I’m sure there will be people that mock you on here for saying that. But I’ve come to realize we were better off with Riley compared to today. Riley should have told Eichorst he wouldn’t fire Banker and said you’ll have to fire me instead. Eichorst wouldn’t have.
1 score games: Riley > Frost > Rhule
- Thread starter thall_
- Start date
Riley had Tommy Armstrong, but it was Bo Pelini (people say) who couldn't recruit..
BS, Riley’s teams were power puff soft.. We became more physical at first under SF and than that went away near the end of his era here by soft spring practices..
Diaco cost him multiple Ws. Our judgement gets clouded by disdain for coaches we don’t like. IF you look at him objectively, his long term downfall in college was his recruiting. He won his second year with Bo’s guys. Diaco’s defense was horrific. I get that recruiting is a big part of the job but if you just want to talk X’s and O’s, he’s good. He’s an illustration of a guy who lacked some of the off field skills you need to have at a P5 program.
What’s interesting is the list of guys Riley put in the NFl when at Oregon State but he could never consistently recruit enough of those guys to field top teams. Some of that was the lack of tradition there. The location and facilities sure as hell didn’t help him either.
IF Matt Rhule had Riley’s football knowledge, Rhule would be a much better coach.
Last edited:
Bo found some guys. Actually Tim Beck recruited Tommy. Beck was an excellent talent evaluator and his connections in Texas helped us. Bo got some really good players but not enough of them. Then his defensive 2 gap scheme got shredded by good teams when he didn’t have enough guys who could execute it.
I agree that his teams weren’t as physical as they should be. That was largely because he was a believer in a player led and motivated structure. We had a core of guys who were pissed that Bo got fired The team chemistry was a mess. The fans were fractured and so was the team. Kind of amazing that he won 8 games wasn’t it?
His last year I think Diaco’s defense gave up over 50 points. 4 times. The switch to the 3-4 mandated by Eichorst was a disaster.
Last edited:
They were physical at first under SF yet started 0-6 that year.
Pelini left the cupboard pretty bare for Riley. And we haven't dug ourselves out of the talent deficit since then.
One of the reasons I’m still fairly optimistic that Rhule will get it done is his recruiting and organizational skills. I would feel better if we hadn’t lost our DB coach. Starting a freshman QB is never a recipe for instant success.
Which is why going to a bowl game is very important this year. Who knows what will happen to the recruiting class if we end up with 6 straight losses and no bowl game.
No he didn’t beat Wisconsin.. Bo did 2012, only win against Wisconsin we have since joining the conference..
Didn’t Banker get blown out 40-10 and say clarkeyes practice’s must be meat grinders..
Last edited:
Our offense was in trouble when Armstrong was injured. That was a pretty good Iowa team but that last year teams averaged putting up 40 on Diaco’s defense.
I looked it up. Rile lost in OT to Wisconsin in Madison and lost a one score game to them in Lincoln. I’m sure we got blown out his last year.
Yes, 38-17 in Lincoln. Armstrong didn’t play QB in 2017, can’t remember the white guys name who did.😂
It was Tanner Lee.
No, he didn't. He went 2-2 (9-3 overall).
What does this have anything to do with what I had posted?
The guy won 75% of his games here, no fewer than 9 wins each year, consistently ranked, bowl game every season. The team is so pathetic now that we'd consider just getting bowl eligible as a major win for the program.
My post just brings more context to those numbers.
"shouldn't have been close" is a whole different ballpark from "lost all the close ones."
Wisconsin/Oregon shouldn't have been close.
Georgia/Kentucky shouldn't have been close.
Nebraska/Ohio State shouldn't have been close.
the difference is winners find a way, and we haven't been winners for nearly a decade.
Yes, that is also different.
I know you're not meaning it this way, but to just say "the difference is winners find a way" can be silly sometimes because "Pelini finding a way to beat McNeese St" doesn't mean a whole lot to me.
Like I already said, context is super important.
