At what point do we stop bringing up Bo to defend Riley?

ColoradoHusk

ColoradoHusk

Donor
Look, I know we are only 3 games into the Mike Riley tenure, and that Riley is playing with a roster that was put together nearly 100% by Bo and the previous staff. But, at what point do we stop bringing up the negatives of Bo and his staff, just in the effort to defend Mike Riley and his staff?

I fully supported the firing of Bo. Although I didn't care as much about his sideline demeanor as most fans, Bo's win-loss record and performance in big games wasn't getting it done.

When Mike Riley was hired, I fully knew he who he was, and was aware of his performance at Oregon State. He had some good and bad years at OSU, in a very difficult situation. But, I could understand a lot of concerns with him from fans.

I came into this season with moderate expectations. I was very concerned about the overall talent and depth on the team. But, I thought that Riley and his staff could get the team to improve in the on-field performance. The first 3 games have produced extremely mixed results. Yes, the BYU game was lost on a fluke Hail Mary, but NU was also almost blown out in the first half and didn't finish the game in the 4th. The Miami game was also very alarming. I think Miami has more speed and talent than NU, but that doesn't excuse the poor start, lack of execution, and overall lifelessness shown for most of the game. A 1-2 record is still a 1-2 record. Yes, BYU and Miami are good teams, but it's not like NU was starting out with 2 teams ranked in the top ten.

I state the above because it seems like whenever someone brings up negative items regarding the Riley and the new staff, it seems like someone has to follow-up with a negative point or comparison to Bo. Yes, I guess it's good to see a calm demeanor on the sidelines, but it doesn't do much good if the coach doesn't win. Yes, it's a positive is a good representative of the University, handles the media well, and is universally well-liked. But, frankly, those are minor aspects of a coach for me, and winning is the biggest aspect of a coach for me. But, all of these "positives" about Riley seem to be in comparison to the previous guy. When can we let it go with Bo (insert Frozen GIF) and just talk about Riley and his team's performance, and not have every thread be a comparison to Riley and Bo?

 
knapplc said:
Pelini provides the context for every conversation about Riley. The two will always be tied at the hip. It's not an excuse, it's a circumstance.
Click to expand...
I think my point is that it doesn't need to be EVERY conversation. Can't we discuss Riley's gameplan or Banker's D without it turning it into a Bo vs. Riley conversation? Riley should be able to be evaluated by fans without having the previous guy used as context.

 
knapplc said:
Pelini provides the context for every conversation about Riley. The two will always be tied at the hip. It's not an excuse, it's a circumstance.
Click to expand...
In what ways other than recruits? And whoever answers, don't get snippy. I'm asking in a polite curious manner... for context.

 
In four years after all of his recruited players are out of the program. That is why I think that every coach needs six years to prove their worth. They get a pass for the first four years and then it is time to produce after that because there are no more excuses. I can almost agree with three years , but that fourth year is the year when the transition recruiting class are seniors, and that isn't going to be a positive thing most of the time.

 
AFhusker said:
In four years after all of his recruited players are out of the program. That is why I think that every coach needs six years to prove their worth. They get a pass for the first four years and then it is time to produce after that because there are no more excuses. I can almost agree with three years , but that fourth year is the year when the transition recruiting class are seniors, and that isn't going to be a positive thing most of the time.
Click to expand...
So, if a coach gets a free pass for 4 full years and he can't receive any blame for doing poorly, does that same coach get no credit if he gets the team to play well in those first 4 years?

 
What we're going to find out over the course of this year is what Bo left us. A sleeping giant, or a badly mismanaged roster? Somewhere in between?

Nebraska's immediate future will have a lot to do with Riley and the work he puts in. It will also have a lot to do with Bo.

That's for better or for worse. If the Huskers go 11-2 this year and finish in the Top 10, that's great work from Riley, obviously, but Bo would also get a good share of the credit. On the other hand, maybe for all the Tommy Armstrongs on the roster Bo also bequeathed a team with serious talent or depth issues at key spots that will take years to recover from...as well as a team more accustomed to pointing fingers at critics than raising their own bar.

(I applaud all parties including Alex Lewis for how this was ultimately handled -- but how concerning / emblematic of deeper issues is it that a team captain was so ready to proclaim "I'm done playing for the state of Nebraska"? ... we'll see, right?)

To what extent do those issues exist and how fast can they feasibly be addressed? We don't know. We are 1-2, yes. We're a hair's breadth away from being 3-0 against two teams that look Top 25 quality. We're also a hair's breadth away from having been totally run off the field by Miami in a Bo-style rout.

Joined at the hip is a good way to tell it. There will be some sharing of fortunes, of praise and blame.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
ColoradoHusk said:
AFhusker said:
In four years after all of his recruited players are out of the program. That is why I think that every coach needs six years to prove their worth. They get a pass for the first four years and then it is time to produce after that because there are no more excuses. I can almost agree with three years , but that fourth year is the year when the transition recruiting class are seniors, and that isn't going to be a positive thing most of the time.
Click to expand...
So, if a coach gets a free pass for 4 full years and he can't receive any blame for doing poorly, does that same coach get no credit if he gets the team to play well in those first 4 years?
Click to expand...
He would get credit for bringing talent. Just like people credit Callahan for leaving Bo with Suh, Amukamara, Dennard, etc. And how people credit Michigan's Sugar Bowl win a couple years ago to the talent Rich Rodriguez brought in.

 
ColoradoHusk said:
knapplc said:
Pelini provides the context for every conversation about Riley. The two will always be tied at the hip. It's not an excuse, it's a circumstance.
Click to expand...
I think my point is that it doesn't need to be EVERY conversation. Can't we discuss Riley's gameplan or Banker's D without it turning it into a Bo vs. Riley conversation? Riley should be able to be evaluated by fans without having the previous guy used as context.
Click to expand...
Yes you can, but you also have to understand the the results either negative or positive are not all on this staff due to having to use players that they didn't recruit who don't fit into their system. You can adjust for what you have only so much, if you have lack of team speed on defense, it doesn't matter what you call, they will get beat by faster guys. The same for the OL, We do have a pretty good QB, and some good WR's esp once DPE comes back. So you will likely see them pass more than run due to the talent that they inherited. But this doesn't excuse passing on 3rd and less than one while not using Cross. But then again, that could be the coaches lack of faith in the OL. Just like on the positive side, Bo got a lot of credit by getting the most out of Bill's recruits, which was deserved and I think he did a heck of a job with them. But even with that success, he doesn't get credit for recruiting them and it was shocking and the most disapointing part of his tenure here was that he couldn't get that kind of defensive talent to come to Nebraska.

 
huskerfan92 said:
ColoradoHusk said:
AFhusker said:
In four years after all of his recruited players are out of the program. That is why I think that every coach needs six years to prove their worth. They get a pass for the first four years and then it is time to produce after that because there are no more excuses. I can almost agree with three years , but that fourth year is the year when the transition recruiting class are seniors, and that isn't going to be a positive thing most of the time.
Click to expand...
So, if a coach gets a free pass for 4 full years and he can't receive any blame for doing poorly, does that same coach get no credit if he gets the team to play well in those first 4 years?
Click to expand...
He would get credit for bringing talent. Just like people credit Callahan for leaving Bo with Suh, Amukamara, Dennard, etc. And how people credit Michigan's Sugar Bowl win a couple years ago to the talent Rich Rodriguez brought in.
Click to expand...
I'm not talking about the previous coach's credit, I am talking about the current coach's credit.

If the NEW coach gets no blame for 4 years, then does he deserve any credit for 4 years, too?

 
Back
Top