Guy Chamberlin Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 Certainly wouldn't be unsusual if the move worked out to the benefit of both Oregon State and Nebraska. I'd like to think Wisconsin was the loser, but who knows? Quote Link to comment
San Diego Husker Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 If MR can beat a top 10 team inside of two years, he will be an improvement since 2001. That said, I don't care if we have the "nicest" coach on the plant, I want a respectable/ethical coach who wins games. Quote Link to comment
Count 'Bility Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 If MR can beat a top 10 team inside of two years, he will be an improvement since 2001. That said, I don't care if we have the "nicest" coach on the plant, I want a respectable/ethical coach who wins games. Bo has done this twice. Just so you know. 1 Quote Link to comment
San Diego Husker Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 If MR can beat a top 10 team inside of two years, he will be an improvement since 2001. That said, I don't care if we have the "nicest" coach on the plant, I want a respectable/ethical coach who wins games. Bo has done this twice. Just so you know. I am not Anti-Bo. Yes, he as a temper and behaves badly at times, loses games at blow-out proportions but I don't think he is a horrible coach. would have helped himself a lot if he would have brought in proven coordinators (especially defense) and let them do their jobs and just ran the program.. I am hopeful that MR doesn't get caught up in micromanaging. Quote Link to comment
lo country Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 Quick question. Where is the proof he developed talent? I see that a lot, but am unfamiliar enough with Riley to know. I mean Bo developed Suh, Prince, SJB etc......(for the record I wanted Bo gone) As said above, past performance doesn't translate to future succes, but is is a tangible statistic to look at. Just hate to see he was flavor of the month for like a day and now grades out at a C+ or 10 out of 13...... Quote Link to comment
True2tRA Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 I'm not sure why they did any sort of ranking in this article. It isn't clear at all as to what system they're ranking the hires by? It seems like it should have simply been a write up of their own personal opinions of the hire. SMU and Pitt made great hires based on what? Narduzzi has a brilliant history as a Head Coach? Where? Strange piece of writing. Quote Link to comment
San Diego Husker Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 Quick question. Where is the proof he developed talent? I see that a lot, but am unfamiliar enough with Riley to know. I mean Bo developed Suh, Prince, SJB etc......(for the record I wanted Bo gone) As said above, past performance doesn't translate to future succes, but is is a tangible statistic to look at. Just hate to see he was flavor of the month for like a day and now grades out at a C+ or 10 out of 13...... Believe those players were from BC's era and very highly recruited around the country (meaning they had exceptional ability/raw talent). which is to say Bo could develop talent, but Bo truly seemed to have problems recruiting talent to NU. He would get a good one (or exceptional one) here and there but over all his recruiting was mediocre. Example of this would be the USC game, USC has scholarship limitations yet they clearly had the overall better team in terms of talent and athletic ability. Quote Link to comment
Dr. Strangelove Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 Nick Saban did nothing more noteworthy prior to going to LSU than Riley did at Corvallis. Saban went on to win the National Championship in his fourth year at LSU. So ranking Riley's hire 10th and claiming it's a low-ceiling hire based on what Riley did at Corvallis, while bragging up Narduzzi at Pitt (never been a head coach, read: Bo Pelini) and Chad Morris at SMU (also never a head coach) is a little laughable. Nobody has a clue how any of the hires they ranked are going to do. Harbaugh at Michigan is the flavor of the month, but until he accomplishes something he's no better of a hire than Tony Sanchez. If you ignore Harbaugh's incredible success at Stanford, then sure, you might as well compare him to Tony Sanchez. However, he actually has accomplished something in CFB including turning a program that was an afterthought in Southern California, the team went 1-11 the previous year, into a program that beat up on USC while Pete Carroll was still head coach and won a Orange Bowl within 4 years. He built that program to the point that it remained successful for a few seasons after he left. So no, I disagree with the Harbaugh - Sanchez comparison because these hires can be separated by previous accomplishments. Huskerboard, of course, freaks out. This is the most freaked-out post in this thread. I felt the thread was treading towards the 'ESPN/Grantland' hates us attitude that I see often when a sports outlet is even remotely critical of our program. The 'antagonize the fans for clicks' thinking that seems to occur when a shred of negativity is reported (even though in this case the team listed as #1 is Michigan). Perhaps I was incorrect. Quote Link to comment
