where is the line?

[Red Dead Redemption]

 

[BigRedFA]

8-4 and I guess I "wish" we keep him as you put it. That would mean a top 10 win, a top 10 loss, and probably 2nd in the west. That would be serious momentum into next year.

Now, back to our regularly scheduled program. 7-5 I'd lean toward keeping him, but would be OK with whatever the admin does given how we've looked against lesser teams.

I tend to agree with you but I think there are some factors that weigh heavier than our record at the end of the year. HC availability pops out at me right away. There should always be some forethought put in before the big decision of firing a coach. Who is available and who would be willing to come to coach at Nebraska. It would be ludicrous to start a search only after you fire a HC. Yes, I know it happens all the time but I am just not sure what to think of an organization that doesn't make sure there is a viable replacement before making a big decision.

 

[BigRedAvenger]

I tend to agree with you but I think there are some factors that weigh heavier than our record at the end of the year. HC availability pops out at me right away. There should always be some forethought put in before the big decision of firing a coach. Who is available and who would be willing to come to coach at Nebraska. It would be ludicrous to start a search only after you fire a HC. Yes, I know it happens all the time but I am just not sure what to think of an organization that doesn't make sure there is a viable replacement before making a big decision.

It depends on the record of the current coach. There is little risk in firing a coach in the .500 range as opposed to firing a coach in the .750 range. When you have little to lose you can take greater risks.

 

[wheat]

I said 7-5 because it will require significant improvement to get there. 6-6 could be enough under the right circumstances. Factors other than record will likely play into the decision including whether the product on the field "looks like football," the number of empty seats in the stadium and, quite possibly, whether the new AD has a back channel commitment from his top choice.

One thing Ifind discouraging is that, in my opinion, the two best performances (MSU, UCLA) under Riley came in his first year when there were apparent buy in problems. I can give the defense a pass but this is not a start over on offense. The plays, blocking schemes and terminology are in their third year of implementation. Riley's qbs have historically struggled in their first year. An offense that is this poor every time there is a first year starting quarterback is a real liability. Oregon State fans were more prone to tolerate a 5-7 season with a new qb. Husker fans, not so much.

 

[Black41FlashReverse]

I am looking for a change regardless because I have grown to expect that the skers will find a way to play down to the level of their competition. They are far more likely to lose to anyone that to stand a chance of beating anyone. I'd say that 2.5 years (plus a career record outside of NU) is long enough to objectively judge that MR isn't "the guy" and if you accept that, then the only logical choice is to go hire someone that the admins think is "the guy".

 

[Ellis Boyd Redding]

Wow, I just looked at the poll results. What an equal distribution. Although the sample size is rather small, there could not be a more even split on how us fans are thinking.

What is the worst record NU could have to make you wish HCMR coaches here next year?

1. 
   I've seen enough, I want a change regardless
   14 vote(s)
   23.3%
2. 
   8-4+
   6 vote(s)
   10.0%
3. 
   7-5
   15 vote(s)
   25.0%
4. 
   6-6
   9 vote(s)
   15.0%
5. 
   5-7
   1 vote(s)
   1.7%
6. 
   Give him more time regardless
   15 vote(s)
   25.0%

 

[BARNUM is back]

I tend to agree with you but I think there are some factors that weigh heavier than our record at the end of the year. HC availability pops out at me right away. There should always be some forethought put in before the big decision of firing a coach. Who is available and who would be willing to come to coach at Nebraska. It would be ludicrous to start a search only after you fire a HC. Yes, I know it happens all the time but I am just not sure what to think of an organization that doesn't make sure there is a viable replacement before making a big decision.

all good points. the timing is going to be a big deal here - i don't think you could bring an AD in sometime in November and ask him to have all these ducks in a row after a couple weeks. the December 20th signing period accelerates the time line on all of this, and there is a window closing with every day we do not have an AD

 

[BARNUM is back]

Wow, I just looked at the poll results. What an equal distribution. Although the sample size is rather small, there could not be a more even split on how us fans are thinking.

they are pretty spread out. but as it stands right now. 58.3% of voters would not wish MR back if team goes 6-6 or worse. 7-5 will be tough sledding. I did not think there would be this high a % of "keep him regardless" votes because i don't think i've seen them posting this viewpoint on the BBS, but i would understand wanting to stay off the bbs to avoid people like me, who would try to argue with them about that.

 

[wheat]

Wow, I just looked at the poll results. What an equal distribution. Although the sample size is rather small, there could not be a more even split on how us fans are thinking.

I'm a little surprised as well. It's a small sample size but, if representative, a 6-6 record would result in a 60-40 split. No matter what happens, about a quarter of the fan base apparently will feel like the wrong move was made (those who have said they'd either move on or stand pat no matter what). Not exactly a recipe for happy kumbaya moments within the fan base.

