Shatel: Mike Riley goes on offensive with staff changes, but creates more questions than answers

[Saunders]

 

Three assistants fired. Two seasons.

 

What does that tell you?

 

It tells you that urgency has officially moved into North Memorial Stadium. It is not renting. It lives there. It means Mike Riley or Shawn Eichorst — whoever fired defensive coordinator Mark Banker — means business. Or both of them do.

It also makes you wonder what sort of long-term plan, if any, is in place for Riley’s program. Remember Eichorst’s line a year ago about building Nebraska football “brick by brick?” One of the bricks just landed on Banker.

 

It may, in fact, signify that Riley is saying “What did I get myself into here?”

 

http://www.omaha.com/huskers/football/shatel-mike-riley-goes-on-offensive-with-staff-changes-but/article_4b614362-19d7-5297-8470-32f495d744df.html

 

 

[Bad2theBONES]

"What did I get myself into here?" Really? That is garbage . More so he is doing is damn job and knows exactly what needs to be done and what he got himself into.

[NM11046]

Seriously? I don't read Shatel all that often but he's actually criticizing the Banker decision made yesterday? Why do the journalists in NE just pick apart every decision like this and instead of saying - "good job, a commitment to excellence" say "well, he shouldn't have brought him here"? I don't know his history on the situation all that well, but would it be fair to say that I'd find Shatel articles criticizing Banker being here if I googled?

 

Anybody who has been in business and managed people knows that sometimes the most consistent employee, the one that's been with you forever can hit a bump and not perform. Isn't necessarily a reflection of your hire - they brought skills and performed initially. Your ability as a leader to make the decision to cut bait when they are no longer performing is what is key.

 

Let's sit back and watch how the replacement hire is announced and how he does.

[suh_fan93]

I keep hearing how one of the two (Eichorst or Riley) 'means business' now with the firing of Banker. Let's be honest. It's more like one of the two or most likely both are already trying to save their jobs especially after that Iowa blowout among other things.

 

Now he's firing major cogs of the defensive staff that he brought over 2 years ago so obviously he thought he could win here and in the Big 10 with the same staff he had at Oregon State???!!!

 

I don't read Shatel too often but but he's spot on here.

[JJ Husker]

The whole premise that urgency has now moved into Memorial Stadium is false. Urgency has been residing there rent free for about 15 years.

 

It is pure BS and sensationalism to question the motives or impetus behind firing an obviously underperforming Def Coord. It was needed and due. Why can't we just give Riley and the whole program props for doing what needed done. I for one will assume that they actually want the on field product to improve and are willing to do what it takes to get back to championship level football. Kudos to Riley, Eichorst, or anybody else that had a hand in this.

[Scratchtown]

Why do the journalists in NE just pick apart every decision like this and instead of saying - "good job, a commitment to excellence" say "well, he shouldn't have brought him here"?

 

Because they know they will get reaction. You don't get readers and reaction from saying "Good job.........".

 

They know Nebraska fans will read it and share it and crucify them, but what do they care? They are getting clicks.

[BoNeyard]

Regardless of what the message is or was, the move was needed to get to the ultimate goal that was set out when Riley was hired. I could care less if this is someone making a move to save their job, or trying to upgrade the team, in the end it needed to be done. Good job Coach Riley for actually doing it.

[Undone]

Seriously? I don't read Shatel all that often but he's actually criticizing the Banker decision made yesterday? Why do the journalists in NE just pick apart every decision like this and instead of saying - "good job, a commitment to excellence" say "well, he shouldn't have brought him here"?

 

Agreed. And I think the answer to your question is that it's the very nature of journalism these days - The bigger the train wreck of an argument that's being made, the more cars that slow down to watch as they go by. The more controversial the argument, even if it's a bad argument, the more clicks the article will get.

 

I almost can't even let myself think that Shatel actually believes what he's writing.

[Enhance]

Seriously? I don't read Shatel all that often but he's actually criticizing the Banker decision made yesterday? Why do the journalists in NE just pick apart every decision like this and instead of saying - "good job, a commitment to excellence" say "well, he shouldn't have brought him here"? I don't know his history on the situation all that well, but would it be fair to say that I'd find Shatel articles criticizing Banker being here if I googled?

 

Anybody who has been in business and managed people knows that sometimes the most consistent employee, the one that's been with you forever can hit a bump and not perform. Isn't necessarily a reflection of your hire - they brought skills and performed initially. Your ability as a leader to make the decision to cut bait when they are no longer performing is what is key.

