.500

[BIG ERN]

The problem for me isn't even the coaching record at Oregon State. I get it, very hard to win at Oregon State. Probably not much different than winning at Iowa State...Not a big city, not good in-state recruiting, and if there is a kid, he's going to Iowa. Riley isn't dumb, and knows that a national title wasn't coming through Corvallis. After the 2006 season Mike could have left for a better university to achieve that goal. The GREAT coaches use schools as stepping stones to get to the top. That's just how things work. Riley didn't do that though. He was content on getting paid good money to do something he loves with good job security. Again, showing his good character, but not blood thirsty for winning. 

[teachercd]

1 minute ago, BIG ERN said:

The problem for me isn't even the coaching record at Oregon State. I get it, very hard to win at Oregon State. Probably not much different than winning at Iowa State...Not a big city, not good in-state recruiting, and if there is a kid, he's going to Iowa. Riley isn't dumb, and knows that a national title wasn't coming through Corvallis. After the 2006 season Mike could have left for a better university to achieve that goal. The GREAT coaches use schools as stepping stones to get to the top. That's just how things work. Riley didn't do that though. He was content on getting paid good money to do something he loves with good job security. Again, showing his good character, but not blood thirsty for winning. 

I 100% agree with all of this.

 

 

[Landlord]

So bloodthirst for winning is what we're looking for then? 

 

Does anyone actually believe any ounce in 'Not the victory, but the action'...?

[GBRFAN]

So being loyal is a bad thing and loyalty can't go hand in hand with wanting to win?

[BoNeyard]

15 hours ago, California Husker said:

Yeah, Corvallis is a small town, but it's really close to Eugene (home of Oregon) and Salem (state capital) and it's a little over 70 miles from Portland with a pop of nearly three-quarters of a million people. And Riley was there forever, why didn't he do something to improve the facilities? Why didn't he court Adidas, they're up there in the Pacific NorthWest. Maybe they would have enjoyed helping out the rival of Nike's corporate mascot. I know he wasn't the AD, but seriously, he had to have some pull being the institution he was with that program. 

I just don't buy all the excuses. He was a .500 coach, I just think that's what's in his blood. 


Hey, this is my 1776 post....GO USA!!!

 

1.) Being close to Eugene doesn't account for much, even though Eugene may have a large(r) population there is really nothing to do in Eugene either to entice recruits, and it is home to eth Beavers arch rival, so any benefit you show them in Eugene they may be thinking why not go to Oregon instead of Oregon State.

 

2.) Salem is not a place to show recruits for a positive sell. Nothing to do there and it isn't great at all.

 

[BIG ERN]

9 minutes ago, unlfan said:

I just ask for people to provide me an example of the following:

 

A power 5 coach in his 60s with 15+ years of college HC experience and a lifetime college winning percentage of less than .550 that didn't win a conference title during his first 15 years but then suddenly won one or more conference titles.

 

That is what we are expecting Mike Riley to do. Are there any examples? I can't think of any, but maybe there are plenty. Or, maybe there are none and Mike Riley will be the first. I, for one, am not going to hold my breathe for that.

 

 

I'm not sure you could name one. Bill Snyder was 63 when he won his first B12 title, but his win percentage was 70% 

[Landlord]

I don't think this is unreasonable - all I'm asking for is a scenario with qualifier #1, qualifier #2, qualifier #3, qualifier #4, and then 4 more qualifiers to weed out any possible qualifiers.

 

 

The situation with Riley is fairly unique and unprecedented. That doesn't mean a single thing towards whether or not it can work out how we all hope. @unlfan, how many examples can you give of power 5 coaches in their 60's with 15+ years of college HC experience at the same school in their hometown who then decided to go coach at a different school?

[Landlord]

1 minute ago, unlfan said:

 

very few, I would guess none except Riley.

 

Doesn't change the fact that no longtime, established .500 college head coach has suddenly started to win big in the twilight of his career. Feel free to drop my qualifiers, and just give me examples of 60 year old head coaches who win their first power 5 conference title after age 60. I would guess even that list is extremely small. Bill Snyder, who else?

 

 

The absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence (of ability, in this case).

 

For you to have a point, there would need to be plenty of 60+ year old coaches who did what Riley is doing and failed. Then you could point to the data and say, "See, look! It doesn't work." 

[Landlord]

Not that willingly chose to remain in their void of resources hometown, turning down jobs at top 5-10 programs along the way, who were suddenly gifted the keys to a top 5 all-time blue blood program.

 

That just hasn't ever happened. 

