Elf vs Huskerboard

[Elf]

Banker was fired because he wasn't very good

But he said he had given him things that needed to improve and they weren't happening.

So which is it? Was he fired because he wasn't very good? (Even Riley doesn't believe that. If he did, Banker never would have been hired to begin with.) Or was it because Riley gave him things to improve on and he didn't improve?

I know which one is correct and which one is you making sh#t up.

You're really stretching trying to make those two statements have to be exclusive of each other.

I'm hardly stretching. It's stretching to think Riley would hire Banker if he thought he wasn't any good. Riley told us why he fired Banker and adding anything else to it, like "Banker just wasn't very good" is simply projecting your own opinion into the facts. Riley kept Banker with him for years when he didn't think he was a very good coach? Yeah, I'm not buying that one at all. Lol

 

[Elf]

Here's the thing. Gerry was a beast when he wanted to be. He could have been more. The guy flat out admitted they weren't buying in or accepting the schemed changes, see Purdue loss. I've heard from more than one person that Gerry was the last main holdout still complaining about coaching change saying how much better he would be under them etc. This is of course to go with how he was said to complain about the old staff not utilizing him properly.

I was a fan of the guy, had the right tools. But it's his own fault he missed out on the bowl game, it's his own fault he missed out on breaking records and it's a shame because he could have been more, much more.

That said, there is no need to sh#t on the guy. I think he will do okay in the NFL if he drops the attitude problem.

Michael Rose-Ivey also said that every play there were 2-3 players, (the same players each play), who were still playing the old defense. Personally, I think that would have a large impact on how well your defense plays.

I think Banker made a mistake by allowing those players to keep playing. I would have made them ride the pine until they fixed their attitudes.

 

[Elf]

https://twitter.com/eagles/status/858410879771181060

Yeah, Nebraska tried Gerry at LB...he's not tough, or physical, enough to play LB.

He's Charmin. A soft, weak, half-speed, player.

Sorry fellow Nebraska fans, I'm just not a Nate Gerry fan. I think he embodied and carried forward for two years, every thing wrong about the former coach.

If he excels with the Eagles, terrific, I'll congratulate him. But I'll never root for, or like, him as person or player.

dude, you have a grudge problem, this kid is the sh#t!....he will play a role for the Eagles!

I'm not saying he won't.

I'm saying not a fan of his. His words, after the loss to Purdue in 2015, still rankle me. He flat out admitted that they hadn't "bought in." The extremely poor play we saw against BYU, Illinois, Purdue, etc, painfully highlighted the lack of "buy in."

In football speak, not "buying in" means you go half speed, you don't care, and you're holding a grudge because the coach who recruited you got fired.

And then he didn't do his school work and wasn't eligible for the bowl game his senior year--which was 100% inexcusable.

So yeah...not a fan of the former #25.

The lack of buy-in was on Riley. His job was to coach and inspire this team to win games.
We lost most of those games because of a poor scheme, not because the players weren't trying hard enough. If it was that easy, we wouldn't have just hired two new coordinators.

It's 100% understandable to be upset that his inability to go to class resulted in his suspension, but that kid played hard for us.

Dude, buy in is on the kids...not the coaches. The coaches are already bought in to their program and how they run things. Kids have to step on the bus. You can't make kids you coach do anything...they have to want to do it. You can't force kids you coach to do anything more than I could force a liberal to 'buy in' on conservatism.

We lost those games because the players lacked focus because they didn't care enough....they were still pissed that Pelini was gone...and they admitted they did that.

.... and because our defensive coordinator and special teams coordinator were terrible.

Were they terrible because they were terrible or were they terrible because the kids didn't buy in?

What you said isn't a fact...it's just an opinion. Just like what I said.

Well, my opinion was apparently shared by Riley so.....

Maybe with Reed it was, but it wasn't with Banker. Riley told us why he fired Banker, he was given things to improve upon and those improvements didn't happen. So he's gone. It really is that simple. Just because you want the reason to be different, doesn't mean it is.

 

[Mavric]

https://twitter.com/eagles/status/858410879771181060

Yeah, Nebraska tried Gerry at LB...he's not tough, or physical, enough to play LB.

He's Charmin. A soft, weak, half-speed, player.

Sorry fellow Nebraska fans, I'm just not a Nate Gerry fan. I think he embodied and carried forward for two years, every thing wrong about the former coach.

