they get to call all the shots. The better the coach, the more options they will have as to where they can go. It's a seller's market for good coaches. You want to be competitive in this market for the best coach available...you do not tie their hands with anything. Look at it this way...extreme examples, but let's say you have a chance to hire a Saban/Urban/Dabo and tell them them "you're hired, but you have to keep Mickey and Busch and hire Suh." You think that coach isn't saying "thanks but no thanks" and hanging up on you? They aren't going anywhere their hands are already being tied from the jump. The AD is already exhibiting the coach doesn't have their full support and trust. Trickle down from there and once you get to a coach that is willing to take on that kind of limitation, you're down to a coach who didn't have many better options i.e. probably not very good. Trev can suggest they keep XYZ guys or work with them to hire others once the new coach is in place. And most new coaches do look at who they should keep, if anyone. But, great coaches want complete control and the final say to bring in their guys. We can't control our results over the last 20 years. We can't control our location. We can't control several things that may make us less appealing to a coach than other places. But, we can control not alienating top candidates by doing something stupid like putting limitations on them before they even start.

I think BOB may look better on paper than in reality. I know a few Alabama fans and every single one of them can't stand O'Brien. Like, they all hate him with a passion. It's rather alarming when I listened to them, all separately, all saying the exact same things. He did a decent job of keeping the wheels on at Penn St. He was only there for 2 years and it was damn near 10 years ago. At least Rhule did it at 2 schools and the latest was only 3 years ago. I'd say there are quite a few names between Rhule and O'Brien. I don't hear anyone saying "which P5 school is going to win the O'Brien sweepstakes" and that seems to be the trending phrase with Rhule right now. Probably a reason for that.

Ummm...LSU would like a word.

I keep seeing this term thrown around as some sort of main criteria for the job. What does it mean? And why is it important? Serious questions. I've seen some people use it with regard to the fanbase. Here, you seem to be using it with regard to the players. Is it just a phrase to replace "I like the guy" or "I don't like the guy" that people use to try to make themselves sound more intelligent? Frost seemed like a "cultural fit" all the way around and he failed miserably. Riley seemed like a "cultural fit." Fail. Was Pelini a "cultural fit?" The guy was a huge a-hole and eventually got fired largely because of it. But, he won more than anyone recently. Does it really matter if a guy is a "cultural fit?" If it does matter, isn't it much more important to be a "cultural fit" with the players than the fanbase (assuming he's not doing anything nefarious that would embarrass the fanbase)? Often times, I don't think the two necessarily go hand-in-hand. The best "cultural fit" for the players we need to win may be the worst "cultural fit" for our fanbase. Subjective moving target that the term seems to be, is there really a single coach out there who isn't a "cultural fit?" Or, isn't there a way to classify just about anyone who fails as not having been a "cultural fit?" That said, isn't it kind of a meaningless term, let alone a term that should be considered as a main criteria for the job?

Fixed that for you. It's crazy to me that so many people on here are saying this guy doesn't have enough experience or that guy isn't proven enough, yet so many are also saying MJ needs to stay if he can win 3 more games. I think most average fans have a hard time seeing more than an inch past what's right in front of them. That's not really a knock on anyone, it's fairly normal from what I've experienced. They may know more about their own program than most, but you get them outside of that and they are clueless. MJ could win out at any other school in this situation and he wouldn't even get mentioned in this thread, or if he would, he'd get scoffed at as...you guessed it, not having nearly enough experience. But, because he's right in front of people, has won a couple crappy games, and he's likable and one of our own, he should be the guy. He has by faaaaaar the least experience of anyone mentioned on this entire thread. I mean, with the exception of the random fan in Cairo Nebraska that sent his resume to Trev

Sounds easy enough. Why the hell didn’t you mention that 20 years ago?

If we're going the NFL D-Coordinator route, give me Dan Quinn. Dude is a boss.

Let me just fix that for you...

And he's got to be a cultural fit. Back up the brinks trucks, Trev. Make it happen.

Would he keep MJ and Busch?

Only problem with your little theory here (which you're stating as fact even though it's just your guess) is that Urban has been pretty critical of Herman publicly on more than one occasion since they split back in 2014. And you might want to take a closer look at the whole Zach Smith situation. Let's just say I don't think there's a whole lot of love lost there. So, unless Urban was trying to sabotage NU during their little discussion (which is possible since Urban is a tOSU guy), I'm guessing that didn't happen.