[southernoregonhusker]

On 9/4/2017 at 2:01 PM, teachercd said:

Riley left that place a mess.  There is a reason he was all of a sudden so happy/quick to leave after allegedly turning down USC and his Bama.

He left because the President told him to fire Banker and some others.  He didn't.  Then when he went to the President to get raises for Banker and others, he was told no.  He saw the writing on the wall.  He was safe because OSU couldn't buy out his contract, but they were putting all the pressure on him they could to get him to fire some assistants.  He didn't want to frie them.  So he left and brought those assistants here.  We know who they are.   

 

As far as the team, there was talent on it as I've explained here before.  Andersen plays a different style and told guys to leave.  Now they're "rebuilding."  Rebuilding towards what I have no idea.  What I do know is the pressure is now mounting on Andersen because the program has gotten worse in his tenure.    

[southernoregonhusker]

Kind of a funny story.  During Riley's last two seasons at OSU, I wanted him fired.  He had become complacent and I never liked his "golly gee willikers" attitude.  I like coaches and players to have fire.  Plus, his failure to fire Banker annoyed me.  So, there I was putting at the 3rd hole at my local golf course and I saw my buddy driving towards me as fast as he could.

 

Him:  Hey, your Huskers hired a coach.

Me:  Who?

Him:  Mike Riley.

Me:  Who is Mike Riley?

Him:  OSU's Mike Riley.

Me.  Silent for about 5 seconds thinking he's lying.

Him:  Dude, I'm serious.  

 

My mind wouldn't allow me to put Nebraska and Mike Riley together.  I remember being ticked, but then I thought it may work because he can coach and, maybe, he'd be hungry at Nebraska and try to prove himself.  I only had one thought after that.....Don't bring Banker. hahahaha.  Sadly he did.  

 

I'm still behind him, but he needs talent.  You can't make chicken salad out of chicken poop. 

[California Husker]

2 hours ago, BoneyardHusker said:

 

1.) Being close to Eugene doesn't account for much, even though Eugene may have a large(r) population there is really nothing to do in Eugene either to entice recruits, and it is home to eth Beavers arch rival, so any benefit you show them in Eugene they may be thinking why not go to Oregon instead of Oregon State.

 

2.) Salem is not a place to show recruits for a positive sell. Nothing to do there and it isn't great at all.

 

I know you want to win this discussion, but suggesting that Oregon is in a WAY better position that OSU geographically, really is a bit disingenuous. Perhaps Eugene is a bit bigger city, but by West Coast standards, it's a tiny little burg too. Those guys up north are all trying to recruit in California...that's the real target. As a person who grew up here in So Cal, let me tell you that the perception of Eugene, Oregon is absolutely no different to a California kid that the perception of Corvallis, Oregon. I live in an area that is technically considered part of the greater L.A. metro (even though we are 60 miles away from Downtown L.A.). Where we are, when you get on the freeway, you pass through one town with a population of 175,000 then another, then another...you pass through 10 of them on your way to Downtown and there is no space between them. The only way you know that you left one and went on to the next is the little sign on the side of the Freeway that says: Welcome to__________

So for any recruit who is being courted to head north to Oregon, I will tell you right now from experience, to that kid, Eugene is in the middle of freaking nowhere, just as much as Corvallis. So the only thing that has been drawing talent to Eugene was the way they were recruiting the kids. The whole Nike thing, the image, the system....Riley could have done that in Corvallis. I just don't think he cared enough, or he didn't know how.

But, if you still want to suggest that location and budget are such an overwhelming advantage for U of O, then consider this. Corvallis isn't anywhere near as isolated as Pullman, freaking, Washington. Yet, Mike Leech has turned that program around and they have made steady improvement since he got there. They have not won a conference title, the competiton in the North are Oregon and U-dub so Leech started with a built in disadvantage, partly because U-dub in in an ACTUAL large metropolitan city (unlike U. of Oregon) and that's Wash. State's biggest competition for recruiting. But they are improving and somehow Leech is getting kids to come to a school that is really, truly in the middle of nowhere...Pullman is half the size of Corvallis and the next biggest city is freaking Moscow, Idaho. 

You can win or you can make excuses. I just don't think the "you can't win in Corvallis" argument is valid. When Riley first got to Oregon State (and when he went back in `03) it was prior to the University of Oregon being a winning program. Some people forget that Oregon has only been really good for about the last 7 years...before that they were a 6 or 7 wins per year team. Riley had a chance to establish his teams as the dominant teams in the state. But he was only able to put together one ten-win season.  A good coach can win anywhere. Riley just isn't that good a coach. At least that's what his record would indicate. 

