Its funny you say that because there is some truth to it. Player rankings often get bumped if they go to a name program.
Scott Frost’s recruiting
- Thread starter hddude55
- Start date
Just for the record,
a -there are other choices between hiring Scott Frost or keeping Mike Riley. Gray area, I know it's tough for some of you to comprehend.
b- a no vote for Frost does not automatically mean a yes vote to keep Riley. Again not black and white.
c- If the recruiting rankings have had UCF consistently where they are in the rankings, top1-4 in their conference for the past several years, wouldn't that mean the George O'Leary is also a great coach? He won a Fiesta Bowl with the same level of talent. - Weird how that works.
d- George O'Leary had an 0-12 record his last year but went 21-5 in the previous 2 seasons, he recruited those players that went 21-5 and many of the starters on the current UCF roster. Does his one bad year show the team had 0-12 talent?
e - saying a team didn't have 0-12 talent, is not the same as saying they had 12-0 talent. Again, there is gray and not everything is black and white.
As usual, some are more worried about being right about Frost being the guy and are apparently unable to even consider other options and are unable to have any semblance of a discussion about it.
When/ if Frost turns down the job, this place will go into full meltdown mode, When/if he takes the job, there will be all sorts of excuses and defenses made for why he didn't win a conference title within 3 years. The league is tough, the East is just better, 2018 schedule is hard, you can't expect him to recruit to Nebraska on short notice, new offense, lazy players recruited by Riley, bad S&C program under Riley, no discipline under Riley, the team is soft under Riley. No development under Riley.
The discussions don't change, just what side of the argument you choose to be on does.
a -there are other choices between hiring Scott Frost or keeping Mike Riley. Gray area, I know it's tough for some of you to comprehend.
b- a no vote for Frost does not automatically mean a yes vote to keep Riley. Again not black and white.
c- If the recruiting rankings have had UCF consistently where they are in the rankings, top1-4 in their conference for the past several years, wouldn't that mean the George O'Leary is also a great coach? He won a Fiesta Bowl with the same level of talent. - Weird how that works.
d- George O'Leary had an 0-12 record his last year but went 21-5 in the previous 2 seasons, he recruited those players that went 21-5 and many of the starters on the current UCF roster. Does his one bad year show the team had 0-12 talent?
e - saying a team didn't have 0-12 talent, is not the same as saying they had 12-0 talent. Again, there is gray and not everything is black and white.
As usual, some are more worried about being right about Frost being the guy and are apparently unable to even consider other options and are unable to have any semblance of a discussion about it.
When/ if Frost turns down the job, this place will go into full meltdown mode, When/if he takes the job, there will be all sorts of excuses and defenses made for why he didn't win a conference title within 3 years. The league is tough, the East is just better, 2018 schedule is hard, you can't expect him to recruit to Nebraska on short notice, new offense, lazy players recruited by Riley, bad S&C program under Riley, no discipline under Riley, the team is soft under Riley. No development under Riley.
The discussions don't change, just what side of the argument you choose to be on does.
Nebraska has 6 of their 11 current commitments that are going to be early enrollees. Meaning they can sign in December if they want, but they don't have to sign at all and just show up on campus in January to start classes, as long as the school they go to has a scholarship available for them.
If those 6 players decide to go elsewhere, there will be no time for them to wait and establish relationships with the new staff. That is why you see most of those guys getting their ducks in a row now, the new coach will not have much of an opportunity to win those 6 over. They will have to be in the rare breed that picks a school for the school and not because of a relationship with a coach, if they decide to stay with Nebraska.
If those 6 players decide to go elsewhere, there will be no time for them to wait and establish relationships with the new staff. That is why you see most of those guys getting their ducks in a row now, the new coach will not have much of an opportunity to win those 6 over. They will have to be in the rare breed that picks a school for the school and not because of a relationship with a coach, if they decide to stay with Nebraska.
All spot on, Tuco and I'll be supportive of the coach, be it Riley, Frosty or CTBNL. The burning question I have is what the hell happened in that 0-12 season after 21-5. Did half the team get Chronic Fatigue Syndrome? Did O'Leary have big money on the spread in their games?
One of the UCF visitors touched on it, but he was going to retire at the end of that year anyway. I believe he was going to work the athletic department in some capacity. So he was already checked out of coaching. The season snowballed and they flat out sucked.
Shoot, it better not change, why would it? Being a fan is about the emotions and fun. It is why fans act the way they do.
0-12 after averaging 10 wins the previous two seasons is an exquisite kind of sucking.
F. Being a former Husker great does not mean he is not the best person for the job. He may very well be the best candidate we have a chance for. Moos should do what he thinks is best for the University
Whoever is hired, are people expecting us to win a Big 10 title in the first 3 years? Do people really think that's why Riley is on the hot seat? Sure, if Frost(or any other coach) is hired and is getting his brains beat in year 3 while losing to MAC level schools and his team continues to make the same mistakes over and over and over again all the while the fanbase is making excuses for Frost(or any other coach) then yes, that would be fishy.
