I kinda figured this one out on my own...IMO, had Riley come in and been honest from the jump, people would be more understanding. He came in talking about the talent. He came in here talking about being hired to win. he talked about using the running game. Using the players he had. He stated that he believes in tailoring the program to what you have on hand as it relates to scheme. He and his staff brought in like 800 years of coaching experience. Unfortunately, 9 games that appears to be nothing but coach speak and a prime example that quantity doesn't equal quality.
Had he come in and said that there will be some growing pains, that there will be some bumps in the road. A new staff getting to know the players and vice versa. That new schemes is not easy, at any level. to implement successfully in year one. That merging different systems is difficult at times. I think we would have been set up for what we have witnessed thus far and the back lash not so extreme.
The rest of the season with MSU and Iowa will be interesting. Riley was hired as he showed the ability to "win big" games. Hopefully this weekend is one of those.
Looking at coaching changes in general around college football, they don't always go well. Sometimes they go really well, Urban Meyer at OSU comes to mind. Sometimes it takes time to make it all work. As soon as Pelini was fired I knew we could be looking at any number of possibilities with a new coach.