So why did we hire Mike Riley?

[walksalone]

He was hired because he's got a relatively clean track record, is a nice guy, and was "safe"...

They wanted to hire the "Anti Bo"

When they hired him, they overlooked the fact he's an asshair over .500 and is signature bowl win is the "Sun"...

His previous track record at much lower tier schools shouldn't be used heavily against him, imho. Saban was an a$$ hair over .500 at Michigan St. before bailing for LSU. Not saying they're the same guy, obviously. But, a lot of very successful coaches at major division one programs weren't exactly stellar at their other head coaching jobs.

Why shouldn't it? What other reasons was he hired? Because he's a nice guy?

His previous record is his resume. If you were trying to get hired by a company, and your resume was "eh", would you expect to get hired?

 

[TheSker]

The exact same number as Pelini.

Now that you cleared up that riddle, why did we hire Mike Riley?

Probably because he was the best available coach willing to take the job, and his demeanor and respect within football circles is what Nebraska needed to repair its brand after the Pelini debacle.

You might get me to agree he may be in scarce company in his willingness to take the job.

As far as debacles go......I'd say he's creating his own right now.

 

[Kernal]

The exact same number as Pelini.

Last I checked he at least was able to win his division more often than not.

Cool.

 

[Spooky Tooth]

Riley was the only guy that would accept an offer from Pederhorst.

Tetracycline is what you're looking for. Clear that sh#+ up right away.

 

[lo country]

He was hired because he's got a relatively clean track record, is a nice guy, and was "safe"...

They wanted to hire the "Anti Bo"

When they hired him, they overlooked the fact he's an asshair over .500 and is signature bowl win is the "Sun"...

His previous track record at much lower tier schools shouldn't be used heavily against him, imho. Saban was an a$$ hair over .500 at Michigan St. before bailing for LSU. Not saying they're the same guy, obviously. But, a lot of very successful coaches at major division one programs weren't exactly stellar at their other head coaching jobs.

Why shouldn't it? What other reasons was he hired? Because he's a nice guy?

His previous record is his resume. If you were trying to get hired by a company, and your resume was "eh", would you expect to get hired?

The bold is pretty much my reason for the OP. It appears he was simply hired as the anti-Bo. The only tangibles one could look at is/was his resume. Collegiate and NFL was pretty average. CFL, good stuff. It really seems reading the above he was the following:

Anti-Bo

Cheap hire

Nice guy

"Potential" to repair the fan base

Don't really know that his record or history would be predictable to mean more wins.

I figured we would lose 1 of our 4 conference games (Miami or BYU), but figured we'd be 4-1 at his point. Obviously going 2-3 makes this hire look even more suspect and those who only had access to the resume question it even more.

 

[admo]

He probably was on a short list of recommendations by many.

I'd actually say probably not.

Maybe because, unlike the last three Head Coaches at Nebraska, Riley was someone who actually ran a college football program before. Plus he had experience. He probably was on a short list of recommendations by many. This program and fan base was out of control by the end of November. And it's possible that there are a lot of coaches that are just too scared to come to Lincoln, try their best, and fail. Riley was not one to back down from this enormous challenge.

He's not a bad hire IMO. I don't have a lot of emotion saying that. I am being level headed here. It's been 5 games. 3 Losses by 8 points. That stings. But IMO that doesn't warrant emotional fits and outburst and Fire Riley threads. Even the consistent jabs throughout so many threads are getting old.

This is our team. He's our coach. Wisconsin is up next. Go Big Red

The only short list Riley was on belonged to Pederhorst and Perly. And it was a really, really, really short list.

Yes short list of candidates by AD. Recommended as a good fit for Nebraska within the football circle. Just worded it quickly.

 

[Kernal]

The exact same number as Pelini.

Now that you cleared up that riddle, why did we hire Mike Riley?

Probably because he was the best available coach willing to take the job, and his demeanor and respect within football circles is what Nebraska needed to repair its brand after the Pelini debacle.

You might get me to agree he may be in scarce company in his willingness to take the job.

