Fixing the talent gap, article from Dirk...

[Archie Graham]

I just had the argument with a buddy of mine who is on the "fire everyone now train".

My opinion is basically, Riley should get until the other side of the 2018 hump. At that point we will have seen at least 2 years of his players, and how well they play in adversity. He will have had four years to build his system and rebalance the roster, it should fairly clear whether we should allow another year or two.

To be clear, I'm not suggesting he should get six no matter what happens. Obviously, if the wheels are falling off the program (e.g., Cally's final season) then you weigh everything and move forward. But if we are still moving in the right direction they give him another year or two. This is precisely what Bo got during his tenure. There was some concern by the end of year four but anyone calling for his job at that point was being foolish. Just because he was fired after seven doesn't mean he shouldn't have gotten more than four.

 

[Archie Graham]

Appearing in the conference championship, by year four...yes, that is my position. If they make it next year or the year after, people won't even be able to distinguish my posts from yours other than the screen name and avatar.

Both of mine are better. FYI.

P.S. I'd suggest the wording be 'four years can be enough..." but certainly aren't always going to be enough to decide whether to fire a HC.

 

[huskerfan1414]

So if we don't make the conference championship in year four, given the situation Riley et al. walked into, you want him fired at the end of that fourth year. That's your position?

If things are the same as they are now? (I mean if we don't make it but not like Ohio State didn't make it this year, that's different...)
Absolutely! Why in the HELL did we even hire the guy if that's not the expectation?
You're crazy. Absolutely bonkers crazy.
Your excuses are putrid, and your excuse-making for years 3-5 shows that you, deep down, think he can't get it done. Enough of this crap. The program is bigger than one man, regardless of how much of his stock you bought.

 

[NikkiSixx]

Excuse me. I just got done reading some hyperbole and I puked.

You've got to be kidding.. especially after that massive turd that you posted that is filled with it. I'm guessing it's you who is the author.

 

[PeliniTheCrutch]

Both of mine are better. FYI.

I do dig the Archie Graham name and pic. I'm probably due to change Erik Estrada, even if he does represent everything that is great in America.

 

[BroskiRed]

So if we don't make the conference championship in year four, given the situation Riley et al. walked into, you want him fired at the end of that fourth year. That's your position?

^^^This. I see what you're getting at Crutch. But why is there some arbitrary number assigned to your support of Riley? I expect to be at or above Wisconsin 's level in 2 years, what does that look like record wise, who knows exactly and who knows exactly what the outcome will be.
It's was clear to me when Bo was fired what his ceiling was, he couldn't win a championship and he was trending below the division leaders. I'm still in a holding pattern with Riley, I don't know what his ceiling is but we should be trending in a couple years.
Your argument assumes that we'll pass up Wisconsin in 2 years, out develop the machine that they have been. All that I am saying is that if you look at the big picture, if we are right there with them I'll be good. If they somehow pull some overtime BS to beat us I'll be ok with it IF this is the same Wisconsin team that is beating top 10 competition etc.
Right now we are still a joke on the national scene, a punchline in big games etc.
I am not willing to assign a number but rather take a look at everything in year 4/5 to see where we are at both in the division and nationally and evaluate what Riley's ceiling is and if that is acceptable for Husker nation or if we lowered our standards like Crutch put it, "not being able to tell the difference between posts". I like that, I don't want lower standards either. The article by Archie assumes taking a broad look at things and I am in favor of that. Thanks for posting Archie

 

[Archie Graham]

You've got to be kidding.. especially after that massive turd that you posted that is filled with it. I'm guessing it's you who is the author.

No sir. Your take is dog shit. It's the kind of position that offers hard/fast conclusions without an ounce of critical thought about the majority of the facts on the ground. I always enjoy reading things like that though; reminds me that we still have idiots firmly entrenched in our fan base.

 

[Archie Graham]

If things are the same as they are now? (I mean if we don't make it but not like Ohio State didn't make it this year, that's different...)
Absolutely! Why in the HELL did we even hire the guy if that's not the expectation?
You're crazy. Absolutely bonkers crazy.
Your excuses are putrid, and your excuse-making for years 3-5 shows that you, deep down, think he can't get it done. Enough of this crap. The program is bigger than one man, regardless of how much of his stock you bought.

What does 'same as they are now' mean in your post?

 

[PeliniTheCrutch]

P.S. I'd suggest the wording be 'four years can be enough..." but certainly aren't always going to be enough to decide whether to fire a HC.

