Eichorst Statement About Football Program

[Elf]

 

 

 

 

Anyone trying to defend Eichorst's treatment of coaches is deceiving themselves. Eichorst was hired to fire Pelini. There is simply no other way around it. Perlman had wanted Pelini out for some time. That was Job #1 when Eichorst was hired.

 

Pelini had decided to go after the Miami job in 2010. He had an inside track - Mike Ekeler played football at Kansas State with then-Miami AD Kirby Hocutt. But Miami hired Al Golden instead. A couple months later Hocutt leaves Miami for Texas Tech. Miami then hires .... Shawn Eichorst. Pretty easy for Eichorst to find out that Pelini wanted the Miami job (one way or another at some point along the line). A couple years later, Eichorst interviews for the Nebraska job. No idea if that knowledge helped him get the job or not but now there is a Chancellor that wants Pelini out and an AD who knows he wanted out.

 

Eichorst wanted to fire Pelini after the 2013 season but couldn't get enough boosters on board to get it done. So now he's gone through a year wanting to fire Pelini and has to sit through another one trying to drum up enough support to get it done. How can anyone be surprised that there wasn't much of a relationship there. Eichorst trying to play it off as being busy is a thin cover story. After Eichorst hires his own guy, obviously they're going to have a close relationship - Eichorst has a vested interest in him succeeding.

 

The second paragraph is exactly what happened - straight from the horse's mouth. The third has been widely rumored and makes too much sense to not be true. Trying to pass off the bad relationship as being only Pelini's fault is disingenuous.

Jesus. Poor Bo, he was just perfect. Give me a f'n break.

 

I didn't read that at all in his post.

 

So Pelini wanted to leave Nebraska as early as 2010, and was constantly looking to get out every season after that, and yet Eichorst is the bad guy.

Why can't it be both?

 

IF, Eichorst was brought in specifically for firing Bo...how does that make him the bad guy for doing what his bosses wanted? Just to be clear, I don't necessarily subscribe to the theory that Eichorst was brought here specfically for that reason.

 

I think he was brought here just for that. Anyone with common sense knows that,and he is not the bad guy for that. He is what he is, an over paid axeman. This is Harvey's fart in the elevator.

 

He's the bad guy for being a liar and being incompetent while searching for the next coach.

 

I think part of his job once he got here was to get rid Bo but I don't think that was the sole purpose of bringing him here. And who knows, he might have known that before he accepted the job. Regardless, we needed a new Athletic Director and it wouldn't matter who was brought in, people would be calling him/her The Axeman. /shrug

[LAblackshirt]

 

If you want to evaluate a coach's first 2 year performance based on just win-loss record and blowouts then you would have been the guy telling everyone Jim Harbaugh "was never going to get Stanford to a championship" after going 4-8, and 5-7.

 

Stanford of course has nowhere near the tradition as us, but they recruited with an average recruiting ranking of about 40 the three years prior to Harbaugh. Bo Pelini the 3 years prior to Riley had an average recruiting class of 29. Not much of a gap at all, even without considering the point that of the highest ranked players in those three classes (4*) a third of them never even played meaningful snaps for the Huskers.

 

All I'm trying to say is we need to give Riley more time, and honestly I think hes done well all things considered to this point. Anyone saying these first two years are evidence he can't get the job done is probably just a worried fan not being objective, which I can be at times as well.

 

Before Harbaugh was hired for the 2007 season, Stanford had the #59 (2006), #25 (2005), and #60 (2004) classes, or a #48 average. They just came off a 1-11 season, where 9 of those 11 losses were blowouts. He came in and they immediately improved, and then improved again, and then improved again, and finally improved again before he was hired away. The situation Harbaugh inherited at Stanford and improvement he consistently made there is nothing like Riley at Nebraska.

 

And anyone who says "he's done well all things considered to this point" after a losing season and the curbstompings we've encountered is also not being objective.

 

 

Ok that's my bad, so not 40, number 48. I used rivals and 247 in combination and made that mistake. So those 8 places represent a whirlwind of difference in your opinion? Jim Harbaugh is an elite Coach at both the college and NFL level. He took over a team with a talent level within the same ballpark as Riley did in the cupboards. He proceeded to win 4 games, then 5 games, then 8 games. He didn't surpass Mike Riley's 1st season win total until his 3rd year.

