Nebraska will always be around the 35th best team in the country. Some years they may finish around 15th & some years they may finish around 65th. That's just the way it's going to be for Neb football.
I see us being 7-5, and I fear Riley would be comfortable with that.
- Thread starter Clevinger
- Start date
"but I still think he's a head-scratching hire. We needed to build around someone who recruits his ass off and hates losing. Riley seems like the respectable, smiling face of a 5 loss team."
We know that Riley hates losing. He's said so. His friends have said so. His colleagues have said so. Talking heads who know him in the national media have said so. The only people that say he is some naive Mr Rogers out to hand out lollipops and lose 8 games a year and be happy about it are Husker fans who are upset he's not dominating in his first year on the job (and those folks have never even met the guy).
Per reports our recruiting effort is pretty darn high. We'll see what kind of effect it has come February.
I'll ask the question yet again, who is the guy if its not Riley? I was on-board the Tressel train like half of everyone else, but also understanding that was like the 0.5% chance of happening. Frost, Smart, McElwain unproven coordinators who we'd be taking even bigger fliers on, and a guy like Hudspeth who boasts a ridiculous win percentage at a small directional school likely wouldn't move the meter of posters who say things like the part I quoted. That's not to say that Riley was the only choice, but folks in his tier of experience and capability were basically what we were shopping in if folks were looking at previous HC experience as a must.
Saban, Meyer, those guys weren't coming, and I don't see any other multi-conference title winning guys just sitting around waiting for a call. If there had been, you think UT would have done better than they did, and Strong was already a pretty big name.
We know that Riley hates losing. He's said so. His friends have said so. His colleagues have said so. Talking heads who know him in the national media have said so. The only people that say he is some naive Mr Rogers out to hand out lollipops and lose 8 games a year and be happy about it are Husker fans who are upset he's not dominating in his first year on the job (and those folks have never even met the guy).
Per reports our recruiting effort is pretty darn high. We'll see what kind of effect it has come February.
I'll ask the question yet again, who is the guy if its not Riley? I was on-board the Tressel train like half of everyone else, but also understanding that was like the 0.5% chance of happening. Frost, Smart, McElwain unproven coordinators who we'd be taking even bigger fliers on, and a guy like Hudspeth who boasts a ridiculous win percentage at a small directional school likely wouldn't move the meter of posters who say things like the part I quoted. That's not to say that Riley was the only choice, but folks in his tier of experience and capability were basically what we were shopping in if folks were looking at previous HC experience as a must.
Saban, Meyer, those guys weren't coming, and I don't see any other multi-conference title winning guys just sitting around waiting for a call. If there had been, you think UT would have done better than they did, and Strong was already a pretty big name.
That makes sense. So that makes the Hogeyes...what the 60th best team most years? And on bad years the 80th?
Most of the time, the big 8
Not sure how unproven coordinators would be a bigger flier than Riley. Riley was very underwhelming at Oregon State...losing seasons in 3 of the past 5 years. Eichorst took very little time to hire Riley and I would question how much thought he actually put into the hire. I hate to mention the name...but the hire feels way to much like when Tennessee hired Derek Dooley. They basically hired him because he wasn't Lane Kiffin. That is what Riley seems like. He was hired because he was basically the opposite of Pelini. Not saying he will be bad like Dooley.
Just doesn't make sense to try and build your future around an AARP coach that has basically been mediocre his entire career. This wasn't a decision that should have been made in a week. Nebraska fans deserved better.
Not sure how unproven coordinators would be a bigger flier than Riley. Riley was very underwhelming at Oregon State...losing seasons in 3 of the past 5 years. Eichorst took very little time to hire Riley and I would question how much thought he actually put into the hire. I hate to mention the name...but the hire feels way to much like when Tennessee hired Derek Dooley. They basically hired him because he wasn't Lane Kiffin. That is what Riley seems like. He was hired because he was basically the opposite of Pelini. Not saying he will be bad like Dooley.
Just doesn't make sense to try and build your future around an AARP coach that has basically been mediocre his entire career. This wasn't a decision that should have been made in a week. Nebraska fans deserved better.
Obviously Iowa doesn't have Nebraska's fantastic history but they have 2 conference titles and 4 top 10 finishes since the last time Nebraska has done either. The high school seniors that are being recruited this year weren't alive when Nebraska won their last national title. Iowa has been mediocre for most of the last decade but Nebraska hasn't been much better. Hopefully both teams can make strides and be top 10/20 teams every year. Its great for both schools, the conference and would be great to have a meaningful rivalry.
