Where do you stand?

[Landlord]

Good coaches come in and win immediately all of the time. That's what good coaches do. Regardless of what they inherit, let alone when they inherit a consistent .700 winner with the most talented roster in its division.

I agree with the overall thought behind your post, but Bob Stoops, Pete Carroll, Nick Saban, Steve Spurrier (at SCAR), Art Briles, Gary Patterson, and Bill Snyder would be a few who would disagree with this notion.

 

[cm husker]

Each of those won more than their predecessors I think.

 

[Landlord]

But they didn't come in and win immediately all of the time. 6-6, 7-5, 4-8, etc.

 

[Saunders]

Good coaches come in and win immediately all of the time. That's what good coaches do. Regardless of what they inherit, let alone when they inherit a consistent .700 winner with the most talented roster in its division.

I agree with the overall thought behind your post, but Bob Stoops, Pete Carroll, Nick Saban, Steve Spurrier (at SCAR), Art Briles, Gary Patterson, and Bill Snyder would be a few who would disagree with this notion.

Briles, Patterson, Spurrier and Snyder took over much, much lower tier teams, so it's not really comparable.

Stoops, and Saban won national titles in year 2, Carroll won the Pac 12 and finished #5. They took over comparable programs to Nebraska that were in a down period, and flourished in year 2.

So, championship or bust this year?

 

[cm husker]

But they didn't come in and win immediately all of the time. 6-6, 7-5, 4-8, etc.

They immediately won more than their predecessors.

I guess I should have said "come in and win as much or usually more than their predecessors immediately."

I don't this this should be controversial.

What will be interesting is to see if this staff can buck a historical trend, which is that only coaches who improve on the records of teams they assumed win national championships (and I think mainly for conference championships, too - though there are at least a couple of off the top of my head, like Solich taking a step back and then going on to win a CC).

 

[Red Five]

Briles, Patterson, Spurrier and Snyder took over much, much lower tier teams, so it's not really comparable.

Not true for Spurrier and Patterson. Spurrier went +1 wins his first year (7-5 vs 6-5). Patterson went -4 wins his first year (6-6 vs 10-2)

Holtz 2000-2004: 6.6 wins/year

Spurrier 2005-2009: 7 wins/year

Franchione 1998-2000: 8.3 wins/year

Patterson 2001-2004: 8 wins/year

 

[Saunders]

Briles, Patterson, Spurrier and Snyder took over much, much lower tier teams, so it's not really comparable.

Not true for Spurrier and Patterson. Spurrier went +1 wins his first year (7-5 vs 6-5). Patterson went -4 wins his first year (6-6 vs 10-2)

Holtz 2000-2004: 6.6 wins/year

Spurrier 2005-2009: 7 wins/year

Franchione 1998-2000: 8.3 wins/year

Patterson 2001-2004: 8 wins/year

I mean that they weren't taking over top tier teams. For instance, looking at what South Carolina was, and what it's resources were, and comparing that to Nebraska isn't even close.

 

[ColoradoHusk]

Briles, Patterson, Spurrier and Snyder took over much, much lower tier teams, so it's not really comparable.

Not true for Spurrier and Patterson. Spurrier went +1 wins his first year (7-5 vs 6-5). Patterson went -4 wins his first year (6-6 vs 10-2)

Holtz 2000-2004: 6.6 wins/year

Spurrier 2005-2009: 7 wins/year

Franchione 1998-2000: 8.3 wins/year

Patterson 2001-2004: 8 wins/year

I don't think you can compare Franchione and Patterson to Pelini and Riley. Franchione left TCU to get a "promotion" at Alabama. He took TCU to it's peak at the time. It would have been difficult for Patterson to improve on the record of Franchione in his first few years.

Pelini was fired, as he wasn't winning "big enough" and showing the behavior that Eichorst wanted in a head coach. Riley has shown better demeanor on the sideline, but his first year was a complete disaster in terms of results on the field.

 

[Red Five]

I agree with what you guys are saying, just showing some numbers that "good" coaches don't come in and win "immediately".

And yeah, Riley needs to win more games this year or there will be problems.

 

[Enhance]

Good coaches come in and win immediately all of the time. That's what good coaches do. Regardless of what they inherit, let alone when they inherit a consistent .700 winner with the most talented roster in its division.

