• You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.

HuskerMax readers can save 50% on  Omaha Steaks .

Riley dispels rumor

Paramus said:
The article only dispels the notion that Eichorst forced Riley to replace Banker. It does not dispel any talk about Devaney's role in the move. Per Short Side Option, this is how it went down...and nothing in the article dispels what *** said.

"Devaney looked at our roster and saw we had walk-ons at 50% of our DEs two deep in 2015, and started one each of the last two seasons.
Devaney saw we couldn't get a rush to save our lives without the blitz and what the LB room for edge rushers compared to DEs.
Devaney brought up our personnel being possibly more suited for a 3-4.
Devaney brought up if that was something we needed to do, we most likely needed to change coordinators.

Riley looked at roster and thought maybe he was on to something.
Riley would not do anything without knowing realistic replacement options, as we had improved.
Riley dug deep enough to find issues that were consistent last year and this year, despite the improvements.

Devaney presents Diaco as an option, rest is history.

I am of the opinion if it was not for Devaney, Banker would be our DC next year as the option we got may not have been presented. But that's part of why Devaney is here. Diaco would not be here over Banker if Riley did not ok bringing him here, which is Riley having the final say."
Click to expand...
This all seems plausible and is exactly why Devaney was brought in. Sometimes when friends are involved we can not see the forest through the trees. So having an additional perspective and someone who will be honest with us is important.
 

Paramus said:
The article only dispels the notion that Eichorst forced Riley to replace Banker. It does not dispel any talk about Devaney's role in the move. Per Short Side Option, this is how it went down...and nothing in the article dispels what *** said.

"Devaney looked at our roster and saw we had walk-ons at 50% of our DEs two deep in 2015, and started one each of the last two seasons.
Devaney saw we couldn't get a rush to save our lives without the blitz and what the LB room for edge rushers compared to DEs.
Devaney brought up our personnel being possibly more suited for a 3-4.
Devaney brought up if that was something we needed to do, we most likely needed to change coordinators.

Riley looked at roster and thought maybe he was on to something.
Riley would not do anything without knowing realistic replacement options, as we had improved.
Riley dug deep enough to find issues that were consistent last year and this year, despite the improvements.

Devaney presents Diaco as an option, rest is history.

I am of the opinion if it was not for Devaney, Banker would be our DC next year as the option we got may not have been presented. But that's part of why Devaney is here. Diaco would not be here over Banker if Riley did not ok bringing him here, which is Riley having the final say."
Click to expand...


I don't know if it went down that way or not, but if it did, it doesn't diminish Riley, it credits him. * He brought in Devaney. And if Devaney saw something or had an idea Riley didn't think of that's no discredit to Riley either. No single leader is complete in himself, more able and wiser than all his staff in every way. That's nothing but a dangerous myth.

The point of bringing in any coach, and certainly someone in a role like Devaney's, is to bring in people who expand the capabilities of the team. The best leaders know that. The best leaders know to bring in people who will challenge them with good ideas. (And by the way, the best people always want to work for leaders who do that and listen.)

To quote a post from a wise poster in different thread just days ago: :)

huskernut said:
It's a characteristic of strong and effective leaders that they attract and empower good people who can expand the capability of the team, even when those people have skills that rival or exceed the leader's in some way or ways. It doesn't guarantee success - there are lots of different things that go into that; but it's a very powerful asset.
Click to expand...

Or another one whose post I probably should have read and just liked before I wasted my time (and anyone's who's read this far) saying the same thing with 10 times the words:

Huskerthom said:
This all seems plausible and is exactly why Devaney was brought in. Sometimes when friends are involved we can not see the forest through the trees. So having an additional perspective and someone who will be honest with us is important.
Click to expand...
:Biggrin:

(* Not addressing this to you, Paramus. You didn't say it diminishes him. I'm adding this point as an extension not a rebuttal.)
 
Last edited:
Red Dead Redemption said:
Is that explicit of a command the only possibility? What about dropping not-so-subtle hints? What if SE told MR that the program needs to improve, and if that means replacing certain assistant coaches, then he needs to do it? Would that substantiate the rumor at all, or fully disprove it? What if SE was even more direct? or less? As I said, the full truth is somewhere in between the two extremes, and it's irrelevant to how MR responded to the loaded question by the media, because it is extremely likely MR would respond the same.
Click to expand...

Then again, the full truth may be just what MR said it was.
 



Whatever transpired that lead to the final decision, it needed to be done.

I'm fairly confident that if there were a round table discussion between Riley, Devaney, DVD, and Eichorst, it was likely a mutual agreement that changes on defense needed to be made if NU is to become a major player again.
 
1standten said:
Whatever transpired that lead to the final decision, it needed to be done.

I'm fairly confident that if there were a round table discussion between Riley, Devaney, DVD, and Eichorst, it was likely a mutual agreement that changes on defense needed to be made if NU is to become a major player again.
Click to expand...
Also very plausible. Leaders often take input from many people. It does not mean they did not make the final decision. I will always remember one of my first interactions with one of the best leaders I ever met. There was a technical dispute between my self a sergeant and a Gunnery Sergeant. He stepped in listened to both sides. even though we had just met and the other person was two ranks ahead of me. He listened to both equally. In the end he said, "OK this is what we are going to do." At that point it was his decision not ours. (for the record he chose my way.:Biggrin:) However the Gunny did not feel slighted. Both sides were heard and an intelligent decision was made. Based on all of the facts.
 
HuskerNCorpus said:
It has been suggested by some that athletic director Shawn Eichorst was behind the changes, that Riley was doing it to save his job.

"No way any part of that is true," he says. "This was done by me. I had good sounding boards all around me, but the only way I wanted it to happen was if I made the decision. I didn't want anybody else to have to bear that burden. Nobody else was involved except for me."

http://portlandtribune.com/pt/12-sp...raska-staff-in-hopes-of-better-things-in-2017
Click to expand...

Slow news day in Portland, no riots. AD's do not get involved, thats what they have coaches for.
 




I think this was posted in another thread this week. Despite the best efforts of some to turn Riley into a paper tiger, it appears the buck stops with him.

And, in a broader sense, it's also natural to wonder about Devaney's role in the program. For example, you wonder how much input and influence he had in the offseason hire/fire decisions.

"I have zero say in that," he says. "That's one guy (Riley) making that call."

Devaney quickly adds, "Now, does Riles bounce stuff off me and other people in the building? Absolutely. That's part of my job, to give my opinion. But at the end of the day, we're just waiting for Mike to say, 'We're making a change' or 'We're not making a change.' My job is to be prepared for whatever the decision is."
Click to expand...

http://journalstar.com/sports/huske...cle_6ad9cbee-0c05-5ebe-82f7-25e7e226de03.html
 
Eichorst may have suggested changes, but I doubt he forced them. His ass is on the line on this deal. If Riley fails, Eichorst shouldn't be the one to can him. It was a HUGE roll of the dice to begin with, a very risky, out of left field hire. If Riley can't win, Eichorst shouldn't be the one hiring another football coach. Have to see moving forward. Hard to fire a 70% coach and replace him with a 50% coach.
 



Husker In Oklahoma said:
Eichorst may have suggested changes, but I doubt he forced them. His ass is on the line on this deal. If Riley fails, Eichorst shouldn't be the one to can him. It was a HUGE roll of the dice to begin with, a very risky, out of left field hire. If Riley can't win, Eichorst shouldn't be the one hiring another football coach. Have to see moving forward. Hard to fire a 70% coach and replace him with a 50% coach.
Click to expand...
:rolleyes::rolleyes:
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

GET TICKETS


Get 50% off on Omaha Steaks

Back
Top