Depends on what you mean by "type of job." Yes - he's a football coach. But same with regard to facilities or institutional adavantages? Of course not. Hopefully the easier-opened doors of the red N translate to a better record; I'm totally in a wait and see mode. But after watching a few games of recent vintage on the dvr and BTN, and thus reminded of the systemic mistakes by Nebraska, I do expect that the team will be in better position to win winnable games than Bo's were.
Your mention though of USC's and Alabama's interest in Riley I find instructive too - but maybe for a different reason. Let's accept that neither you nor I truly know what the level of interest was - discussions only or did Riley turn down offers?
Even if one posits that Riley is a worthwhile coach because USC and Bama (schools with as good as if not better tradition than Nebraska) were once interested in him as head coach, then if he turned down those jobs in the past, schools with which he actually had a history and to which recruiting is "easier" than probably both N and OSU, why would he take the foreign-concept Nebraska job later in life? He was so comfortable in Corvallis to turn down those schools, yet felt the "time was right for a change" later on. What in Corvallis made 2014 "the time right for a change, a last challenge?"
Was it the pressure he was feeling for his recent record? We've all read that it was brewing in the background.
So I don't know how turning down those jobs back when he was feeling little pressure at OSU translates to when he took an offer from Nebraska when he was feeling more later on.
I've got nothing against Riley. He appears at all turns to be a friendly and genuine guy, a knowledgeable coach capable of winning games in Corvallis and Lincoln. I just don't think that because he's the personified anti-Bo makes him impervious to questioning whether he was the best candiate for the opening - or why he was, apparently, Eichorst's focused candidate without much inquiry as to any other candidate.
