Sports Illustrated: Why Mike Riley sees a bright future after the Huskers' 2015 nightmare

[RedDenver]

Can someone else please explain the point RDR is trying to make?

What he's doing is minimizing the MSU win and how the Huskers finished the season while simultaneously claiming that's not what he's doing. As for what he's trying to do, who knows?

[ADS]

We all cheer for the same team. What's the point of playing down a win against a top 10 team?

[ZRod]

We all cheer for the same team. What's the point of playing down a win against a top 10 team?

Increased troll xp?

[MichiganDad3]

 

 

I think too many put too much emphasis on the first games and very little on the last four. This team changed, an all out fight was also mentioned. Buy in or get the fork out it seemed is what happened. And most did. Awfully hard to do anything with half not wanting to, arguing, doing the opposite of what is being asked, not trusting, and this word called loyalty. Sometimes loyalty is not good, and I think we saw it a lot last year. But towards the end, the group become loyal to themselves and followed the new leadership.

 

No idea of how we will do this year, but I expect to see a better team and effort from the start. I expect to see a team that is on the same page, and I truly do not think we have had that for quite awhile, maybe since Coach Osborne's last year. In house battles hurt teams, we have seen that a lot and too much of it last year.

This is still a coaching failure. If a player is not following instructions then bench him. How can a capable coaching staff let a group of players who are not following instructions on the field for more than half the season?

 

What if those players were still your best option? What if the players behind them had the same attitude?

 

What if the coaching staff knew in all of this that those players are the ones they have got to get on board so they had to keep trying?

 

 

 

 

I think too many put too much emphasis on the first games and very little on the last four. This team changed, an all out fight was also mentioned. Buy in or get the fork out it seemed is what happened. And most did. Awfully hard to do anything with half not wanting to, arguing, doing the opposite of what is being asked, not trusting, and this word called loyalty. Sometimes loyalty is not good, and I think we saw it a lot last year. But towards the end, the group become loyal to themselves and followed the new leadership.

 

No idea of how we will do this year, but I expect to see a better team and effort from the start. I expect to see a team that is on the same page, and I truly do not think we have had that for quite awhile, maybe since Coach Osborne's last year. In house battles hurt teams, we have seen that a lot and too much of it last year.

This is still a coaching failure. If a player is not following instructions then bench him. How can a capable coaching staff let a group of players who are not following instructions on the field for more than half the season?

 

What if those players were still your best option? What if the players behind them had the same attitude?

 

What if the coaching staff knew in all of this that those players are the ones they have got to get on board so they had to keep trying?

 

If that many players think the coaching staff is inept, then we hired the wrong staff. In the business world I have been through many leadership changes where subordinated are not aligned with the new leaders. This cannot be allowed to fester. It must be dealt with quickly, and 9 nine games is way too long. Even if you are trying to build trust, and even if you want the best players on the field, something must be done when you record is 2-4.

[ADS]

 

We all cheer for the same team. What's the point of playing down a win against a top 10 team?

Increased troll xp?

[knapplc]

 

 

 

I think too many put too much emphasis on the first games and very little on the last four. This team changed, an all out fight was also mentioned. Buy in or get the fork out it seemed is what happened. And most did. Awfully hard to do anything with half not wanting to, arguing, doing the opposite of what is being asked, not trusting, and this word called loyalty. Sometimes loyalty is not good, and I think we saw it a lot last year. But towards the end, the group become loyal to themselves and followed the new leadership.

 

No idea of how we will do this year, but I expect to see a better team and effort from the start. I expect to see a team that is on the same page, and I truly do not think we have had that for quite awhile, maybe since Coach Osborne's last year. In house battles hurt teams, we have seen that a lot and too much of it last year.

This is still a coaching failure. If a player is not following instructions then bench him. How can a capable coaching staff let a group of players who are not following instructions on the field for more than half the season?

 

What if those players were still your best option? What if the players behind them had the same attitude?

 

What if the coaching staff knew in all of this that those players are the ones they have got to get on board so they had to keep trying?

 

 

 

 

I think too many put too much emphasis on the first games and very little on the last four. This team changed, an all out fight was also mentioned. Buy in or get the fork out it seemed is what happened. And most did. Awfully hard to do anything with half not wanting to, arguing, doing the opposite of what is being asked, not trusting, and this word called loyalty. Sometimes loyalty is not good, and I think we saw it a lot last year. But towards the end, the group become loyal to themselves and followed the new leadership.

