Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Husker Board' started by BigRedPimp, Jan 13, 2017.
Does it matter to n the end whether SE involved. He's the AD.
Lol. You and your booster buddies know all. Got it.
And here's another minion right on queue! Lol Which one's next?
Draw away. Won't matter though as you don't know shit.
You have a plan that you are going to hire Bob Diaco. Arkansas makes a push... You make the move. Riley waits any longer his guy may be DC at Arkansas
That makes no sense. If hiring him is your plan, why are you waiting at all when there are three weeks until signing day?
Curious, the only way Banker was staying is if we didn't have a replacement for him? Not that is matters but did Banker know we were actively looking for his replacement?
Reporting (and getting down to the facts) is part of the newspapers job, no?
Like I said in another post, Banker and Read should thank the good man above that Riley came into their lives
Maybe semantics on this one, but I was thinking that Banker's contract wasn't renewed. I've never been an annual contract employee. But I've known ex-military working contract jobs, the contracts are either renewed or they're not. And, the people I know have a mindset that the certainty of their job ends on the contract date.
That's all the bloners want to do. Look back and cry no matter what the new regime does. Same thumb-suckers defended Osborne's lack of balls to hold Bo to any standards that normal human have. But oh yeah.. that's the "Nebraska way"
Unfortunately, I have had to fire A LOT of people before. I agree with you about 90% of the time Tim, but I have to disagree on this one. I was told that MR knew that he was going to can MB a few weeks ago. Do it then. Even though t needed to be done, this move is a little douchey. I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this topic.
I love Mike Riley. Just think he could have handled this better.
Damn TT, cut the s#$t already. You at least used to be good at trolling. At least sit down at the keyboard yourself, instead of having your wife type for you. That is almost creepy.....
According to the article, Banker was returning from Oregon where he had been visiting.
Seems to me that if somebody really does like him they would give him the benefit of the doubt that there were reasons why he had to do it this way.
Yep. This. I was originally skeptical of the whole story before I read the article. So on the surface, I agree, this does not look good. That is why I was skeptical. It just did not seem to fit Riley's character. So I think this is the best post in this whole thread. NONE of us know all the facts. NONE of us knows why Riley felt like he had to do it this way. Therefore, ALL of us should be giving Riley the benefit of the doubt. That is, we should do so unless we are already bringing an anti Riley agenda to the discussion.
It seems that more people now seem to believe that this really did come from Shawn Eichorst. Well, I think that is a given. SE is running the football program, Mike is just the day to day manager, the puppet.
I think they are both douche bags. I certainly would not treat a friend that way, and I wouldn't let my boss force me to fire my friend that way either. I would do it on my terms.
Whatever you think of the last guy, he was not a liar. He told us who SE is, and I believe him. SE texts football players when he fires their head coach, and he makes his head coach phone it in to fire his best friend.
I'm glad this information came out. It gives me a pretty good idea what's going on down there now.
SE is not the Nebraska way.
Maybe there was something on Daico's end preventing anything sooner? Makes sense since no other teams were pursuing him before the current info came out. Or at least there was zero news reported about any interest for daico before
The flaw in your little hate fest here is that even if SE ordered Riley to fire Banker, I highly doubt he ordered him to fire Banker over the phone. And that is the key issue here people are discussing. So your whole anti SE agenda is a red herring in this discussion. I think TrueHuskerfan nails it above when he says we have to give Riley the benefit of the doubt as to why Riley fired Banker this way. Nobody on here, including you, knows all the facts or what went down. So it is all speculation.
Just for fun, I read this entire thread in reverse this morning. If you do it that way it goes from worse to bad instead of bad to worse.
My best guess is Riley called him up and said something to the affect that "listen my good friend, a decision has been made to change directions on the defensive side of the ball. I know the timing is not right, but we needed to take action immediately to effect this plan. When you get into town, give me a call and lets sit down and visit"
In my mind this is what I choose to believe how Mike could have handled the call. Or if you dislike Mike you can choose to believe the opposite. Your choice.
It was speculation yesterday when I was asking these very questions, and then we got more information from Banker himself. This was not Mike's doing by design. On some other sites, we have people from Oregon State telling us that there is no way this is coming from Mike. You are free to think what you want. I feel good about the conclusions I have drawn.
Seriously this seems like a non-issue. The Bob Diaco hire was time sensitive. Mike Riley's hand, may or may not have been forced. In either case Riley called his friend to spare him the embarrassment of hearing about it secondhand. Perhaps Riley knew the info would reach Mark Banker before he could meet with him face to face. Where is the Sock.Puppet when you need him?