 

[wheat]

all good points. the timing is going to be a big deal here - i don't think you could bring an AD in sometime in November and ask him to have all these ducks in a row after a couple weeks. the December 20th signing period accelerates the time line on all of this, and there is a window closing with every day we do not have an AD

We're definitely behind the 8 ball. I have no problem with Eichorst being gone but, if sure would have been better to have made that decision at the end of the last academic year. I'm not saying it's a train wreck but it sure isn't ideal to have these kinds of questions about retaining the football coach with no permanent AD in place.

Part of it is we have had ADs hire coaches in ways that tie their job security directly to the success of the football coach they hire. You can't have a search committee of 30 but if the process was a little more robust an AD could survive a failed football coach and avoid the kind of chaos we now have.

 

[Husker_in_Illinois]

Yes, I'm in the "Give him more time regardless" camp, so flame away. However, if we all agree that our talent level is rising, why are we so intent on getting rid of the guy who is responsible for that? I completely understand that the results on the field are what ultimately matter, but you can't deny that the cupboard was a little bare in 2015, and didn't really fit the type of team HCMR or OCDL wanted. That excuse is wearing thin as we move further into MR's tenure, but the fact remains that the upper classmen on this team were recruited by the previous coaching staff. Just sayin'.

Having said that, I just threw this together. Make of it what you will, including nothing at all. Here's the schedule and results of HCMR's time at NU, and my personal opinion of those games, for what that's worth. I've highlighted the games that I feel were bad losses because we were either run off the field, or games we should have won. I've also highlighted the games we won that I expected us to lose.

2015
BYU: Winnable game. Lost a toss-up.
South Alabama: Won a game we were expected to win
@ Miami: Winnable game. Lost a toss-up
S. Miss.: Won a game we were expected to win
@ Illinois: Lost a game we were expected to win
Wisconsin: Winnable game. Lost a toss-up
@ Minnesota: Won a game we were expected to win
Northwestern: Lost a toss-up
@ Purdue: Bad loss
Michigan State: Won a game we were expected to lose
@ Rutgers: Won a game we were expected to win
Iowa: Winnable game. Lost a toss-up
UCLA: Won a game we were expected to lose

2016
Fresno State: Won a game we were expected to win
Wyoming: Won a game we were expected to win
Oregon: Won a game we were expected to lose (before we knew Oregon wasn't very good last year)
@ Northwestern: Won a toss-up
Illinois: Won a game we were expected to win
@ Indiana: Won a game we were expected to win
Purdue: Won a game we were expected to win
@ Wisconsin: Lost a game we were expected to lose
@ Ohio State: Bad loss, but in a game we were expected to lose (just not that ugly)
Minnesota: Won a game we were expected to win
Maryland: Won a game we were expected to win
@ Iowa: Bad loss in a toss-up
Tennessee: Bad loss in a game we were expected to lose

2017 (so far)
Ark. State: Won a game we were expected to win
@ Oregon: Lost a game we were expected to lose
N. Illinois: Bad loss
Rutgers: Won a game we were expected to win
@ Illinois: Won a game we were expected to win
Wisconsin: Lost a game we were expected to lose

So far, the bad losses outnumber the good wins and we seem to lose most of the toss-ups. Based on that, my position seems a bit illogical, but I just can't shake the feeling that a guy should have the chance to work a bit longer with the better talent he's bringing in.

Of course, as I stated earlier in this thread, if HCMR is retained, I'd like to see the remaining Oregon State assistants shown the door, especially since none of them should have been here to begin with, except MAYBE Langsdorf.

 

[BARNUM is back]

...
Having said that, I just threw this together. Make of it what you will, including nothing at all. Here's the schedule and results of HCMR's time at NU, and my personal opinion of those games, for what that's worth. I've highlighted the games that I feel were bad losses because we were either run off the field, or games we should have won. I've also highlighted the games we won that I expected us to lose.

...

So far, the bad losses outnumber the good wins and we seem to lose most of the toss-ups. Based on that, my position seems a bit illogical, but I just can't shake the feeling that a guy should have the chance to work a bit longer with the better talent he's bringing in.

Of course, as I stated earlier in this thread, if HCMR is retained, I'd like to see the remaining Oregon State assistants shown the door, especially since none of them should have been here to begin with, except MAYBE Langsdorf.

that is alot of work, probably deserves his own thread - I'd like to add another dimension - within the wins and losses - did we play good-looking, disciplined football? IMO we have failed that standard too many times under MR and it makes me really pessimistic about his ceiling here.

 

[Pops]

In the sand

 

[denisonred]

I could live with 7-5 thats losing to Ohio State and Penn State but beating all the rest. I guess if he does that being pounded by the two powers in the other division would convince me to give him another year.

 

[denisonred]

The team needs to play physical.

But no chance of that, so...

This is all mental masturbation.

I like your way of putting it doc. Never thought I would see Nebraska incapable of playing physical football.