A little about Riley - from an Outsider

[bigboxes]

Now that I corrected the fact. Would you like to dispute it?

Would you recommend we hire a coach that is over 60 and has lost 12 of his last 14 conference games ? Sorry, I had one too many losses there.

But, honestly, do you think that fact is irrelevant?

If Riley is fired, would you advocate that we hire a coach that has lost at that rate? A coach that has gone 2-12 in his last 14 conference games?

My guess is no. Unless he is really, really nice. And won a championship in a seven team league in a country that only cares about hockey over 20 years ago.

Confirmation bias is noted. No one says that Riley was hired because he is nice. It's a desirable trait in any employee. He was hired to see what he can do at a traditional school with lots of resources. He's going to get at least another year barring a team collapse. I think he should get at least a couple more years. I already know what you think, as it's obvious in the way that you lead.

 

[SnohomishRed]

I could be wrong but if you read his entire post, I would guess that he has dyslexia. I have two very good friends with dyslexia and one of them makes those same type of transposed spelling errors ESPECIALLY with other people's names. While I understand you want throw shade on his credibility, it is an extremely informative and well thought out post. Much better than some of the angry rhetoric we see so often on here.

I guess thats possible and if so I apologize, however I have no idea of credibility - What he said was:

• Riley did a very good job making OSU competitive
• Riley at least was very respected by other coaches
• Riley won the grey cup and some other individual awards

All of this I 100% agree with - What I do not agree with is that what he did at OSU years ago or in Canada years translates to a successful coach today. if that was the case Bobby Bowden would still be coaching. I do think he can still make it here if the defense carries him this year and I hope it does. I do not agree that NU fans are being hasty with their doubts based on his first couple of years and how his last few years at OSU went. I believe the now and the recent past is more predictive than what he did when he took over at OSU

 

[Solana Beach Husker]

15 years too late...

 

[Toms Wife]

If we are going to correct some things we might want to mention the original poster somehow left Dennis Ericson and his winning percentage out of his post.

And if you want to say, "But, but, but Riley's guys" then you have to say, "But, but, but Anderson has Riley's guys too."

 

[cubsker]

i think whats happened to riley is whats happened to a lot of successful coaches (mack brown, les miles, to name a couple). they get older and the game passes them by some. what worked in the past no longer quite does. i like what riley did on the def side of the ball. he has not done the same with the offense which i believe will ultimately be his downfall.

 

[timnsun]

If we are going to correct some things we might want to mention the original poster somehow left Dennis Ericson and his winning percentage out of his post.

Obviously you didn’t read it. He mentioned Erickson, and mentioned that Erickson credited Riley consistently for setting the foundation that gave Erickson success at Oregon State. He didn’t mention Erickson’s record, which probably is what got your panties in a twist, but he did mention that Erickson’s success was because of why Riley had put in place there.

You can disagree with that statement if you want, I don’t care, but he did mention Erickson.

 

[Toms Wife]

Obviously you didn’t read it. He mentioned Erickson, and mentioned that Erickson credited Riley consistently for setting the foundation that gave Erickson success at Oregon State. He didn’t mention Erickson’s record, which probably is what got your panties in a twist, but he did mention that Erickson’s success was because of why Riley had put in place there.

You can disagree with that statement if you want, I don’t care, but he did mention Erickson.

My words: "Erickson AND his winning percentage." How about we credit Riley with the current state of affairs there too? Anderson and the AD surely believe he is responsible for laying that foundation.

 

[ExxHusker]

Someone has an agenda. Hmmm. What could it be? Huskers best interest? Nah. HCMR’s best interest. Without a doubt.

HCMR needs to pull out some wins. His tenure at Nebraska depends on it. Wins are the only thing that keeps him here. Not this kind of....

 

[SnohomishRed]

My words: "Erickson AND his winning percentage." How about we credit Riley with the current state of affairs there too? Anderson and the AD surely believe he is responsible for laying that foundation.

Erickson always credited both Riley and Pettibone, his first teams,his upperclassmen were recruited by Pettibone and it was Pettibone that fought to get facilities improvement. Riley brought offense to the program,defense improved under Erickson and principally due to a bunch of thugs he got from the JC ranks.

Erickson took the team to winning records, Riley maintained that without thugs albeit at lower level. Riley normally had decent offense it was defense that held them from going further.

