Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2017 13:52:03 GMT -8
Curious, but then wouldn't the logic.... Just because you agree with them, does not make them rational....work as well? Who says I agree with them? I post there and if you went and looked (same user name) I am not in agreement with most of their reasons. That doesn't make them irrational. I dislike Riley for the Brenda Tracy situation and how he handled that. I wouldn't hire him back because he quit on the program not once but twice AND I worry about him possibly over shadowing JS. Those are perfectly rational reasons to disagree with the hire. But are by no means an exhaustive list of rational reasons. You guys pretend that their are no rational reasons to dislike this hire, I'd call irrational. A - I believe I offered a comparative logic. I did not infer that anyone agrees with anything. (I re-used your word "them". I can see how that may have been misread. My bad.) B - I don't peruse boards that I do not post on, so I'll have to take your word for it. C - You can like or dislike anyone you want. D - Lumping me in with "You guys"? I have never....ever...posted anything that infers that there are no rational reasons to dislike this hire. I am going to reluctantly offer a suggestion. Your frustration, or disappointment, or dislike regarding this subject is both posted and clear. It appears you are seeking the whetstone of opposition from which to sharpen your opinion. I am not that guy. Peace
|
|
|
Post by nabeav on Dec 8, 2017 14:08:46 GMT -8
I dislike Riley for the Brenda Tracy situation and how he handled that. I wouldn't hire him back because he quit on the program not once but twice AND I worry about him possibly over shadowing JS. Alright, before I start, I'm not saying this applies to you, @youngorst - these might not be the reasons behind your opinion on Mike Riley. But here's my reasons why I think the things you listed above are not really the reasons people dislike Riley. Honestly, I don't think the Brenda Tracy thing is reason to dislike him. Judged through the lens of today's society, yes. If he did the same thing today, it'd be contemptible. However....if you can find me ONE SINGLE INSTANCE of a college coach doing more than Riley did in a case that occurred before the turn of the century. He suspended the kids immediately. The District Attorney dropped the charges due to lack of cooperation from the witness. He suspended them for a game even after that. Compare that to some of the other coaches dealing with sexual assault/rape at the time. Neuheisel at Washington. Was it Gary Barnett at Colorado that made some flippant remarks about Katie Hnida? I'm sure there's a host of others who had "no conviction, no suspension" policies. Again, if it happened today and he had the same response, then it would be a justifiably fireable offense. But if you're mad at Riley for reacting as was socially acceptable at the time, then you should also be for changing the name of every building in the country named for someone who was vaguely racist in the 1800s. Also, you'd better be against Luke Heimlich pitching here in 2018. Otherwise, you're using it as an excuse for not liking him as a football coach. Similarly, I've gone over the credentials Mike Riley brings to the table as an assistant coach on other threads. The fact that he left us twice is not a reason to dislike him. EVERY COACH LEAVES A JOB FOR SOMEWHERE ELSE. Here's a list of guys who were on staff here at one point and then left for other jobs elsewhere: Trent Bray Keith Heyward Jonathan Smith Jim Michalczik Dennis Erickson Inoke Breckterfield Nick Saban is a Kent State alum. He coached at Kent State. Are they not going to take him back because he left them to coach at Syracuse in 1977? Mike Price played at Washington State and then left them for Alabama (joke was on him)....would they be pissed if he came back? So stop with this crap about how he left us. Twice he left us for higher profile jobs making far more money. This wasn't Ritchie McKay running off to New Mexico, or even Gary Andersen leaving Wisconsin. The one argument that makes sense to me is the people who are worried about divided leadership. If you don't think Jonathan Smith is a strong leader and that guys will gravitate towards Mike Riley for guidance, I think that is a reasonable concern. My concerns about that were alleviated by Jonathan's press conference, where he seemed far more confident and assured of himself than I gave him credit for. He's going to be a good leader. He said on the JBS today that "I have some strong beliefs in how we're going to do things and the direction I want us to go." The one argument you never hear...."he's not a good football coach," despite that being what everyone really thinks. They know it's an indefensible stance to take.
