What Bo Pelini taking YSU to a title game means for NU...

[Mavric]

The hot head coaching commodities are always guys who proved themselves by taking downtrodden football programs and turning them around almost immediately. That's what Mike Riley did at Oregon State, one of the weakest and least respected major conference programs at the time. Over the years his aggregate record certainly flattened out into the average category, but he was still operating a program that was second-tier in his own state, and still pulling out the occasional upset of much more talented teams. The year Nebraska hired him, Riley was voted the second most underrated head coach by his college football peers and enjoys a fairly stellar reputation within coaching and recruiting circles. So while I think he has a lot left to do at Nebraska, I think we can give him a little credit for being above average.

He also wanted to be here. And appears to be taking a long-term strategy.

So yeah. Let's check back in two years.

Eh, maybe, maybe not. Two years before Riley got there, they were 4-7. His best year of the first two years he was there was 5-6. Erickson was really the one who turned it around. Riley kept it up for awhile but never got particularly close to Erickson's 2000 season.

 

[Mierin]

The hot head coaching commodities are always guys who proved themselves by taking downtrodden football programs and turning them around almost immediately. That's what Mike Riley did at Oregon State, one of the weakest and least respected major conference programs at the time. Over the years his aggregate record certainly flattened out into the average category, but he was still operating a program that was second-tier in his own state, and still pulling out the occasional upset of much more talented teams. The year Nebraska hired him, Riley was voted the second most underrated head coach by his college football peers and enjoys a fairly stellar reputation within coaching and recruiting circles. So while I think he has a lot left to do at Nebraska, I think we can give him a little credit for being above average.

He also wanted to be here. And appears to be taking a long-term strategy.

So yeah. Let's check back in two years.

Eh, maybe, maybe not. Two years before Riley got there, they were 4-7. His best year of the first two years he was there was 5-6. Erickson was really the one who turned it around. Riley kept it up for awhile but never got particularly close to Erickson's 2000 season.

They were 4-7, 1-10, and 2-9 in the 3 years before Riley got there. The last time they had more than 4 wins before Riley arrived was in 1971. They had a stellar 4 wins about 4 times in the 30 years before Riley arrived.

 

[TheSker]

That's what Mike Riley did at Oregon State, one of the weakest and least respected major conference programs at the time. Over the years his aggregate record certainly flattened out into the average category, but he was still operating a program that was second-tier in his own state, and still pulling out the occasional upset of much more talented teams. The year Nebraska hired him, Riley was voted the second most underrated head coach by his college football peers and enjoys a fairly stellar reputation within coaching and recruiting circles.

These might be included in the "qualifications" to look for if we were Kansas. Or Wyoming. Or Indiana.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

The hot head coaching commodities are always guys who proved themselves by taking downtrodden football programs and turning them around almost immediately. That's what Mike Riley did at Oregon State, one of the weakest and least respected major conference programs at the time. Over the years his aggregate record certainly flattened out into the average category, but he was still operating a program that was second-tier in his own state, and still pulling out the occasional upset of much more talented teams. The year Nebraska hired him, Riley was voted the second most underrated head coach by his college football peers and enjoys a fairly stellar reputation within coaching and recruiting circles. So while I think he has a lot left to do at Nebraska, I think we can give him a little credit for being above average.

He also wanted to be here. And appears to be taking a long-term strategy.

So yeah. Let's check back in two years.

Eh, maybe, maybe not. Two years before Riley got there, they were 4-7. His best year of the first two years he was there was 5-6. Erickson was really the one who turned it around. Riley kept it up for awhile but never got particularly close to Erickson's 2000 season.

That's a bit churlish. The 5-6 record was the best record at at OSU in more than 25 years, and Riley's 8 bowl games (in 12 seasons) doubled the number of OSU bowls over the previous 100 years. Erickson definitely thrived with Riley's recruits, but Riley had a nice run in his second stint. Erickson's 2001 OSU team went 5-6 when the talent graduated, and he went on to have a couple miserable seasons with the 49ers.