Time to move on, the hire was made and we need to rally behind it a give the man time to recruit his players and install his system. PERIOD. I believe we would be in same position with previous staff, but much more embarrassment in both games, score and other bs. Sure we would have been told to F off again!
Appreciate you coming to the board but don't even go there. I know you want to prop your team and the other 3 board members, not on the rasslin board, are watching the Emmy's, so I get it. See you in Lincoln the day after turkey day!
And they were alive in 1958 when Io_a last won their last "national title", with an 8-1-1 record!?!
Well, I wonder why, according to Rivals....
Class rankings
2002 - NU > Io_a
2003 - NU > Io_a
2004 - NU > Io_a
2005 - NU > Io_a
2006 - NU > Io_a
2007 - NU > Io_a
2008 - NU > Io_a
2009 - NU > Io_a
2010 - NU > Io_a
2011 - NU > Io_a
2012 - NU > Io_a
2013 - NU > Io_a
2014 - NU > Io_a
2015 - NU > Io_a
Nebraska will always be a national brand name, it's called Blue Blood status, something Io_a can only dream of.
Spin it however you want, but the reality is this.
If record alone is the key consideration for NU to hire a coach (and it seems to be a HUGE sticking point with some fans), then NU was not going to make a better hire than we already had in Pelini. We should have never fired him. Here is the list of active coaches with a better record than Pelini:
Herman, Leipold, Meyer, Fisher, Petersen, Helfrich, Martin, Stoops, Carey, Shaw, Saban, Patterson, Mora, Richt, Malzahn, Kelly, Hudspeth, Miles, Harsin, Spurrier, Freeze, Wilder, Bohl, Petrino, Swinney.
You can see that the list boils down rather quickly. In one tier, are dream sheeters who aren't coming here, the Sabans and the Meyers and pretty much every other SEC coach along with Kelly, Helfrich, Petersen, etc.
In another tier are guys who Husker fans probably wouldn't accept...Swinny, Petrino, Bohl.
Shaw really boils down as a guy who *might* move and is also a "name". But that's a pretty big emphasis on the might, I think he is a Stanford alum. The other two guys who pop out are Hudspeth and Harsin, but I'm not sure that either of those would really move the needle here of the anti-Riley guys either.
The hot shot coordinator route, the Frost's and Herman's and Smart's of the world, a goodly chunk of the fan base soured by Bo, basically said head coaching experience was a must this time around. NU wasn't a place to put training wheels on because we are a blue blood program.
The reason the "haters" can't answer the simple question of "who would they get that meets their criteria" is because that guy doesn't exist. Typically because it doesn't just come down to record, they also would like championships as well because we are NU and deserve that echelon of coach, and not all of those guys above have those either.
Link
Last edited:
Thanks for the info from the northwest. The look on HCMR's face at his PC yesterday did not appear to be that of someone who is OK with losing. He looked like there was a death in his family.
And they were alive in 1958 when Io_a last won their last "national title", with an 8-1-1 record!?!
Well, I wonder why, according to Rivals....
Class rankings
2002 - NU > Io_a
2003 - NU > Io_a
2004 - NU > Io_a
2005 - NU > Io_a
2006 - NU > Io_a
2007 - NU > Io_a
2008 - NU > Io_a
2009 - NU > Io_a
2010 - NU > Io_a
2011 - NU > Io_a
2012 - NU > Io_a
2013 - NU > Io_a
2014 - NU > Io_a
2015 - NU > Io_a
Nebraska will always be a national brand name, it's called Blue Blood status, something Io_a can only dream of.
I didn't say Iowa was something special. Just that Nebraska really isn't anymore either. Show me results since the departure of Tom Osborne that shows something different. Maybe you will recover like Alabama was able to after several down years. Like I said I hope both programs ascend in the rankings.
You downplayed Nebraska’s brand name in regards to recruits not alive since the last national title, while propping what Io_a did 10 or so years ago, on on a conferemce level. All I did was show you, and anyone else that may have the same whacky belief, that NU football still matters to recruits and Io_a doesn't.
If it was the opposite, NU wouldn't out recruit Io_a. Every. Single. Year.
Congrats on out recruiting Iowa like 40 or so other programs do annually and still being a national power with a brand name. Which other national powers haven't finished in the top 10 since 2001?