I agree with the overall thought behind your post, but Bob Stoops, Pete Carroll, Nick Saban, Steve Spurrier (at SCAR), Art Briles, Gary Patterson, and Bill Snyder would be a few who would disagree with this notion.

Briles, Patterson, Spurrier and Snyder took over much, much lower tier teams, so it's not really comparable.

Stoops, and Saban won national titles in year 2, Carroll won the Pac 12 and finished #5. They took over comparable programs to Nebraska that were in a down period, and flourished in year 2.

So, championship or bust this year?

I've sometimes thought about this in the back of mind, wondering if year two could be some kind of breakout year for the program. What holds me up more than anything is some of the depth issues we have on the lines.

I could look it up (don't have time at the moment) but I'd be curious to see what kind of talent was recruited to Alabama prior to Saban's takeover and heading into year two. My uneducated guess is it's better than Nebraska.

 

[cm husker]

Plus, Patterson was an assistant under francione and promoted from within wasn't he? Not really analogous.

Anyway, I don't think anyone is really disagreeing here. Good coaches win immediately, at the very least within the second year. We need to see real improvement from Riley and his staff, particularly regarding in game management.

 

[cm husker]

Good coaches come in and win immediately all of the time. That's what good coaches do. Regardless of what they inherit, let alone when they inherit a consistent .700 winner with the most talented roster in its division.

I agree with the overall thought behind your post, but Bob Stoops, Pete Carroll, Nick Saban, Steve Spurrier (at SCAR), Art Briles, Gary Patterson, and Bill Snyder would be a few who would disagree with this notion.

Briles, Patterson, Spurrier and Snyder took over much, much lower tier teams, so it's not really comparable.
Stoops, and Saban won national titles in year 2, Carroll won the Pac 12 and finished #5. They took over comparable programs to Nebraska that were in a down period, and flourished in year 2.

So, championship or bust this year?

I've sometimes thought about this in the back of mind, wondering if year two could be some kind of breakout year for the program. What holds me up more than anything is some of the depth issues we have on the lines.
I could look it up (don't have time at the moment) but I'd be curious to see what kind of talent was recruited to Alabama prior to Saban's takeover and heading into year two. My uneducated guess is it's better than Nebraska.

Scanning through on 247 - 2004 - 30th

2005 - 20th

2006 - 15th

2007 - 13th

 

[ColoradoHusk]

Plus, Patterson was an assistant under francione and promoted from within wasn't he? Not really analogous.

Anyway, I don't think anyone is really disagreeing here. Good coaches win immediately, at the very least within the second year. We need to see real improvement from Riley and his staff, particularly regarding in game management.

This is the biggest concern I have. Riley struggled with game management at Oregon State, and he struggled last year at NU. The guy has been a head coach for ~20 years. I don't think he is all of a sudden going to improve in that area. He is basically who he is.

 

[RedSavage]

Plus, Patterson was an assistant under francione and promoted from within wasn't he? Not really analogous.

Anyway, I don't think anyone is really disagreeing here. Good coaches win immediately, at the very least within the second year. We need to see real improvement from Riley and his staff, particularly regarding in game management.

This is the biggest concern I have. Riley struggled with game management at Oregon State, and he struggled last year at NU. The guy has been a head coach for ~20 years. I don't think he is all of a sudden going to improve in that area. He is basically who he is.

I agree and it's not like Langs has a history any better than Riley's in that regard

 

[Saunders]

Plus, Patterson was an assistant under francione and promoted from within wasn't he? Not really analogous.

Anyway, I don't think anyone is really disagreeing here. Good coaches win immediately, at the very least within the second year. We need to see real improvement from Riley and his staff, particularly regarding in game management.

This is the biggest concern I have. Riley struggled with game management at Oregon State, and he struggled last year at NU. The guy has been a head coach for ~20 years. I don't think he is all of a sudden going to improve in that area. He is basically who he is.

Agreed. I posted it a while back, but Hail Varsity did a great article in their yearbook on the importance of year 2, and how telling it is to success.
Basically, if we don't make a huge jump this year, than chances of ever being relevant under the current regime is very small.