I'm only interested in this staff under these conditions. That's why I didn't mention others. With this staff and all of the conditions they have now, and every single condition they've dealt with, and everything they started with, four years is enough.

 

[Archie Graham]

I'm only interested in this staff under these conditions. That's why I didn't mention others. With this staff and all of the conditions they have now, and every single condition they've dealt with, and everything they started with, four years is enough.

Ok. We could go on but it would largely be nuance. Suffice it to say that I don't believe Riley is going to be fired after four years.

 

[Archie Graham]

Thanks for posting Archie

My pleasure.

 

[PeliniTheCrutch]

Ok. We could go on but it would largely be nuance. Suffice it to say that I don't believe Riley is going to be fired after four years.

Agreed about going on. And you're right, he won't be fired after 4 years unless he throws in another 5-7 or worse, which I don't see happening.

 

[jflores]

I think Riley moreso than most coaches will get somewhat of a 2 year mulligan from the AD, Regents, former players, "people that matter".

Because there is really 2 chief problems that we faced early on. We had no viable QB option besides TA for 2 years (one year lost to transition, another lost to Lee sitting his transfer time) and OL's don't grow on trees. Unless you hire a guy that's bringing 5 ready to play freshman with him, you are going to have some percolation time for the guys on the OL to get reshaped and on the field together.

Riley won't be given forever, but there's really kind of a feeling now of "this is now a Riley team" rather than some hodgepodge of who is not on IR from the last regime.

 

[nebcountry]

It seems the narrative for giving a 6-7 year coaching evaluation is now in full swing, seeing the increasing doubt on the horizon. This is the PR campaign being sold to you.

It does not matter that other schools show near immediate success when new coaches are hired, you instead are fed this line of bs about the talent level of the players and overlapping recruiting class ownership.

I don't think people should buy into the hype. Nebraska fans have been fed a bunch of crap for 2 seasons already, and this is just the next one on the list.

The best thing I think a Nebraska fan can do is to continue to ratchet up the pressure and stop accepting excuses for the performance on the field.

I gave ya a "like", but I don't necessarily agree with the whole thing. I don't know that at this point in time people are saying give Riley 6 or 7 years, they're certainly inferring it though. Now about year ago, people were openly saying Riley deserves 6 or 7 years. Even Chatelain's article looks to be skewed to the give him more time agenda, with a warning, but you have to make it happen Mike Riley or the fanbase will rise up.

I don't know that I'll be ratcheting up anything, probably more ratcheting down on my part. What are Riley's job performance expectations (what does he have to do to keep his job). I don't know, probably have even or winning seasons, no off the field embarrassments.

 

[NikkiSixx]

No sir. Your take is dog shit. It's the kind of position that offers hard/fast conclusions without an ounce of critical thought about the majority of the facts on the ground. I always enjoy reading things like that though; reminds me that we still have idiots firmly entrenched in our fan base.

Completely disagree. You pump post 53 full of garbage and then have the audacity to call what I wrote hyperbole. I think you should actually look that word up, because clearly you don't know what it means. Yes, I'm afraid there are some idiots in the fan base, Archie.

 

[huskerfan1414]

What does 'same as they are now' mean in your post?

IF we don't win the B1G West, it probably means we are looking at best 9 win seasons, no?
It's impossible to write out all the scenarios that would be acceptable or unacceptable. Depends who you beat, who you lose to, how you lose, heck how the team looks, etc. Impossible to write it all out....

If next season we win 9 games again, but don't get blown out in any losses, and beat the teams we should, that's progress. However, if in year 4, we get the same thing? Unacceptable.
It's highly unlikely we end up with 10 regular-season wins and finish in the top-15 and NOT make the championship game, but it is technically possible, so that would be an example of an exception to the rule of course.
If, by year 4, we have not even won our weak division, that is enough proof that the Riley experiment is a failure. We don't need two more years after that, no matter how many excuses can be conjured up.

 

[Archie Graham]

Completely disagree. You pump post 53 full of garbage and then have the audacity to call what I wrote hyperbole. I think you should actually look that word up, because clearly you don't know what it means. Yes, I'm afraid there are some idiots in the fan base, Archie.

And yet...your substantive response to that post is missing.

Shocking.

 

[gw2kpro]

Among other reasons. Two losing seasons and a historically awful defense in 2007 were also factors.

This. That 2007 defense was a bad as most Pelini defenses not containing anyone named "Suh" on the roster.

 

[NikkiSixx]

And yet...your substantive response to that post is missing.

Shocking.