 

"He inherited a team with a 1 win record" you say, so is he from an objective point of view allowed a couple bad seasons? You prove my point in that sentence. It is of course relevant what the previous coach leaves behind in culture and talent, and that of course plays into Riley's losing season and blowouts. You know what Harbaugh didn't inherit Qmany? A defense that gave up an NCAA record breaking amount of yards rushing in a game, a team accustomed to it's coach receiving penalties and being broadcast throwing fits on the sideline, a team that was pulled aside by the previous coach and told the AD was a p*ssy and they should transfer.

 

Lets be even more objective just to crush your point a little further. Nebraska is the first Major college football program that Riley has coached at. I want to note that I don't count Oregon State due to lack of resources, and unbelievably bad tradition. When he took over at Oregon State, the beavers hadn't been to a bowl game since 1966. There are very few power 5 teams as historically bad as Oregon State. Let's take a look at some of the best coaches in the current era of college football and their record in their first 2 seasons as a head coach of a Major program.

• Mike Riley- Nebraska- (15-10)- 60%
• Nick Saban- Michigan State- (12-11-1)- 50%
• Jim Harbaugh- Stanford- (9-15)- 37.5%
• Urban Meyer- Utah- (22-2)- 92%
• Dabo Swinney- Clemson- (13-8)- 62%

 

So lets see, among 4 of the best active College Football Coaches Mike Riley ranks better or about the same as 3 of them. I'm going to go ahead and say its pretty objective to say that he has done nothing in his first two years that proves he can't and wont win a championship. You can continue to pretend his performance his first two years points to the fact he has no chance, but history just doesn't agree.

[Elf]

 

 

 

 

 

Anyone trying to defend Eichorst's treatment of coaches is deceiving themselves. Eichorst was hired to fire Pelini. There is simply no other way around it. Perlman had wanted Pelini out for some time. That was Job #1 when Eichorst was hired.

 

Pelini had decided to go after the Miami job in 2010. He had an inside track - Mike Ekeler played football at Kansas State with then-Miami AD Kirby Hocutt. But Miami hired Al Golden instead. A couple months later Hocutt leaves Miami for Texas Tech. Miami then hires .... Shawn Eichorst. Pretty easy for Eichorst to find out that Pelini wanted the Miami job (one way or another at some point along the line). A couple years later, Eichorst interviews for the Nebraska job. No idea if that knowledge helped him get the job or not but now there is a Chancellor that wants Pelini out and an AD who knows he wanted out.

 

Eichorst wanted to fire Pelini after the 2013 season but couldn't get enough boosters on board to get it done. So now he's gone through a year wanting to fire Pelini and has to sit through another one trying to drum up enough support to get it done. How can anyone be surprised that there wasn't much of a relationship there. Eichorst trying to play it off as being busy is a thin cover story. After Eichorst hires his own guy, obviously they're going to have a close relationship - Eichorst has a vested interest in him succeeding.

 

The second paragraph is exactly what happened - straight from the horse's mouth. The third has been widely rumored and makes too much sense to not be true. Trying to pass off the bad relationship as being only Pelini's fault is disingenuous.

Jesus. Poor Bo, he was just perfect. Give me a f'n break.

 

I didn't read that at all in his post.

 

So Pelini wanted to leave Nebraska as early as 2010, and was constantly looking to get out every season after that, and yet Eichorst is the bad guy.

Why can't it be both?

 

IF, Eichorst was brought in specifically for firing Bo...how does that make him the bad guy for doing what his bosses wanted? Just to be clear, I don't necessarily subscribe to the theory that Eichorst was brought here specfically for that reason.

 

I think he was brought here just for that. Anyone with common sense knows that,and he is not the bad guy for that. He is what he is, an over paid axeman. This is Harvey's fart in the elevator.

 

He's the bad guy for being a liar and being incompetent while searching for the next coach.

 

Edited, *not acceptable, attack the post, not the poster*

 

That was wrong of you, but I laughed anyway....I wonder why?

[ColoradoHusk]

So, let me get this straight. Riley is a good hire for NU because of his years of experience at the major college football level, but we should only compare his record at NU with some of the best college coaches in their first 2 years at major college football. That makes perfect sense.