We know this is not how he handled it because Banker stated how he wished the communication was better. Let's review what Banker said again:
"That's just disappointing, that it'd be a phone call and not face-to-face," Banker said. "That's a weird way to approach things. And you can say that it's hard, but if it's hard on him then it's hard on my end. But that's what you got to do, do it (face-to-face). Be grown men about it. It's a communication thing. Let's just be good communicators."
Now, does your story match up with what he says?
I really dont care either way here, im just glad banker is gone, but it is possible to be disappointed in people you like. Have you ever? This is part of the riley walks on water and could do no wrong problem. (Im not saying he did anything wrong here, just doesnt seem like a big deal that dana doesnt approve)
Not everything deserves a tin foil hat, one way or another, and just because you dont agree with the way it was done doesnt make you strange or a hater. However, we should be excited about this.
Really we dont know everything...riley has probably been thinking about it but didnt pull the trigger until he knew he wanted diaco and good timing just wasnt in the cards.
Too bad Callahan never called Cosgrove. He might still be here.
This is a results oriented business, not an employment agency for old friends. Banker is a big boy who has been in this business long enough to know that.
Phone call, in person conversation, Skype, Carrier pigeon, Red Rover... I don't care who or how Banker was told. He gone and that is good.
You're correct, this is Eichorst's doing. Some boosters are squeezing him a touch but they are still in the minority by far. However, a 7 win season or God forbid less, will not set well with some of those in the wait and see mode. Riley needs to start winning to fend those off.
Obviously, I am very pro Mike Riley. I will not hide that nor should I. No reason to.
However, I will grant this to the anti Riley folks on here. This firing, and the Read/Hank Hughes firings, do make it seem as if Riley, though a veteran coach, is learning on the fly what it means to coach at an elite, blue blood program and what the expectations are. All of these firings do make you wonder why he hired them in the first place. Read and Banker were clearly brought here because they were in Riley's "comfort zone". But now he has learned that he needs more than comfort zone coaches. He needs winners and recruiters and go getters and ball busters.
But that is a lesson neither Callahan or Bo ever learned. At least Riley is willing to make the necessary changes
This is a good post and exactly what I have been saying. Riley wasted 2 years and it may now take another 2 years for the defensive players to get the scheme down and for the coaches to recruit for it. How much time is Riley going to get? I have heard 4 years and others say 5 total.
I believe so. I stated what I believe to be Mike side and because Banker doesn't like it doesn't take way from what might have been said. It's kind of funny how Banker turns around and bitches about communication to a reporter. A "Grown man" doesn't go airing his dirty laundry to a reporter. He takes his firing and moves on. Don't get me wrong, I like Banker and saw some improvement but the trajectory of his improvement wasn't at the accepted pace.
No he wouldnt, nothing short of a national title would have saved him. Tom was having none it.
I agree with this. That is why I noted above that this is a results oriented business and Banker damn well knows that. He has been in the coaching profession far too long to view it as a soft and accommodating profession. So he should have just kept his mouth shut and expressed any disappointment he had with the process to Riley or SE themselves. Everything else is just public whining. Move on dude.... you coach at Nebraska and your defenses did not measure up to our expectations.
Only certain so called Nebraska fans would call out Riley as being a bad guy....if only he had the integrity of the last prick roaming the sidelines for Big Red.
I was making more of a rhetorical point than a historical one.
I agree that he was toast as soon as TO came back.
Exactly. Good post
How do the knuckle draggers feel about the change?
Ahhh, Oregon State fans, the same ones that said he'd never part ways with Read or Banker.
As much as I hate to admit it, the only scenario that makes sense to me was what Husker Tom Osborne (H.T.O.) told us. We wanted an NFL guy who eventually said no. When we didn't get the guy we wanted we went to our Plan B guy. (It's not unlike recruiting.) By that time the only way to fire Banker was by phone.
The other point that Husker Tom Osborne makes is that, while Diaco may be Mr. Plan B and his last couple of years scare me to death, he does seem to be way better than Banker as a coordinator. We are sitting better today than a week ago.
P.S. Diaco was fired with a phone call too.
What HTO says makes sense other wise why didn't Riley and Eichorst fire him after the first of the year..
You would think if they were also such good friends you would think Riiey would have given Banker a heads telling him I'm being forced to make changes on the defensive side of the ball.
If Banker's telling the truth he knew nothing about this till he received the phone call.
In a perfect world situation, sure, but not in this case. The time line didn't allow it.