We not only out recruit Io_a, we own them on the field as well. NU is the only Blue Blood, and it's why we're on our third coach.
Not sure what championships you are talking about. The Grey Cup in the CFL? That is laughable.
Has NU out recruited Io_a? Yes.
Has NU owned Io_a on the field? Yes.
Go ahead and prove the above wrong. I wait patiently...
It is a championship in pro football. You may think it is laughable but then again you don't know shit. Bottom line is he knows winning and will demand it.
I was done with this thread but since you asked for a response:
I never disputed either of those things. Nebraska always has higher ranked recruiting classes and has beaten Iowa 3 out of 4 since joining the Big Ten. Me saying otherwise would be untrue. I admitted that Iowa has been mediocre for the last decade. 2008 and 2009 were the only years I feel Iowa had good teams in that time frame.
The things I asked you which you still haven't answered. What makes you feel like Nebraska is still a blue blood because the results certainly don't say that they are? For 15 years the results say they have been a good but not great program. There is nothing wrong with that. I am sorry if you feel like I am insulting you to say you aren't Alabama/Auburn/Ohio State/Florida State/Oregon. You guys had a 3 decade run where you were at the top of the blueblood list. No doubt about it. Its been long enough since you have had consistent top 5/10 results that you simply aren't on that list now. Doesn't mean you won't get back there. You just aren't there now. That is all I was trying to say.
Nobody is saying NU is there. Don't make stupid comments and you won't be treated like your football program.
There's some truth to this, but then again, I believe it on the whole to be incorrect. I don't anyone at NU would argue that NU has had blue blood type of success on the field in awhile.
But football as an enterprise is much more than "what have you done for me lately?" even though that factor is quite high on fan's list. The national punditry, our own conference commissioner, the tv networks, recruits, high school coaches, all refer to us as a blue blood program. It comes from the fact that we have a ridiculous fan following, that ponies up the money for the nice facilities and the sellouts and all that business. We can still the championship trophy and all that.
The problem from NU going forward is time. At some point, if we don't rise up again, then it becomes harder to package the blue blood thing, Minnesota certainly can't do that anymore. It seems like NU has a little ways to go before we hit that point though, football and Nebraska remain synonomous in the CFB world, which helps a lot.
Blue Bloods don't lose status with a 15-year drought, that's downright ignorant to say such a thing. Notre Dame hasn't won a freaking thing since the 80's and they're still on the Blue Blood list. Auburn is Blue Blood? Oregon is a Blue Blood? My goodness dude, what a crock of shit. There's a reason Miami, Florida State, and Tennessee are the next group...
#2 or #3 in all-time wins, which isn't a "3 decade run", will keep NU on the Blue Blood list for a very long time. You don't gain that status over "a 3 decade run" nor do you lose it over a "15 year drought". To suggest such a thing is 110% asinine.
In addition to that, LSU for a long time was a not very good to marginal football program. They had a run there with Saban and Miles that's been pretty good, but it remains to be seen if they will just replace coaches of that caliber and keep rolling once Miles leaves. Miles certainly isn't legendary status coach, but Saban is, at some point they just won't live up to that standard that they've had for about 10 years.
So I would say even today's darling teams, we're not sure whether they will be blue bloods in the next 20 years or not. What if LSU ends up like UT?
Blue-blood status isnt a "what have you done lately" concept. What it does for your program is it sustains you thru the tough times and allows you to bounce back much faster than other schools could. Blue-blood programs are only a couple of years of great recruiting away from winning championships at any given time. What it means is you bounce back much quicker than others because all that Tradition and Winning sustains a program during tough times. An example would be Paterno and Penn State. In the early 2000's PSU had a spell of 3 losing seasons in 4 years and everyone was calling for Paterno to retire. He told the fanbase that PSU was only a few players away, and then what happened? Penn State had an "elite" recruiting class and some of those Freshmen became key contibutors to finishing No. 3 in the country with a Big Ten Championship in 2005. No one really knows but why couldnt this happen at Nebraska?
For those who dont know the Blue-bloods of College Football are: Nebraska, Oklahoma, Ohio State, Notre Dame, Penn State, Michigan, USC, Alabama, and Texas. All are in the Top 10 all-time wins and all have been winning for almost a hundred years. These teams will always recruit well because of their great winning tradition so they will always be a few players away from winning a championship in any given year. Teams like Oregon or Wisconsin who have won more recently would kill for this status.
Look at the 2nd Tier, schools like Miami, Florida State, Florida, Georgia, LSU, Tennessee. They havent been able to sustain winning over a long period of time like the true blue-bloods. Based on this I like where Nebraska stands in college football folklore. If a young recruit doesnt know about Nebraska's elite past some adult whether it be one's Dad or Football Coach is surely telling that young person. I am certain that the "elite" recruits know plenty about Nebraska's "historically" elite past.
For those who dont know the Blue-bloods of College Football are: Nebraska, Oklahoma, Ohio State, Notre Dame, Penn State, Michigan, USC, Alabama, and Texas. All are in the Top 10 all-time wins and all have been winning for almost a hundred years. These teams will always recruit well because of their great winning tradition so they will always be a few players away from winning a championship in any given year. Teams like Oregon or Wisconsin who have won more recently would kill for this status.
Look at the 2nd Tier, schools like Miami, Florida State, Florida, Georgia, LSU, Tennessee. They havent been able to sustain winning over a long period of time like the true blue-bloods. Based on this I like where Nebraska stands in college football folklore. If a young recruit doesnt know about Nebraska's elite past some adult whether it be one's Dad or Football Coach is surely telling that young person. I am certain that the "elite" recruits know plenty about Nebraska's "historically" elite past.
Not only that, but Riley's OSU team beat that 2012 Wisconsin team that dropped 70 on us, to the tune of 10-7. I know, Wisconsin had fired their OLine coach early in the year, and we had beaten them early too. I guess Banker truly is much better stopping the run than the pass though.
OSU also beat UCLA that year, who we lost to as well. Again, the recurring theme of Riley being able to do more with less talent.
How do we know they had less talent that year? - But yes that year was probably Bankers best Defense they finished ranked 34th - which was great per his track record.
We will find out pretty quick if he can stop the run as we get into league play - I was not overly impressed with our run defense against Miami
File under the "completely ignored stats by Bo-lievers"
I would like to see tangible evidence that Riley would be satisfied with a 7-5 record at Nebraska
Can't say, outside of this thread, I've ever read Penn State as a BB.
8 schools have consistently been brought up in just about every conversation I've had.
In no order:
8 schools have consistently been brought up in just about every conversation I've had.
In no order:
- Nebraska
- Ohio State
- Michigan
- Oklahoma
- Notre Dame
- USC
- Alabama
- Texas
Riley knows he is replacing a coach that won 9 games every year so you are just wrong in that he doesn't understand the expectations here. Why don't you just support the coaches? You've given him all of 3 games.
Yeah they don't have the longevity as these and had more valleys...so I agree they're a cut below. But if you look at the last 50 years they stack up pretty strong to UM and Texas. (And I really dislike PSU for obvious reasons).
PSU 2 nattys/5 undefeated seasons/22 times ranked in top 10 and winning % of 74%.
UM 1 natty/3 undefeated seasons/24 times ranked in top 10 and winning % of 73%
Texas 2 nattys/2 undefeated seasons/16 times ranked in top 10 and winning % of 71%
Well than you're not paying attention. PSU is 8th in all time wins and the difference between 5th and 8th is only a handful of games. PSU is 3rd all time wins since the modern era started in 1950 and is 5th all time in producing NFL players so what am I missing? I dont think you're paying attention? Whenever the networks promote a Penn State game I hear the term "blue-blood" all the time. I'm trying to give Nebraska some support, I guess you're not much into the accepting mood, LOL !
Considering I travel the lower 48 states, including a heavy concentrate in Pennsylvania - Altoona to Philly up to Wilkes-Barre/Scranton - I pay close attention. And that includes working for one of the top 50 PSU donor families (prior to Paterno/Sandusky scandal), not sure if they cut back or not. So spare me about not knowing anything about PSU or not paying attention. 99% of the non-business conversations I have in that area is all about college football or the Eagles, sometimes the Bills as I trip up to Salamanca and Buffalo, NY often enough during my PA visits.
I watch plenty of college football, and don't recall any network "promoting Penn State as a blue blood". I'll play closer attention next time though. You can give Nebraska all the support you want, it still doesn't change the fact NU is a blue blood and PSU isn't, unless it's a wrestling discussion...
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
Whitlock: Deion Sanders TRASHES CU players entering the Portal- Latest: philosophusker
-
-
-
-