Debate over Nebraska 'harming itself' brings back the ghosts of Mike Riley, Scott Frost

Despite both the baseball and softball teams having great success, and the basketball team just finishing up a historic season, the end of May means it's once again time for the Nebraska football fan base to debate all things head-coaching decisions. This time, it's not the decisions Matt Rhule and his staff made; this time, it's the decisions Troy Dannen and his predecessors made regarding hiring, firing, and retaining head coaches.

In the defense of the fanbase, this debate was sparked by a recent interview with Dannen by ESPN's Heather Dinich, just as the Big Ten's spring meetings wrapped up. That interview quickly turned to how much patience Dannen has regarding Rhule, his extension, and how much time he might get, even if 2026 turns into a step back from the moderate progress NU made in the last two years.

"One of the things Nebraska has done that's harmed itself has been quick to react when things didn't happen soon enough instead of giving someone a chance who is by definition a program builder the chance to actually build a program," the Nebraska athletic director told Dinich. "That's different than inheriting a program that won 10 and then winning 11 the next year."

"It's hard. Especially when Matt walked into a program that hadn't been to a bowl game in 10 years. By definition, that's one of the bottom end of the Power 4 programs he walked into. I think he's done a great job getting us from A to B. The next hurdle is C."

Troy Dannen has Nebraska football fans debating whether patience was missing for past coaches

Dannen's comments sparked discussion on local radio about whether his assessment that guys like Trev Alberts, Shawn Eichorst, Bill Moos, Scott Pederson, and yes, Tom Osborne acted too quickly and didn't give the men who worked for them a chance to really build.

93.7 The Ticket hosts (not exactly a group known for patience when it comes to any of the Husker programs) believe that Dannen was categorically wrong in claiming Nebraska had used a quick hook in the past.

"Did anyone think there was a quick trigger on Riley? Quick trigger on Frost? No. I don't know that I think that Nebraska has had a quick trigger."

The problem with that argument is, setting aside whether someone believes it was the correct call to fire Riley, Frost, Frank Solich, or Bill Callahan, it's hard to argue that the ADs of those times weren't quick to fire them. Of the group of coaches tasked with turning around Nebraska and failing, Riley and Bill Callahan are somewhat in the same boat.

Riley went to bowl games in his first two seasons and saw a three-game improvement from Year 1 to Year 2. Yes, NU took a massive step back in Year 3, but he was not given a chance to really build his own team. He was even forced to hire a defensive coordinator he didn't want or know for his final year in Lincoln. That was the very definition of a quick hook.

Callahan saw improvement in Years 2 and 3 and then, like Riley, took a big step back due to poor defense. He, too, was run out on a rail by Osborne. As the hosts did, one could make the argument that the trigger was pulled too quickly on Frank Solich, considering he had one bad season and then bounced back with a 9-3 campaign in his sixth year.

Scott Frost stands out from this group because, despite Trev Alberts showing him the door three weeks into his fifth season, the first four showed little to no actual growth. In fact, after improving by a game from Year 1 to Year 2, he took several big steps backward.

The bottom line, especially with the level of Nebraska fans' anxiety, even before Rhule's fourth season kicks off, is that Dannen isn't wrong in claiming that, for the most part, the Cornhuskers have used a quick hook on their head coaches. Whether that's why the program has been as bad as it has over the last decade-plus is still very much up for debate.

Add us as a preferred source on Google

Follow