The Unfathomable

lo country said:
Dabo built a program quickly and has kept it constant for some years...He took over for Tommy Bowden who had records "comparable" to Bo, in a conference not as tough as the Big XII IMO.......Riley inherited a better "program" than Dabo, but Dabo instilled his culture, buy in and the kids LOVE home (so do the fans)...

Dabo was also the lead recruiter of 11 of those kids from the 2008 class and was recognized as one of the top recruiters in the nation....
Click to expand...
"Riley inherited a better "program" than Dabo"

Clemson had much higher rated talent on the roster and an easier schedule as you point out.

As big if not a bigger factor in determining how fast a new staff can have success is the situation in which they came into power.  Sinney took over a team he already had established relationships with the players and was not only accepted immediately, but embraced.  That's the best possible starting point for a new coach.

MR took over in a much different fashion.  Players have admitted there were those who didn't buy in at the beginning.  That's a much more difficult challenge to overcome than stepping into a locker room where you're already welcome.  If MR had immediate buy in from all the players, would it have made a difference vs BYU, Illinois, and Wisky?  Hard to imagine it wouldn't have.  How much would perceptions be changed right now if they'd won 9 games that first season with wins over Wisky and MSU?

 
LaunchCode said:
MR took over in a much different fashion.  Players have admitted there were those who didn't buy in at the beginning.  That's a much more difficult challenge to overcome than stepping into a locker room where you're already welcome.  If MR had immediate buy in from all the players, would it have made a difference vs BYU, Illinois, and Wisky?  Hard to imagine it wouldn't have.  How much would perceptions be changed right now if they'd won 9 games that first season with wins over Wisky and MSU?
Click to expand...
On defense*

You think maybe the combination of Hughes and Banker who were both horrible recruiters and players said they didn't talk to/have much of a relationship with them have anything to do with it? I believe there was a small amount of toxicity in the program but it was way overblown. The whole buy in thing is a cop out. 

The last sentence is just a what if. It doesn't mean anything to our current situation. Like what if Callahan won a NC in his 4th year? It doesn't matter because he didn't.

 
LaunchCode said:
"Riley inherited a better "program" than Dabo"

Clemson had much higher rated talent on the roster and an easier schedule as you point out.

As big if not a bigger factor in determining how fast a new staff can have success is the situation in which they came into power.  Sinney took over a team he already had established relationships with the players and was not only accepted immediately, but embraced.  That's the best possible starting point for a new coach.

MR took over in a much different fashion.  Players have admitted there were those who didn't buy in at the beginning.  That's a much more difficult challenge to overcome than stepping into a locker room where you're already welcome.  If MR had immediate buy in from all the players, would it have made a difference vs BYU, Illinois, and Wisky?  Hard to imagine it wouldn't have.  How much would perceptions be changed right now if they'd won 9 games that first season with wins over Wisky and MSU?
Click to expand...


The players buying in wouldn't have stopped a run/pass option call against Illinois (with a QB with a gunslinger mentality and questionable decision making) when one simple run takes care of the clock. 

Players buying in wouldn't have changed the fact that we brought no pressure at all, let a QB run around and have time to step into a throw in order to heave it far enough for a fluke to occur against BYU. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
LaunchCode said:
"Riley inherited a better "program" than Dabo"

Clemson had much higher rated talent on the roster and an easier schedule as you point out.

As big if not a bigger factor in determining how fast a new staff can have success is the situation in which they came into power.  Sinney took over a team he already had established relationships with the players and was not only accepted immediately, but embraced.  That's the best possible starting point for a new coach.

MR took over in a much different fashion.  Players have admitted there were those who didn't buy in at the beginning.  That's a much more difficult challenge to overcome than stepping into a locker room where you're already welcome.  If MR had immediate buy in from all the players, would it have made a difference vs BYU, Illinois, and Wisky?  Hard to imagine it wouldn't have.  How much would perceptions be changed right now if they'd won 9 games that first season with wins over Wisky and MSU?
Click to expand...
We're seeing why the players didn't buy in.

 
LaunchCode said:
What we know is he's making changes/improvements as needed, works tirelessly, and is completely dedicated to seeing this program improve to conference championship level. 
Click to expand...


But that's nearly every head coach. It's a stupid hard job. The hours are excessive, the stress high, and every time you make any decision thousands of people second guess it. It just takes that certain something special to get over that 8-9 win level and start winning somewhat consistently against other teams that are also above that level.

LaunchCode said:
Staying the current course is our quickest path to getting over the hump.   But like you say it's a gamble.  Changing course sets us back another 3 or 4 years.
Click to expand...


This is where we have a fundamental difference of opinion. The change, especially for programs in a short decline but have resources and a rich history like Nebraska, is nearly instant. That first year may border on more of a promise, but that second year is usually pretty confirming, and almost certainly by the third. Every year this kinda becomes more and more the case. High school offenses and defenses get more and more advanced, the players are much, much bigger out of high school now. Even since the mid-90s, there's so much more your incoming players can contribute. It jump starts the process so much compared to the old days.

 
Pedro Guerrero said:
So who is to blame for that?  The coaches or the players?
Click to expand...
Coaches. I've heard both Nick Bahe and Damon mention it the past two days. Our previous coach would spit in the players faces and scream at them on national television. Our new coach smiles and probably gives them a "go get em next time". Neither of those go far in terms of accountability, building confidence and providing motivation.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top