As far as debacles go......I'd say he's creating his own right now.

The good news is these are all easy mistakes to fix. The bad news is these are all easy mistakes to avoid.

 

[74Hunter]

The exact same number as Pelini.

Last I checked he at least was able to win his division more often than not.

Won 3 division titles in 7 years. How is that more often than not?

4. Tied with Mizzou his first year. They went to the CCG via tiebreaker.

 

[benjibean1]

Nine wins is all i hear about pelini. but did he have any signature wins? yes he won the expected games but to win the signature wins takes coaching. in those losses he was out coached. with pelini we were not going to see anymore improvement. you were not going to see any big 10 championships and definitely not a national title. and yes the embarassment of his sideline antics. Do we so soon forget his remarks after he was no longer here? Solich was let go for reasons other then coaching performance which was the reason for his short tenure. Callahan was let go for coaching performance after 5 years?. Pelini was let go for a little of both after 5 years. Mike Riley is owed 3 - 5 years before we should make a decision as to performance. Until then lets support him. there are good things happening if we can see past this temporary win/loss ratio.

 

[74Hunter]

The exact same number as Pelini.

Last I checked he at least was able to win his division more often than not.

Cool.

Last I checked you actually have to win the division to get a shot at a championship.

 

[admo]

The exact same number as Pelini.

Last I checked he at least was able to win his division more often than not.

Won 3 division titles in 7 years. How is that more often than not?

4. Tied with Mizzou his first year. They went to the CCG via tiebreaker.

You mean the same year that his Huskers lost 52-17 on homecoming? In Lincoln? Ouch, that wasn't even close. That was his 5th game and second loss in a row. The third in a row came the following week to Texas Tech. 3-3 and yet he got 7 years...........?

Thank goodness he started the season off getting to play Western Michigan, San Jose State, and New Mexico State. Made it seemed like he was a legit coach and everything was hunky dory.

 

[TheSker]

The exact same number as Pelini.

Last I checked he at least was able to win his division more often than not.

Won 3 division titles in 7 years. How is that more often than not?

4. Tied with Mizzou his first year. They went to the CCG via tiebreaker.

You mean the same year that his Huskers lost 52-17 on homecoming? In Lincoln? Ouch, that wasn't even close. That was his 5th game and second loss in a row. The third in a row came the following week to Texas Tech. 3-3 and yet he got 7 years...........

You will get a lot more leeway and patience following a 5-7 season than you will following a 9-4 season. Obviously.

 

[admo]

The exact same number as Pelini.

Last I checked he at least was able to win his division more often than not.

Won 3 division titles in 7 years. How is that more often than not?

4. Tied with Mizzou his first year. They went to the CCG via tiebreaker.

You mean the same year that his Huskers lost 52-17 on homecoming? In Lincoln? Ouch, that wasn't even close. That was his 5th game and second loss in a row. The third in a row came the following week to Texas Tech. 3-3 and yet he got 7 years...........

You will get a lot more leeway and patience following a 5-7 season than you will following a 9-4 season. Obviously.

Um, no. According to some this is "Nebraska". No room for that nonsense. But keep trying.

 

[74Hunter]

The exact same number as Pelini.

Last I checked he at least was able to win his division more often than not.

Won 3 division titles in 7 years. How is that more often than not?

4. Tied with Mizzou his first year. They went to the CCG via tiebreaker.

You mean the same year that his Huskers lost 52-17 on homecoming? In Lincoln? Ouch, that wasn't even close. That was his 5th game and second loss in a row. The third in a row came the following week to Texas Tech. 3-3 and yet he got 7 years...........?
Thank goodness he started the season off getting to play Western Michigan, San Jose State, and New Mexico State. Made it seemed like he was a legit coach and everything was hunky dory.

Yah, cuz this year's schedule, while a little tougher, has been a murderers row.

And even though we lost to Mizzou, we did technically tie them for the division. I think there is even a "trophy" in Lincoln to prove it.

 

[admo]

@TheSker - They won the division the year before that. Went to the CCG and Cotton Bowl. They were good.