ESPN: Is Nebraska making progress or starting over? Answer will come soon enough

[Caliborn72]

It does feel like there is an awful lot at stake this season. Could be a major turning point for the program, especially with what a successful season means for our recruiting finish. 9 or so wins this year + an elite recruiting class and we head into a tough schedule with a lot of positivity surrounding the football team.

 

I don't exactly know what a rough season would mean but hopefully it doesn't come to that.

[moveitforward]

41 minutes ago, BIG ERN said:

We have to sit back and realize we are the 5th best team in the B10....out of 14 teams -- that's the reality. We first must start to consistently win the West as we did the North of the B12. Wisconsin should be our main priority before we think about winning a B10 title. 

I like your frankness, and many fans need to yet let that sink in. We stopped being a big fish in the pond a long time ago. There are now many programs with a lot of money and prestige, and we are somewhere in the middle. Further, there is no magic coach that will suddenly cause the old days to return. We need to learn to grind it out against the likes of Iowa and Wisconsin and hope we can win one now and then. That is reality.

[Hunter94]

48 minutes ago, junior4949 said:

 

Whether most would be alright with it, I don't know.  However, we very well should be.  TO's first six seasons went like this:  9-2-1; 9-3; 10-2; 9-3-1; 9-3; and 9-3.  This came on the heels of winning two NCs in three years.  I've been a big Mike Riley fan for quite a while (over a decade).  However, I'm still not sure this was the best hire when one considers his age.  Does he coach into his 70's?  If not, I have to think Eichorst thought he'd build a pretty good base for the next one up. 

he's no Bill Snyder!

[Xmas32]

8 minutes ago, Hunter94 said:

he's no Bill Snyder!

 

No one is like Bill Snyder.  They broke the mold after he was born.  Dude is just a flat out anomaly. 

[lo country]

Come on man. Progressing or regressing.  Look at 2001 to now.....For whatever reason, we can't seem to get to that "next level".  From poor coaching choices to include staff, from recruits that didn't pan out or show, losing guys who left the team, to change in scheme, conference etc.... we just can't seem to find the identity we need to succeed.  We have gone for years pounding the square peg into the round hole.  We finally have more "correct" pieces, at least on O, but on defense i'd suggest we are off. Just look at Chalk Talk and the statuesque performance of some of our guys....  Riley tanks, and I hope he doesn't as it negatively impacts the program, we are back to another 3 years of the coach and staff "getting their guys".  

 

Recruiting looks great.  For now, but its dependent on 18 year old kids sticking to their word......  I still think we simply lack the physicality and desire that the "big time" programs have.  Just an opinion based on watching games...We don't seem to play with the a$$ on fire, head is catching mentality....

 

I'd say we are what we are right now.  A mediocre program just maintaining the current status quo...

[krc1995]

We have not been relevant in nearly 20 years.  The only thing that keeps the big wheels turning for the football program is the delusional fan base that keeps generating an enormous amount of revenue.  But I suspect that even that will run its course if we don't put together something reputable and soon.  It's like chasing your tail-the athletic department fears the loss of money generated by a devoted fan base-they, in turn, try to create "energy" by firing and hiring new coaches that sell their version of  the winning way-then fire these coaches when it doesn't immediately work-thereby generating new interest and energy (read money)from the fan base.  

 

Winning is addictive, but maybe it was time in the 2000's that we experience some failure? I think Riley is not an investment in the future but a placating knee-jerk reaction designed to sell fans a bag of temporary goods.    I have nothing against Riley, but I do not see him as the resurrector of the football promise land.  Logic tells you that he was hired with maybe 5-7 years in him, if things went well.   Now that Nebraska boy that is ripening his coaching skills in Florida.....

[lo country]

8 minutes ago, krc1995 said:

We have not been relevant in nearly 20 years.  The only thing that keeps the big wheels turning for the football program is the delusional fan base that keeps generating an enormous amount of revenue.  But I suspect that even that will run its course if we don't put together something reputable and soon.  It's like chasing your tail-the athletic department fears the loss of money generated by a devoted fan base-they, in turn, try to create "energy" by firing and hiring new coaches that sell their version of  the winning way-then fire these coaches when it doesn't immediately work-thereby generating new interest and energy (read money)from the fan base.  

 

Winning is addictive, but maybe it was time in the 2000's that we experience some failure? I think Riley is not an investment in the future but a placating knee-jerk reaction designed to sell fans a bag of temporary goods.    I have nothing against Riley, but I do not see him as the resurrector of the football promise land.  Logic tells you that he was hired with maybe 5-7 years in him, if things went well.   Now that Nebraska boy that is ripening his coaching skills in Florida.....

I agree with the bolded in that he was hired as the "anti-Bo".  He was nice, friendly, gave a pleasant interview, embraced the fan base, media and former players. He a home run in the PR department.  I have heard his described as nicest guy you'd ever meet, genuine, does more with less, knowledgeable, but don't know if anyone ever described him as driven, a winner etc....

 

I do like that Scott Frost reference....

