While I no longer recall the name of the poster who said this, it was someone with coaching experience who said ...
It's easier to inherit a group of players who hasn't experienced winning and convince them you can teach them how to win than it is to inherit a group of players who have been winning and convince them you have a better approach to winning.
Riley inherited a bunch of players that were beyond pissed that Bo was let go. Let alone half the fan base. There was some strong pushback to Riley's hiring. Now, that's not to completely excuse Riley. His biggest fault was allowing Eichorst to have too much control. And all that said, I won't claim Riley is a good coach. But I won't Scott Frost either. Not to this point anyhow. Yes, without knowing either's abilities to coach at Nebraska beforehand, I'd take Frost over Riley without even thinking about it. We all would. But as any sports fan should know, it doesn't always work out as we hoped.
Regardless -- even if you wish to call all of that hogwash -- losing by 18 to an Illinois who fired their coach at year's end -- and a Minnesota team whose defense had gotten their ass handed to them all season, had their top WR opt out the week prior, and dealt with dozens of Covid positives -- well, those things have a grand total of nothing to do with Riley in year three. The Riley excuse may have had some bearing in year one. In year three -- that's just no longer the case. We returned the entire 2019 offensive line in 2020, a 3-year starting QB, the starting RB, the starting TE, and Wan'Dale -- as much starting experience as you'll ever have returning -- yet that was arguably the least productive offense any of us have ever seen. That's also not on Riley. I'll be damn glad when the day comes when no one else mentions Riley as an excuse for Scott Frost. Good coaches don't need excuses -- not in year three.