 

No idea of how we will do this year, but I expect to see a better team and effort from the start. I expect to see a team that is on the same page, and I truly do not think we have had that for quite awhile, maybe since Coach Osborne's last year. In house battles hurt teams, we have seen that a lot and too much of it last year.

This is still a coaching failure. If a player is not following instructions then bench him. How can a capable coaching staff let a group of players who are not following instructions on the field for more than half the season?

 

What if those players were still your best option? What if the players behind them had the same attitude?

 

What if the coaching staff knew in all of this that those players are the ones they have got to get on board so they had to keep trying?

 

If that many players think the coaching staff is inept, then we hired the wrong staff. In the business world I have been through many leadership changes where subordinated are not aligned with the new leaders. This cannot be allowed to fester. It must be dealt with quickly, and 9 nine games is way too long. Even if you are trying to build trust, and even if you want the best players on the field, something must be done when you record is 2-4.

 

 

In the business world you have dozens, sometimes hundreds of options to choose from if you fire your employees for not being aligned with new leadership. On a football team you have 85 scholarship players, spread out among four classes. You can bench all your scholarship seniors and play your freshmen, or if they're still a problem you can throw the walk-ons in there, but you're going to lose a bunch of games and your job.

 

It's easy to say we should bench the malcontents. To an extent it's not wrong. But you can only go so far with that.

[SABER]

The malcontents are pretty much gone, everyone gets a fresh start on Sept.3. Lets move on except for the trolls that never will. 14-0

[BigRedBuster]

 

 

 

I think too many put too much emphasis on the first games and very little on the last four. This team changed, an all out fight was also mentioned. Buy in or get the fork out it seemed is what happened. And most did. Awfully hard to do anything with half not wanting to, arguing, doing the opposite of what is being asked, not trusting, and this word called loyalty. Sometimes loyalty is not good, and I think we saw it a lot last year. But towards the end, the group become loyal to themselves and followed the new leadership.

 

No idea of how we will do this year, but I expect to see a better team and effort from the start. I expect to see a team that is on the same page, and I truly do not think we have had that for quite awhile, maybe since Coach Osborne's last year. In house battles hurt teams, we have seen that a lot and too much of it last year.

This is still a coaching failure. If a player is not following instructions then bench him. How can a capable coaching staff let a group of players who are not following instructions on the field for more than half the season?

 

What if those players were still your best option? What if the players behind them had the same attitude?

 

What if the coaching staff knew in all of this that those players are the ones they have got to get on board so they had to keep trying?

 

 

 

 

I think too many put too much emphasis on the first games and very little on the last four. This team changed, an all out fight was also mentioned. Buy in or get the fork out it seemed is what happened. And most did. Awfully hard to do anything with half not wanting to, arguing, doing the opposite of what is being asked, not trusting, and this word called loyalty. Sometimes loyalty is not good, and I think we saw it a lot last year. But towards the end, the group become loyal to themselves and followed the new leadership.

 

No idea of how we will do this year, but I expect to see a better team and effort from the start. I expect to see a team that is on the same page, and I truly do not think we have had that for quite awhile, maybe since Coach Osborne's last year. In house battles hurt teams, we have seen that a lot and too much of it last year.

This is still a coaching failure. If a player is not following instructions then bench him. How can a capable coaching staff let a group of players who are not following instructions on the field for more than half the season?

 

What if those players were still your best option? What if the players behind them had the same attitude?

 

What if the coaching staff knew in all of this that those players are the ones they have got to get on board so they had to keep trying?

 

If that many players think the coaching staff is inept, then we hired the wrong staff. In the business world I have been through many leadership changes where subordinated are not aligned with the new leaders. This cannot be allowed to fester. It must be dealt with quickly, and 9 nine games is way too long. Even if you are trying to build trust, and even if you want the best players on the field, something must be done when you record is 2-4.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

Can someone else please explain the point RDR is trying to make?

 

I think he's been pretty clear: the MSU upset shouldn't count because we lost to Purdue.

[RunMickeyRun02]

Interesting article.

 

As someone else pointed out, no mention of Foltz and the effect on the team. That has to be at least part of where they are in terms of team chemistry, a big hole to leave out of the picture.

[Redux]

 

Can someone else please explain the point RDR is trying to make?

What he's doing is minimizing the MSU win and how the Huskers finished the season while simultaneously claiming that's not what he's doing. As for what he's trying to do, who knows?

 

Can someone else please explain the point RDR is trying to make?

 

I think he's been pretty clear: the MSU upset shouldn't count because we lost to Purdue.