 

[timnsun]

My words: "Erickson AND his winning percentage." How about we credit Riley with the current state of affairs there too? Anderson and the AD surely believe he is responsible for laying that foundation.

My response... he did mention Erickson. If you meant why didn’t he mention Erickson’s record, you shouldn’t have included the word ‘and’. You should have asked why didn’t he mention Erickson’s record?

They way you posted it, you were suggesting he didn’t mention Erickson, nor his record.

Sorry you weren’t more clear.

 

[Nebraska Fan]

There was no reason for him to bring the misfits to Nebraska

 

[Wasker77]

A Little about Mike Riley from an Outsider:

I was born in California and raised throughout the West Coast, where I met my wife (a Nebraska grad), who eventually dragged me to the Midwest to raise a family.

I am familiar with Mike Riley for 3 reasons: 1) I’m a lifetime PAC10 fan, 2) my wife is an avid Husker fan, which makes me a fan, 3) a conversation I had with Mike Bolletti circa 2011 at a fund-raiser. (and a Mike Riley handshake in a hotel lobby in 2005)

Having lived in the PAC10 footprint most of my life, I knew of and always found Mike Riley intriguing, but my knowledge of Riley only really increased both after my conversation with Bolletti and again when he was named head coach of Nebraska

For those that don’t know Mike Bolletti, he is Oregon’s winningest Head coach of all-time, mentor to Chip Kelly and Chris Peterson, and coached directly against Mike Riley in 97/98 and again from 2003-2009. Upon meeting Bolletti, short on time, I awkwardly asked – “who is the greatest coach you ever coached against?”. While he did not answer my question directly, he did offer up the following 2 nuggets: 1) that he knew of nobody that could do more with less than Mike Riley, and 2) that he felt Riley would have been a national household name and won a national championship if he would have been willing to leave his home state of Oregon earlier in his career.

Why was Bolletti so easy with his praise of Riley that day? I think to understand, one has to dig a little deeper……

The common refrain I hear from Husker fans when I am out w/ my wife watching a Nebraska game goes something like this: “Riley is just a mediocre 500 coach who has never won a thing”. Does that represent the majority of what people think? Like a rushed national writer trying to hit a deadline, does the average Nebraska fan do a 10 second google search of his record at Oregon State, draw a conclusion, and then call it a day?

How many people know that at the age of 24, Riley became the defensive coordinator of Linden College and over the next 6 years coached them to a 52-7-1 record, 5 conferences titles and a NAIA National Championship at the age of 29.

How many people know that at the age of 33, Mike Riley become the 2nd youngest head coach in the 75 year history of the Canadian Football League (the legendary Bud Grant being the youngest), and in his very first season became the youngest coach to ever win the Grey Cup, only to turn around and do it again 2 years later at the age of 35.

How many people know that at the age of 38, USC hired Mike Riley to be QB/Assistant Head Coach and then immediately won 2 Pac10 titles, with QB Rob Johnson braking numerous NCAA QB records.

My favorite: How many people know that in 1997, Mike Riley inherited a Jerry Pettibone wishbone triple threat Oregon State football team (the undisputed 30yr doormat of college football, Avg 2 wins a season). In his first year he installed a pro-style offense. By year 2 he came within 1 point (twice) of breaking a streak of 27 consecutive losing seasons. By year 4 (having handed the team over to Dennis Erickson in Year 3), Oregon State won the PAC10 title, the Fiesta Bowl, and finished the season ranked 4th in the country. To this day, Erickson credits Mike Riley for laying the foundation for that miraculous season.

How many people know that upon his return from the NFL to Oregon State in 2003, with the worst talent (per recruiting services), facilities and resources in the PAC10, that over the next 7 seasons, the only 2 teams that had a better conference record were USC (Carroll) and Oregon (Bolletti). - the same record as Cal, and significantly better than Arizona, ASU, Stanford, UCLA, Washington and Washington State.

How many people know that over those 7 seasons only 3 PAC10 coaches retained their jobs: Pete Carrol, Mike Riley and Tedford, and that Oregon State went 5-1 in bowl games.

