ADVERTISEMENT

VV and Hank Hughes

Pennsyhusker

Athletic Director
Aug 6, 2009
15,432
25,047
113
Harveys Lake, PA
saw on the Huskermax site this morning that VV discussed his displeasure with Riley before declaring for the draft. He indicates that Riley said nothing about releasing Hughes at that time. Makes me think the departure of VV to the pros was a strong factor in Riley's decision. Probably a "straw that broke the camel's back" sort of event. Who was the person on the current staff that recommended Hughes to Riley las year?
 
Pretty sure the HH firing had everything to do with the lack of recruiting results and the lack of recruits in his active pipeline.
 
  • Like
Reactions: northeastNebraska
Not quite. VV never mentioned displeasure or anything of the sort with HCMR. He mentioned suprise, but that's it.

He did fire shots at HH, but it's nothing that would suprise anyone.
 
http://www.omaha.com/huskers/blogs/...cle_669883b0-e24e-11e5-97bc-bff818f3fbda.html

One factor, Valentine said, in choosing the NFL related to former Nebraska defensive line coach Hank Hughes. Before Valentine made his decision, he talked to coach Mike Riley about Hughes.

"When I was talking to Coach Riley, he kinda seemed like he was sticking with Hughes," Valentine said. "I didn't think they were going to change it, but it happened. I was hearing it happened because of the recruiting trail, but I'm not sure what happened. I was kind of surprised that they changed."

Riley fired Hughes in early February.

Valentine said he shared his concerns with Riley at the time.

"I didn't think he was as great of a teacher as I wanted him to be," Valentine said of Hughes. Valentine said Hughes' predecessor, Rick Kaczenski was a different kind of coach and more into details.

"That's the reason I didn't think I'd improve my draft stock," Valentine said of Hughes potentially returning. "That wasn't the biggest factor in (the decision), but I think it was one of the factors."
 
I believe it was Banker.
I do believe that Banker knew Hughes well previous to his hiring. That said, Hughes was more than qualified for the job. It certainly appears though that he didn't exactly crush it on the job. He seemed like a good guy and who knows what's going on in his life. He's about my age, and because of some recent health issues I find it pretty damned hard some days to get too excited about work. I hope he has good things coming his way going forward.
 
I thought it was Banker too. And I agree that it was primarily recruiting that did Hughes in, but I still think VV's decision and his discussions with Riley had something to do with his firing. It adds up to a double whammy: can't bring in new guys AND you can't retain the older guys. Fate sealed. It is a shame though. Seems like a nice guy and I hate to see anyone lose their job.
 
Hughes and Banker played together at Springfield College in the late 1970's. Banker made the recommendation and Hughes on paper looked more than qualified.

VV never said anything bad about Riley. Riley got rid of Hughes because of his lack of success recruiting and communicating with recruits. It would have been nice to have Valentine back but he made his choice.

It's not like Riley was going to fire a coach because of Valentines lack of production.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HuskerPam
Hughes and Banker played together at Springfield College in the late 1970's. Banker made the recommendation and Hughes on paper looked more than qualified.

VV never said anything bad about Riley. Riley got rid of Hughes because of his lack of success recruiting and communicating with recruits. It would have been nice to have Valentine back but he made his choice.

It's not like Riley was going to fire a coach because of Valentines lack of production.

You and I must have read different articles. The article clearly states that VV shared with Riley his "concerns" over Hughes and then immediately quotes VV as saying that he thought Hughes was not a good teacher. Clearly the article is implying that this is the "concern" about Hughes he shared with Riley. Not certain then how you can conclude that VV said nothing negative about Hughes to Riley.

Also... I clearly stated that VV is not the main reason that Hughes was fired. Recruiting is the main reason and I said so.

Nevertheless, my deep suspicion is that VV was expressing an opinion probably shared by other linemen. And Riley knows it. Riley was openly critical of our defense's lack of a pass rush last year from the front four. So my guess is that Riley was also displeased with Hughes as a coach as well as a recruiter.
 
saw on the Huskermax site this morning that VV discussed his displeasure with Riley before declaring for the draft. He indicates that Riley said nothing about releasing Hughes at that time. Makes me think the departure of VV to the pros was a strong factor in Riley's decision. Probably a "straw that broke the camel's back" sort of event. Who was the person on the current staff that recommended Hughes to Riley las year?

Was it a factor in VV going pro. Absolutely. Riley didn't let on that he had concerns about Hughes to Valentine probably because he hadn't made a decision on Hughes yet. Maybe he didn't want to let a player have any information that wasn't public or Riley didn't want to risk any appearance of a player having influence over a coach's employment. (See James, LeBron). It's also possible that Riley didn't really care one way or another if VV came back. Questions on work ethic aside, VV's on the field production can be replaced.
 
Was it a factor in VV going pro. Absolutely. Riley didn't let on that he had concerns about Hughes to Valentine probably because he hadn't made a decision on Hughes yet. Maybe he didn't want to let a player have any information that wasn't public or Riley didn't want to risk any appearance of a player having influence over a coach's employment. (See James, LeBron). It's also possible that Riley didn't really care one way or another if VV came back. Questions on work ethic aside, VV's on the field production can be replaced.