I think most college football observers not on Husker bulletin boards don't have a problem giving Riley credit for doing more with less.

 

[QMany]

The hot head coaching commodities are always guys who proved themselves by taking downtrodden football programs and turning them around almost immediately. That's what Mike Riley did at Oregon State, one of the weakest and least respected major conference programs at the time. Over the years his aggregate record certainly flattened out into the average category, but he was still operating a program that was second-tier in his own state, and still pulling out the occasional upset of much more talented teams. The year Nebraska hired him, Riley was voted the second most underrated head coach by his college football peers and enjoys a fairly stellar reputation within coaching and recruiting circles. So while I think he has a lot left to do at Nebraska, I think we can give him a little credit for being above average.

He also wanted to be here. And appears to be taking a long-term strategy.

So yeah. Let's check back in two years.

Eh, maybe, maybe not. Two years before Riley got there, they were 4-7. His best year of the first two years he was there was 5-6. Erickson was really the one who turned it around. Riley kept it up for awhile but never got particularly close to Erickson's 2000 season.

They were 4-7, 1-10, and 2-9 in the 3 years before Riley got there. The last time they had more than 4 wins before Riley arrived was in 1971. They had a stellar 4 wins about 4 times in the 30 years before Riley arrived.

Mike Riley was only 3-8 and 5-6 before leaving for the NFL. Like they had been, they were still 8th-10th in the conference, since he only won 2 conference games over those 2 years. That is when Erickson came in, as Mavric alluded, took them to an 11-win season, T1 in conference, Fiesta Bowl victory, and never finished worse than 7th in conference.

 

[Mierin]

The hot head coaching commodities are always guys who proved themselves by taking downtrodden football programs and turning them around almost immediately. That's what Mike Riley did at Oregon State, one of the weakest and least respected major conference programs at the time. Over the years his aggregate record certainly flattened out into the average category, but he was still operating a program that was second-tier in his own state, and still pulling out the occasional upset of much more talented teams. The year Nebraska hired him, Riley was voted the second most underrated head coach by his college football peers and enjoys a fairly stellar reputation within coaching and recruiting circles. So while I think he has a lot left to do at Nebraska, I think we can give him a little credit for being above average.

He also wanted to be here. And appears to be taking a long-term strategy.

So yeah. Let's check back in two years.

Eh, maybe, maybe not. Two years before Riley got there, they were 4-7. His best year of the first two years he was there was 5-6. Erickson was really the one who turned it around. Riley kept it up for awhile but never got particularly close to Erickson's 2000 season.

They were 4-7, 1-10, and 2-9 in the 3 years before Riley got there. The last time they had more than 4 wins before Riley arrived was in 1971. They had a stellar 4 wins about 4 times in the 30 years before Riley arrived.

Mike Riley was only 3-8 and 5-6 before leaving for the NFL. Like they had been, they were still 8th-10th in the conference, since he only won 2 conference games over those 2 years. That is when Erickson came in, as Mavric alluded, took them to an 11-win season, T1 in conference, Fiesta Bowl victory, and never finished worse than 7th in conference.

See previous post.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

That's what Mike Riley did at Oregon State, one of the weakest and least respected major conference programs at the time. Over the years his aggregate record certainly flattened out into the average category, but he was still operating a program that was second-tier in his own state, and still pulling out the occasional upset of much more talented teams. The year Nebraska hired him, Riley was voted the second most underrated head coach by his college football peers and enjoys a fairly stellar reputation within coaching and recruiting circles.

These might be included in the "qualifications" to look for if we were Kansas. Or Wyoming. Or Indiana.

Or USC, or UCLA or Alabama.

I know some folks think Nebraska is entitled to a pre-proven dream coach with a glitch-free career. If you have his name and any hint of his willingness to come to Nebraska, I'm all ears.