Okay, glad I'm not alone in how I was taking his posts.

[drfish]

I am not completely sold on MB either, but blaming him for the entire 2015 fiasco is a bit myopic in my opinion. Seems like a perfect storm of sorts.

1. Outgoing coach tries to poison the well by saying, "The new staff will probably come in and tell you how we did things wrong." or words to that effect. Whenever a new staff comes in things change, but this kind of comment to the players most loyal would increase the chances that a player would question what the new staff asks them to do because, "... Yeah, that's exactly what Bo said they would do."

2. O Line: I remember that in the Spring, a Cavanaugh comment made me think that he felt that the O Line were lacking in some of the fundamentals (e.g., footwork). Certainly many here have had concerns about OL under the past regime. Ameer covered that problem over a bit in my view. I also remember it seeming like whenever someone not named Ameer was in in '14, they only got half as many yards. The inability to convert 3rd and 1 in the BYU game was telling. That certainly improved over the course of the year. Also. 1 first down after the first Wisconsin missed FG in the 4th qtr and that is a win. Yes the defense did their fair share to give that away, too, but one first down.

3. IU game. Not a good gameplan on offense in the wind. 3rd down run-pass option play called as a run only, but Tommy throws (understandable explanation by him), but IU did not score enough points to have a chance to win.

4. Buy in as cited in the article.

5. Major distraction before Iowa game. Plus, I don't think the two long TD runs go if Gerry is still in the game.

 

Anyway, a whole bunch of things. That was last year. This is this year. I expect things to go better. There losses last year that could not have been wins with just a little better performance, so I am hoping for a much better year. If there are still a bunch of losses like that this year, I will start to be concerned.

[skersfan]

This was discussed a little on Sirius/XM during the tour stop. Banker I believe made the statement that Coach Riley might have been able to move the team along a little quicker if he had benched the malcontents earlier in the season, but that was not his style. He wanted to give them the chance to adjust, accept the change. There was a huge fight in the locker room after the Purdue game, and the coaching staff allowed it to go on for awhile before stopping it. That supposedly cleaned up some of the attitudes and they all realized there was still some season left. At least that was my take from the comments.

 

These kids went through a lot, with the previous staff and the change to this staff. Pretty sure the past coach talked with members of the team after the new staff took over. It is something he did quite regularly when he left the first time. His calls and comments were not positive then, and doubtful they were this time. He was a snake, is a snake and will always be one as far as I am concerned. He did Nebraska no favors either way. He messed these kids minds up as much as he could when he left. Very unprofessional to say the least.

 

I am going to take it that, Coach Riley got through to the kids after the Purdue game, the bad attitudes changed some, some left the program, and now we will see what we have. I think we will see a vast improvement in what the staff does with the talent, you have to learn what you truly have, hard to tell in the middle of mutiny, who is true and who may not be.

 

I am giving this staff this year to show me what they have. Not wins or losses, but how the team plays, the adjustments the staff makes and to see if there is a better harmony within the team. I am betting we will be much happier this year.

[seaofred92]

This was discussed a little on Sirius/XM during the tour stop. Banker I believe made the statement that Coach Riley might have been able to move the team along a little quicker if he had benched the malcontents earlier in the season, but that was not his style. He wanted to give them the chance to adjust, accept the change. There was a huge fight in the locker room after the Purdue game, and the coaching staff allowed it to go on for awhile before stopping it. That supposedly cleaned up some of the attitudes and they all realized there was still some season left. At least that was my take from the comments.

 

These kids went through a lot, with the previous staff and the change to this staff. Pretty sure the past coach talked with members of the team after the new staff took over. It is something he did quite regularly when he left the first time. His calls and comments were not positive then, and doubtful they were this time. He was a snake, is a snake and will always be one as far as I am concerned. He did Nebraska no favors either way. He messed these kids minds up as much as he could when he left. Very unprofessional to say the least.

 

I am going to take it that, Coach Riley got through to the kids after the Purdue game, the bad attitudes changed some, some left the program, and now we will see what we have. I think we will see a vast improvement in what the staff does with the talent, you have to learn what you truly have, hard to tell in the middle of mutiny, who is true and who may not be.

 

I am giving this staff this year to show me what they have. Not wins or losses, but how the team plays, the adjustments the staff makes and to see if there is a better harmony within the team. I am betting we will be much happier this year.

 

A+ summary here

[drfish]

Mutiny seems a bit harsh. How about lack of trust?