California Husker

I agree completely with the bolded sentence above. If SE isn't removed, in my opinion, Riley will remain at the helm. So in other words, if they keep SE around long term, we are looking at Riley as the HC at least through the 2020 season (unless he retires, he would be close to 70 by then).

I have to admit, out here in So Cal I don't know a lot about what's going on there in Nebraska other than at the university. I saw someone post it earlier, just wondering what the general attitude is about Trev Alberts as a replacement for Sean Eichorst? He's a Nebraska guy through and through. If he's a good athletic director, then he should be courted to come to Lincoln. As someone above said, that might be the clincher to bring Frost in. I know they never played together, but they have both propped the program and have similar youth (or at least youthful exuberance).

Yes, please do.

Based on my brief conversation with him, this doesn't surprise me a bit.

I don't know if Scott Frost would be a good coach at Nebraska. I would like to think he would be; I always liked him as a player and his enthusiasm for the program....at least after he came back from Stanford. I also don't know what he thinks about the Nebraska coaching job and I would never suggest that I do until he comments on it. However, I met Scott a few years back at a high school football game here in So Cal. He was the receivers coach at the time (I think) for Oregon, before he was promoted to OC. He was standing on the side of the field watching the kid he was recruiting play and I came down to stairs at the end of the stadium and recognized him right away. Then he saw my Huskers sweat shirt and said: "Nice shirt". So I stopped and introduced myself and we stood there for a good 10 minutes and talked about Nebraska football. He was wearing some sort of Oregon shirt, because of course that's who he was working for, but all he wanted to talk about was Husker football. I will admit, my shirt was a dead giveaway that I was interested in Husker football, and a person might say that he was just being polite, but he never even mentioned his current job, never mentioned Oregon other than to say he was there recruiting (I don't even think he said the name Oregon). He just seemed legitimately content to discuss Husker football. The only reason I bring this chance meeting up is to say that based on my experience talking to him, I do think he'd be interested in the head coaching job at Nebraska.

Maybe you care just a little too much about what I'm saying. When I comment on the trolling, I'm responding to people who choose to add nothing but some sarcastic remark about me. And, as I said before, if you don't like what I'm saying, but don't want to have a discussion about the topic, then why on earth would you feel compelled to comment? When I see a thread or a comment that I disagree with, I either respond to the topic, or I ignore it. So, why don't you stop trolling my posts unless you want to have a conversation about the topic? And there aren't 10 people implying that I'm doing something...just you and a couple of the other "legends" who seem to think that you have the last word on everything huskerboard. I am pretty sure that I have disagreed with something you have said in the past, but unless it was a personal remark about me, I just ignored it. I'm not really that interested in you (or the other "legends"). Maybe you should just move on and let the people in this thread who want to discuss this topic, do so without being harassed.

Hahaha, I'm not trying to be incognito...and I usually come on the board only during football season. Since Riley got here, that happens to include a lot more losses than it used to, so it may seem like that's the only time I come on the board....but still....find someone else to stalk...it's creepy.

How do you know when I'm on the board? Are you stalking me? Weird.

Brilliant response. Thanks for sharing the depth of your wisdom.

I didn't start this thread, I just chose to comment on what the OP had to say, and for such, I end up getting attacked from all sides by people who don't appreciate my word choice. I just wanted to ask you something...when you don't like the subject matter of a thread, why do you choose to click on it and comment? I mean, seriously...there are dozens of active threads right now that I have not clicked on and therefore not read any of the posts. If I don't think I'm going to like the topic, or if I think the topic has been done to death, then I just move on to a thread that has more interest to me. If I click on a post that looks interesting and I realize that it's not what I thought it would be, once again, I just move on. I don't start making negative posts about the thread, or the OP, or other member's ideas that have been expressed in the thread....I just move on. I'm just curious what seems to compel people, who see a post they don't agree with or are not interested in, to post something negative toward other board members rather than simply sharing your opinion on the topic? And as I said, if you don't really want to engage, then why leave a negative comment at all? Maybe you can enlighten me.

