Trev Alberts named new Husker AD - 11 a.m. press conference

[Hilltop]

Just now, Hedley Lamarr said:

isnt 5 years enough though? 

Not to the recruit trying to make a decision today.  I do agree we should know one way or the other after 5 years if Scott is the guy.  However, the minute you don't extend a coaches contract, it looks like you are going to fire the guy soon- which negatively impacts recruiting.   

[BigRedBuster]

1 minute ago, The Dude said:

No.  My armchair AD policy is you give a coach 5 years, then make an evaluation. 

 

I made an exception with Riley though because it was already a foregone conclusion he was on the way out the door (as we all know the armchair AD job is by committee) and Frost's stock was growing rapidly.

Soooo.....you're claiming Husker fan's expectations are so low because Frost is still here after his record the last three years.....but you support him still being here.

[BigRedBuster]

1 minute ago, Hilltop said:

Not to the recruit trying to make a decision today.  I do agree we should know one way or the other after 5 years if Scott is the guy.  However, the minute you don't extend a coaches contract, it looks like you are going to fire the guy soon- which negatively impacts recruiting.   

This is EXACTLY it.  Anyone complaining about the extension doesn't understand how all this works.  You want to destroy Frost's ability to recruit anyone?  Don't extend his contract.  If you don't extend it, you might as well fire him.

[Hedley Lamarr]

2 minutes ago, Hilltop said:

Not to the recruit trying to make a decision today.  I do agree we should know one way or the other after 5 years if Scott is the guy.  However, the minute you don't extend a coaches contract, it looks like you are going to fire the guy soon- which negatively impacts recruiting.   

if I am a recruit a 5 year deal means the coach is there the 5 years I will be in the program. I always thought that was the standard length of time coaches were extended to. This 7 year deal is news to me. 

[Hedley Lamarr]

1 minute ago, BigRedBuster said:

This is EXACTLY it.  Anyone complaining about the extension doesn't understand how all this works.  You want to destroy Frost's ability to recruit anyone?  Don't extend his contract.  If you don't extend it, you might as well fire him.

why not give him a 20 year contract then? A kid will be at a school for at most 5 years unless you have another covid making it 6. Why is 7 so important? When it got to 5 just tack on a year to keep it at 5 for the following season and rinse and repeat. 

[BigRedBuster]

5 minutes ago, Hedley Lamarr said:

if I am a recruit a 5 year deal means the coach is there the 5 years I will be in the program. I always thought that was the standard length of time coaches were extended to. This 7 year deal is news to me. 

Why does it matter to you, 5 or 7?

[The Dude]

2 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Soooo.....you're claiming Husker fan's expectations are so low because Frost is still here after his record the last three years.....but you support him still being here.

 

Yeah.  No serious person would try to argue expectations are high.  

 

I support Frost still being here.

 

Those things aren't contradictory. 

[BigRedBuster]

Just now, The Dude said:

 

Yeah.  No serious person would try to argue expectations are high.  

 

I support Frost still being here.

 

Those things aren't contradictory. 

 

I would say, long term, expectations are still high in the fan base.  I would also say that most fans are hoping for incremental improvement to get there.

 

And, I'm a pretty serious person.

[The Dude]

Just now, BigRedBuster said:

 

I would say, long term, expectations are still high in the fan base.  I would also say that most fans are hoping for incremental improvement to get there.

 

And, I'm a pretty serious person.

 

The only serious person in history named Buster was Douglas.

[BigRedBuster]

1 minute ago, The Dude said:

 

The only serious person in history named Buster was Douglas.

That hurts.

[NoLongerN]

20 minutes ago, Hilltop said:

The problem with doing that is it sends recruits a negative message.  Put a coach on notice with a shortened contract or reduced pay and recruiting suffers almost immediately because the staffs longevity is seriously in question.  In todays transfer portal world, that would basically seal a coaches fate imo.  

There was nothing done to short Scott's contract or to reduce his pay.  Scott's contract was lengthened two years past what was needed for him to prove himself.

[TGHusker]

23 minutes ago, Hedley Lamarr said:

Exactly, 5 years on a contract is plenty. Not sure why we needed 7 on Frost. Either he turns it around or he doesnt. Lets just all hope we make a bowl this year. Otherwise I would imagine recruting tanks...like really tanks. 

isnt 5 years enough though? 

I'm ok with the 2 year extension.  In the long term - I think it will work for our benefit.  Here is why:

1.  The depth of the rebuild was deeper than I think we all knew -  I don't think the AD or Frost and his team realized the depth of the rebuild.  Not that it matters, the fan base especially didn't realize it.  Thus we lived under the mis-quided & deceptive false expectations that we'd see a UCF type turnaround here. 

2.  The rebuild wasn't just in talent but perhaps more importantly in culture & work ethic & strength training.  We could have had all 5 * players but the culture would have held us back. 

3.  Frost and assistant coaches, being new to the Big 10 and its culture, made big recruiting mistakes on the type of players they needed to win in the Big 10.  We are now recruiting the type of players that I think will make us competitive in the Big 10.  Without the 2 year extension, I don't think we would of gotten these type of players.  I'm thinking of the recent TE, WR, LB especially.  The Big 10 is a totally different animal than the AAC or Pac 10 (Frost's Oregon experience). 

4. I do think this year we will see the difference in culture, work ethic and the new type of player on the field that better fits the Big 10.  However, I think our schedule works against us to fully see the results in our record,  but I do still think 2022 will be our "restore the order' year.  Our players will be older and more experienced - so many of our players (other than starters on our D) are Soph or younger. 

5.  This super senior year will enable our team to develop I believe. 

I believe we will get to a bowl this year 7-5 or 8-4.  

2022 - 10-2 or better  - if we play up to our potential.  It will be interesting to see who the QB will be.  IF AM returns to and improves upon his Frosh year - then great. Otherwise  I think we have some good guys in the wings. 

If Frost flames out in 2022 - then I think we will have a real 'Coming to Jesus' moment. 

 

[Hilltop]

Just now, BigRedN said:

There was nothing done to short Scott's contract or to reduce his pay.

I know.  I was responding to Hedley who suggested Nebraska should have.  

[Hedley Lamarr]

7 minutes ago, Hilltop said:

I know.  I was responding to Hedley who suggested Nebraska should have.  

No i dont think we should have shorted his contract. I think we should extend it to 5 years, not 7. All 7 does is put us on the hook for an extra 10 mil and 2 years if it doesnt work out. 

[Hedley Lamarr]

17 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Why does it matter to you, 5 or 7?

It just seems out of line with what you see around college football. We have had a ton of discussions on contract length etc over the years and I was under the impression it was standard to have your coach tied up to be there when the incoming class would graduate as a sign of stability. Wondering when having 2 extra years on top of that made it so much more valuable. I am just saying keep it at 5, save the extra 10 mil you are committed to if it doesnt work out. If he does turn it around sure feel free but even then 5 is a long term contract.