Questioning the coaching search timeline

knapplc

knapplc

International Man of Mystery
A rather odd claim about the Nebraska Head Coach search came out the other day from Gil Brandt, NFL analyst. Brandt claimed that Bret Bielema of Arkansas (and Wisconsin) was offered the Head Coach job, but turned it down. Later, on FootballScoop.com, Scott Roussel cites Brandt in his "timeline" of Eichorst's search. However, the timeline presented by FootballScoop would be difficult to reconcile.

11/30/14

9:45am Grant Muessel of Hail Varsity reports that Eichorst has dismissed Bo Pelini

1:30pm Shawn Eichorst formally announces Pelini's termination in a press conference, and states that he will be conducting the coaching search alone.

12/1/14

A black hole in the timeline.

12/2/14

This evening/night, Scott Roussel of FootballScoop.com begins beating the bushes to see what Eichorst is up to.

12/3/14

Roussel posts a vague story in the morning stating Eichorst has a very short list, maybe with one name.

At 1:30pm Roussel updates his story with a report that Eichorst had offered the job to Bret Bielema.

At 3:40pm Roussel again amends his story to report that, per Gil Brandt, Bielema was offered the job but turned Eichorst down.

12/4/14

At 11:25am, The University of Nebraska announces the hiring of Mike Riley as Head Coach.

Approximately an hour after the Riley announcement, Roussel presents a fleshed-out timeline of Eichorst's search, stating that Bielema was offered the job, but was advised against it because "of the current climate at Nebraska."

Shortly after Roussel's timeline is posted, Brian Christopherson of the Lincoln JournalStar tweets he believes the Bielema story, stating that a source told LJS that Arkansas assistants felt Bielema was going to NU "as late as yesterday." Later on 12/3/14 Bielema tweets a picture of himself on a recruiting visit in Indianapolis.

At approximately 4:25pm Harvey Perlman tells the Omaha World Herald that no other coach was offered the position, stating "There is absolutely no truth to any rumor or speculation to the contrary." Perlman states FOIA requests will back this up.



What else do we know, or think we know? According to Rob Zatechka, former Husker lineman turned kick-a$$ anesthesiologist, Tom Osborne got enough boosters to pull money from the program to block Bo Pelini's termination in 2013. This would explain why Bo wasn't fired after the team collapsed at the end of the season, and why he wasn't let go after basically challenging Eichorst to do so in front of a room full of reporters.

That would also explain why Eichorst stated in his Sunday presser that he had not yet spoken to Tom Osborne about Bo's termination. Eichorst's comment seemed innocuous at the time, but when the Zatechka information came out, it made perfect sense.

We can also extrapolate from the two above paragraphs that there was enough momentum to fire Pelini in 2013 that Eichorst would have begun laying the ground work for a coaching search, but was forced to stop by Osborne. Rather than shelve his efforts, Eichorst most likely spent the next year getting his house in order to make a change if necessary.

So we have a coaching search that lasted less than 100 hours. We have a claim that another coach was offered, and declined, the job within that span, presumably in or around Wednesday, 12/3/14, an offer that would have been made less than 24 hours prior to Riley's hire. This is certainly not impossible, but seems unlikely, especially in light of Bielema's tweet/recruiting trip to Indianapolis.

Eichorst had a year to plan this move. He would not have begun the process after Sunday's meeting with Bo. We've seen how disastrous it can be to conduct a from-scratch coaching search after you fire a nine-win coach, and Eichorst would be a fool for trying. It would be safe to presume that Bo's fate was sealed on 11/15/14 after the Wisconsin disaster, so it's possible that Bielema was contacted through channels about the opening and declined.

That flies in the face of Perlman's statement, and what we will find after the records are garnered by the media. Perlman is many things, but a bald-faced liar to the press is unlikely to be one of them.

The question becomes, what's more believable, that Nebraska fired Bo Pelini and then offered at least two coaches Bo's job, less than 72 hours after the ouster?

Or is it more believable that Eichorst had his man already locked up before he ever brought Bo into his office on 11/30/14?

All things considered, with the short timeline we have, I'll take option two.

 
Eichorst and Perlman obviously had made up their minds following the Minnesota game (11-22-2014) and probably after the Wisconsin game (11-15-2014).

 
When I read Perlman's statement, I immediately thought he meant he didn't make a formal written offer to anyone else. This doesn't mean they weren't in discussions, or even had made a verbal offer to anyone else.

 
Regardless of what Pelini did this year I don't think it's a good look for a new AD to fire the head football coach at Nebraska his 1st year here.

 
I agree with option 2 as well. There is too much behind-the-scenes work to be done for this not to have been laid out well in advance of Pelini's ouster. Not to mention that Riley and Bielema have nothing in common personality-wise, and I believe Riley's unifying personality was one of the primary reasons he was hired. No way they went after Bielema IMO.

 
Eichorst at the presser said the press knows what his characteristics are. Really?!?! They all say he's annoyingly silent.

Says Mike Riley has been on his radar for ten years.