How many people know that the following are Oregon State’s football winning % before, during and after Mike Riley was head-coach:

- Before / Doormat of College Football: 19% winning percent (2 wins/year)
- During / 2003-09: 64% winning percent
- During / 2010-14: 47% winning percent (see below)
- After / Gary Anderson Era: 24% winning percent

How many people know that he has been named, NAIA assistant coach of the year, Pac10 assistant coach of the year, Pac10 Coach of the year, CFL Coach of the year (twice), and in 2014 his Power 5 head coaching peers voted him the most underrated coach in College Football?

So that leaves just 2 relatively short periods of his 40 year coaching career where Riley saw limited or no success:

Three unsuccessful years in the NFL (think Saban, Spurrier, Holtz, Petrino, Chip Kelly, etc.) and five very average years (2010-14) at Oregon State where he went 0-10 against Oregon and Stanford (think Phil Knight-Oregon/John Arrillaga-Stanford $150+ million arms race) but a respectable 29-23 against rest of PAC10 (again with the least amount of talent). This widening un-level playing field was ultimately a key factor in him leaving OSU and coming to Nebraska.

Except for the NFL, Mike Riley has had an immediate and positive impact that resulted in either championships or significantly higher performance at every step of his career (NAIA, CFL, USC, and Oregon State twice). Every place he went got significantly better, every place he left got significantly worse.

As an outsider, who admittedly is not quite as emotionally attached as you all, my only thought about the situation is pretty simple. Based on Riley’s past, I think the odds are significantly greater of winning a BIG10 Title sooner if you stick with Riley, rather than blowing it up and starting all over again. (lest we forget in year 2 he came within one play on the road of winning the BIG10 West with an” island of misfit toys” and a dumbed-down modified scheme).

Mike Riley has overachieved in almost every endeavor he has ever undertaken. If given the right amount of time, Riley will win at Nebraska and win consistently. If Riley can win 2 state championships (player), a NCAA football national championship (player), an NAIA championship (coach), two Canadian Football League Championships (coach), and two PAC10 championships (assistant head coach), and nearly win a PAC10 championship as a head coach with lesser talent (imagine Illinois), then he will win a BIG10 Championship with Nebraska’s resources.

There are many more Riley stories (his association w/ Tom Brady, Bear Bryant, Major Ogilvie, etc..) but let me leave you with one last thought.

How many people know that Mike Riley has coached in College football for 38 years, (held numerous positions, turned down numerous positions) and not once in those 38 years, not a single time, has he ever been fired. I guess there’s always a first time for everything though. Be careful what you wish for.

Go Big Red!

I am not sure you know what you are talking about. First of all it is Mike Bellotti not Bolletti. Sounds like a made up conversation with Bellotti to substantiate your story. (When I saw Belotti on the golf course in Bend, Oregon the summer before last he laughed at my Nebraska hat. Well not really but it makes a great story) I don't know where you are from in PAC 12 country but most of us here know the NAIA school is not Linden College but Linfield College (the same school OC Danny Langsdorf played Qb at). I don't want to take the time to verify your report Riley's 29-23 record against the the Pac-12 minus Stanford and Oregon. Well one, Stanford before Harbaugh was very up and down. U Dub and Washington State were in turmoil. Both schools going through some bad coaches. Cal was not winning games. UCLA was underachieving. The PAC 12 was simply not the conference it is today. Your story about what Mike Riley will do is just more fantasy. It's speculation.

 

[Wasker77]

Way to base his career on his last 15 games. You are amazing!

Tim, like it or not it's true many Beaver fans were getting tired of Mike's act? To be honest many Pac-12 fans still think highly of Mike, today. But it doesn't have anything to do with his record and is based solely on his character and him being such a nice guy.

 

[timnsun]

Tim, like it or not it's true many Beaver fans were getting tired of Mike's act? To be honest many Pac-12 fans still think highly of Mike, today? But it doesn't have anything to do with his record and is based solely on his character and him being such a nice guy.

Here’s my issue with Phillipe... I have yet to see him say anything positive about Riley. He simply can’t do it. Sometimes I’m able to ignore him, sometimes not.

When the OP took the time to post a long and informative post, Phillipe went Phillipe and blasted it. Not everything in The OP is going to be agreed upon, I get that. But the lack of respect phillipe has shown for Riley is tiresome. And to completely ignore everything the OP posted and boil it all down to the last few years at Oregon State and how that trumps everything was pretty tasteless in my opinion.