I think Riley probably had misgivings about VV's work ethic. But to say he did not care if VV came back is a bit of an exaggeration I think. At the very least losing him was a blow to our depth at an already thin position, talent wise. VV may not be the greatest tackle we have ever had, but he wasn't a totally crappy player by any stretch. Damn good run stopper and line clogger.
 
  • Like
Reactions: otismotis08
We don't need to rehash the thoroughly reported "tampering" by Kaz with current players --and VV mentioned him-- but that surely put Hank in a tough spot as the coach who was most directly affected. And of course current players are a major factor in recruitment, so if they were mourning the loss of the great meddler, they surely weren't helping recruiting much. It sounds like we have a fireball now coaching and recruiting for us. Hopefully Kaz will no longer be working behind the scenes to our detriment.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: LonghornInOmaha
Not quite. VV never mentioned displeasure or anything of the sort with HCMR. He mentioned suprise, but that's it.

He did fire shots at HH, but it's nothing that would suprise anyone.
Bottom line, whether he had issues with position coach, D coord, or head coach, it doesn't matter. If you wanna be a football player in the NFL or college for that matter you need to put on your big boy pants and deal with the fact that you will go through many coaches in the game because its a high turnover profession. Just because you don't like a coach doesn't give you any reason to half ass it and not give 110 percent. And its plain to see with his weak 17 reps why J. Peter didn't like this guy. Because he didn't wanna put the time or effort in when it came to strength training. Being a Blackshirt is a special thing. Honor it by giving your all. NO MATTER WHO YOUR COACH IS!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: countrybob
Bottom line, whether he had issues with position coach, D coord, or head coach, it doesn't matter. If you wanna be a football player in the NFL or college for that matter you need to put on your big boy pants and deal with the fact that you will go through many coaches in the game because its a high turnover profession. Just because you don't like a coach doesn't give you any reason to half ass it and not give 110 percent. And its plain to see with his weak 17 reps why J. Peter didn't like this guy. Because he didn't wanna put the time or effort in when it came to strength training. Being a Blackshirt is a special thing. Honor it by giving your all. NO MATTER WHO YOUR COACH IS!!
I thought it was interesting that VV said he didn't think Hank measured up to Kaz technically, which could adversely affect his pro prospects. While that may be true, his pro prospects are more likely going to be a reflection of his work habits, including the time tutored by the wife beater. His performance and body shape don't reflect the hardest worker we've ever had, but let's hope he is successful.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dinglefritz
i just hope JP kills it here. we dont have much room for error.
 
I think Riley probably had misgivings about VV's work ethic. But to say he did not care if VV came back is a bit of an exaggeration I think. At the very least losing him was a blow to our depth at an already thin position, talent wise. VV may not be the greatest tackle we have ever had, but he wasn't a totally crappy player by any stretch. Damn good run stopper and line clogger.
Maybe, and I'm just speculating that may be the case. I don't know. We all should remember though that historically few Huskers have been tough to replace. A new talented kid steps in, gets more attention at practice and... voila... you've got a new starter. After Rex Burkhead came Abdullah. After Taylor Martinez came Tommy, etc. Vince did OK when he was healthy so I don't want to sound like I am knocking him.
 
I'm still baffled that Valentine declared for the draft. His "draft stock" equates to undrafted free agent. He is basically selling his stock at its lowest point. But all that aside, the #1 person that affects his draft profile and how much he stands to make as a pro is himself. I don't think Hughes is really to blame for a lackluster junior season.

Valentine is still an intriguing pro prospect and someone could end up picking him up for a very good value. It wouldn't surprise me to see him make an NFL roster. I just think a much smarter path for him would've been to stay for his senior season, put up good numbers, and get himself into the top three rounds of the draft.
 
You and I must have read different articles. The article clearly states that VV shared with Riley his "concerns" over Hughes and then immediately quotes VV as saying that he thought Hughes was not a good teacher. Clearly the article is implying that this is the "concern" about Hughes he shared with Riley. Not certain then how you can conclude that VV said nothing negative about Hughes to Riley.

Also... I clearly stated that VV is not the main reason that Hughes was fired. Recruiting is the main reason and I said so.

Nevertheless, my deep suspicion is that VV was expressing an opinion probably shared by other linemen. And Riley knows it. Riley was openly critical of our defense's lack of a pass rush last year from the front four. So my guess is that Riley was also displeased with Hughes as a coach as well as a recruiter.


Read the article from this site......

https://nebraska.n.rivals.com/news/valentine-weighs-in-on-the-hank-hughes-firing

It looks like Sam McKewon used some creative license in his article to slant it to his views. Specifically....."Before Valentine made his decision, he talked to coach Mike Riley about Hughes." VV talked to Riley about going pro and not to voice concerns about Hughes. VV was surprised by the HH firing because Riley didn't bring up that he was going to fire Hughes in that meeting. VV said that HH was only "minor" in his decision and he thought HH was about the details and that wasn't going to help him progress to the nfl.

Read the two articles and imho the Sam McKewon article is shoddy journalism.

As the old adage says, "Don't believe all of what you read and half of what you see."
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT