(12-15-2015 12:58 PM)AlonsoWDC Wrote:  That's fair, but I don't expect Navy to sniff a losing season unless they also lose their coach.

Regardless, Navy is still light years ahead of Tulane on the program level.

I thought he was a leading candidate for the BYU position? (He is)

(12-16-2015 07:11 AM)99Tiger Wrote:  

(12-15-2015 12:58 PM)AlonsoWDC Wrote:  That's fair, but I don't expect Navy to sniff a losing season unless they also lose their coach.

Regardless, Navy is still light years ahead of Tulane on the program level.

I thought he was a leading candidate for the BYU position? (He is)

Yep. He even announced that he's taking a trip to BYU to hear them out and consider the position. They made a big deal about it, because the only reason he's considering it is that he's a Mormon.

"tougher"? Low bar there.

(12-16-2015 10:52 AM)fsquid Wrote:  "tougher"? Low bar there.

They weren't exactly easy for US to beat the last two years. The final scores are not indicative of how those games actually went.

30 point blowouts are 30 point blowouts. He might get them to 5 wins one season with a break here or there.

(12-15-2015 10:27 PM)Irish Wrote:  

(12-15-2015 06:56 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(12-15-2015 04:34 PM)Tiger46 Wrote:  

(12-15-2015 04:17 PM)Irish Wrote:  

(12-15-2015 09:32 AM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  He could not afford to go undefeated and and possibly a candidate for the playoff. He would have been locked into this deal until at least Jan 2nd.

Gee, I'll bet it would have gone exactly as it did.

Yep, he would have just been that much more ballyhooed at Va Tech, and worth every word of it.

I think we would have been happy too.

Wait... so, what y'all are saying is, IF we had gone undefeated, and IF Ole Miss had won out, and IF there was enough chaos in the other P5s, and we had an outside chance at one of the 4 spots as long as we beat a ranked Temple in the title game, you guys think Fuente would have accepted the job at VT the day after the final regular season game? "...it would have gone exactly as it did."?

I don't think so.

And, no, Johnny Betts, it was not sarcasm.

Yes, EXACTLY as it did. I don't think he would passed on VT to coach in any game. He is a stand up guy.

What does that even mean? You mean, "He's a stand up guy" for VT? Cuz that would NOT be beneficial for US for him to leave the week before we had to play a CCG.

(12-16-2015 12:25 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(12-15-2015 10:27 PM)Irish Wrote:  

(12-15-2015 06:56 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(12-15-2015 04:34 PM)Tiger46 Wrote:  

(12-15-2015 04:17 PM)Irish Wrote:  Gee, I'll bet it would have gone exactly as it did.

Yep, he would have just been that much more ballyhooed at Va Tech, and worth every word of it.

I think we would have been happy too.

Wait... so, what y'all are saying is, IF we had gone undefeated, and IF Ole Miss had won out, and IF there was enough chaos in the other P5s, and we had an outside chance at one of the 4 spots as long as we beat a ranked Temple in the title game, you guys think Fuente would have accepted the job at VT the day after the final regular season game? "...it would have gone exactly as it did."?

I don't think so.

And, no, Johnny Betts, it was not sarcasm.

Yes, EXACTLY as it did. I don't think he would passed on VT to coach in any game. He is a stand up guy.

What does that even mean? You mean, "He's a stand up guy" for VT? Cuz that would NOT be beneficial for US for him to leave the week before we had to play a CCG.

Here is what it means:
1. He did everything we could have hoped for during his tenure.
2. VT is a better job. Those negotiations would have still occurred.
3. He would have accepted and left after the final regular season game BECAUSE he is a stand up guy. Unlike the prior basketball coach who's fake soul searching only masked his recruitment of our incoming recruiting class.
4. If any of us had been told the hire four years ago would have played out as it did; we would have signed in blood. And you know that.

I believe MN to be the same stand up kinda guy, because I have confidence in our search team.

(12-15-2015 09:32 AM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(12-15-2015 09:10 AM)btiger Wrote:  

(12-15-2015 09:09 AM)T.I.G.E.R.S Wrote:  It take years sometimes to master the triple option, Navy caught us slipping because we didnt prepare better for it because we haven't had to defend against it in year

well, that and our coach was already working on a new gig

He could not afford to go undefeated and and possibly a candidate for the playoff. He would have been locked into this deal until at least Jan 2nd.

That is a HUGE leap and ridiculous statement.

(12-15-2015 09:56 AM)Brother Bluto Wrote:  In 4 years Tulane will be looking for a new coach

This

(12-15-2015 09:29 AM)Tiger46 Wrote:  

(12-15-2015 08:59 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  Tulane just hired a triple option coach. Smart move in my opinion. Can't do it here, of course, because most locals think run-oriented offenses are "boring". http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...tulane-job

If we had a dynamic running back, the offense we ran with Fuente is perfect for someone to gain tons of yard, like DeAngelo did in the spread with Fichtner

That's what Auburn does in Malzahn's offense.

Our running backs just weren't healthy all year.

With Navy and Tulane running the triple option, I think that will help teams who have to play both, figure out how to slow it down.

Navy may ditch it when Mohitodalialama takes the BYU job.

(12-15-2015 11:15 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  

(12-15-2015 08:59 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  Tulane just hired a triple option coach. Smart move in my opinion. Can't do it here, of course, because most locals think run-oriented offenses are "boring". http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...tulane-job

All the more reason to allot more time to defending that offense. A non-special Army team came really close to beating Navy this season. I suspect Army has allotted that time ---

Well, yeah, because that's Army's biggest game every year ---

(12-16-2015 04:59 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(12-15-2015 09:29 AM)Tiger46 Wrote:  

(12-15-2015 08:59 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  Tulane just hired a triple option coach. Smart move in my opinion. Can't do it here, of course, because most locals think run-oriented offenses are "boring". http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...tulane-job

If we had a dynamic running back, the offense we ran with Fuente is perfect for someone to gain tons of yard, like DeAngelo did in the spread with Fichtner

That's what Auburn does in Malzahn's offense.

Our running backs just weren't healthy all year.

With Navy and Tulane running the triple option, I think that will help teams who have to play both, figure out how to slow it down.

Navy may ditch it when Mohitodalialama takes the BYU job.

The triple option is more a function of the school than the coach. They used it before the current dude, and will use it after.

(12-16-2015 04:57 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(12-15-2015 09:32 AM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(12-15-2015 09:10 AM)btiger Wrote:  

(12-15-2015 09:09 AM)T.I.G.E.R.S Wrote:  It take years sometimes to master the triple option, Navy caught us slipping because we didnt prepare better for it because we haven't had to defend against it in year

well, that and our coach was already working on a new gig

He could not afford to go undefeated and and possibly a candidate for the playoff. He would have been locked into this deal until at least Jan 2nd.

That is a HUGE leap and ridiculous statement.

That's your opinion.

No, Navy's coach is not going anywhere.

Coach Fritz's offense is very different from what Navy/Georgia Tech and the other service academies run. Sure they do use triple option but it's not the same. The biggest difference is the blocking schemes they use and they also base their offense out of the shotgun and use tempo. It's more of a mix of Urban Meyer/Gus Malzahn/Nevada Pistol.

(12-17-2015 02:19 AM)AlonsoWDC Wrote:  No, Navy's coach is not going anywhere.

Good for them...but that's a very recent announcement. I think he was the guy BYU wanted...guess the grass is greener in Anapolis.