Well, as you said above, we have a bit of a different take on things, and that's okay. And of course I guess some might just chalk it up to coaching philosophy, but for me it wasn't just his staff. I will go a little farther and suggest that he wasn't being enitirely forthcoming when he said he wouldn't try force the guys that were at NU, fit his system...and then he pretty much tried to do exactly that. I don't remember the stats, but Armstrong's pass attempts per game were up something like 25-30%. And now, he seems to want to stick with "his guys" when it comes to players the same way he wanted to stick with his guys on the staff. It's that kind of arrogant, "I'm the coach and I know what will work best" attitude, that is never conducive to winning at times when the wheels seem to be coming off the wagon. Hey, he may seem like a nice guy when you meet him (I never have), and I will admit, he seems like a very nice guy when he does interviews and press conferences, I'm just looking at what he's done to Nebraska, not how he acts. But I understand your point of view.

I sort of bought into the pre-season hype. You know, Riley finally has his kind of QB, he can finally run his system, blah, blah, blah. I was even a little insulted (not personally, but for the program) that some of the media were predicting a 6 to 7 win season for Nebraska. Now I am totally with you. Looking at the upcoming schedule, it's hard to find more than a couple sure things...and lest I forget, I thought, even after the first two games, that NIU was a sure thing. I'm still not exactly sure what I think of Diaco. I know he's been getting ripped in the media and here on Huskerboard as well. His defense did a pretty good job yesterday. Maybe as more games go by, the players will get more comfortable with the system and they will continue to show growth on that side of the ball. I can hope, right?

Sure, we can have different opinions...as far as I know that's what forums like this one are all about. Perhaps you missed my first post above, but I pretty much said explained why I think he's an a**hole, in pretty much the same terms that I did just a few minutes ago when I was responding to you. And yes we can all have our own opinion about how we "choose to apply that moniker". And to be clear, it's not that he accepted the head coaching job at NU that makes me think what I think of him. It's that he stuck Nebraska with that really bad group of coaches that he brought with him. He had a chance to get a few really good position coaches and coordinators when he headed east (the possible choices were discussed here ad nauseam, but suffice to say, many of those available at the time would have been better than Banker, Landsdorf, et. al.). So either you agree or disagree that he knew how inept the staff was....and you can agree or disagree if he should still be considered a "nice guy". As I said, I'm willing to discuss any of those ideas and I won't attack you for your views. I would really love to hear (other than his, shucks, by golly, gee willikers persona) why everyone thinks he's so nice (and I don't say that with condescension or sarcasm...I really would like to know). It's my position that what he's done, and continues to do to Nebraska football, isn't nice. So, tell me what you think.

I'm not avoiding anything. I meant what I said and anyone who wants to talk about why I said it, I would be happy to have that discussion. I said that I think Riley is an a**hole in the context of talking about the way he set this program up for failure by bringing (as someone else above put it) "his merry band of idiots form Corvallis". It is out of context to just focus on the way I chose to characterize him and completely ignore the sentiment behind it. Look, I get it, some people are naive and fall for the "nice guy" act. But the truth is, Riley knowingly saddled Nebraska with an absolutely horrible coaching staff (himself included). If he didn't know how bad they all were, then he's an idiot, because everyone else in the world other than Sean Eichorst and the Riley apologists know how bad they are. So, yes you were addressing the poster by zeroing in on a term that was used rather than the topic and you (and the usual suspect group of "legends") are attempting to derail the thread by making it about one term that was used rather than the idea...."is Riley really a nice guy?" So it is you who are wrong and perhaps you need a little afternoon nap to clear your head. And by the way and stay

Well, since the MODs aren't going to do this.... now

This

Yes, and a thief is not a "nice guy". When did someone ever steal something from you and you said: "What a nice guy"? When someone stole from you, you said: "Some a**hole stole from me.

Haha, ranting and raving? Boy bob, you do have a flair for the dramatic. Dude, if my opinion is causing you such consternation, there are a bunch of other posts you can read. You don't have to read mine.

Wow bob...why does my opinion seem to be causing you so many problems. Maybe you should go drink a beer and not take huskerboard so seriously. Geez.

Yikes, somebody (don't know if you're grown, or a man) feeling like he has to play holier than thou because he doesn't agree with something somebody typed on a message board.

Yeah, like I said it was out of context and that is lazy. So we can go back-and-forth with this if you want, but it's not going to change the fact that when you quote part of a sentence to prove some sort of point, you are being lazy.

No, it's not new. And if you're going to quote, don't do it out of context, that's just lazy. I stand by my ENTIRE statement.