[MichiganDad3]

2 hours ago, Landlord said:

I don't think this is unreasonable - all I'm asking for is a scenario with qualifier #1, qualifier #2, qualifier #3, qualifier #4, and then 4 more qualifiers to weed out any possible qualifiers.

 

 

The situation with Riley is fairly unique and unprecedented. That doesn't mean a single thing towards whether or not it can work out how we all hope. @unlfan, how many examples can you give of power 5 coaches in their 60's with 15+ years of college HC experience at the same school in their hometown who then decided to go coach at a different school?

There probably aren't any. Who in their right mind would hire a 60 year old coach with more than 15 years experience being mediocre to head a P5 team?

[Landlord]

4 minutes ago, California Husker said:

But, if you still want to suggest that location and budget are such an overwhelming advantage for U of O, then consider this. Corvallis isn't anywhere near as isolated as Pullman, freaking, Washington. Yet, Mike Leech has turned that program around and they have made steady improvement since he got there. 

 

 

Mike Leach hasn't yet done anything in his time at Washington State that Mike Riley hadn't done in the same amount of time at Oregon State. 

 

 

Further, that WSU program was less than a decade removed from three straight 10 win, top 10 ranked seasons. They had some really solid seasons in the 90's as well. 

 

Oregon State hadn't had a winning season since 1970. Here's their season records from '71-'97, Riley's first year:

 

5-6

2-9

2-9

3-8

1-10

2-10

2-9

3-7-1

1-10

0-11

1-10

1-9-1

2-8-1

2-9

3-8

3-8

2-9

4-6-1

4-7-1

1-10

1-10

1-9-1

4-7

4-7

1-10

2-9

 

 

 

57 wins in 27 years.

 

 

[BoNeyard]

14 minutes ago, California Husker said:

I know you want to win this discussion, but suggesting that Oregon is in a WAY better position that OSU geographically, really is a bit disingenuous. Perhaps Eugene is a bit bigger city, but by West Coast standards, it's a tiny little burg too. Those guys up north are all trying to recruit in California...that's the real target. As a person who grew up here in So Cal, let me tell you that the perception of Eugene, Oregon is absolutely no different to a California kid that the perception of Corvallis, Oregon. I live in an area that is technically considered part of the greater L.A. metro (even though we are 60 miles away from Downtown L.A.). Where we are, when you get on the freeway, you pass through one town with a population of 175,000 then another, then another...you pass through 10 of them on your way to Downtown and there is no space between them. The only way you know that you left one and went on to the next is the little sign on the side of the Freeway that says: Welcome to__________

So for any recruit who is being courted to head north to Oregon, I will tell you right now from experience, to that kid, Eugene is in the middle of freaking nowhere, just as much as Corvallis. So the only thing that has been drawing talent to Eugene was the way they were recruiting the kids. The whole Nike thing, the image, the system....Riley could have done that in Corvallis. I just don't think he cared enough, or he didn't know how.

But, if you still want to suggest that location and budget are such an overwhelming advantage for U of O, then consider this. Corvallis isn't anywhere near as isolated as Pullman, freaking, Washington. Yet, Mike Leech has turned that program around and they have made steady improvement since he got there. They have not won a conference title, the competiton in the North are Oregon and U-dub so Leech started with a built in disadvantage, partly because U-dub in in an ACTUAL large metropolitan city (unlike U. of Oregon) and that's Wash. State's biggest competition for recruiting. But they are improving and somehow Leech is getting kids to come to a school that is really, truly in the middle of nowhere...Pullman is half the size of Corvallis and the next biggest city is freaking Moscow, Idaho. 

You can win or you can make excuses. I just don't think the "you can't win in Corvallis" argument is valid. When Riley first got to Oregon State (and when he went back in `03) it was prior to the University of Oregon being a winning program. Some people forget that Oregon has only been really good for about the last 7 years...before that they were a 6 or 7 wins per year team. Riley had a chance to establish his teams as the dominant teams in the state. But he was only able to put together one ten-win season.  A good coach can win anywhere. Riley just isn't that good a coach. At least that's what his record would indicate. 

 

Good points, especially the Leach and Pullman comparison. But I'll have to go back to your other post about Oregon state going the Adidas route instead of Nike to try and build what the Ducks did with Nike. Oregon may have only been good for the past 7 years, but their marketing and partnership with Nike began in the late 90s and it started to pay off 7 years ago. Eugene and the UofO is seen as the "cool" school, largely and basically only in part because of Nike and Phil Knight. Without Nike and Oregons partnership with them, the Ducks are in the same boat as the Beavers in Corvallis.