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Dec 8, 2017 14:18:08 GMT -8
Four2itus beat me to it, but he's spot on and it bears repeating. There are plenty of irrational reasons to dislike Riley, and just because you agree with them doesn't automatically make them rational. Seriously, start listing rational reasons to dislike Riley. I'd like to see them. It could also be argued that it is "irrational" to be on the pro "hire Riley back a third time" side. And not everyone that disagrees with Riley coming back as an asst HC, "dislike Riley" I don't personally know him. Some people absolutely didn't want other coaches to come here during the search, does that mean they hate or dislike them? Some of us don't like the idea of bringing someone back for a third time, when he has shown at the end of his last stint here that he started to slide downhill and then going into a better situation (at Neb.), with better resources and players than in Corvallis (as he apparently stated) and being underwhelming at best. If you choose to say that everything Riley did at Oregon State was extremely successful...ok... the numbers don't paint the same picture. If you want to try and argue that he was successful at Nebraska because there are other coaches that have done worse with their programs, ok.... what about the facts though? Go Beavs! I have stated all along that Riley's time as head coach is done. I also argued that it probably wasn't expedient to bring him back at any kind of coordinator level once it was obvious that Coach Smith was interested in him. However, rationally, Coach Mike Riley is probably one of the most qualified QB and defensive back coaches available in college football today, and would be more than capable at several other postition as well. As far as numbers painting a picture: 25 years pre Riley... 52 wins = just over 2 wins a season, 0 seasons with more that 4 wins. 14 seasons of Riley 93 wins = 6.64 wins average. Multiple 8-10 win seasons, multiple bowl games and wins, no season worse than 3 wins. Post Riley 3 years 7 wins... and back to just over 2 wins a season. Fact of the matter is we're not hiring him is a head coach. He is VERY well qualified to be a postion coach and has already turned down 2 Power 5 job offers (I would love to hear a list of actual inquiries Riley has had into his availability over the years, it's probably huge). The only reason I could see NOT to hire Riley as a postion coach would be the ego of the hirer.
|
|
|
Post by gobeavs92 on Dec 8, 2017 14:24:03 GMT -8
Hey Drunkandstoopid, had a question for ya?
Honest question: Are you on board with the Smith hire, now that Riley is back?
Go Beavs!
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Dec 8, 2017 14:30:22 GMT -8
On this quitting thing... if you had a business and hired a manager to fix your pathetically unscuccessful business and in two years time he turned it in the right direction, then a big company offered him a prestigious position at triple what you were paying... would you refuse to rehire him when your next manager took off for a more prestigious job? If you did hire him and he came back for a decade and a half, bringing your business to where it was consistently competitive and in the top 30% or so of your field for said decade and a half, albeit a few temporary downturns... and yet another prestigious company wants to take him, this time at 40% more than you are willing to give him... and he moves on... If he came back and offered his availability to help you, at a lesser position, would you call him a quitter and say no effin' way even though he might be the most qualified person available for a position you need filled? Honest question: Are you on board with the Smith hire, now that Riley is back? Go Beavs! Smith was nowhere near one of my favorite candidates. I thought he should cut his teeth at the G5 level than move up. The moment he was hired though I was onboard, and seeing fan response (in general) and his hires he's brought on so far (and I'm talking before Riley was officially confirmed) I'm really getting excited to see what he can do. So far I think every hire is a winner. I really think he's putting something good together here, Riley being involved or not. As far as Riley goes, I have stated if he came back I'd prefer it to be in a more background position. I do truly think Riley is a tremendous coach and would do a terriffic job at whatever position coach Smith puts him at. I see no drawbacks other than the perception it carries with some fans and some members of the local media.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2017 14:30:44 GMT -8
I dislike Riley for the Brenda Tracy situation and how he handled that. I wouldn't hire him back because he quit on the program not once but twice AND I worry about him possibly over shadowing JS. The one argument you never hear...."he's not a good football coach," despite that being what everyone really thinks. They know it's an indefensible stance to take. If he were hired as HC I would absolutely make that argument. I think he is a terrible HC at this point in his career. As for the Brenda Tracy being no bid deal due to when it happened. I'll have to agree to disagree, the minute I heard that story I lost all respect for Mike Riley. I don't care what other coaches would have done. Call me irrational for that all you want. I stand by it. I also disagree when you talk about him leaving for a better paying job. I'll buy that the first time but the second time he was given a lifetime contract (essentially) and made multiple comments about being at OSU for the rest of his career. To me, bailing on that (even for more money) does not excuse it and makes him someone I would not rehire. I'm actually not that bothered by him being a position coach, I just would prefer it be someone else. I don't think my reasons are irrational simply because you disagree with them.
