CSNbbs

http://www.uhnd.com/bb/forum/index.php?a...gid=116625

Not sure why they think that coming to Akron gives them a better shot at the NFL.

Seriously, as bad as Akron has been you need to build the program up......not take a bunch of one year players. Even if it improved the team considerably in 2012, it doesn't help after that and I am not sure that 8 guys is enough to put Akron in the MAC East title race for 2012. Build the program up and hope to compete in 2013 or 2014.

I think it's a move made in desperation by our coach. If the team isn't SIGNIFICANTLY improved next season, he will be out of a job.

It would be a great move. Eight established players, you can compete, and develop other players. You get attention and if you start winning that makes recruiting easier the next year.

What happens a few years down the road when your team doesn't have any seniors because an entire recruiting class was taken up by one-year transfers and JUCOs (coaches are rumored to be bringing in a half-dozen JUCOs on top of this)?

It's a win now approach that will destroy the team for the next coach after we fire this guy. He's burning bridges before he's even made it across them.

(11-16-2011 06:58 PM)uakronkid Wrote: [ -> ]What happens a few years down the road when your team doesn't have any seniors because an entire recruiting class was taken up by one-year transfers and JUCOs (coaches are rumored to be bringing in a half-dozen JUCOs on top of this)?

It's a win now approach that will destroy the team for the next coach after we fire this guy. He's burning bridges before he's even made it across them.

This would throw the last shovelful of dirt on the program.

Based on that list of names, they were all three and four star recruits and the QB was a five star coming out high school. It is an interesting gamble. If Akron can pull together a winning season and maybe make a bowl, it could really get them back in the recruiting mix for some more notable MAC caliber players. Given the season they just posted, I do not think it is a bad gamble at all. The cupboard seems really bare at Akron right now.

http://notredame.scout.com/a.z?s=109&p=9&c=8&yr=2008

(11-16-2011 06:58 PM)uakronkid Wrote: [ -> ]What happens a few years down the road when your team doesn't have any seniors because an entire recruiting class was taken up by one-year transfers and JUCOs (coaches are rumored to be bringing in a half-dozen JUCOs on top of this)?

It's a win now approach that will destroy the team for the next coach after we fire this guy. He's burning bridges before he's even made it across them.

See: http://espn.go.com/college-football/team...emple-owls

Player devil's advocate here because I personally think it's a desperate attempt to plug holes, but is it possible these 8 would allow the coaching staff to redshirt some freshmen that might otherwise be pressed into service immediately? It seems redshirting is one of the best tools a coach has to 1) Develop players and 2) Develop depth. May be a reach but is that possible?

(11-17-2011 08:30 AM)Karl Wrote: [ -> ]Player devil's advocate here because I personally think it's a desperate attempt to plug holes, but is it possible these 8 would allow the coaching staff to redshirt some freshmen that might otherwise be pressed into service immediately? It seems redshirting is one of the best tools a coach has to 1) Develop players and 2) Develop depth. May be a reach but is that possible?

Of course it's possible.

This approach simply requires phasing in of talent. To say "where are the seniors" is to ignore the fact that you can continue to recruit transfers (including JUCO) as classes progress. The best thing to do is phase this down so you're not so heavily dependent on them. 8-12 one year, 7-9 the next, and so on.

There is also the ability to gray-shirt, which is what the top universities do. There is no reason that the MAC can't do this, and if you average one starter per year or two, then you're doing well.

The biggest thing is to recruit real talent along with good attitudes. If you bring in toxic players, then you have destroyed your program. Bring in good attitudes and you get: good players, good mentors and recruiting leads.

(11-17-2011 08:41 AM)DrTorch Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-17-2011 08:30 AM)Karl Wrote: [ -> ]Player devil's advocate here because I personally think it's a desperate attempt to plug holes, but is it possible these 8 would allow the coaching staff to redshirt some freshmen that might otherwise be pressed into service immediately? It seems redshirting is one of the best tools a coach has to 1) Develop players and 2) Develop depth. May be a reach but is that possible?

Of course it's possible.

This approach simply requires phasing in of talent. To say "where are the seniors" is to ignore the fact that you can continue to recruit transfers (including JUCO) as classes progress. The best thing to do is phase this down so you're not so heavily dependent on them. 8-12 one year, 7-9 the next, and so on.

There is also the ability to gray-shirt, which is what the top universities do. There is no reason that the MAC can't do this, and if you average one starter per year or two, then you're doing well.

The biggest thing is to recruit real talent along with good attitudes. If you bring in toxic players, then you have destroyed your program. Bring in good attitudes and you get: good players, good mentors and recruiting leads.

I agree with the guys here.

EMU built their defense with a med. redshirt S (Lattarius Thomas), a transfer sitout CB (Marlon Thomas), some impact JUCO LBs (Justin Cudworth, Blake Poole, and Bryan Pali).

IF Akron can come up with a handful of players who can transfer under the 5 year rule it would tremendously add to the 2-deeps and as Karl suggested allowed true frosh to redshirt.

I'd rather have a 5th year senior from ND than a true frosh in my 2-deeps.

I think most MAC fans realize that the difference between a 2 - 10 and say a 6 - 6 team in the MAC isn't THAT much.

A few impact players can make a difference within the MAC.

(11-17-2011 08:41 AM)DrTorch Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-17-2011 08:30 AM)Karl Wrote: [ -> ]Player devil's advocate here because I personally think it's a desperate attempt to plug holes, but is it possible these 8 would allow the coaching staff to redshirt some freshmen that might otherwise be pressed into service immediately? It seems redshirting is one of the best tools a coach has to 1) Develop players and 2) Develop depth. May be a reach but is that possible?

Of course it's possible.

This approach simply requires phasing in of talent.

The reason I disagree is because this is not Buffalo, this is Akron. Akron struggles mightily against decent FCS schools right now. They have such depth issues and quite frankly lack of talent that 8 transfers are not gonna make enough of a difference. They need to understand that they are going to taken their lumps now and slowly build up the program the right way.

If they have any freshmen worth playing this year, then they would be playing and at least showing some flashes of talent. That is very far and in between right now. So once your one year with 8 guys is over, where you might win 4-5 games, you are back to the building of a program with a ton of freshmen and sophomores. This only delays the proper way of building the program up by one year, because those 8 transfers and the number of JUCO's being brought in are taking up too many scholarships that young talented freshmen could be taking.

If it's better talent than what Akron has or would otherwise have next year, why not. Coaches are judged on what they produce now, not 2 years from now. If any of these players have seen the field for ND, they're almost certainly better than the talent Akron has to work with.

(11-17-2011 12:16 PM)BrianNowicki Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-17-2011 08:41 AM)DrTorch Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-17-2011 08:30 AM)Karl Wrote: [ -> ]Player devil's advocate here because I personally think it's a desperate attempt to plug holes, but is it possible these 8 would allow the coaching staff to redshirt some freshmen that might otherwise be pressed into service immediately? It seems redshirting is one of the best tools a coach has to 1) Develop players and 2) Develop depth. May be a reach but is that possible?

Of course it's possible.

This approach simply requires phasing in of talent.

The reason I disagree is because this is not Buffalo, this is Akron. Akron struggles mightily against decent FCS schools right now. They have such depth issues and quite frankly lack of talent that 8 transfers are not gonna make enough of a difference. They need to understand that they are going to taken their lumps now and slowly build up the program the right way.

If they have any freshmen worth playing this year

8 out of 22 positions isn't goint to help?

If they have freshmen worth playing, then play them. You're arguing both ways, they don't have talent or they aren't going to develop the talent they have.

Assuming that these transfers are decent players, then this is a huge advantage. You get proven, experienced players, and develop the talent you have.

If they have positive attitudes, you win big time.

If they are toxic, then you're in trouble.

It's the attitude wherein lies the risk.

Quote: This only delays the proper way of building the program up by one year, because those 8 transfers and the number of JUCO's being brought in are taking up too many scholarships that young talented freshmen could be taking.

First mistake is you assume you can find and sign young talented freshmen. Second mistake is you assume you can't find other JUCO talent.

This isn't about math, that works out fine. It's about finding players w/ talent and integrity.