[Stumpy1]

It makes sense because he has only been here for 2 years and people already want hime fired.

[ColoradoHusk]

It makes sense because he has only been here for 2 years and people already want hime fired.

But to say that Riley has had better records his first 2 years at NU compared to Saban at Michigan State and Harbaugh at Stanford is flawed in so many ways. While factually correct, the comparisons don't hold water.

[Ratt Mhule]

I doubt it. It disappoints me that it still comes up. I wish we could give negative votes to anybody who brings his name up here on HB.

Unfortunately he will we talked about until Riley wins a championship. If Riley cant, him and Riley will be talked about until the next coach wins a championship. Thats the way things go. If Pelini had won a title, I dont think we would ever hear the name Solich or Callahan again. Unfortuantely we havent, so those names are still even brought up from time to time.

[Saunders]

It makes sense because he has only been here for 2 years and people already want hime fired.

Who?

[Redux]

 

Bo felt screwed over at Nebraska. He wanted out because he was pissy about Carl getting pushed out which was his own damned fault. He couldn't field a competent offense in 2009, so we managed to lose a game to Texas we had no business losing. That was the BCS's fault and the Big 12's fault. Then the fans were upset that we got humiliated by Wisconsin in our B1G debut so they voiced their displeasure as many paying customers do, so his taped rant after tOSU '11 is the fans fault. Him not getting the Miami job he wanted is Perlman and ADSE's fault. Getting embarassed by Wisconsin in the title game was....Bill Callahans fault?

Idk, for all the things that went wrong under his watch, not many of them were his fault. Maybe that's why he is at an FCS school in his home area and not a cushy ACC gig.

This post is so wrong that simple common sense feels stupid reading it.

You really need to quit calling me stupid, it hurts my feelings.

[teachercd]

Wait...Riley took over a team that was winning 9 and 10 games a season. None of those other teams even come close to that average when those other coaches took over.

 

Riley actually took over a program and regressed the two year average. I don't think those other guys did that, they might have, but I don't know.

[Redux]

Wait...Riley took over a team that was winning 9 and 10 games a season. None of those other teams even come close to that average when those other coaches took over.

 

Riley actually took over a program and regressed the two year average. I don't think those other guys did that, they might have, but I don't know.

I'm betting Callahan did...

[teachercd]

 

Wait...Riley took over a team that was winning 9 and 10 games a season. None of those other teams even come close to that average when those other coaches took over.

 

Riley actually took over a program and regressed the two year average. I don't think those other guys did that, they might have, but I don't know.

I'm betting Callahan did...

 

For sure! Good call!

 

But, he wasn't on that list.

[BIGREDIOWAN]

 

Wait...Riley took over a team that was winning 9 and 10 games a season. None of those other teams even come close to that average when those other coaches took over.

 

Riley actually took over a program and regressed the two year average. I don't think those other guys did that, they might have, but I don't know.

I'm betting Callahan did...

 

Who's this Callahan guy you speak of?!

[LAblackshirt]

So, let me get this straight. Riley is a good hire for NU because of his years of experience at the major college football level, but we should only compare his record at NU with some of the best college coaches in their first 2 years at major college football. That makes perfect sense.

I cant tell if this was a response to my post or another, I definitely didn't mention anything about Riley's experience making him a good hire. I do stand by the point I made, Riley's first two year record in no way means we should be freaking out right now. It's in line with the first two years of some of the greatest coach's of all time, that's a fact.

 

Teachercd, Riley definitely took over a team with a better winning average than any of the other Coach's I mentioned. I'm not sure what that is supposed to change about my point though, the first two years are a rebuilding and changing time for every coach regardless of the previous years for the program. All these coaches had the same job, to tear down the previous regimes culture and install their own. A difficult task indeed. I simply wanted to show you how some of the greatest coach's around had fared in their first two years, to point out Mike Riley isn't far off the mark.

 

We can talk wins and losses all day and end up with the same argument over and over again. The fact is Mike Riley's first two year record does not bare any significant evidence he is an incapable coach. Next year will certainly be different though.

[BRV920]

His carreer win percentage does that. There's a reason he's a .500 coach.