If we hired Tom Herman, he would be one of very few coaches that I couldn't force myself to get behind and would embarrass me as a Nebraska fan. He's toxic. They ran him out of Texas faster than was probably expected for a reason. They couldn't wait to get rid of him. And it wasn't just his on-field performance, although that wasn't very good given their resources. The stories floating around from when he was at Texas make the Frost stories look like amateur hour. I'm closer to it than most, but you don't have to take my word for it. Look at it this way...do you think there might be a reason that 2 years removed from being the head coach at a blueblood program, he hasn't even sniffed a legitimate coaching job? Not a lower tier head coach, not a coordinator, not even a position coach. And you think you know something the rest of the entire football world doesn't know and want to hand him the reins to Nebraska?

No.

Good read, thanks for posting. This part stuck out to me... As I mentioned a few pages back, it's really hard to know what will make Rhule tick when he chooses where he wants to coach. When he opted to go to that shambles of a program Baylor over the fairly stable program Oregon (and reportedly others), it was beyond perplexing. This article makes it sound like he did it just because there was more talent nearby in Texas (I don't remember it that way), but if that's the case, we're pretty much out of the running. Although, not sure what jobs will be open that fit that criteria, so who knows (none in the big 3 hotbed states that I can think of). I'm sure that was one of the factors, but there had to be more to it than that. It was reported that Baylor was paying him somewhere around $4M/yr with a 7 year contract (although as a private school, they don't publicly disclose that). Is it possible that was a lot more than Oregon was willing to pay him and that was the driving factor? Most times it is. I know Baylor was willing to pay a premium at that time as they knew they were pretty much screwed. Here's an old article called "Why Matt Rhule Took The Baylor Job" that doesn't even mention recruiting proximity. This makes it sound like it was all gut feel and comfort level with the AD. Also an interesting read... https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/18333730/why-matt-rhule-took-baylor-job

@PaulCrewe would like a shot at it…

This concerns me more and more the more I think about it ^ This also concerns me... Recruiting Rankings 2013 - 77 2014 - 69 2015 - 80 2016 - 59 2017 - 40 2018 - 29 2019 - 36 In researching him a little more, he definitely seems to be much more of a developer than a recruiter. And, being firmly of the mindset that you need both to win Championships, I might be moving more toward the "pass on Rhule" camp. Tack on the "never beat a ranked team" and it's possible his results were slightly fools gold, meaning he only ever beat the teams he was supposed to beat. Probably good enough to be competitive in the West most years, and maybe we just need to be okay with that. But, I want more. I think we need to start with an elite recruiter, or at least someone who hasn't built their career priding themselves on doing more with less.

Yep...I'd be like, "See ya in St Barth, b!^@hes!"

Yep, it's already being referred to as the "Sweepstakes for Matt Rhule"

Lots of players left as they could transfer without losing a year of eligibility (before the transfer portal) and most recruits decomitted. It was a mess on and off the field. What Rhule did there in 3 years was pretty miraculous. Which is why he got the NFL interest.

Definitely not taking it personally and I don’t have a problem with the “I don’t see it happening for various reasons” takes. Hell, I don’t really see it happening. It’s the “not happening so stop discussing them” takes that are ridiculous. Stating opinion as if it is fact is pretty rampant on this board. It’s just a crutch to make people feel like they have more credibility, when they don’t know any more than the rest of us.

Yeah and Saban and Urban sucked as NFL coaches too. NFL results mean jacks#!t when looking at NCAA coaches. It's a completely different game. The only thing that it even impacts is having some NFL experience may help with recruiting.

Rhule's previous head coach left him much Much MUCH worse at Baylor. In the wake of the Briles mess, most of the roster transferred as they were given the option to do so without losing a year of eligibility (pre-transfer portal days), all but like 1 recruit switched their commitment away from Baylor, and everyone assumed Baylor was looking down the barrel of an NCAA suspension of some sort, so who would want to go there.

Hahaha so being at a place for 5+ years is your criteria? Well, that pretty much eliminates…everybody but Matt Campbell. Yay!

Not sure how you can say one 8 win "turnaround" season as a head coach is good enough, but "2 turnarounds" at two different programs, one of which was in MUCH worse shape than Nebraska, isn't good enough. I don't have a problem with your logic, I just have a problem with your consistency. I mean, comparing resumes, if a Matt Rhule isn't good enough after what he's done throughout his career, then MJ shouldn't even be in the conversation, regardless of if he makes a bowl this year or not. Seems like just blind homerism to see it any other way.