Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
When a coaching change takes place, some of the players are going to be unhappy about it. That's to be expected. There was nothing extremely toxic about it. Just another fairy tale you and your buddies on this board made up with no basis in reality.
And where's the proof that these are the same posters? There was a lot of people saying he wouldn't fire his buddies. What proof is there that those were the same people criticizing Riley? You're trying to create a rift among the posters on this board.
Tulsa Tom...masquerading as his wife......you can't make this sh*t up....lmao.
French saefeties great in the I st half, but just roll over in the IIIs that French?
Not saying you're wrong, but do you think those coaches (who were brought on to help with the transition) knew that coming in?I have had thoughts that some coaches that Riley brought with him on this staff were basically a "transition" team and when the time was right, moves were made. His comments after the bowl game about being the end of one chapter and the starting of a new one(or something like that) start to make a little more sense now. It wasn't just players, it may have been coaches too.
You can have a positive post about Riley without insulting most of the players who have been on the team over the last few years. You can also have a positive post about Riley without trying to cause hostility with people who don't agree with your opinion.So you read a positive post about Riley and your reaction is "It wasn't THAT bad when he took over. What proof do you have about who posted negative comments?"..... I mean what do you expect others to conclude about you?!?... Because first it WAS that bad, Pelini did ALL he could to poison the well before he walked away. And people saying he would NEVER let go of his buddies no matter how bad things got IS a criticism of Riley that many have liked to throw around as to why he hasn't had more success in the past and won't succeed at NU. And now it's one that needs to stop, because it's proven untrue.
The strange thing about Bray is that I thought he did a great job of coaching a depleted linebacking group and holding them together in 2015. So I had high hopes for his unit this year. But imo they greatly underachieved this year. Seemed like we actually regressed.Bray has shown little as a LB coach. Until he has a unit that performs I can't see him becoming a D.C. At least not here.
It's just the go to excuse around here. They so very much want to believe we're done firing/hiring coaches, and Riley is our guy. I sure hope so, and I applaud him or whomever made the decision.You can have a positive post about Riley without insulting most of the players who have been on the team over the last few years. You can also have a positive post about Riley without trying to cause hostility with people who don't agree with your opinion.
Yes, people saying he wouldn't let go of his buddies is a criticism, but even people who have been very positive on Riley have that criticism. Just because people criticize some of the ways Riley runs things doesn't mean they hate him and want him to fail.
Disagree. It could be as simple as Banker being a lousy recruiter. Sure our defense improved somewhat this year. But they underperformed big time in three key games which exposed some glaring weaknesses on our roster. Weaknesses that can only be remedied with better recruiting. And so.... if Banker was not pulling his weight as a recruiter, he had to go. Period.The more I think about this, the more it bothers me. There has to be more to the story that we aren't being told. I heard something on the radio that said our defense had gone from 60 something to 30 something, and we all know that defensively we played well until after the Wisconsin game, when the air was let out of the tires sort to speak. I wonder if there isn't something more to this, meaning something not performance related.
That's hardball, but the AD does have veto power in this instance.Part of me wonders if Mark just had enough and told Mike to let the contract go.
Part of me wonders if Mark just had enough and told Mike to let the contract go.
Sorry, I was editing my other post. If he says I'm going to retire, maybe people might look at Mike with the same question. I think it's more coincidence that the contract ends near the end of the recruiting cycle. Also, If he just wants to retire, it makes people start talking about just collecting a paycheck type thing.I am not going to say it's completely out of the question. But if he wants to go fishing or golfing, why not say I've decided to retire and go fishing and golfing. Why go through the embarrassment of being fired? If he still wants to coach somewhere else, say I'm resigning to pursue other opportunities.
Most of these guys are egomaniacs, I have a hard time believing a guy who is leaving, on his own, to go fishing is just going to sit back and be ok with the university saying he is being fired.
Then add in the 20 year relationship with Riley And it makes less sense.
You don't know what the reason was, because none was given. Therefore, you are guessing along with everyone else.Pelini apologists having a difficult time with Riley making moves to better the program.
You don't know what the reason was, because none was given. Therefore, you are guessing along with everyone else.
Any truth to the rumor there was a conversation right after the Bowl?Ya, I've been known to guess for the 13 years I've been on here.
No reason had to be given in order to make the valid assumption that:You don't know what the reason was, because none was given. Therefore, you are guessing along with everyone else.
They are all assumptions. There is no way to prove that one assumption has more validity than another. Unless you were there and know the reason(s), or it is publicly stated, everyone's assumption is merely a guess.No reason had to be given in order to make the valid assumption that:
A) This was Mike Riley"s decision
B) That the decision was made in order to improve the program
Those are the ONLY two assumptions that one can make from the prima facie facts before us, namely that Mike Riley fired his DC. Anything else beyond those two basic assumptions is what counts as unfounded speculation.
They are all assumptions. There is no way to prove that one assumption has more validity than another. Unless you were there and know the reason(s), or it is publicly stated, everyone's assumption is merely a guess.
I guess I don't understand what you mean by "attempts to subvert the natural chain of command" argument. If it's related to what inWV was saying, I didn't understand what he was getting at either.The hierarchical relationship between a HC and DC isn't an assumption. Attempts to subvert the natural chain of command are all speculation unless they can be sourced.
What about Bob Diaco?
Did Banker coach a position group?
Nearly everyone said this two years ago. OSU fans told us this about Banker and the others. The team stats from OSU told us this. They are who we thought they were.