Jump to content

Who's Worse: Riley VS Callahan


Dark Days Remembered  

87 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 115
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I don't want to speak for everyone, but I think we are all exhausted of the prior regimes, and just want to focus on dialogue that pertains to the current era. We've been dragged around long enough. I

Find this perspective a bit short sided.  If Riley had been hired at the time of Callahan, you'd be saying Riley is who destroyed our traditions. That is focusing the argument essentially on timing. I

3 hours ago, RockyMountainOySker said:

Find this perspective a bit short sided.  If Riley had been hired at the time of Callahan, you'd be saying Riley is who destroyed our traditions. That is focusing the argument essentially on timing. If we focus entirely on the field, Riley is without question the worst (as you stated).

 

I can't believe I'm defending Callahan but all he did was bring the system he believed in at the instruction of Pederson. You could also argue Callahan's system worked. 

 

Now if you want to argue who is the worse AD, timing must be apart of it and I personally would put Pederson over Eichorst.

 

 

No, Callahan bringing his west coast system and the destroying of our traditions are two different things. I'm talking about the things like the pictures he had removed, alienating former players, etc. Completely changing our offensive and defensive identity plays into it so I see what you're saying about timing and that Riley would have basically done the same thing but that isn't what I was getting at with the destroyed our traditions comment. It will always be my opinion that Callahan was worse and some of that may be simply due to him being the first to head Nebraska in the wrong direction but it is what it is and there's no sense in playing the "ifs and buts" game. He ruined it first  so he gets the blame. I will agree that Pederson and Eichorst are more to blame but we're talking about coaches here.

Edited by Comfortably Numb
Link to post
11 minutes ago, NebraskaHarry said:

A different look at it is if you had to pick between Callahan or Riley to be a coach for you second favorite team. I don't have one, but i would probably pick Callahan over Riley if I did. 

I have never seen Riley actually coach. Ever. 

 

I agree with that......but I wouldn’t want either for any team I remotely liked. Heck, it would be tough to even wish that on Iowa or CU.

Link to post

7 minutes ago, Comfortably Numb said:

 

I agree with that......but I wouldn’t want either for any team I remotely liked. Heck, it would be tough to even wish that on Iowa or CU.

I would want Riley at Iowa (because he would dismantle that O-Line) and Callahan at CU, but the one stipulation would be that he would be required to Run the Buffalo all by himself while doing the "throat slash" gesture the whole time.

Link to post
  • 3 weeks later...

When he was hired back in 2014 I honestly had to do a double take. It did not make sense to me. I saw his age, career record and thought is this for real? Was this the best coach the Huskers could get? Remember at the time we had just let go of Pelini. He won a lot of games but left many Husker fans wanting more. After 7 years I think many people were tired of the behavior and lack of significant wins.

Riley, I believe was doomed to fail here for many reasons. He inherited a lousy plate from Pelini. Some of which included poor roster management and depth brought on by lazy recruiting. Secondly he did not have total player buy-in from key members of his 2015/2016 squads.

Many in the fanbase never gave him a chance from day one. We live in the social media age and it has been a barrage of negativity for most of his tenure especially this last season. Unfortunately we live in a "win right now" society in big time athletics. Nebraska fans are some of the best fans in college football. However some of them are naive to the landscape changes that have affected Nebraska football since Osborne's time here.

Administration has some blame for this as well. Did Eichorst put together a well orchestrated and intensive search? Or did he just go out and hire the antithesis of Pelini?
Recently, I've read where our fired AD hamstrung Riley in recruiting in regards to junior college players? For a coach that is trying to clean up a mess by your predecessor you tied a hand around your hire's back. Perhaps in a panic or from increased fan discontent, the powers that be fired AD Shawn Eichorst. I honestly felt that had an effect on some of the performances down the stretch.

Riley. The BIGGEST thing that I liked about him was the effort and organization in regards to recruiting. Selling Nebraska is not easy. Mike and his staff did the best job in this department since Osborne in my opinion. He showed that he was willing to replace coaches. I think in time he would have replaced a few more coaches if the decision makers were a little more patient. When it was time to play football there was a disconnect for some reason. His attitude on the field was very milquetoast. The players took on the behavior. Is that the best attitude to have when playing the game? Plus I think the hire of Bob Diaco was risky. The conversion of a 4-3 to a 3-4 for the college game takes time. Riley did not have such luxury of a 5 year build with the things I've mentioned earlier.

Lastly, with coaching there is a performance metric. 19-19 is not going to cut it at most colleges. Especially at Nebraska. Who's to say what may have happened had he gotten another year. Maybe things would have improved maybe they would have been status quo? We will never know.