I don’t care if we don’t agree on everything... you and I haven’t either, but I’ve come to respect your posts a heck of a lot more over time. Phillipe brings nothing but vitriol for Riley to this board, and he doesn’t even try to hide it.

 

[Wasker77]

Maybe you missed the point. I'll provide some context. While people are debating the merits of various coaches we might like to hire. Nobody, absolutely nobody, would even suggest or bring up the idea of hiring somebody that has lost 13 of his last 15 conference games.

Nobody with any semblance of sanity would think, hey this guy is trending well. Let's hire the guy coming off a losing record with 2 conference wins in almost two full seasons. Yet, we actually hired that guy. I think it is more than fair to judge a guy with a mediocre career record, a 1-15 season on his resume, and an absolute free falling program on his last 15 games BEFORE WE HIRED HIM.

By the way, ever since we picked up Riley, I've heard about his lack of resources at OSU. Why didn't he get those resources built up in his years there?

What kind of resources did Devaney have when he took over the sterling Nebraska program? Must have been something to behold.

I will take this one and I am not a Riley defender. Nebraska fans have never had to deal with an in-state rival university. Washington State and Oregon State get scraps compared to U Dub and Oregon. Then Oregon has billionaire Uncle Phil Knight giving them EVERYTHING they want. Both State schools have teeny tiny stadiums. I think with new conference tv money that is going to change but in the past it was a struggle. It's only my opinion but I think the alums of both State Universities have an inferiority complex when it comes to the bigger University schools. I can't speak for Oregon State fans but living in agriculture focused Eastern Washington, so therefore having more Cougs than Husky fans (the lawyers and doctors), the Cougs have a big dislike for the Huskies.

Obviously you didn’t read it. He mentioned Erickson, and mentioned that Erickson credited Riley consistently for setting the foundation that gave Erickson success at Oregon State. He didn’t mention Erickson’s record, which probably is what got your panties in a twist, but he did mention that Erickson’s success was because of why Riley had put in place there. 4 years Erickson was at Oregon State and the four years that mike followed him.

You can disagree with that statement if you want, I don’t care, but he did mention Erickson.[/Q

It is extremely hard to win at Oregon State. Mike's and Erickson's records are pretty similar when you compare the 4 years Erickson coached the Beavers with the four years Mike followed him. My perception back then was Erickson was the better coach. I guess the big factor in that thought was the 2000 season when Erickson lead the Beavers to a 11-1 record finishing No 4 in the polls. The only loss that year was to Ricky Neuheisel's No 3 Huskies. (I miss Rick. I was at every game he ever coached the Buffs against the Huskers. At the end of the game when he had to run across the field to shake Tom's hand was simply the best)

 

[Wasker77]

It is extremely hard to win at Oregon State. Mike's and Erickson's records are pretty similar when you compare the 4 years Erickson coached the Beavers with the four years Mike followed him. My perception back then was Erickson was the better coach. I guess the big factor in that thought was the 2000 season when Erickson led the Beavers to a 11-1 record finishing No 4 in the polls. The only loss that year was to Ricky Neuheisel's No 3 Huskies. (I miss Rick. I was at every game he ever coached the Buffs against the Huskers. At the end of the game when he had to run across the field to shake Tom's hand was simply the best)

I guess it was Frank's hand Rick shook that last year, 1998. It was a great game in Boulder in 97. As he was taking his headset off at the end of the game Rick muttered to himself, "F**k! I hate losing to these guys". Then he ran to find Tom.

 

[CFBfan70]

You're right, I'm sorry.

He lost 12 of his last 14 PAC 12 games. That would be 2-12 instead of 2-13.

I guess we can pretend that's acceptable. But I guess that changes everything. 2-13 would have been bad. 2-12, now I see why we hired him. He was really trending well.

Never pretended anything was acceptable just pointing out that you have such an anti Riley hard on that you have to use the same incorrect stat over and over using only 38% of a season to try and make yourself more justifiable while completely ignoring anything positive anyone else tries to bring up. I mean come on. 6-12 for 2 seasons is bad but your anti Riley just cant let you use two full seasons

 

[Phillipe]

Confirmation bias is noted. No one says that Riley was hired because he is nice. It's a desirable trait in any employee. He was hired to see what he can do at a traditional school with lots of resources. He's going to get at least another year barring a team collapse. I think he should get at least a couple more years. I already know what you think, as it's obvious in the way that you lead.

yes, I see you ignored my question.