Process went quickly for Eichorst. Got home Sunday night after meeting with the team, took a deep breath and hasn't slept since.

Said he fixed on Riley on Sunday morning. Reached out to him, Mike said he's interested. From there Eichorst recruited his tail off like he's never done before.

Harvey Perlman JUST HAPPENED to be in San Francisco when Mike Riley was in town. They met with Riley, Eichorst and Perlman talked and said he was their guy. Did due diligence and then drew up contracts and got their guy Wednesday night.

Dirk HAMMERING on Riley's record. Second question about this.

Eichorst has no concern about the record. Took circumstances into account.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Locked in on Mike Riley Monday morning. Had a conversation with Riley Tuesday morning.

This is blowing FootballScoop's timeline all to hell.

 
lance0623 said:
When I read Perlman's statement, I immediately thought he meant he didn't make a formal written offer to anyone else. This doesn't mean they weren't in discussions, or even had made a verbal offer to anyone else.
Click to expand...

As I said in the other thread that would be hiding behind semantics. By the time you get to the written offer the deal is pretty-much done. By that standard it's rare for a team to have their offer turned-down. If(I said IF) Biliema had a verbal offer then Perlman is just engaging in lame politician speak.

 
I think Pelini has been on the way out since the Texas A&M game. Pearlman hasn't liked him since at least then and it was just getting enough support - and possibly getting Osborne sufficiently out of the way - to get it done. I think it was a done deal when Eichorst was hired, it was just a matter of when. Only winning a conference championship was going to change/delay that. That's not to say the firing was unjustified, just that it was a foregone conclusion.

I really don't know why it should be that hard to believe that Riley might not have been our first choice. Really the only reason to believe that is out of a "We're Nebraska and we should be able to get any coach we want" type of attitude that I don't think meshes with reality. I think the Wisconsin game this year sealed the deal as it - for all intents and purposes - eliminated us from the conference title race and provided plenty of ammunition along the way. There is absolutely no reason that Eichorst wasn't seriously checking into who would consider coming here since that game.

I, for one, would be extremely disappointed in Eichorst if Riley WAS our first and only choice. That is not intended as a slam against Riley. I was definitely aware of him from the pretty good run they had from 2006-2009 and definitely remember some pretty big upsets he pulled along the way. But he hasn't been able to sustain that success. After finishing 2nd in the Pac-10 in 2006 and 2007 and finishing 3rd in 2008 and 2009, they fell to 5th, 9th, 3rd, 7th and 10th since then, only finishing .500 in conference once in that span. Yes, Oregon State isn't the easiest place to win at. But why did they have pretty sustained success for about four years than been pretty bad four of the five years since?

Saying he turned down Alabama and USC sounds good but that's because we're on the other end of the history of those programs. When he turned down USC, they hadn't won a bowl game in five years and only been to one. Alabama was in basically the same boat with the additional trouble of NCAA sanctions and had to immediately fire the guy they hired instead.

I'm not anti-Riley. I'll see what he can do. But if he was our first choice, Eichorst should be fired. A 61-year-old who's been in a tough spot but has been generally trending downward for the last nine years is really the best we think we can do? I was definitely expecting more of a Tim-Miles-type - a younger guy with a ton of energy who's been working his way up through the smaller school ranks and is ready for a shot at the big time. Especially with all the stories of Eichorst and his positive energy mantra that's been in all the reports this week. Not that Riley isn't a great guy or have his own energy. But I was surprised to learn he is 61. I would have guessed 10 years younger. But when I see the pictures from when he got to Lincoln last night, he looks 10 years older.

This was an anybody-but-Pelini operation. Again, not that Pelini should still be here but they wanted him out and wanted everything to look smooth so it was rushed.

Not only was he not the first choice of anyone on this board or anyone in the media, he was not even mentioned? Why did no one even mention him and the Hello Mike Riley thread blew up with WTH-type comments but yet many are convinced that he was our first and only choice. Pearlman can find a million different ways for the statement "no one else was offered the job" to be factually accurate but not have anything to do with who our first choice was.

If we didn't at least call Gary Patterson and make him say no we didn't do our job. There is almost no chance he'd leave but I bet we spend a good chunk more on football than TCU does and maybe he's wanting to push the envelope but they're holding back. You don't know until you ask. Same with Art Briles. How was Kyle Whittingham not a better prospect? (I actually think Eichorst was talking to him as well but not sure what came of it.) He's 7-1 in bowl games, done at least as much and probably more than Riley and is younger. We definitely offered the job Bielema and were turned down. The more reliable sources are his current assistants who were expecting him to leave. They don't just make that up. I wasn't a fan of getting him but he's got better credentials than Riley. We were surely talking to McElwain before Florida jumped in, right? I sure hope so.

Again, I don't think Riley is a terrible hire. But when we knew this was coming for at least one year and probably several, were certain that's what we were doing for about a month then settle on a guy who's main selling point is other schools wanted him 12 years ago, he had some good seasons 8-10 years ago, he SHOULD do better at a bigger school and he's a nice guy, I'm not sure why we had to go for that four days after we fired our previous coach.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top