It's weird, because for 40 solid years of Devaney, Osborne and Solich, we had no idea how desirable the head coaching job at Nebraska was to the college football world.
I suppose we could pony up the money and test the waters of the big name, can't miss coaches, of which there are maybe what? Five or six? How will we feel and what is our leverage if they reject the offer?
Back when this first happened, in 2003, we were spurned by Houston Nutt. Apparently our first choice and considered a hot property at the time. Things didn't work out so well for us, but it didn't work out well for Houston Nutt, either. Demanding a "top tier" coach is no guarantee of a top tier program. If there are other attractive openings at the time, a hot coach may not want to come to cold Nebraska, where you have six full games to prove yourself.
Still, we can absolutely get a great coach. We just don't know who is is. It will involve a risk. He will be an innovative offensive or defensive coordinator, but we will have to trust his transition to HC. He will be a head coach with a short but excellent track record in a conference considered less competitive than the Big 10. He will be a coach with a longer but rockier cumulative record, but who might thrive in the right setting with the right resources. He could turn things around overnight, like Bob Devaney, or he might take a four straight years of mediocrity, like Nick Saban at Michigan State. But the Nick Saban who becomes a hot property at Michigan State is going to go to the SEC, not to Nebraska. We may not have wanted Bret Bielema, but he also didn't want us, and that is an issue.
I don't think anyone is content with mediocrity at Nebraska. Nobody. But the notion that Nebraska had a chance at greatness and went for Riley instead makes no sense.
Unless you know something I don't. Who did we pass up? Any indication they would have taken the job? Because public rejection during a coaching search is a killer. See 2003.
We should be grateful for Riley because he wanted to be here. That's not nothing. And a mere 12 months ago, Mike Riley was voted the second most underrated coach by his college football coaching peers. That's not nothing either. I know TheSker will be quick to point out it was aeons ago, but Mike Riley was approached by Alabama, USC and UCLA for their HC jobs. There were actually professional and objective college football analysts who considered the Riley hire a bit of a coup. The national recruiting director at Rivals.com tweeted that the Riley hire was a "home run" and "I don't think Husker fans realize what a well-respected game coach Riley is and how hard it is to win in Corvallis."
Considering that recruiting was considered Riley's strong suit, we may want to let him give it a go before burying him.
Riley may still surprise you. He may not. But I don't think we "settled" for mediocrity. We took one of the many calculated risks Nebraska has to make to hire a new head coach.
I can't speak for the others commenting on this thread, but perhaps I should qualify my statement on $$$, fit, and coaches.
Unlike some others I have seen posting on these matters, I am not of the persuasion of throwing as much money as possible at a Established Superstar Coach 'X' just to get him here.
What I do believe is spending as much money as it takes to get the coach you want and think your program needs and will be a good fit at your program, and to keep him there.
At Michigan, that meant spending $5 million a year to lure Jim Harbaugh. At Baylor, that means paying Art Briles $4.2 million a year. At Florida, they are spending something like $3.5 million a year on McElwain. I'm sure we could keep going on down the line, but you get the idea.
I personally do not subscribe to the belief to just throw as much money as possible at a big name coach just because he is big name coach, unless that big name coach is absolutely the right guy, the right fit--the guy you want. It needs to be someone whom you feel will mesh with your program. To me, the fit should be the first and most important thing to take into consideration, then targeting the right guy(s), with compensation determined from there.
I cannot tell you precisely who we passed up, but I can tell you, if we are to believe what Shawn Eichorst said, that this process happened very quickly, he immediately targeted Riley, they met days later, and boom, Riley was our coach. So as far as claiming inside knowledge on the process itself, I personally can't.
I'm not necessarily saying this is the wrong way to go about the process (some would say it is, some would say it isn't), the question just remains is Riley that fit? Were there guys who were better fits? You'll always be taking a risk, but I think there is a difference between the risk involved in having your number hit in roulette as opposed to a winning hand in a game of blackjack. How calculated was this risk vs. its potential reward? We don't definitely know the answer to that right now. In the meantime, there will be debate and speculation until we get some answers on the field.
But, like I said, I'm not sure what the OP is getting at exactly with his original post. Makes it a bit hard to formulate a concrete dialogue when I'm not sure if he is saying the Huskers are doomed to be insignificant in 'tier 3', won't get a good coach again after Riley leaves or retires, are doomed to never have a good coach again, or expects us to believe we should accept this 'tier 3 reality' (whatever that is/means)--I really don't know.
With that being said, I do very much agree with your comments about being thankful for coaches taking interest in us regardless of their perceived worthiness or fit (did not intend to be snarky with my "That we should just be grateful we got Riley at all?" question. I was genuinely trying to determine what the OP was trying to convey in the post).
And yes, it is humiliating to be publicly passed up. I'm not sure exactly what SP's thinking was there (or in many regards, for that matter). As negatively as the Callahan era is looked at today, thank god we didn't end up with Houston Nutt. Ugh.
