Stryker Pregame Perspective: Grading Donovan Raiola

Survey gives Nebraska's second-year offensive line coach midrange reviews

Nebraska Athletics photo

In Nebraska, almost everyone has an opinion about the offensive line coach.

That coach, somewhat unfairly, often is compared to Milt Tenopir and Dan Young, who oversaw the construction of the original Pipeline. But fair or not, they are the standard.

On a windy Saturday morning before the Nebraska-Maryland game, I asked 100 Husker fans this question:

“How would you rate Donovan Raiola’s job performance in his second year as offensive line coach?” As people thought it over, I suggested they consider things like recruiting, retention, development and game-day performance.

I offered five options: A, B, C, D and F.

The voting was quite balanced, and heavily centered on the B-C range, and there were more “A” votes than I thought I’d find. Here are the results:

• A: 10 (including one A-plus vote) 
• B: 39 (including two B-plus and seven B-minus votes)
• C: 42 (including 14 C-plus and three C-minus votes)
• D: 8 (including one D-minus vote)
• F: 1

Common observations among those who voted “B”: 

• “He started out rough, but he’s improving.”
• “You have to consider the injuries he’s dealt with.”
• “There’s been a definite improvement in run blocking.”
• “He needs more talent; you can’t squeeze blood out of a turnip.”

Common observations among those who voted “C”:

• “He needs to recruit better; give him another year or two.”
• “There’s been some improvement in the run game, but pass blocking is not good.”
• “I’d like to see more development.”