zoogs Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 Wouldn't get too caught up in the coaching equivalent of a June mock draft. Quote Link to comment
C N Red Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 Lost Letterman graded our hire as a C+ which was 12th out of the 14 hires on their list. ESPN's Big Ten Blog rated us a C+ which was 9th out of 11 rated in their article (Insider). Lost lettermen is horrible imo. Grantland and espn are basically the same, grantland is powered by espn. Quote Link to comment
strigori Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 Wouldn't get too caught up in the coaching equivalent of a June mock draft. Yep. In 4 years at least half of that list will not be at that job for one reason or another. There are great hires on paper in January every year. Dan Hawkins comes to mind. Everyone thought he was a great hire at Colorado, and I remember much hand wringing around here about being out coached and out recruited by Hawkins. The man never posted a winning record. Pete Carroll was an eye roll hire at USC. We won't know for three years what the best order of hires really should be. Quote Link to comment
mwj98 Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 Nick Saban did nothing more noteworthy prior to going to LSU than Riley did at Corvallis. Saban went on to win the National Championship in his fourth year at LSU. So ranking Riley's hire 10th and claiming it's a low-ceiling hire based on what Riley did at Corvallis, while bragging up Narduzzi at Pitt (never been a head coach, read: Bo Pelini) and Chad Morris at SMU (also never a head coach) is a little laughable. Nobody has a clue how any of the hires they ranked are going to do. Harbaugh at Michigan is the flavor of the month, but until he accomplishes something he's no better of a hire than Tony Sanchez. BOOM!! Quote Link to comment
NUpolo8 Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 If MR can beat a top 10 team inside of two years, he will be an improvement since 2001. That said, I don't care if we have the "nicest" coach on the plant, I want a respectable/ethical coach who wins games. Bo has done this twice. Just so you know. Not in the first two years he didn't. And Mizzou 2010 was his high water mark. Quote Link to comment
walksalone Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 10. NebraskaOther than Harbaugh, Mike Riley is the most accomplished head coach on this list, having forged a perennial overachiever from a historical backwater in Oregon State. (Riley also has nine years under his belt as a head coach in the pro ranks, a stint notable mainly for two Grey Cup championships with the CFL’s Winnipeg Blue Bombers, in 1988 and 1990, and later for drafting LaDainian Tomlinson and Drew Brees in the 2001 draft as head coach of the Chargers.) At 61, he’s also a bizarre choice for Nebraska, a sleeping giant that grew increasingly impatient with diminishing returns under Bo Pelini. By all accounts, Riley is more approachable than his volatile, tantrum-prone predecessor, which ought to be worth a little goodwill in the honeymoon phase, at least. In 14 years in Corvallis, though, Riley’s teams never produced a conference championship, top-10 finish, major bowl bid, or any other result that might pass for success in Lincoln; nor is he regarded as an innovator or an especially energetic recruiter. Pelini failed on all of those counts, too, and was shown the door despite winning at least nine games in every year of his tenure. For a hometown underdog just looking to remain competitive, Riley was a solid long-term steward. For an established program looking to raise the bar, he may be the lowest-ceiling hire the Cornhuskers could have reasonably made. Quote Link to comment
Sparker Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 Quick question. Where is the proof he developed talent? I see that a lot, but am unfamiliar enough with Riley to know. I mean Bo developed Suh, Prince, SJB etc......(for the record I wanted Bo gone) As said above, past performance doesn't translate to future succes, but is is a tangible statistic to look at. Just hate to see he was flavor of the month for like a day and now grades out at a C+ or 10 out of 13...... Neither will matter 9 months from now, and neither is an accurate prediction of his success. I know you know this, but I noticed a lot of people in this thread getting worried that is was a bad move now that people aren't pumping him up so much. In a few weeks nobody will be talking about this anymore and I bet by spring game there are more feel-good articles about how Riley is turning the team around and kids are looking inspired. Still won't matter when Wisconsin shows up. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.