If he excels with the Eagles, terrific, I'll congratulate him. But I'll never root for, or like, him as person or player.

dude, you have a grudge problem, this kid is the sh#t!....he will play a role for the Eagles!

I'm not saying he won't.

I'm saying not a fan of his. His words, after the loss to Purdue in 2015, still rankle me. He flat out admitted that they hadn't "bought in." The extremely poor play we saw against BYU, Illinois, Purdue, etc, painfully highlighted the lack of "buy in."

In football speak, not "buying in" means you go half speed, you don't care, and you're holding a grudge because the coach who recruited you got fired.

And then he didn't do his school work and wasn't eligible for the bowl game his senior year--which was 100% inexcusable.

So yeah...not a fan of the former #25.

The lack of buy-in was on Riley. His job was to coach and inspire this team to win games.
We lost most of those games because of a poor scheme, not because the players weren't trying hard enough. If it was that easy, we wouldn't have just hired two new coordinators.

It's 100% understandable to be upset that his inability to go to class resulted in his suspension, but that kid played hard for us.

Dude, buy in is on the kids...not the coaches. The coaches are already bought in to their program and how they run things. Kids have to step on the bus. You can't make kids you coach do anything...they have to want to do it. You can't force kids you coach to do anything more than I could force a liberal to 'buy in' on conservatism.

We lost those games because the players lacked focus because they didn't care enough....they were still pissed that Pelini was gone...and they admitted they did that.

.... and because our defensive coordinator and special teams coordinator were terrible.

Were they terrible because they were terrible or were they terrible because the kids didn't buy in?

What you said isn't a fact...it's just an opinion. Just like what I said.

Well, my opinion was apparently shared by Riley so.....

Maybe with Reed it was, but it wasn't with Banker. Riley told us why he fired Banker, he was given things to improve upon and those improvements didn't happen. So he's gone. It really is that simple. Just because you want the reason to be different, doesn't mean it is.

And I've got some oceanfront property in Arizona to sell you. Trust me. If I tell you that's what it is, you can just believe it at face value.

 

[Elf]

https://twitter.com/eagles/status/858410879771181060

Yeah, Nebraska tried Gerry at LB...he's not tough, or physical, enough to play LB.

He's Charmin. A soft, weak, half-speed, player.

Sorry fellow Nebraska fans, I'm just not a Nate Gerry fan. I think he embodied and carried forward for two years, every thing wrong about the former coach.

If he excels with the Eagles, terrific, I'll congratulate him. But I'll never root for, or like, him as person or player.

dude, you have a grudge problem, this kid is the sh#t!....he will play a role for the Eagles!

I'm not saying he won't.

I'm saying not a fan of his. His words, after the loss to Purdue in 2015, still rankle me. He flat out admitted that they hadn't "bought in." The extremely poor play we saw against BYU, Illinois, Purdue, etc, painfully highlighted the lack of "buy in."

In football speak, not "buying in" means you go half speed, you don't care, and you're holding a grudge because the coach who recruited you got fired.

And then he didn't do his school work and wasn't eligible for the bowl game his senior year--which was 100% inexcusable.

So yeah...not a fan of the former #25.

The lack of buy-in was on Riley. His job was to coach and inspire this team to win games.
We lost most of those games because of a poor scheme, not because the players weren't trying hard enough. If it was that easy, we wouldn't have just hired two new coordinators.

It's 100% understandable to be upset that his inability to go to class resulted in his suspension, but that kid played hard for us.

Dude, buy in is on the kids...not the coaches. The coaches are already bought in to their program and how they run things. Kids have to step on the bus. You can't make kids you coach do anything...they have to want to do it. You can't force kids you coach to do anything more than I could force a liberal to 'buy in' on conservatism.

We lost those games because the players lacked focus because they didn't care enough....they were still pissed that Pelini was gone...and they admitted they did that.

.... and because our defensive coordinator and special teams coordinator were terrible.

Were they terrible because they were terrible or were they terrible because the kids didn't buy in?

What you said isn't a fact...it's just an opinion. Just like what I said.

Well, my opinion was apparently shared by Riley so.....

Maybe with Reed it was, but it wasn't with Banker. Riley told us why he fired Banker, he was given things to improve upon and those improvements didn't happen. So he's gone. It really is that simple. Just because you want the reason to be different, doesn't mean it is.

And I've got some oceanfront property in Arizona to sell you. Trust me. If I tell you that's what it is, you can just believe it at face value.

LMFAO!!!

