Jump to content


The Unfathomable


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, LaunchCode said:

 

 

Swiney's first 3 seasons:

4-3

9-5

6-7 (including wins vs N. Texas and Presbyterian)

 

Following your satisfaction standards would have cost a National Championship.  Pretty steep price wouldn't you say.    

 

Swiney also inherited a team that had been bringing in top 15 classes prior to his arrival.  Compared to what MR walked into, shouldn't Swiney's record have been better than MR's?     

Possibly but that is not the only standard I apply. This is year 3 and I expect to see some form of progress being made. I cannot in good conscience say that anything I've seen in these first 3 games signifies progress. If there were any bright spots, anything at all, my preference would be to give it more time because staff changes are disruptive and usually add more time to get to where you want to be. Maybe you disagree with me or just aren't as far along in the recognition process as I am. That's fine. I won't be douching up every topic on the board demanding his removal. But yes, I've seen enough to know this dog won't hunt.

  • Plus1 2
Link to comment

3 minutes ago, LaunchCode said:

Swiney's first 3 seasons:

4-3

9-5

6-7 (including wins vs N. Texas and Presbyterian)

 

Following your satisfaction standards would have cost a National Championship.  Pretty steep price wouldn't you say.    

 

Swiney also inherited a team that had been bringing in top 15 classes prior to his arrival.  Compared to what MR walked into, shouldn't Swiney's record have been better than MR's?     

 

Funny how you make sure to point out two teams that they blew out to try to discredit some of the wins but neglected to state that some of their losses were to eventual national champion Auburn in overtime, as well as two other Top 25 teams by five and three points and six their seven losses were by a total of 31 points.  That's not a great season but they played respectable.  Not to mention that the actual comparison to our performance this year would be the following year (third full season) when they went 10-4, won the conference and made a New Year's Six game.  Doesn't appear to be the track that we're on.

 

And there are always exceptions to the rule.  For each one example you can site, how many counter-examples do you want to see?  10?  20?  50?  Wouldn't be tough.

  • Plus1 5
Link to comment
30 minutes ago, El Diaco said:

Possibly but that is not the only standard I apply. This is year 3 and I expect to see some form of progress being made. I cannot in good conscience say that anything I've seen in these first 3 games signifies progress. If there were any bright spots, anything at all, my preference would be to give it more time because staff changes are disruptive and usually add more time to get to where you want to be. Maybe you disagree with me or just aren't as far along in the recognition process as I am. That's fine. I won't be douching up every topic on the board demanding his removal. But yes, I've seen enough to know this dog won't hunt.

I hear you, but keep in mind It's darkest before the dawn.

 

 

Link to comment

31 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

Funny how you make sure to point out two teams that they blew out to try to discredit some of the wins but neglected to state that some of their losses were to eventual national champion Auburn in overtime, as well as two other Top 25 teams by five and three points and six their seven losses were by a total of 31 points.  That's not a great season but they played respectable.  Not to mention that the actual comparison to our performance this year would be the following year (third full season) when they went 10-4, won the conference and made a New Year's Six game.  Doesn't appear to be the track that we're on.

 

And there are always exceptions to the rule.  For each one example you can site, how many counter-examples do you want to see?  10?  20?  50?  Wouldn't be tough.

With top 15 talent, he coached some good losses .  That's the point you feel I conveniently left out?   

 

 

Link to comment
14 minutes ago, LaunchCode said:

 

 

Swiney's first 3 seasons:

4-3

9-5

6-7 (including wins vs N. Texas and Presbyterian)

 

Following your satisfaction standards would have cost a National Championship.  Pretty steep price wouldn't you say.    

 

Swiney also inherited a team that had been bringing in top 15 classes prior to his arrival.  Compared to what MR walked into, shouldn't Swiney's record have been better than MR's?     

 

Hiring and firing is all gut. There are all kinds of mistakes in hindsight. I'm, frankly, not interested in "random example to prove a point" because all sides could play that game until the end of time. Would anyone believe me if I told you early on that a coach like Bob Stoops would win only one national title, despite a very productive 18 years? Or that Dean Smith or Tom Osborne would win any titles? You just don't know for sure, so it's a pretty pointless exercise.

 

The best you can do is make an educated guess on if your guy is the right one. I've never felt Riley was the guy if your goal (as was stated) is to exceed that 9 win plateau and win titles. I simply did not, and do not, feel a guy with his track record suddenly becomes that coach. Others disagree, and still others didn't even have a clue who he was (and maybe they still don't). I feel that if your goal is to exceed 9 wins (not a trivial matter) then there is some element of risk. It may take several hirings to get it right. Going from a 9 win standard to 10 sounds like nothing, but each win takes more and more ability; it gets disproportionally harder and harder.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
39 minutes ago, brophog said:

 

Hiring and firing is all gut. There are all kinds of mistakes in hindsight. I'm, frankly, not interested in "random example to prove a point" because all sides could play that game until the end of time. Would anyone believe me if I told you early on that a coach like Bob Stoops would win only one national title, despite a very productive 18 years? Or that Dean Smith or Tom Osborne would win any titles? You just don't know for sure, so it's a pretty pointless exercise.

 

The best you can do is make an educated guess on if your guy is the right one. I've never felt Riley was the guy if your goal (as was stated) is to exceed that 9 win plateau and win titles. I simply did not, and do not, feel a guy with his track record suddenly becomes that coach. Others disagree, and still others didn't even have a clue who he was (and maybe they still don't). I feel that if your goal is to exceed 9 wins (not a trivial matter) then there is some element of risk. It may take several hirings to get it right. Going from a 9 win standard to 10 sounds like nothing, but each win takes more and more ability; it gets disproportionally harder and harder.

You bring good reason to discussion.  MR may or may not be that guy,  What we know is he's making changes/improvements as needed, works tirelessly, and is completely dedicated to seeing this program improve to conference championship level.  Staying the current course is our quickest path to getting over the hump.   But like you say it's a gamble.  Changing course sets us back another 3 or 4 years.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

Visit the Sports Illustrated Husker site



×
×
  • Create New...