"Frost would most likely come if offered"
- Thread starter TarheelHuskerFan
- Start date
i know I would love to see him here. Should have hired him three years ago.
"But he was untested then! Too big of a risk!"
No bigger a risk than hiring a 61 year old coach nobody had heard of, coaching at a lousy school, who had never won anything of note, and whose career winning percentage hovered around 50%.
Last edited:
I actually had hoped we would have hired Kirby Smart or Justin Fuentes or Gary Patterson. Hindsight is pretty cool!!
Agreed with everything you said except the "nobody heard of"--- and everyone please spare us the "Frost is not prepared", if selection committee and AD think he is best choice...hire that man!
Not hindsight in my case. I wanted Frost three years ago just as I want him here now.
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
Good. Now if it does not happen Bounds and Green need to be fired immediately.
mods, Can I "like" this 100 times?
I still don't have him as my first choice, but I'd take him.
Take this for what it’s worth, but Patterson was very much in play after Callahan was fired. Maybe now it’s an “LOL” but back then it wasn’t.
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
That is the only guy that could come close to Scott Frost, if we are being honest.
And even then, I lean towards Frost. Frost has the better build. And...he was born in a small town IN Nebraska...which means he works harder than anyone one ever...I wish I would have been born in a small town in Nebraska instead of Chicago.
Always wanted Leach since 2004, Isu Campbell, brohm, then Frost.
I always liked Leach, and thought he'd kill it at a big budget school. The other 3 are interchangeable to me.
I pick those 3 with Frost for their immediate impact on the teams they coach now and before.
Only on the message boards was Patterson in play. You are telling me that Osborne interviewed three guys, 2 "internal" and Jim Grobe but Gary Patterson didn't get an interview?
Is it possible that Patterson showed interest but that, for whatever reason, TO wasn't interested?
Is it really that unreasonable for people to say he wasn't ready to be head coach at Nebraska three years ago? I still don't think he would have been ready three years ago (and that doesn't mean I was pro MR by any stretch), but yet I'm enthusiastically on board with SF now. Those things aren't mutually exclusive and they're not bandwagon either. Nebraska is a totally different beast than UCF. Just because SF has been successful at UCF over the last couple of years doesn't mean he would have been as successful over the same time at Nebraska. Young coaches have gone back to their alma maters for their first HC gig and not lived up to the hype. Kliff Kingsbury, for example. Plenty of coaches have even flopped in their first gig(s) and still gone on to do great things. Pete Carroll was fired twice and held a sub 0.500 record as HC of the Jets and Patriots.
My point is that you have to have the right person and it has to be at the right time. We (as in the majority) are all on board with the former; why do we need to make an issue out of the latter?
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
Grobe was barely a .500 coach at 46-38
Gill was 7-17
Pelini 1-0
Patterson was winning 70% and had a top 10 finish.
No. Not unreasonable at all. Sorry if my sarcasm is misleading. My only point is that if our choices last time around were either Riley or Frost, then the "he is too big a risk" argument goes out the window. Riley was also a huge gamble for all the reasons I stated above. And I doubt Riley was Eichorst's first or even second choice. So once he was deep into his list after being turned down by his first choices, why not take a chance on the guy most fans wanted back then?
If you say so. I don't believe he had any interest. If he did he would have garnered an interview over at least 1 of those 3 guys.
You do realize I was responding to the post saying instead of Riley....... Callahan was not in the topic
I think a mutual interest may have been expressed until the financial parameters were made available. In my experience (and my wife's) when being contacted by a search firm (obviously not a coaching spot), the first question is "would you be interested". My response was always, "Maybe. Where is it and what are the terms?". Just for curiosity's sake I wanted to know. Heck, most of the time a salary range was mentioned in the opening inquiry. I know you don't think salary comes up right off the bat, but in my experience it comes up before an interview is set.
The powers that be had just fired a coach that won 9+ games per year and was fairly popular with his players. There was a us against them attitude from the outgoing head coach. I know people say they were ready for Pelini to go, but I was surprised it happened when it did, and I remember the message boards had all figured he was going to get another year.
All that said, and I have said it before, I believe Eichorst was fixated on hiring a coach with head coaching experience because he knew the transition would be difficult. Maybe Frost would have been a great hire at that time, it is definitely easy to look back now and say he would have, but at the time, I don't think people realized how devoted a lot of that team was to Pelini and staff.
And makes a lot more $ @ TCU than NU was probably willing to spend. Which is sad. Very very sad
Yeah, I just saw Grobe, wasn't he a candidate then too?
Looking back, it's been a who's who of mediocre coaches for the most part.
Coaching searches are different than hiring a plant manager or Head Accountant. Those hires have a salary in mind because they are casting a wide net. There are literally thousands of people across the country that could do those jobs. They want to eliminate as many candidates as possible. However, even in those cases, if the hiring manager calls you directly, he is going to have an idea on what you make, and your salary probably isn't publicly known. If he knows what you make, he isn't going to contact you and try to sell you on coming over for less money.
I can look up 95% of the head coaches contracts and can determine their exact compensation package. It is a colossal waste of time to call a coach making $4 million a year if I know I am only going to pay $3 million. Patterson had already turned down Minnesota, after the 2006 season, who were offering $2 million per year. If you contacted him knowing you weren't going to pay more than that then you really didn't have true interest.
Agreed. Given a binary choice, SF very well may have been worth the risk three years ago. Tuco makes some good points about the locker room transition, though. So even if they haven't translated to on-field success, perhaps MR's contributions were needed for the next HC to succeed.
In hindsight, Eichorst engaged in a true botch job. He fired a nine win coach and replaced him with a coach that showed no evidence of being able to consistently do the same. Given Pelini's behavior over his last couple of years at NU, he was practically begging to get fired. So Eichorst essentially had an entire year to get his ducks in a row, get some back and forth with agents, get the salary structure correct, and then move. The time might have been after the woodshedding at Camp Randall. Let Barney coach out the season. But of course, as horrific as that loss was, it was only our second of the season.
The truth of the matter was that Bo was going to get his haul of wins as long as we had Tommy at QB. If you were going to replace him, it had to be with a guy really proven to get the job done. And I get the feeling that maybe none were interested in the offer.
In that scenario, maybe Frost as the hometown favorite would have been the right call. At least he could have taken advantage of the player pieces we had on hand.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
Basketball ***Live Game Thread: Final — Minnesota 67, Nebraska 65- Latest: klowtherjr