X1000
At all the Riley apologists who push the false narrative that the reason he's on the hot seat is because he hasn't won a conference title by now.
Funny you get on your pedestal and preach to people about gray areas then proceed to insinuate that the reason people are upset with Riley is because he hasn't won a conference title in 3 years
Just a quick question for you while you are here, any idea or place to find (without spending too much time) how many transfers have came to ucf, where they came from, and what their ratings were? I don't want to compare ucf to east Mississippi cc (last chance u), but it does seem like a legit option for some top level talent to transfer to, play early and win, and then possibly get a shot at the league...I know they are capable of recruiting and winning without the transfers, but was just curious on how big of an impact they are currently making on the roster therewell if your posters are going to ruin our homeboard I'll lurk and put in my 2 cents over here occasionally
I don't expect any coach to win a conference title in 3 years. Michigan, Ohio State, and Penn State will all potentially be national championship caliber teams. Wisconsin has consistently been very good. Iowa and Michigan State have the potential to have special years and win a conference championship. I don't expect a conference title in 5 years. If we can consistently put together good, well coached teams, we're going to get on a run at some point and a conference title will come.
It doesn't have to take that long to establish a relationship. It can be done in 1 visit or even a few phone calls. Frost or whoever the next coach is and their assistants share their vision and maybe the player is sold or maybe he's not.
Ok. So why is the recruiting process now 18 months instead of 9? Why is the guy who runs the 7 on 7 team that Gebbia played for saying that without D. Williams the kids from California, in this class, aren’t coming to Nebraska? These players are taking visits now, most have already visited Nebraska. I would bet that most will be committed elsewhere before Riley is fired and the next coach is hired. This is a big decision for these kids. They aren’t going to wait around and hope that new Nebraska coach is going to show them interest. Then you have to consider the dead period that begins Dec 18.
I deal with these kids every single day, I know how they think. The players that will stick to their commitment will be the players where Nebraska is their best offer. The others are not sticking around.
And please don’t confuse this post as a “one class of recruits are more important than the next coach” stance. They aren’t but a team that is already behind on talent, is going to have a lower rated class with a coaching change.
So why was Pelini fired? He won some big games, played in 3 conference title games in 7 years, finished 2nd or better in the division 6 of 7 seasons.
It appears you have lowered your expectations. Pelini, for the most part, met your subjective standards of a good, well coached team and got on some runs. But that wasn’t good enough. So for the next coach it will be? Why? Because you think it is going to be Frost?
To me it’s the same thing as Parella. Hardly anyone says anything negative about how poorly the DLine played the past 2 games. Parella has a different level of failure than everyone else. Because he is a Husker legend. His status as a player buys him that different level. Which is fine as long as people face up to that double standard.
That's lowering the bar for folks who were upset we didn't reel in a big name coach when Riley was announced.
As the narrative goes the right guy will get the results and quickly. (Maybe not Bob Stoops natty quickly, but B1G results).
For the record, I don't expect Frost to win in 3 years, nor did I expect Riley too.
Your last sentence is moving the bar as well. We had that for the most part with Bo. The whole "we have to win now/get this hire right its our last chance before we become Minnesota!" thing doesn't work if we have forever to win a title.
You absolutely could not be more wrong on this statement. I have been working with teenagers and kids in general for 40 years, sometimes it takes years to develop a true relationship. Now if you just want to know a kids name, that is a different story but don't confuse that with a relationship.
Its part of the mysticism with coaching change.
Hire the right guy and the wins just come. The recruits just jump in the boat like fish.
Which I agree, there's a certain trajectory there, but its not always this magic carpet ride to relevance.
Tom Herman's hire should be instructive. When he was announced, a few local kids jumped on board, at least one didn't (our own Jaimes).
The hire of Frost will lead to some flips of guys that like Frost, and it'll leave losses too. Same as any other coach. I don't really expect a whole boatload of 4* and 5* players to sign on the dotted line having talked to him about wanting to have a winning football program again...(what school doesn't have that vision?).
Recruits will be lost during a coaching change, but I would think the nature and severity of the loss may be situational. Looking at the 2015 class, Lee, Anderson, Khalil and Morgan were 4* and stuck with the class after Pelini was cut loose. Looking at the list, those that committed when Pelini was still employed constitute a greater percentage of the performers of that class. A new staff would obviously re-recruit a lot of these kids. I remember Bo and Mike E going hard after Compton and Riley worked the Davis twins pretty hard. Whether the kids stick would depend on whether a relationship can be built with the new staff. Could be a hard sell with some of the high fliers Riley is after.