[MichiganDad3]

4 hours ago, junior4949 said:

 

I'm not sure I really understand this post especially when you consider where we came from.  In two of the three previous years to TO becoming the head coach, we won the NC.  It wasn't until TO's ninth season that we even won our first outright conference title.  We haven't even allowed a coach nine seasons since TO retired.  Has anyone ever considered that this might very well be why it has been so long since we won our last conference title?  Ushering in a new coach and AD every 4-7 years isn't going to yield any conference titles.  Heck, we could even pay the highest salary out there and it won't necessarily mean conference titles (Michigan probably doesn't win the B1G this year). 

 

To some degree, we already have enough disadvantages when it comes to recruiting.  We don't need to compound those disadvantages by constantly firing and replacing coaches.  Why would any top notch kid want to come into that environment when they have no idea whether the guy recruiting them will even be there when their time is up?   

 

 

The difference with TO is that his teams were good. Below are the final rankings for the Huskers (AP & UPI). TO finished in the top 10 in at least one poll every year. I would be happy if we were consistently in the top 20, but consistently un-ranked in not acceptable.

 

1973 - 7th & 11th
1974 - 9th & 8th
1975 - 9th & 9th
1976 - 9th & 7th
1977 - 12th & 10th
1978 - 8th & 8th
1979 - 9th & 7th
1980 - 7th & 7th

[Moiraine]

4 hours ago, KingBlank said:

That is far we have fallen, the urgency to win is gone from the fan base.  It is always focused on the future that somehow is always better to win then, than right now.

 

 

Uh, no. Good job making stuff up though.

 

I'm calm about the Oregon game because we beat them last year, and I think we have a decent chance of beating them this year.

Edit: Just saw that Blitz made a much better response to this.

[BoNeyard]

Regardless of the outcome of this season Riley and Co. are back next year, and deservedly so. I think B1G title aspirations is a little high for this season given Michigan and Ohio State are where they are; however, I think just like in the Big 12 North, Nebraska SHOULD be consistent contenders and more often then not win the B1G West. There is zero reason we should finish behind Iowa, Wisconsin and most definitely how some experts have us finishing behind Northwestern this year. Nebraska should never finish below Northwestern.

 

IMO, Wisconsin is what Nebraska should be, and what Nebraska was. Hard nose hitting gritty team with speed in the right key places. I think whoever Wisconsin is recruiting, Nebraska should go and offer because those are the type of players that fit Nebraska and fit the B1G.

[brophog]

46 minutes ago, BoneyardHusker said:

Regardless of the outcome of this season Riley and Co. are back next year, and deservedly so.

 

 

Why?

 

This is a progam that is near infamous now for firing 9 win coaches and the scenario being painted is that a guy that wouldnt have won 9 games in any of his first 3 seasons is still brought back. What's changed, or has it changed?

[REDFANATIC]

 National perception of the program will be exactly what it is until until we start producing wins or at least show up in games that matter. Last year's Ohio States woodshed beating, Iowa beat down and bowl game was an example of where we're at as a program. Rember we received 1 vote in AP poll. 

  Article made a good point. As a program in whole... No!!! On the defensive side I would say yes. Riely made staff changes that needed to happen. Hough's, Stewert, Reed, and Banker were all upgraded. Parella was a steal in my opinion on the defensive front and already has shown he can recruit...D. Thomas. D. Williams is one of if not the best secondary coaches in the country. We'll probably end up with the best secondary class in the nation due to his recruiting ability. Booker... Yet to be determined. Then there's Bob Diaco. One of the best D coordinators in the country. The only remaining original staff member is Trent Bray. Who almost bolted for a D coordinator gig at SD St. That's allot of new coaches on the D. So in that aspect of article I'd say we did rebuild.

Offensively we're definitely progressing. We're going to see depth on the O'line, Q-back, running back, and tight ends. WR is shallow. 

 

[Moiraine]

8 minutes ago, brophog said:

 

Why?

 

This is a progam that is near infamous now for firing 9 win coaches and the scenario being painted is that a guy that wouldnt have won 9 games in any of his first 3 seasons is still brought back. What's changed, or has it changed?

 

 

He won 9 games last year.

If we visit lala land and pretend he didn't win 9 games year, nothing changed.

 

Firing a coach after 3 seasons is something we haven't done. So NOT firing Riley would be the same thing we've done with previous coaches.

 

 

All of that said, I don't agree with the statement "regardless of the outcome." If we win 3 games this season, I don't think Riley will be here next season.

[In the Deed the Glory]

4 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

He won 9 games last year.

If we visit lala land and pretend he didn't win 9 games year, nothing changed.

 

Firing a coach after 3 seasons is something we haven't done. So NOT firing Riley would be the same thing we've done with previous coaches.

 

 

All of that said, I don't agree with the statement "regardless of the outcome." If we win 3 games this season, I don't think Riley will be here next season.

 

This.  I don't get how some are saying he will be here "no matter what".  That is probably not accurate, i.e. the above bolded scenario.

[Hunter94]

no way he wins 9 games this season...........sad, we are headed for MOTS.