|
|
|
Post by nabeav on Dec 8, 2017 14:46:32 GMT -8
You didn't hear about it until 2014. Nobody did. That's my point. Public sentiment towards sexual assault victims flipped dramatically in the 16 years between the event and when she went public.....unless you're talking about hearing about two players being accused of rape in 1998 and being upset then. If you were upset in 1998, I can't argue with that. Respect that decision. I'm relatively new to the message board scene, don't know if you've been vocal about Riley being a rape denier for the last twenty years.
And I'll admit, I don't remember the incident at all, and I was in school here during that time. Shows how much I paid attention.
As far as the "retire a Beaver" stuff. I'm sure he felt that way when he said it. Obviously something changed between then and the time he left for Nebraska. What that was, I don't know. Was it the losing? Was it the increasing fan dislike? Was it something he heard from administration? Was it the Nebraska $$$$? I have no idea.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2017 14:55:56 GMT -8
You didn't hear about it until 2014. Nobody did. That's my point. Public sentiment towards sexual assault victims flipped dramatically in the 16 years between the event and when she went public.....unless you're talking about hearing about two players being accused of rape in 1998 and being upset then. If you were upset in 1998, I can't argue with that. Respect that decision. I'm relatively new to the message board scene, don't know if you've been vocal about Riley being a rape denier for the last twenty years. And I'll admit, I don't remember the incident at all, and I was in school here during that time. Shows how much I paid attention. As far as the "retire a Beaver" stuff. I'm sure he felt that way when he said it. Obviously something changed between then and the time he left for Nebraska. What that was, I don't know. Was it the losing? Was it the increasing fan dislike? Was it something he heard from administration? Was it the Nebraska $$$$? I have no idea. I respectfully disagree. I don't care what public sentiment was at the time. The minute a coach hears his players sexually assaulted someone they should be off the team. I don't care if the charges were dropped and I don't care if it was 1998. I am willing to accept a lot of bad behavior from players, an adult committing sexual assault against anyone is a red line for me. Even if every other coach on the planet would have kept the players, I still have no respect for it. And while I did not know this story in 1998 but I do remember being disgusted and losing all respect for Tom Osborne that Christian Peters was allowed to play at Nebraska and that the NFL rewarded him as a 1st round pick back in the early 90's. And I was in middle school at the time the Peters stuff was going on. So I know where I would have stood when it came to the Brenda Tracy story back in 1998.
|
|
|
Post by beavadelic on Dec 8, 2017 14:59:58 GMT -8
Curious, but then wouldn't the logic.... Just because you agree with them, does not make them rational....work as well? Who says I agree with them? I post there and if you went and looked (same user name) I am not in agreement with most of their reasons. That doesn't make them irrational. I dislike Riley for the Brenda Tracy situation and how he handled that. I wouldn't hire him back because he quit on the program not once but twice AND I worry about him possibly over shadowing JS. Those are perfectly rational reasons to disagree with the hire. But are by no means an exhaustive list of rational reasons. You guys pretend that their are no rational reasons to dislike this hire, I'd call irrational. I would love to hear how anything be else would have handled that situation differently in the late ‘90’s. Riley probably did more of his own volition that 95% of the coaches in the country would. We are, after all, living in a country where supposedly people are presumed innocent until proven guilty. With the information MR has - including the fact that charges were dropped - what was he going to do? The benefit of applying present day information to events 20 years ago is not legit. If we want to dislike a coach because of a misstep in their past, good luck finding any candidates. What happened to Brenda Tracy was horrendous. Riley has just a portion of the information at the time. In retrospect it would have been great if he would have been so evolved that he went beyond what anyone else at the time would have done in order to deal justly. Ask Brenda Tracy what she thinks of Mike Riley if you want an accurate read of that man. Where most people are constantly engaged in advanced butt coverage, Riley has done everything possible to make it right.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2017 15:07:40 GMT -8
Who says I agree with them? I post there and if you went and looked (same user name) I am not in agreement with most of their reasons. That doesn't make them irrational. I dislike Riley for the Brenda Tracy situation and how he handled that. I wouldn't hire him back because he quit on the program not once but twice AND I worry about him possibly over shadowing JS. Those are perfectly rational reasons to disagree with the hire. But are by no means an exhaustive list of rational reasons. You guys pretend that their are no rational reasons to dislike this hire, I'd call irrational. I would love to hear how anything be else would have handled that situation differently in the late ‘90’s. Riley probably did more of his own volition that 95% of the coaches in the country would. We are, after all, living in a country where supposedly people are presumed innocent until proven guilty. With the information MR has - including the fact that charges were dropped - what was he going to do? The benefit of applying present day information to events 20 years ago is not legit. If we want to dislike a coach because of a misstep in their past, good luck finding any candidates. What happened to Brenda Tracy was horrendous. Riley has just a portion of the information at the time. In retrospect it would have been great if he would have been so evolved that he went beyond what anyone else at the time would have done in order to deal justly. Ask Brenda Tracy what she thinks of Mike Riley if you want an accurate read of that man. Where most people are constantly engaged in advanced butt coverage, Riley has done everything possible to make it right. Cecil Collins got kicked out of LSU for allegations of sexual assault in 1998 so at least 1 coach did more than Riley.
