Who should our next HC be?

[Jason Sitoke]

33 minutes ago, Huskerfollower4life said:

You would think with all the hype that Kansas got with winning and being ranked that the recruiting class would be better then what it is. That just tells me 2 things that recruits may not care about Kansas football or Kansas doesn't necessarily believe in getting better recruits and we will coach them up. 

I think you should go to the recruiting forum and take a look at some of the individual profiles. You may notice that recruiting a lot of these kids requires several years of building relationships to secure a commitment. Winning on the field seems to provide traction towards better recruiting, but not instantaneously. 

[ColoradoHusk]

Just now, Huskerfollower4life said:

The got the hype when they started winning. If you want to say they got more hype when they became ranked ok then. But 2 weeks ago they were 5-0. Im saying they got the hype before that.

Kansas wasn’t ranked until they beat Iowa State. Then KU lost in a very close game against a good TCU team. They have played well this season, and their coach deserves credit for that. 

[Husker816]

13 minutes ago, Huskerfollower4life said:

I never said Leipold wasn't a good coach I just don't think he is a good enough coach for Nebraska even if we have a worst record right now then them.  Kansas was smart to hire him bc even a former national championship coach couldn't bring enough talent in to win on a year to year basis.

What a dumb post. He's won everywhere he's been that's not good enough for Nebraska.

[PasstheDamnBallGuy]

Here is an interesting one. Who would take this coach: 3 years of HC experience, took over an undefeated group of 5 school, and went 12-1, 10-3, then 6-4

[Huskerfollower4life]

5 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

He has won more games already this year than they did in the two years before he got there.

 

He has won as many conference games already this year as they did in the four years before he got there.

 

People are trying really hard to avoid giving him any credit.

And you would think that by you listing all those accomplishments their recruiting class would be better then 78th or whatever their class is ranked.

[ColoradoHusk]

4 minutes ago, Huskerfollower4life said:

And you would think that by you listing all those accomplishments their recruiting class would be better then 78th or whatever their class is ranked.

Honest question. What is a “good enough” record from the next head coach at Nebraska? What are your “requirements” from a win-loss record other achievement standpoint. 

[Huskerfollower4life]

5 minutes ago, Husker816 said:

What a dumb post. He's won everywhere he's been that's not good enough for Nebraska.

I understand you but the question that everyone should have asked when Mike Riley got hired wasn't about winning games but can he put the team in position to compete with the top dogs. 

[ColoradoHusk]

Just now, Huskerfollower4life said:

I understand you but the question that everyone should have asked when Mike Riley got hired wasn't about winning games but can he put the team in position to compete with the top dogs. 

The Mike Riley comparison is a lazy one. 

[The Scarlet Pimpernel]

1 hour ago, Mavric said:

 

You don't recruit your way to a contending program.  You coach your way there.

 

Recruiting success follows on-field success.  Not the other way around.

 

 

See above.

 

Also, people have seen his success there for about one month now.  That's not exactly a lot of time to put together a lot of recruits.

 

Meh. Sounds like a bunch of excuses to me. If a guy can recruit, he can recruit. Leipold just isn't a hot enough commodity yet. 

[Huskerfollower4life]

Just now, ColoradoHusk said:

The Mike Riley comparison is a lazy one. 

I only stated him bc that question wasn't even thought about when they hired him.

[The Scarlet Pimpernel]

51 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

Yep.  We competed with the top teams in the country with a coach that got fired.  So a better coach could be expected to have better results, right?

 

You might expect that.  It doesn't mean that it's realistic.

[The Scarlet Pimpernel]

9 minutes ago, Huskerfollower4life said:

I only stated him bc that question wasn't even thought about when they hired him.

 

Trust me, I was here during the whole thing. I said from the moment I heard the hire that he wouldn't succeed here, yet I was told my many of the usual suspects that I was just a Negative Nancy/Debbie Downer and that by all accounts he was an excellent coach who achieved great things with lesser talent (ala Leipold)... and how all his former players loved him 

[Mavric]

26 minutes ago, Huskerfollower4life said:

And you would think that by you listing all those accomplishments their recruiting class would be better then 78th or whatever their class is ranked.

 

You might think that.

 

But it's pretty stupid to think that he should be able to overcome a decade of being the laughingstock of college football in a couple of weeks.

[Mavric]

17 minutes ago, The Scarlet Pimpernel said:

Meh. Sounds like a bunch of excuses to me. If a guy can recruit, he can recruit. Leipold just isn't a hot enough commodity yet. 

 

Show me your list of coaches who have taken over a consistently losing program and immediately started recruiting at a Top 15 level.

[The Scarlet Pimpernel]

6 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

You might think that.

 

But it's pretty stupid to think that he should be able to overcome a decade of being the laughingstock of college football in a couple of weeks.

 

Who thinks that? I agree, it's stupid.