Give Riley all the time you want. I am not saying fire him now. I'm saying he is a bad coach. Whether that is determined this season or next is up to somebody else. I'll be surprised if things don't fall apart soon. But, if they don't, great. Let him stay. Let him turn a consistent nine win program into a sub .500 program.

We are getting what one would expect from that hire. My issue is that people seem ok with it.

 

[Phillipe]

Obviously you didn’t read it. He mentioned Erickson, and mentioned that Erickson credited Riley consistently for setting the foundation that gave Erickson success at Oregon State. He didn’t mention Erickson’s record, which probably is what got your panties in a twist, but he did mention that Erickson’s success was because of why Riley had put in place there.

You can disagree with that statement if you want, I don’t care, but he did mention Erickson.

Yeah, that and some really good JUCO's that Erickson brought in. Proving of course, that you can win in OSU.

 

[Phillipe]

Never pretended anything was acceptable just pointing out that you have such an anti Riley hard on that you have to use the same incorrect stat over and over using only 38% of a season to try and make yourself more justifiable while completely ignoring anything positive anyone else tries to bring up. I mean come on. 6-12 for 2 seasons is bad but your anti Riley just cant let you use two full seasons

MY point is, which is rather obvious, he lost 12 of his 14 LAST conference games. You understand what that means, right? Inside that 6-12 ( which should NEVER get somebody hired) is a worse 2-12 and they were his MOST RECENT conference games. Tell me that's acceptable ? Tell me you would see that and think, yeah I'll hire that guy.

 

[kcopsker]

Please, explain it to me. I would love to discuss it with you.

Let's see - if you are trying to define Riley by less than two seasons of his career at OSU, albeit his most recent two, you are deciding to ignore 30+ years of his career. That seems like a pretty short-sighted decision when hiring a coach at a major university. Thus, it appears that you are cherry picking the data that fits your argument which is what the OP was stating yet your post in response to OPs did exactly that.

 

[Husker Priapism]

Nice post OP.

 

[JohnRossEwing]

I feel like Riley should be getting read for Wisconsin instead of typing up long posts about himself.

 

[sparky62]

To the OP, thanks for putting in the time for this post. Appreciate it.

 

[NorthWillRiseAgain]

By the way, ever since we picked up Riley, I've heard about his lack of resources at OSU. Why didn't he get those resources built up in his years there?

What kind of resources did Devaney have when he took over the sterling Nebraska program? Must have been something to behold.

Yeah, cause money just flows in with 9 win seasons in Corvallis.

 

[NorthWillRiseAgain]

Now that I corrected the fact. Would you like to dispute it?

Would you recommend we hire a coach that is over 60 and has lost 12 of his last 14 conference games ? Sorry, I had one too many losses there.

But, honestly, do you think that fact is irrelevant?

If Riley is fired, would you advocate that we hire a coach that has lost at that rate? A coach that has gone 2-12 in his last 14 conference games?

My guess is no. Unless he is really, really nice. And won a championship in a seven team league in a country that only cares about hockey over 20 years ago.

But, sometimes a time at a school goes stale and plateaus. Nah, that can't happen.

I'm not a fan of the Riley hire, but I DO KNOW that you give someone a legitimate shot.

 

[jteten]

Too many words. I'll go ahead and judge MR on his tenure at Nebraska. He's got some work to do, there is still time.

 

[HuskerO]

Maybe you missed the point. I'll provide some context. While people are debating the merits of various coaches we might like to hire. Nobody, absolutely nobody, would even suggest or bring up the idea of hiring somebody that has lost 13 of his last 15 conference games.

Nobody with any semblance of sanity would think, hey this guy is trending well. Let's hire the guy coming off a losing record with 2 conference wins in almost two full seasons. Yet, we actually hired that guy. I think it is more than fair to judge a guy with a mediocre career record, a 1-15 season on his resume, and an absolute free falling program on his last 15 games BEFORE WE HIRED HIM.

