Keeping Bo Pelini was "the safest possible strategy." -Pick Six Podcast (11/3)

[teachercd]

 

 

 

The Firing: Was Correct

The Hiring: Was Wrong

How hard is this?

 

Bo Pelini was hired December 3, 2007.

Mike Riley was hired December 4, 2014.

 

Today's date is November 3, 2015.

 

How hard is this?

Well, you must admit that currently it is the wrong hire, right? That is all we have to go on...and the last 30 years of his coaching career.

You don't have to constantly reassess your decisions. Did you think Pelini was the wrong hire when he started his tenure 3-3? Many people think you never judge a coach in his first year.

I don't remember...but I probably did want him canned.

[GBRedneck]

 

 

Riley also has a long career of sub .500 football staring you in the face

Riley is currently 150-152 as a HC lifetime.

Isn't that what I said?

 

I was just posting the numbers to concretely confirm what you said.

[teachercd]

Something that would be interesting to look up...how many coaches have coached 300 games but have a losing record?

[zoogs]

It's not about winning only 9. It's about always being in a solid position to bounce up, should the right circumstances present themselves.

The chances Bo had to do that, he screwed up fabulously. And they hit the nail exactly on the head: his entire culture was about resenting the fact that anybody wanted to do anything more.

 

It's why a team captain from last year's squad is laughing at fans who wanted Bo gone for going 9-4.

 

Their priorities were so far out of order. I agree wholeheartedly with Sam's perspective.

[True2tRA]

Something that would be interesting to look up...how many coaches have coached 300 games but have a losing record?

That would be interesting.

 

To be coaching that long, they must be respected in the business.

 

Much unlike coaching 7 years in your first gig, being known as one of the only coaches in history to win 9 games a year every year, and then ending up at Youngstown St.

[teachercd]

 

Something that would be interesting to look up...how many coaches have coached 300 games but have a losing record?

 

That would be interesting.

 

To be coaching that long, they must be respected in the business.

 

Much unlike coaching 7 years in your first gig, being known as one of the only coaches in history to win 9 games a year every year, and then ending up at Youngstown St.

Agree 100%, they would have to be highly respected to coach that many games.

 

Makes me wonder how many offers Riley will get this year...with 10 openings already I would have to think 3 or 4 offers will be coming his way. The chance to grab a coach with 150 career wins that is so respected as a hatrick of teacher/coach/person.

[True2tRA]

 

It's not about winning only 9. It's about always being in a solid position to bounce up, should the right circumstances present themselves.

The chances Bo had to do that, he screwed up fabulously. And they hit the nail exactly on the head: his entire culture was about resenting the fact that anybody wanted to do anything more.

 

It's why a team captain from last year's squad is laughing at fans who wanted Bo gone for going 9-4.

 

Their priorities were so far out of order. I agree wholeheartedly with Sam's perspective.

 

Me too Zoogs. It's actually one of the smartest ways I've heard someone describe this whole mindset. McKewon is a sharp dude.

[Undone]

The point that McKewon is making is extremely obvious. So obvious in fact that it's dull. And so many people keep saying that as if it's some kind of revelation.

 

These same people like McKewon also seem to almost paint this picture that there were only two options: Keep Bo around indefinitely, or bring in Mike Riley. That's just ridiculous. There were multiple other options, such as firing Bo in 2014 and hiring someone other than Riley, or waiting another year while you went on a detailed hunt for someone considerably better than Riley.

 

It's time to stop this. Debating whether Bo should or shouldn't have been fired is dull. Bo wasn't going to win titles of any kind; that seems obvious. But it seems relatively clear that, given Mike's resume as a known variable, we should have gotten someone considerably better than him.

[zoogs]

Here's another extremely obvious point: you make a hire, you give him and his assistants some support and some time.

 

Sometimes, the obvious bears repeating ...

[True2tRA]

#BOOM

[Kernal]

The point that McKewon is making is extremely obvious. So obvious in fact that it's dull. And so many people keep saying that as if it's some kind of revelation.

 

These same people like McKewon also seem to almost paint this picture that there were only two options: Keep Bo around indefinitely, or bring in Mike Riley. That's just ridiculous. There were multiple other options, such as firing Bo in 2014 and hiring someone other than Riley, or waiting another year while you went on a detailed hunt for someone considerably better than Riley.

 

It's time to stop this. Debating whether Bo should or shouldn't have been fired is dull. Bo wasn't going to win titles of any kind; that seems obvious. But it seems relatively clear that, given Mike's resume as a known variable, we should have gotten someone considerably better than him.

 

And sometimes you have to point out to people we don't have a time machine and can't go back to December 4, 2014 and hire somebody else.

[teachercd]

Here's another extremely obvious point: you make a hire, you give him and his assistants some support and some time.Sometimes, the obvious bears repeating ...

Which is what worries me...if the press conferences continue to be rough...Riley and his staff might leave for one of the many openings that have already been reported.

[zoogs]

teach, Riley not being able to handle tough pressers is the last thing about which we should worry.

[Sparker]

 

Here's another extremely obvious point: you make a hire, you give him and his assistants some support and some time.Sometimes, the obvious bears repeating ...

Which is what worries me...if the press conferences continue to be rough...Riley and his staff might leave for one of the many openings that have already been reported.

 

You're worried about them taking a different job?? The press conferences will be much easier if they win. I don't see USC coming for Riley again.

[olddominionhusker]

The point that McKewon is making is extremely obvious. So obvious in fact that it's dull. And so many people keep saying that as if it's some kind of revelation.

 

These same people like McKewon also seem to almost paint this picture that there were only two options: Keep Bo around indefinitely, or bring in Mike Riley. That's just ridiculous. There were multiple other options, such as firing Bo in 2014 and hiring someone other than Riley, or waiting another year while you went on a detailed hunt for someone considerably better than Riley.

 

It's time to stop this. Debating whether Bo should or shouldn't have been fired is dull. Bo wasn't going to win titles of any kind; that seems obvious. But it seems relatively clear that, given Mike's resume as a known variable, we should have gotten someone considerably better than him.

+1