If Riley et al. are let go, the new staff faces a small class with the likelihood of attrition. They will retain some quality. The fact that recruiting is stuck in neutral at present might be an advantage, as the new staff might pull a couple of their own recruits. And there is a little time to reach out to possibles before the dead period.
https://nebraska.rivals.com/commitments/football/2015
Pelini was fired because he was an ass and multiple times embarrassed the University. And that was just in the public eye. If you want to take Eichorst for his word as to why Pelini was fired then fine...but, in that case...Riley certainly won't have any legs to stand on.
Parrella gets a pass just like Barney Cotton got a pass because he was a former player.....oh wait. Again I'll repeat, It's quite funny how people bring this up yet the fail to acknowledge that hardly anybody ever brings up Trent Bray, Scott Booker, or Donte Williams.
Hmmm...TO also had the same eye for talent. When I look at UCFast recruiting, I see speed everywhere, and DL tweeners he can develop into stout defenders. Has his 330lb+ nose. His OL look like they have the frame to play at the next level.
Oh, and he just received commitments from a 4star inside LB (with a Bama offer) and a safety from Booker T in Miami with major D1 offers. All of these guys look athletic. He will have even more success recruiting going forward.
If he was a 5-star pro-style, then that right there just shows how recruiting stars can be over-rated. He was a bust.
Had Frost stayed at Stanford, I think he would have ended up playing safety.
https://www.si.com/vault/1997/12/29...d-still-not-get-a-share-of-the-national-title
You are missing a huge variable in your equation.
There was not 45-60 days of lame duck status for Pelini. That 2015 class fully expected Pelini to be there the next year. They weren't continuing to go on visits etc. The situations are completely different simply because of that variable. Riley was in the same situation as everyone else, most of those recruits had shut down their recruiting. That simply isn't the situation now.
Booker I agree with, but there is plenty of talk of the LBs and CBs not playing up to speed.
As far as Eichorst's statements go can you provide me a list of which ones are true and which ones aren't? It all depends on what narrative you want to push. We don't believe him when he says he fired Pelini for not winning the big games, but we believe him when he says he had pegged Riley from the jump and didn't look at anyone else.
LOL, thanks for showing off your football knowledge. Scott was a generational talent and would have been classified as an ATH for sure.
As for being a bust: the guy lettered twice at Stanford, went 24-2 as QB at Nebraska, won a National Championship, had a 1,000/1,000 season, was a finalist for the Johnny Unitas Award, was a third round draft pick. etc ,etc, etc
Last edited:
Plus we had until Feb to recruit them, half this class will sign in December.
No doubt about it. In fact, didn't he play more safety than QB at Stanford? Just like he did in the NFL.
More than a fair point. The events in play were tripped off by the Bounds and Green in consultation with the big machers of the boosters. I doubt the fate of the 2018 recruiting class factored into their decision. However, had Eichorst not been canned, given the way the team has played, Riley's seat would be warm anyway. Highly likely some of these recruits would be kicking the tires on other programs. So anyway you slice it, we have a small class that is just over half filled with retention of several commits being dicey.
The new admin at NU decided to part ways with the AD and get their own guy. Had NIU been just a hiccup, with things going the other way against the Badgers and perhaps a better loss against tOSU, this board would be less Frosty and more hopeful about the back part of the season. But it doesn't seem to be playing out that way.
If a coaching change is made, the new staff will salvage what they can from the present list of commits and work hard to close on the end of the recruiting cycle. If a change occurs, retaining one or more coaches might make sense from a recruiting continuity standpoint.
I was referring to just the Riley kept Pelini recruits. The rest of this is a different argument.
No one knows what happens when you change one variable and how that affects the subsequent results. It's like the guy that says if we would have made a tackle in the 1st quarter then we win the game. He is assuming everything else stays exactly the same.
I don't know what happens in the Wisconsin game, if they don't fire Eichorst, but these guys are human and you have to believe it affects them at least on a subconscious level.
I could just as easily say that if you wait to fire Eichorst then the Riley hot seat isn't as hot and maybe the recruits don't start the process of decommitting early in the year. Which might have resulted in similar results to the last change when most of the recruits stuck with their commitments.
I still say give Riley one more year and if it doesn't go well, put Riley in an admin/recruiting analyst role of some sort, because he does have a lot of positives to him. Then we make an attempt to bring in Frost.
Just complete BS. Because he didn't somehow set the world on fire as a pocket passer at Stanford as a true Freshman he was a "pro style bust?" That is the dumbest thing you have said this AM. The guy was a 5-star athlete and lived up to the hype and then some. You are either a bust or not and SF was FAR from a bust.
I agree, but the point was that not all 5-stars pan out (Frost as a 5-star pro-style was a complete bust). He ended up being a pretty good dual-threat and athlete, for sure. Just like 2 and 3 stars can be pretty effective at a program like UCF. The proof is always in the pudding.
here's my beef with that thinking. If he was a detriment to the program why not fire him for cause?