You have zero connection to the program, so your opinion is no better or worse than anyone elses here. And, it's just an opinion. If that hurts your feelings, to damn bad because its the truth.

 

[Elf]

I'm hardly stretching. It's stretching to think Riley would hire Banker if he thought he wasn't any good. Riley told us why he fired Banker and adding anything else to it, like "Banker just wasn't very good" is simply projecting your own opinion into the facts. Riley kept Banker with him for years when he didn't think he was a very good coach? Yeah, I'm not buying that one at all. Lol

Or Banker was adequate to good when he was hired, but then he didn't adjust his philosophy as offenses innovated, and he became a mediocre DC. Oregon State fans wanted him gone for years. Hell, they came over to this board told us he wasn't going to be good enough.

Or he was seen as good enough for a lower-tier team in the defense-optional Pac-10 and Riley wanted to be loyal to a long-time friend but was exposed when the situation changed.

Riley had him on his staff at San Diego, keep believing your fantasies.

 

[Elf]

Let's see where Banker ends up coaching. If he's a good DC, and the problem was exclusively buy in, he'll be coordinating again at a top school in no time.

Obviously, the problem wasn't exclusively buy in because Riley himself said he gave Banker things to improve on and while re-watching the bowl game he saw those same things weren't fixed. It doesn't mean Banker was incapable of making those changes and anyone making that claim is guilty of conjecture. (I'm not saying you are.) It just means he didn't make those changes so now he is gone.

 

[teachercd]

Geez...you think Riley would have kept Banker especially since all the toxic loafing sandbagging players are gone now.

 

[Saunders]

I'm hardly stretching. It's stretching to think Riley would hire Banker if he thought he wasn't any good. Riley told us why he fired Banker and adding anything else to it, like "Banker just wasn't very good" is simply projecting your own opinion into the facts. Riley kept Banker with him for years when he didn't think he was a very good coach? Yeah, I'm not buying that one at all. Lol

Or Banker was adequate to good when he was hired, but then he didn't adjust his philosophy as offenses innovated, and he became a mediocre DC. Oregon State fans wanted him gone for years. Hell, they came over to this board told us he wasn't going to be good enough.

Or he was seen as good enough for a lower-tier team in the defense-optional Pac-10 and Riley wanted to be loyal to a long-time friend but was exposed when the situation changed.

Riley had him on his staff at San Diego, keep believing your fantasies.

http://beaverbyte.com/2013/09/01/mark-banker-must-go-at-osu/

 

[Elf]

Geez...you think Riley would have kept Banker especially since all the toxic loafing sandbagging players are gone now.

When your boss tells you that you need to improve in certain areas, you'd best improve if you value your job. Banker didn't do that so now he is gone.

 

[Mavric]

I'm hardly stretching. It's stretching to think Riley would hire Banker if he thought he wasn't any good. Riley told us why he fired Banker and adding anything else to it, like "Banker just wasn't very good" is simply projecting your own opinion into the facts. Riley kept Banker with him for years when he didn't think he was a very good coach? Yeah, I'm not buying that one at all. Lol

Or Banker was adequate to good when he was hired, but then he didn't adjust his philosophy as offenses innovated, and he became a mediocre DC. Oregon State fans wanted him gone for years. Hell, they came over to this board told us he wasn't going to be good enough.

Or he was seen as good enough for a lower-tier team in the defense-optional Pac-10 and Riley wanted to be loyal to a long-time friend but was exposed when the situation changed.

Riley had him on his staff at San Diego, keep believing your fantasies.

Which was a lot of years ago, which goes to saunders' point.

 

[Elf]

I'm hardly stretching. It's stretching to think Riley would hire Banker if he thought he wasn't any good. Riley told us why he fired Banker and adding anything else to it, like "Banker just wasn't very good" is simply projecting your own opinion into the facts. Riley kept Banker with him for years when he didn't think he was a very good coach? Yeah, I'm not buying that one at all. Lol

Or Banker was adequate to good when he was hired, but then he didn't adjust his philosophy as offenses innovated, and he became a mediocre DC. Oregon State fans wanted him gone for years. Hell, they came over to this board told us he wasn't going to be good enough.

Or he was seen as good enough for a lower-tier team in the defense-optional Pac-10 and Riley wanted to be loyal to a long-time friend but was exposed when the situation changed.