Again, last time we did this you were on the Jerry Kill bandwagon. I have a lot of respect for Kill and his unfortunate illness notwithstanding, he's no better qualified than the guy Eichorst hired.

 

[Mavric]

The hot head coaching commodities are always guys who proved themselves by taking downtrodden football programs and turning them around almost immediately. That's what Mike Riley did at Oregon State, one of the weakest and least respected major conference programs at the time. Over the years his aggregate record certainly flattened out into the average category, but he was still operating a program that was second-tier in his own state, and still pulling out the occasional upset of much more talented teams. The year Nebraska hired him, Riley was voted the second most underrated head coach by his college football peers and enjoys a fairly stellar reputation within coaching and recruiting circles. So while I think he has a lot left to do at Nebraska, I think we can give him a little credit for being above average.

He also wanted to be here. And appears to be taking a long-term strategy.

So yeah. Let's check back in two years.

Eh, maybe, maybe not. Two years before Riley got there, they were 4-7. His best year of the first two years he was there was 5-6. Erickson was really the one who turned it around. Riley kept it up for awhile but never got particularly close to Erickson's 2000 season.

That's a bit churlish. The 5-6 record was the best record at at OSU in more than 25 years, and Riley's 8 bowl games (in 12 seasons) doubled the number of OSU bowls over the previous 100 years. Erickson definitely thrived with Riley's recruits, but Riley had a nice run in his second stint. Erickson's 2001 OSU team went 5-6 when the talent graduated, and he went on to have a couple miserable seasons with the 49ers.

I think most college football observers not on Husker bulletin boards don't have a problem giving Riley credit for doing more with less.

Yes, but I don't think getting one more win would necessarily be "turning the program around." And when you start talking about bowl games, that's after he left and Erickson came in, which is what I said.

If you're going to say that Erickson won with Riley's recruits, it would also be true that a decent amount or Riley's success came with Erickson's recruits. And something tells me you're kind of speculating about who got how much talent and when that talent graduated.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

The hot head coaching commodities are always guys who proved themselves by taking downtrodden football programs and turning them around almost immediately. That's what Mike Riley did at Oregon State, one of the weakest and least respected major conference programs at the time. Over the years his aggregate record certainly flattened out into the average category, but he was still operating a program that was second-tier in his own state, and still pulling out the occasional upset of much more talented teams. The year Nebraska hired him, Riley was voted the second most underrated head coach by his college football peers and enjoys a fairly stellar reputation within coaching and recruiting circles. So while I think he has a lot left to do at Nebraska, I think we can give him a little credit for being above average.

He also wanted to be here. And appears to be taking a long-term strategy.

So yeah. Let's check back in two years.

Eh, maybe, maybe not. Two years before Riley got there, they were 4-7. His best year of the first two years he was there was 5-6. Erickson was really the one who turned it around. Riley kept it up for awhile but never got particularly close to Erickson's 2000 season.

They were 4-7, 1-10, and 2-9 in the 3 years before Riley got there. The last time they had more than 4 wins before Riley arrived was in 1971. They had a stellar 4 wins about 4 times in the 30 years before Riley arrived.

Mike Riley was only 3-8 and 5-6 before leaving for the NFL.

Which required an NFL franchise hiring Riley over tons of potential candidates.

And yeah, I'm well aware of his record at the Chargers. He joins a litany of head coaches who failed in San Diego, maybe the most baffling franchise in the NFL.

Seriously, I'm not trying to be a Riley apologist. I just think some of the armchair coaches around here are giving him far less credit than the more objective college football community.

Again, let's check in after the four seasons to which he's entitled. I can't say anything conclusive after the first two, and await the results of his recruiting, reportedly his strong suit.

 

[TheSker]

That's what Mike Riley did at Oregon State, one of the weakest and least respected major conference programs at the time. Over the years his aggregate record certainly flattened out into the average category, but he was still operating a program that was second-tier in his own state, and still pulling out the occasional upset of much more talented teams. The year Nebraska hired him, Riley was voted the second most underrated head coach by his college football peers and enjoys a fairly stellar reputation within coaching and recruiting circles.

These might be included in the "qualifications" to look for if we were Kansas. Or Wyoming. Or Indiana.

Or USC, or UCLA or Alabama.

I know some folks think Nebraska is entitled to a pre-proven dream coach with a glitch-free career. If you have his name and any hint of his willingness to come to Nebraska, I'm all ears.

Again, last time we did this you were on the Jerry Kill bandwagon. I have a lot of respect for Kill and his unfortunate illness notwithstanding, he's no better qualified than the guy Eichorst hired.

USC, UCLA and Alabama are old offers. Very old. Eichorst was not competing against any of the three for Riley's services.

Kill is better qualified statistically. And his system and recruiting background would be much better suited for Nebraska than Riley.

And no, I don't have his name. That's Eichorst's job......to find "that" guy. He didn't.

Out of one side some talk about all the resources, tradition, history, etc. Then out of the other side some ask "who would come here?"

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

The hot head coaching commodities are always guys who proved themselves by taking downtrodden football programs and turning them around almost immediately. That's what Mike Riley did at Oregon State, one of the weakest and least respected major conference programs at the time. Over the years his aggregate record certainly flattened out into the average category, but he was still operating a program that was second-tier in his own state, and still pulling out the occasional upset of much more talented teams. The year Nebraska hired him, Riley was voted the second most underrated head coach by his college football peers and enjoys a fairly stellar reputation within coaching and recruiting circles. So while I think he has a lot left to do at Nebraska, I think we can give him a little credit for being above average.

He also wanted to be here. And appears to be taking a long-term strategy.

So yeah. Let's check back in two years.

Eh, maybe, maybe not. Two years before Riley got there, they were 4-7. His best year of the first two years he was there was 5-6. Erickson was really the one who turned it around. Riley kept it up for awhile but never got particularly close to Erickson's 2000 season.

That's a bit churlish. The 5-6 record was the best record at at OSU in more than 25 years, and Riley's 8 bowl games (in 12 seasons) doubled the number of OSU bowls over the previous 100 years. Erickson definitely thrived with Riley's recruits, but Riley had a nice run in his second stint. Erickson's 2001 OSU team went 5-6 when the talent graduated, and he went on to have a couple miserable seasons with the 49ers.

I think most college football observers not on Husker bulletin boards don't have a problem giving Riley credit for doing more with less.

Yes, but I don't think getting one more win would necessarily be "turning the program around." And when you start talking about bowl games, that's after he left and Erickson came in, which is what I said.

If you're going to say that Erickson won with Riley's recruits, it would also be true that a decent amount or Riley's success came with Erickson's recruits. And something tells me you're kind of speculating about who got how much talent and when that talent graduated.

All I know is that the college football community has no trouble giving Mike Riley credit for the OSU turnaround -- or sharing some of that credit with Erickson -- but some Husker fans do.

 

[Mavric]

The hot head coaching commodities are always guys who proved themselves by taking downtrodden football programs and turning them around almost immediately. That's what Mike Riley did at Oregon State, one of the weakest and least respected major conference programs at the time. Over the years his aggregate record certainly flattened out into the average category, but he was still operating a program that was second-tier in his own state, and still pulling out the occasional upset of much more talented teams. The year Nebraska hired him, Riley was voted the second most underrated head coach by his college football peers and enjoys a fairly stellar reputation within coaching and recruiting circles. So while I think he has a lot left to do at Nebraska, I think we can give him a little credit for being above average.

He also wanted to be here. And appears to be taking a long-term strategy.

So yeah. Let's check back in two years.

Eh, maybe, maybe not. Two years before Riley got there, they were 4-7. His best year of the first two years he was there was 5-6. Erickson was really the one who turned it around. Riley kept it up for awhile but never got particularly close to Erickson's 2000 season.