 

Let's sit back and watch how the replacement hire is announced and how he does.

"Journalists in NE" being critical is a broad stroke, my friend. Most of what I've seen is some combination of surprise and curiosity - why did this happen now, what was the drive force behind it, what's it mean for the future, etc. And I don't take Shatel's article as being critical but instead asking the questions a lot of us are wondering.

[Cdog923]

Is there a memorandum at the OWH where they have to stir the sh#t 24/7?

[NM11046]

 

Seriously? I don't read Shatel all that often but he's actually criticizing the Banker decision made yesterday? Why do the journalists in NE just pick apart every decision like this and instead of saying - "good job, a commitment to excellence" say "well, he shouldn't have brought him here"? I don't know his history on the situation all that well, but would it be fair to say that I'd find Shatel articles criticizing Banker being here if I googled?

 

Anybody who has been in business and managed people knows that sometimes the most consistent employee, the one that's been with you forever can hit a bump and not perform. Isn't necessarily a reflection of your hire - they brought skills and performed initially. Your ability as a leader to make the decision to cut bait when they are no longer performing is what is key.

 

Let's sit back and watch how the replacement hire is announced and how he does.

"Journalists in NE" being critical is a broad stroke, my friend. Most of what I've seen is some combination of surprise and curiosity - why did this happen now, what was the drive force behind it, what's it mean for the future, etc. And I don't take Shatel's article as being critical but instead asking the questions a lot of us are wondering.

 

 

Fair enough - I live out of state and don't get the paper every day - my apologies for lumping.

 

We obviously read the tone of the article differently.

[Enhance]

 

 

Seriously? I don't read Shatel all that often but he's actually criticizing the Banker decision made yesterday? Why do the journalists in NE just pick apart every decision like this and instead of saying - "good job, a commitment to excellence" say "well, he shouldn't have brought him here"? I don't know his history on the situation all that well, but would it be fair to say that I'd find Shatel articles criticizing Banker being here if I googled?

 

Anybody who has been in business and managed people knows that sometimes the most consistent employee, the one that's been with you forever can hit a bump and not perform. Isn't necessarily a reflection of your hire - they brought skills and performed initially. Your ability as a leader to make the decision to cut bait when they are no longer performing is what is key.

 

Let's sit back and watch how the replacement hire is announced and how he does.

"Journalists in NE" being critical is a broad stroke, my friend. Most of what I've seen is some combination of surprise and curiosity - why did this happen now, what was the drive force behind it, what's it mean for the future, etc. And I don't take Shatel's article as being critical but instead asking the questions a lot of us are wondering.

 

 

Fair enough - I live out of state and don't get the paper every day - my apologies for lumping.

 

We obviously read the tone of the article differently.

Agreed - I won't begrudge you your take on the article. I can easily see how some might take it is accusatory and a little overly critical.

 

To be honest, I'm not a big fan of the tone of the article either. I would've taken a slightly less edgy approach.

[Scott Tenorman]

Yeah this article was mostly crap to me. Why did he bring him in the first place? Riley thought Banker's scheme and recruiting abilities would improve with Nebraska's resources. They didn't. He let him go. Riley should be lauded for this move. I think this shows he's willing to adapt to fix weaknesses, which is a good thing. I haven't always been super supportive of everything Riley has done, but props to him for how he's handled the staff the last few years. He's weeding out the Oregon State guys who can't hang (especially recruit).

 

Recruiting ability seems to be key to Riley regarding his coaches. Look at his recent firings. Banker, Hughes, Reed. Poor recruiters (along with poor results on the field). Cav and Langs haven't had great results on the field, but they're still here because they can recruit. I thought Cav did a great job to even be in the convo with Sarell and last years O-line class was very good, and Langs has pulled in POB, Gebbia, and Lee. I think they get some extra time to prove they can produce results on the field because they bring in talented players. If in a year or two our o-line and qb play doesn't improve (play calling plays into this for Langs as well), they will probably be on the chopping block too.

 

Props to Riley, he's doing something our past coaches refused to do. I love it.

[zoogs]

I think this is a fair article. The flurry of activity is begging questions.

[Undone]

I think this is a fair article. The flurry of activity is begging questions.

 

Honestly zoogs, the only question that it begs in my mind is why our program hasn't made such moves prior to 2017 over the past 15ish seasons.