He's a good man and I wish him the best. Sorry that it could not work out.

 

Link to post

To say who was worst is difficult.   The above post was my Facebook post shortly after Riley got fired.

 

 

Callahan and Riley both inherited rosters that were in bad shape.   Is it fair? No.   I guess you have to win early enough in your tenure to gain benefit of the doubt.   I don’t believe either fully got to see the fruits of their labor.

 

As bad as Riley was I believe many coaches would have struggled after Pelini.

Link to post
13 minutes ago, OH HSKR FAN said:

When he was hired back in 2014 I honestly had to do a double take. It did not make sense to me. I saw his age, career record and thought is this for real? Was this the best coach the Huskers could get? Remember at the time we had just let go of Pelini. He won a lot of games but left many Husker fans wanting more. After 7 years I think many people were tired of the behavior and lack of significant wins.

Riley, I believe was doomed to fail here for many reasons. He inherited a lousy plate from Pelini. Some of which included poor roster management and depth brought on by lazy recruiting. Secondly he did not have total player buy-in from key members of his 2015/2016 squads.

Many in the fanbase never gave him a chance from day one. We live in the social media age and it has been a barrage of negativity for most of his tenure especially this last season. Unfortunately we live in a "win right now" society in big time athletics. Nebraska fans are some of the best fans in college football. However some of them are naive to the landscape changes that have affected Nebraska football since Osborne's time here.

Administration has some blame for this as well. Did Eichorst put together a well orchestrated and intensive search? Or did he just go out and hire the antithesis of Pelini?
Recently, I've read where our fired AD hamstrung Riley in recruiting in regards to junior college players? For a coach that is trying to clean up a mess by your predecessor you tied a hand around your hire's back. Perhaps in a panic or from increased fan discontent, the powers that be fired AD Shawn Eichorst. I honestly felt that had an effect on some of the performances down the stretch.

Riley. The BIGGEST thing that I liked about him was the effort and organization in regards to recruiting. Selling Nebraska is not easy. Mike and his staff did the best job in this department since Osborne in my opinion. He showed that he was willing to replace coaches. I think in time he would have replaced a few more coaches if the decision makers were a little more patient. When it was time to play football there was a disconnect for some reason. His attitude on the field was very milquetoast. The players took on the behavior. Is that the best attitude to have when playing the game? Plus I think the hire of Bob Diaco was risky. The conversion of a 4-3 to a 3-4 for the college game takes time. Riley did not have such luxury of a 5 year build with the things I've mentioned earlier.

Lastly, with coaching there is a performance metric. 19-19 is not going to cut it at most colleges. Especially at Nebraska. Who's to say what may have happened had he gotten another year. Maybe things would have improved maybe they would have been status quo? We will never know.

He's a good man and I wish him the best. Sorry that it could not work out.

 

 

If he got another year with the schedule this year ... *shudder*

 

also, the team looked more disinterested and definitely unprepared as time went on.  He had to go.  He found ways to lose, rather than find ways to win.  At OSU, losing is not that big of deal, so that permeated his way of thinking.  And, the team takes on the personality of the head coach.

Edited by Dilly Dilly
Link to post

21 minutes ago, OH HSKR FAN said:

The kids on the team knew Riley was gone when Eichorst was let go.

 

Riley had to go.  I don’t agree with the way it went down.  

 

 

 

 

What didn't you agree with in the way it went down?  I guess i have a different viewpoint in that I thought it was about the most classy way to fire a person.  So, i am curious to hear about a different viewpoint on it.

Link to post

Maybe I need to clarify my last point.   I was thinking too much about Eichorst/Riley than Riley himself.

 

Could they’ve waited until after Iowa to let Eichorst and Riley go?   It could have had an effect on the 2017 season.  Players could of maybe played harder if there was some sort of “confidence” in Riley?  Maybe we could have gone 6-6 (eek!). Then again maybe not?

Link to post
1 hour ago, OH HSKR FAN said:

Maybe I need to clarify my last point.   I was thinking too much about Eichorst/Riley than Riley himself.

 

Could they’ve waited until after Iowa to let Eichorst and Riley go?   It could have had an effect on the 2017 season.  Players could of maybe played harder if there was some sort of “confidence” in Riley?  Maybe we could have gone 6-6 (eek!). Then again maybe not?

actually we should thank our lucky stars they got rid of Eichorst when they did- there would have been no way we could have gotten an AD in place fast enough to get Scott Frost on board.

Frost himself even indicated in his PC that if he didn't have a solid AD and Administration he wouldn't have come back.

  • Plus1 4
Link to post

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.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.






×
×
  • Create New...