That's a bit churlish. The 5-6 record was the best record at at OSU in more than 25 years, and Riley's 8 bowl games (in 12 seasons) doubled the number of OSU bowls over the previous 100 years. Erickson definitely thrived with Riley's recruits, but Riley had a nice run in his second stint. Erickson's 2001 OSU team went 5-6 when the talent graduated, and he went on to have a couple miserable seasons with the 49ers.

I think most college football observers not on Husker bulletin boards don't have a problem giving Riley credit for doing more with less.

Yes, but I don't think getting one more win would necessarily be "turning the program around." And when you start talking about bowl games, that's after he left and Erickson came in, which is what I said.

If you're going to say that Erickson won with Riley's recruits, it would also be true that a decent amount or Riley's success came with Erickson's recruits. And something tells me you're kind of speculating about who got how much talent and when that talent graduated.

All I know is that the college football community has no trouble giving Mike Riley credit for the OSU turnaround -- or sharing some of that credit with Erickson -- but some Husker fans do.

And how many times has the "college football community" gone out of their way to try to talk down someone's success or achievements?

Kind of like everyone is a "home run hire" and got their first choice.

 

[CPT Blackshirt]

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

Out of one side some talk about all the resources, tradition, history, etc. Then out of the other side some ask "who would come here?"

That's not talking out of both sides. That's a legitimate conundrum.

I think we can get good coaches to come to Nebraska. I think Riley has gotten some nationally respected assistants to come here, not to mention getting high-profile Southern California recruits bragging about coming to Nebraska.

It's a start.

But the half-dozen (or less) slam dunk Power 5 head coaches who can call their shots?

Maybe those guys don't come to Nebraska. That's not a huge slight or anything. Just the lay of the land.

As long as people think we could or should have signed Jim Harbaugh, there will be message board dysfunction.

 

[cornstar]

The hot head coaching commodities are always guys who proved themselves by taking downtrodden football programs and turning them around almost immediately. That's what Mike Riley did at Oregon State, one of the weakest and least respected major conference programs at the time. Over the years his aggregate record certainly flattened out into the average category, but he was still operating a program that was second-tier in his own state, and still pulling out the occasional upset of much more talented teams. The year Nebraska hired him, Riley was voted the second most underrated head coach by his college football peers and enjoys a fairly stellar reputation within coaching and recruiting circles. So while I think he has a lot left to do at Nebraska, I think we can give him a little credit for being above average.

He also wanted to be here. And appears to be taking a long-term strategy.

So yeah. Let's check back in two years.

Eh, maybe, maybe not. Two years before Riley got there, they were 4-7. His best year of the first two years he was there was 5-6. Erickson was really the one who turned it around. Riley kept it up for awhile but never got particularly close to Erickson's 2000 season.

That's a bit churlish. The 5-6 record was the best record at at OSU in more than 25 years, and Riley's 8 bowl games (in 12 seasons) doubled the number of OSU bowls over the previous 100 years. Erickson definitely thrived with Riley's recruits, but Riley had a nice run in his second stint. Erickson's 2001 OSU team went 5-6 when the talent graduated, and he went on to have a couple miserable seasons with the 49ers.

I think most college football observers not on Husker bulletin boards don't have a problem giving Riley credit for doing more with less.

Yes, but I don't think getting one more win would necessarily be "turning the program around." And when you start talking about bowl games, that's after he left and Erickson came in, which is what I said.

If you're going to say that Erickson won with Riley's recruits, it would also be true that a decent amount or Riley's success came with Erickson's recruits. And something tells me you're kind of speculating about who got how much talent and when that talent graduated.

All I know is that the college football community has no trouble giving Mike Riley credit for the OSU turnaround -- or sharing some of that credit with Erickson -- but some Husker fans do.

Guys like TJ Houshmandzadeh and Ochocinco were Erickson recruits. Erickson was the one who built that and Riley was able to ride his coat tails for a few years. Ironically, I heard that Erickson said that OSU was the best job he ever had.