Riley had him on his staff at San Diego, keep believing your fantasies.

http://beaverbyte.com/2013/09/01/mark-banker-must-go-at-osu/

I understand the Oregon St fans wanted him gone. That still doesn't make him a bad coach. (He may or may not be, but at this point I couldn't care less because he isn't coaching for us.)

Did it make Osborne a bad coach when the fans wanted him gone because he couldn't beat Oklahoma? Of course not.

While I'm not sad to see Banker gone I thought he'd get one more year after all the malcontents had left. And, I can't say that I was saddened to find out he won't be here next year.

The only issue I have is Mavric inserting his opinions and feelings as fact.

 

[Elf]

I'm hardly stretching. It's stretching to think Riley would hire Banker if he thought he wasn't any good. Riley told us why he fired Banker and adding anything else to it, like "Banker just wasn't very good" is simply projecting your own opinion into the facts. Riley kept Banker with him for years when he didn't think he was a very good coach? Yeah, I'm not buying that one at all. Lol

Or Banker was adequate to good when he was hired, but then he didn't adjust his philosophy as offenses innovated, and he became a mediocre DC. Oregon State fans wanted him gone for years. Hell, they came over to this board told us he wasn't going to be good enough.

Or he was seen as good enough for a lower-tier team in the defense-optional Pac-10 and Riley wanted to be loyal to a long-time friend but was exposed when the situation changed.

Riley had him on his staff at San Diego, keep believing your fantasies.

Which was a lot of years ago, which goes to saunders' point.

And for a lot of years after that, Banker was kept on Riley's staff. Obviously, Riley didn't view Banker as a bad coach for all those years or he wouldn't have kept him.

And we know for a fact that Riley is capable of firing his friends if they aren't performing up to expectations.

 

[Elf]

https://twitter.com/eagles/status/858410879771181060

Yeah, Nebraska tried Gerry at LB...he's not tough, or physical, enough to play LB.

He's Charmin. A soft, weak, half-speed, player.

Sorry fellow Nebraska fans, I'm just not a Nate Gerry fan. I think he embodied and carried forward for two years, every thing wrong about the former coach.

If he excels with the Eagles, terrific, I'll congratulate him. But I'll never root for, or like, him as person or player.

dude, you have a grudge problem, this kid is the sh#t!....he will play a role for the Eagles!

I'm not saying he won't.

I'm saying not a fan of his. His words, after the loss to Purdue in 2015, still rankle me. He flat out admitted that they hadn't "bought in." The extremely poor play we saw against BYU, Illinois, Purdue, etc, painfully highlighted the lack of "buy in."

In football speak, not "buying in" means you go half speed, you don't care, and you're holding a grudge because the coach who recruited you got fired.

And then he didn't do his school work and wasn't eligible for the bowl game his senior year--which was 100% inexcusable.

So yeah...not a fan of the former #25.

The lack of buy-in was on Riley. His job was to coach and inspire this team to win games.
We lost most of those games because of a poor scheme, not because the players weren't trying hard enough. If it was that easy, we wouldn't have just hired two new coordinators.

It's 100% understandable to be upset that his inability to go to class resulted in his suspension, but that kid played hard for us.

Dude, buy in is on the kids...not the coaches. The coaches are already bought in to their program and how they run things. Kids have to step on the bus. You can't make kids you coach do anything...they have to want to do it. You can't force kids you coach to do anything more than I could force a liberal to 'buy in' on conservatism.

We lost those games because the players lacked focus because they didn't care enough....they were still pissed that Pelini was gone...and they admitted they did that.

.... and because our defensive coordinator and special teams coordinator were terrible.

Were they terrible because they were terrible or were they terrible because the kids didn't buy in?

What you said isn't a fact...it's just an opinion. Just like what I said.

Well, my opinion was apparently shared by Riley so.....

Maybe with Reed it was, but it wasn't with Banker. Riley told us why he fired Banker, he was given things to improve upon and those improvements didn't happen. So he's gone. It really is that simple. Just because you want the reason to be different, doesn't mean it is.

And I've got some oceanfront property in Arizona to sell you. Trust me. If I tell you that's what it is, you can just believe it at face value.

LMFAO!!!

You have zero connection to the program, so your opinion is no better or worse than anyone elses here. And, it's just an opinion. If that hurts your feelings, to damn bad because its the truth.

So what connections to the program do you have to know it's the truth?

I don't make claims that my word is to be trusted.

Only one person in this thread has done that and unless you can prove some sort of connection to the program, then your word is pretty worthless.