Why are you so angry? I must have really touched a nerve.

Look, you're acting like there is some big analysis in there. It's just an excuse. Let's blame the talent level. And then next year, what's the excuse going to be? (It could be, the line and qb are all first year in Riley's true system etc) And then the year after that what will the excuse be? (It could be, the 2018 brutal schedule). And on and on.

I know you are a big Mike Riley cheerleader.. I remember how we were "killing it" back when we had 4 recruits. It's one thing to applaud when the staff does something good. I think that's great. It's quite another when you are trying so desperately to explain away the deficiencies that this staff has by diverting the conversation to a lack of talent narrative.

It was square peg/round hole, not a lack of talent. So why change the narrative?

Similarly, it does not explain the leadership problems that caused the team to not even try against Iowa or most of the Tennessee game.

 

[nebcountry]

To me, the lynchpin of the whole article is this paragraph:

"I’m not cooking up premade excuses for an 8-5 season. If the Huskers look sloppy and uninspired, as they did the last two games of 2016, Riley is accountable. If his young players, specifically the offensive linemen, don’t start developing, Riley is accountable. But the ingredients he inherited combined with the urgency for progress make the next 12 months dicey. Very dicey."

The article leans toward the give him more time agenda, but Riley is still accountable.

 

[gw2kpro]

Similarly, it does not explain the leadership problems that caused the team to not even try against Iowa or most of the Tennessee game.

Good point. This is the sole reason I'm not panicking that the team is losing a lot of upperclassmen next year. I don't think most teams have freshmen assuming leadership roles on their respective units.

 

[jflores]

A take from Pernell:

"Nebraska has some work to do but I like the foundation Riley has put in place. A strong finish to this class will help, but the Huskers still have work to do. If you look at how they have transformed the LB room and the QB room...you gotta love a LB room of Dedrick Young, Avery Roberts, Mohamed Barry, Tyrin Ferguson, Quayshon Alexander, Pernell Jefferson, Greg Simmons - and then you see how Langsdorf has added a guy in Tanner Lee who pro scouts raved about a few months before he transferred to Nebraska (who has done nothing but increase his hype since getting to Lincoln and winning scout team MVP), along with adding two four-star QBs who appear to be ideal fits for his offense.

Then you look at how they have started to add some pieces to the o-line. From 2015-17, seven of ten recruits are four-star caliber IMPO. I think most people trust Keith Williams will build that WR room into one of the best units in the conference. I think Donte Williams can do the same thing at DB. John Parrella has impressed the heck out of me in year 1 and I expect a d-line class in 2018 that rivals what Keith and Donte bring in - which should continue to be outstanding.

Nebraska is on their way. It will take another couple classes but the trajectory is definitely pointing up."

 

[Pennsyhusker]

A take from Pernell:

"Nebraska has some work to do but I like the foundation Riley has put in place. A strong finish to this class will help, but the Huskers still have work to do. If you look at how they have transformed the LB room and the QB room...you gotta love a LB room of Dedrick Young, Avery Roberts, Mohamed Barry, Tyrin Ferguson, Quayshon Alexander, Pernell Jefferson, Greg Simmons - and then you see how Langsdorf has added a guy in Tanner Lee who pro scouts raved about a few months before he transferred to Nebraska (who has done nothing but increase his hype since getting to Lincoln and winning scout team MVP), along with adding two four-star QBs who appear to be ideal fits for his offense.

Then you look at how they have started to add some pieces to the o-line. From 2015-17, seven of ten recruits are four-star caliber IMPO. I think most people trust Keith Williams will build that WR room into one of the best units in the conference. I think Donte Williams can do the same thing at DB. John Parrella has impressed the heck out of me in year 1 and I expect a d-line class in 2018 that rivals what Keith and Donte bring in - which should continue to be outstanding.

Nebraska is on their way. It will take another couple classes but the trajectory is definitely pointing up."

I love this. And agree with it.
But we really need a strong finish to this recruiting class.
Come on Calibraska!

 

[Archie Graham]

Why are you so angry? I must have really touched a nerve.

Look, you're acting like there is some big analysis in there. It's just an excuse. Let's blame the talent level. And then next year, what's the excuse going to be? (It could be, the line and qb are all first year in Riley's true system etc) And then the year after that what will the excuse be? (It could be, the 2018 brutal schedule). And on and on.

I know you are a big Mike Riley cheerleader.. I remember how we were "killing it" back when we had 4 recruits. It's one thing to applaud when the staff does something good. I think that's great. It's quite another when you are trying so desperately to explain away the deficiencies that this staff has by diverting the conversation to a lack of talent narrative.

It was square peg/round hole, not a lack of talent. So why change the narrative?

Similarly, it does not explain the leadership problems that caused the team to not even try against Iowa or most of the Tennessee game.

You're not even attempting to respond to the actual commentary. You're just throwing shit at the wall and hoping something sticks. That's fine with me. But don't expect anyone to take this 8th grade logic (facts on the ground are excuses unworthy of considering) seriously when you drop it.

 

[timnsun]

A take from Pernell:

"Nebraska has some work to do but I like the foundation Riley has put in place. A strong finish to this class will help, but the Huskers still have work to do. If you look at how they have transformed the LB room and the QB room...you gotta love a LB room of Dedrick Young, Avery Roberts, Mohamed Barry, Tyrin Ferguson, Quayshon Alexander, Pernell Jefferson, Greg Simmons - and then you see how Langsdorf has added a guy in Tanner Lee who pro scouts raved about a few months before he transferred to Nebraska (who has done nothing but increase his hype since getting to Lincoln and winning scout team MVP), along with adding two four-star QBs who appear to be ideal fits for his offense.

Then you look at how they have started to add some pieces to the o-line. From 2015-17, seven of ten recruits are four-star caliber IMPO. I think most people trust Keith Williams will build that WR room into one of the best units in the conference. I think Donte Williams can do the same thing at DB. John Parrella has impressed the heck out of me in year 1 and I expect a d-line class in 2018 that rivals what Keith and Donte bring in - which should continue to be outstanding.

Nebraska is on their way. It will take another couple classes but the trajectory is definitely pointing up."

Let me respond for nikkisixx... I don't think he has time in the midst of his battle with Archie Graham.

EXCUSES!

 

[NikkiSixx]

You're not even attempting to respond to the actual commentary. You're just throwing shit at the wall and hoping something sticks. That's fine with me. But don't expect anyone to take this 8th grade logic (facts on the ground are excuses unworthy of considering) seriously when you drop it.

What you describe as commentary is exactly that.. 8th grade logic being thrown at the wall. A diversion. Why would I want to talk about the diversion itself? I tried to bring you back to talk about the real issues in my last post, but you don't want to do that. You would rather just continue to curse, divert, avoid, and misdirect.

 

[NikkiSixx]

Let me respond for nikkisixx... I don't think he has time in the midst of his battle with Archie Graham.

EXCUSES!

His post was not directed at me, so not sure what your problem is.

I will say one thing, why is it that he expects a great D-Line class in 2018, and not this year?

 

[timnsun]

What you describe as commentary is exactly that.. 8th grade logic being thrown at the wall. A diversion. Why would I want to talk about the diversion itself? I tried to bring you back to talk about the real issues in my last post, but you don't want to do that. You would rather just continue to curse, divert, avoid, and misdirect.

I actually think quite a few people liked the post you are denigrating, and it did make quite a bit of sense to me. There seems to be too much throwing the baby out with the bathwater going on... I don't know what will happen, or if Riley is ultimately going to be the guy long term (beyond 4 years, that is) or not, but I think what was posted makes more sense than you want to give credit for. IMO.

 

[jflores]

His post was not directed at me, so not sure what your problem is.

I will say one thing, why is it that he expects a great D-Line class in 2018, and not this year?

If you are talking about Pernell, he's reiterated on many occasions that building relationships with the players and schools take time. So Parella was going to have his foot in a lot of doors this year, but more real options would be available to him next year.

I also believe the prevailing opinion of several recruiting analysts is that Parella will be able to fill most or all of his class, within the radius next year.

 

[Pennsyhusker]

If you are talking about Pernell, he's reiterated on many occasions that building relationships with the players and schools take time. So Parella was going to have his foot in a lot of doors this year, but more real options would be available to him next year.

I also believe the prevailing opinion of several recruiting analysts is that Parella will be able to fill most or all of his class, within the radius next year.

Bingo. Spot on

 

[timnsun]

His post was not directed at me, so not sure what your problem is.

I will say one thing, why is it that he expects a great D-Line class in 2018, and not this year?

My problem is that since the post that Archie shared advocated giving time you refuse to consider it as viable in any way, shape or form, because you are 100% opposed to that. That's what my problem is.

And besides, Archie's post wasn't directed at you either, but you took offense to it. I assumed you would take offense to what jflores posted as well.

 

[dinglefritz]

His post was not directed at me, so not sure what your problem is.

I will say one thing, why is it that he expects a great D-Line class in 2018, and not this year?

Are you really a Husker fan? IF so why are you posting some of the crap you are this close to signing day? Could it maybe wait a few weeks?

 

[jflores]

If you are talking about Pernell, he's reiterated on many occasions that building relationships with the players and schools take time. So Parella was going to have his foot in a lot of doors this year, but more real options would be available to him next year.

I also believe the prevailing opinion of several recruiting analysts is that Parella will be able to fill most or all of his class, within the radius next year.

They might actually have a good point about the radius. He already has Mapieu, and Jurgens may end up a DE. Two pretty damn good players, and he won't have left the state.

 

[NikkiSixx]

Are you really a Husker fan? IF so why are you posting some of the crap you are this close to signing day? Could it maybe wait a few weeks?

I didn't start this.. ask timnsun why he's quoting me with this crap?

 

[Archie Graham]

What you describe as commentary is exactly that.. 8th grade logic being thrown at the wall. A diversion. Why would I want to talk about the diversion itself? I tried to bring you back to talk about the real issues in my last post, but you don't want to do that. You would rather just continue to curse, divert, avoid, and misdirect.

No problem.

1) Talent level matters. Riley didn't inherit much and it was sparse due to poor roster management from the last staff.

2) System matters. We installed new systems in all phases that were not consistent with the last staff. This causes issues since the athletes in our program the last two years were not recruited for the current system.

3) Leadership matters. The staff inherited a number of guys that were shit leaders. Toxicity remained in the program until the completion of the year.

There's all of your points taken to the woodshed. Anyone who disagrees with those three comments is an idiot.

 

[timnsun]

I didn't start this.. ask timnsun why he's quoting me with this crap?

Already responded to your crap. You are sensitive today, aren't you?

 

[NikkiSixx]

My problem is that since the post that Archie shared advocated giving time you refuse to consider it as viable in any way, shape or form, because you are 100% opposed to that. That's what my problem is.

And besides, Archie's post wasn't directed at you either, but you took offense to it. I assumed you would take offense to what jflores posted as well.

You had no reason to quote me on jflores post. You're just stirring the pot.

 

[gw2kpro]

No problem.

1) Talent level matters. Riley didn't inherit much and it was sparse due to poor roster management from the last staff.

2) System matters. We installed new systems in all phases that were not consistent with the last staff. This causes issues since the athletes in our program the last two years were not recruited for the current system.

3) Leadership matters. The staff inherited a number of guys that were shit leaders. Toxicity remained in the program until the completion of the year.

There's all of your points taken to the woodshed. Anyone who disagrees with those three comments is an idiot.

I think number 3 cannot be stressed enough and in part explains not that we lost games at the end of the year (we were playing much tougher competition at the end of the year than at the beginning) but how we lost games once the bubble got popped at Wisconsin. As in, the team basically laying down for long stretches; particularly noticeable against Ohio State, Iowa, and Tennessee.

Should the coaching staff be able to overcome that? Yes. To a point. It's their team and accountability.

My curiosity with that is UCLA last year. That's the best game I have seen Nebraska play in all phases (against a team with a pulse) in probably the last 5 years if not longer. My hope was that it would continue -- and I don't think we had one performance this year remotely approaching that in any of the 2016 wins.

Having said that, I'm not apprehensive that the roster is turning over quite a bit next year.

 

[NikkiSixx]

No problem.

1) Talent level matters. Riley didn't inherit much and it was sparse due to poor roster management from the last staff.

2) System matters. We installed new systems in all phases that were not consistent with the last staff. This causes issues since the athletes in our program the last two years were not recruited for the current system.

3) Leadership matters. The staff inherited a number of guys that were shit leaders. Toxicity remained in the program until the completion of the year.

There's all of your points taken to the woodshed. Anyone who disagrees with those three comments is an idiot.

1) Wrong. Talent was not a problem. This is being argued after the fact when all along, no one said we had talent issues. The only time we have heard about talent problems is after the second stringers played in the bowl game. That was not an issue brought up all year.

2) Wrong. We were told that the system was to be tailored to the strength of the players. I actually thought they did a good job of that this year. Why is this now being said as an issue when it seems not a problem this year?

3) I sort of agree with this, I just wanted to hear you say it. But I also think the current staff deserves more blame for the leadership problems.

4) Just because someone doesn't agree with you Archie, does not make them an idiot.

 

[GBRhuskers]

@Archie Graham @timnsun @jflores

You boys are getting trolled, hard.