|
|
|
Post by beaver94 on Dec 8, 2017 15:14:44 GMT -8
You didn't hear about it until 2014. Nobody did. That's my point. Public sentiment towards sexual assault victims flipped dramatically in the 16 years between the event and when she went public.....unless you're talking about hearing about two players being accused of rape in 1998 and being upset then. If you were upset in 1998, I can't argue with that. Respect that decision. I'm relatively new to the message board scene, don't know if you've been vocal about Riley being a rape denier for the last twenty years. And I'll admit, I don't remember the incident at all, and I was in school here during that time. Shows how much I paid attention. As far as the "retire a Beaver" stuff. I'm sure he felt that way when he said it. Obviously something changed between then and the time he left for Nebraska. What that was, I don't know. Was it the losing? Was it the increasing fan dislike? Was it something he heard from administration? Was it the Nebraska $$$$? I have no idea. I respectfully disagree. I don't care what public sentiment was at the time. The minute a coach hears his players sexually assaulted someone they should be off the team. I don't care if the charges were dropped and I don't care if it was 1998. I am willing to accept a lot of bad behavior from players, an adult committing sexual assault against anyone is a red line for me. Even if every other coach on the planet would have kept the players, I still have no respect for it. And while I did not know this story in 1998 but I do remember being disgusted and losing all respect for Tom Osborne that Christian Peters was allowed to play at Nebraska and that the NFL rewarded him as a 1st round pick back in the early 90's. And I was in middle school at the time the Peters stuff was going on. So I know where I would have stood when it came to the Brenda Tracy story back in 1998. So I assume you believe Duke handled the accusations against the lacrosse players correctly?
|
|
|
Post by beavadelic on Dec 8, 2017 15:32:41 GMT -8
The one argument you never hear...."he's not a good football coach," despite that being what everyone really thinks. They know it's an indefensible stance to take. If he were hired as HC I would absolutely make that argument. I think he is a terrible HC at this point in his career. As for the Brenda Tracy being no bid deal due to when it happened. I'll have to agree to disagree, the minute I heard that story I lost all respect for Mike Riley. I don't care what other coaches would have done. Call me irrational for that all you want. I stand by it. I also disagree when you talk about him leaving for a better paying job. I'll buy that the first time but the second time he was given a lifetime contract (essentially) and made multiple comments about being at OSU for the rest of his career. To me, bailing on that (even for more money) does not excuse it and makes him someone I would not rehire. I'm actually not that bothered by him being a position coach, I just would prefer it be someone else. I don't think my reasons are irrational simply because you disagree with them. Youngorst....your take on Riley’s handling of the situation sounds pretty sanctimonious. Judging by your moniker, I’m thinking that you might be a millennial? The longer a person lives, the more they recognize that it’s one thing to say what they would do in a given situation, quite another when they are actually in that situation. The measure of character is trying to do right, but when you err (which you probably do just like the rest of us...unless you’re infallible, in which case we should start calling you “St. Youngorst”) and know it, you do all you can to make things right. I 100% believe that Riley had a clear conscience at the time with regard to his response to this terrible incident. Anyone who knows Riley - from his players to his friends and family - would say that it is absolutely inconsistent with the man’s character to knowingly handle a situation in an immoral fashion. He’s not a saint, but if you don’t respect the man as a man that’s on you. You must live in a rigid, unbending world devoid of grace, and I feel sorry for you.