Al Golden won 12 out of his last 16 conference games while at Temple. We probably should have hired him.... Maybe we should have grabbed Kevin Sumlin before Texas A&M did... Brady Hoke, Charlie Strong, Sonny Dykes, Dave Doeren, Gary Anderson, etc...

 

[HuskerDocCO]

holy hell massive amount of avatarless

 

[jlb321]

appreciate the OP post

reading that it is certainly easy to conclude that Riley overachieved at OSU or as was stated got a lot out of a little

let the season play out

but along with the theme of the OP

"how many people know" ..... that it has been nearly 6 decades since a coach at Nebraska has posted 2 non-winning seasons in any 3 year stretch

hopefully this doesn't occur and we can get to 7 wins but I don't think at 6 or 7 wins anyone can conclude that he is overachieving in year 3, in fact I think it can be reasonably concluded that even at 7-5 he has underachieved. He has to win 7 games this year to tie Callahan's win total in his first 3 years.

The question is would this represent a big enough underachievement to warrant replacing him. At 7-5 I suspect he will continue to get time .. probably a coin flip at 6-6.

 

[bigboxes]

yes, I see you ignored my question.

Give Riley all the time you want. I am not saying fire him now. I'm saying he is a bad coach. Whether that is determined this season or next is up to somebody else. I'll be surprised if things don't fall apart soon. But, if they don't, great. Let him stay. Let him turn a consistent nine win program into a sub .500 program.

We are getting what one would expect from that hire. My issue is that people seem ok with it.

Your issue is that you have confirmation bias.

 

[NorthWillRiseAgain]

holy hell massive amount of avatarless

Yeah, because that's a sure sign of.........nothing. Point?

 

[NorthWillRiseAgain]

appreciate the OP post

reading that it is certainly easy to conclude that Riley overachieved at OSU or as was stated got a lot out of a little

let the season play out

but along with the theme of the OP

"how many people know" ..... that it has been nearly 6 decades since Nebraska posted 2 non-winning seasons in any 3 year stretch

hopefully this doesn't occur and we can get to 7 wins but I don't think at 6 or 7 wins anyone can conclude that he is overachieving in year 3, in fact I think it can be reasonably concluded that even at 7-5 he has underachieved. He has to win 7 games this year to tie Callahan's win total in his first 3 years.

The question is would this represent a big enough underachievement to warrant replacing him. At 7-5 I suspect he will continue to get time .. probably a coin flip at 6-6.

Not true, 2002 & 2004.

 

[jlb321]

Not true, 2002 & 2004.

great catch .... you are correct... should have read "it has been nearly 6 decades since a coach at Nebraska has posted 2 non-winning seasons in a three year stretch"

 

[Toms Wife]

Your issue is that you have confirmation bias.

Phillipe has confirmation bias? Mike had a nice little career at OSU...no question. The AD at OSU however was not going to let Mike and the same coaches return in 2015 because the ship was sinking. Some of those coaches came with Mike here.

That got left out in the OP.

Maybe Mike now has the right guys. It's hard to say based on our schedule this far. We will probably know more at the end of the season.

 

[SnohomishRed]

great catch .... you are correct... should have read "it has been nearly 6 decades since a coach at Nebraska has posted 2 non-winning seasons in a three year stretch"

Not sure 7- 7 qualifies as a losing season either

 

[little a]

If we are going to correct some things we might want to mention the original poster somehow left Dennis Ericson and his winning percentage out of his post.

And if you want to say, "But, but, but Riley's guys" then you have to say, "But, but, but Anderson has Riley's guys too."

That's a great point-- all the Riley lovers/Pelini bashers can't have it both ways. He left Oregon state in bad shape. And I can't stand Pelini

 

[JohnRossEwing]

Of course we have to start off posts like this...I hate Bo!

Now...you RileyLovers...what do you love about him other than his personality?

 

[ridge22]

i think whats happened to riley is whats happened to a lot of successful coaches (mack brown, les miles, to name a couple). they get older and the game passes them by some. what worked in the past no longer quite does. i like what riley did on the def side of the ball. he has not done the same with the offense which i believe will ultimately be his downfall.

This right here.

 

[HuskerO]

The AD at OSU however was not going to let Mike and the same coaches return in 2015 because the ship was sinking.

You forgot to add; "*Disclaimer* That is an opinion, not factual."