|
|
|
Post by mbabeav on Dec 8, 2017 15:33:47 GMT -8
On this quitting thing... if you had a business and hired a manager to fix your pathetically unscuccessful business and in two years time he turned it in the right direction, then a big company offered him a prestigious position at triple what you were paying... would you refuse to rehire him when your next manager took off for a more prestigious job? If you did hire him and he came back for a decade and a half, bringing your business to where it was consistently competitive and in the top 30% or so of your field for said decade and a half, albeit a few temporary downturns... and yet another prestigious company wants to take him, this time at 40% more than you are willing to give him... and he moves on... If he came back and offered his availability to help you, at a lesser position, would you call him a quitter and say no effin' way even though he might be the most qualified person available for a position you need filled? Honest question: Are you on board with the Smith hire, now that Riley is back? Go Beavs! Who gives a flying fig about Riley being back re JS being hired. If you think JS needed a Riley security blanket, I really doubt he would have been hired just because he could bring in the old coach for one last hurrah
|
|
|
Post by nabeav on Dec 8, 2017 15:34:51 GMT -8
I would love to hear how anything be else would have handled that situation differently in the late ‘90’s. Riley probably did more of his own volition that 95% of the coaches in the country would. We are, after all, living in a country where supposedly people are presumed innocent until proven guilty. With the information MR has - including the fact that charges were dropped - what was he going to do? The benefit of applying present day information to events 20 years ago is not legit. If we want to dislike a coach because of a misstep in their past, good luck finding any candidates. What happened to Brenda Tracy was horrendous. Riley has just a portion of the information at the time. In retrospect it would have been great if he would have been so evolved that he went beyond what anyone else at the time would have done in order to deal justly. Ask Brenda Tracy what she thinks of Mike Riley if you want an accurate read of that man. Where most people are constantly engaged in advanced butt coverage, Riley has done everything possible to make it right. Cecil Collins got kicked out of LSU for allegations of sexual assault in 1998 so at least 1 coach did more than Riley. I'd never heard of Cecil Collins, so I looked him up: To my knowledge, the OSU football players that assaulted Ms. Tracy had no prior issues. The article goes on to state that Collins would habitually lie to Gerry DiNardo about incidents. Heck the article even states that reporters asked DiNardo why he didn't wait for a conviction to kick him off the team. DiNardo's response: "Is it true that the greatest part of the iceberg is underneath the water?" So yes, Gerry DiNardo kicked him off the team, and good for him. However, I wonder if DiNardo would've kicked him off if he wasn't a habitual liar who had a history of being suspended from his high school team, failed to get academically eligible for the start of the season, failed three drug tests, and then was charged with two separate incidents of sexual violence/intimidation in less than a month.
|
|
|
Post by beavadelic on Dec 8, 2017 15:37:50 GMT -8
I would love to hear how anything be else would have handled that situation differently in the late ‘90’s. Riley probably did more of his own volition that 95% of the coaches in the country would. We are, after all, living in a country where supposedly people are presumed innocent until proven guilty. With the information MR has - including the fact that charges were dropped - what was he going to do? The benefit of applying present day information to events 20 years ago is not legit. If we want to dislike a coach because of a misstep in their past, good luck finding any candidates. What happened to Brenda Tracy was horrendous. Riley has just a portion of the information at the time. In retrospect it would have been great if he would have been so evolved that he went beyond what anyone else at the time would have done in order to deal justly. Ask Brenda Tracy what she thinks of Mike Riley if you want an accurate read of that man. Where most people are constantly engaged in advanced butt coverage, Riley has done everything possible to make it right. Cecil Collins got kicked out of LSU for allegations of sexual assault in 1998 so at least 1 coach did more than Riley. That would comprise a good portion of the 5% who would have done more, I guess! Did Collins end up getting charged? Was it a first (alleged) offense?
|
|