(11-17-2011 10:33 AM)emu steve Wrote: [ -> ]I think most MAC fans realize that the difference between a 2 - 10 and say a 6 - 6 team in the MAC isn't THAT much.

A few impact players can make a difference within the MAC.

Akron is not where EMU was a couple of years ago, and even so they (EMU) are still trying to build the program up.

Akron is 2-20 in the last 2 years with a win last year against Buffalo and a win against FCS VMI this year. This 2-20 record includes a lost to Gardner-Webb.

If a head coach came in and told it like it is......telling the AD it will take a few years to build the program the right way, he will be given the chance. Ianello has not taken that approach, and therefore he won't be given the time. He's taking a chance at this point that his team is improved enough next year with these transfers, but that's because he made his own bed with the approach he is using.

Jerry Tarkanian made his living on this kinda stuff.

(11-17-2011 12:24 PM)DrTorch Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-17-2011 12:16 PM)BrianNowicki Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-17-2011 08:41 AM)DrTorch Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-17-2011 08:30 AM)Karl Wrote: [ -> ]Player devil's advocate here because I personally think it's a desperate attempt to plug holes, but is it possible these 8 would allow the coaching staff to redshirt some freshmen that might otherwise be pressed into service immediately? It seems redshirting is one of the best tools a coach has to 1) Develop players and 2) Develop depth. May be a reach but is that possible?

Of course it's possible.

This approach simply requires phasing in of talent.

The reason I disagree is because this is not Buffalo, this is Akron. Akron struggles mightily against decent FCS schools right now. They have such depth issues and quite frankly lack of talent that 8 transfers are not gonna make enough of a difference. They need to understand that they are going to taken their lumps now and slowly build up the program the right way.

If they have any freshmen worth playing this year

8 out of 22 positions isn't goint to help?

If they have freshmen worth playing, then play them. You're arguing both ways, they don't have talent or they aren't going to develop the talent they have.

Assuming that these transfers are decent players, then this is a huge advantage. You get proven, experienced players, and develop the talent you have.

If they have positive attitudes, you win big time.

If they are toxic, then you're in trouble.

It's the attitude wherein lies the risk.

Quote: This only delays the proper way of building the program up by one year, because those 8 transfers and the number of JUCO's being brought in are taking up too many scholarships that young talented freshmen could be taking.

First mistake is you assume you can find and sign young talented freshmen. Second mistake is you assume you can't find other JUCO talent.

This isn't about math, that works out fine. It's about finding players w/ talent and integrity.

Actually, I am not arguing both ways. I said the freshmen with talent is far and in between, not non-existent, and I am talking about the talent to win now, not that they can't develop into players. A coach has to look at the situation and say "I can't fix any mistakes I or anyone else made in the past, but I can fix the program now by recruiting good young players that won't be very good right away but can develop into a good team with depth in a few years. But after one year with 8 transfers and at least a handful of JUCO's (well 2 years there) playing in front of those guys you are limiting their development for a short answer instead of taking your lumps now to get these guys better by their senior seasons. Add in the young talent you have signed and developed over the next few recruiting classes and you are finally starting to get somewhere.

8 players out of 22 will be an improvement from 2-20 in your last 22 games, but realistically I don't see it getting you bowl eligible. I don't know who the players are, how good they are compared to what they were thought to be coming out of high school, or what positions they play, but that's only 36% of your starters and not even close to adding depth. You need depth to win more than a few games in a season, even in the MAC. One thing they have going for them is that they play in the East Division and there is considerably less depth from top to bottom in the East than there is in the West.

(11-17-2011 12:46 PM)BrianNowicki Wrote: [ -> ]Actually, I am not arguing both ways. I said the freshmen with talent is far and in between, not non-existent, and I am talking about the talent to win now, not that they can't develop into players. A coach has to look at the situation and say "I can't fix any mistakes I or anyone else made in the past, but I can fix the program now by recruiting good young players that won't be very good right away but can develop into a good team with depth in a few years. But after one year with 8 transfers and at least a handful of JUCO's (well 2 years there) playing in front of those guys you are limiting their development for a short answer instead of taking your lumps now to get these guys better by their senior seasons.

Playing guys too early can lead to problems too. Having those players practice against better talent, playing them in situations that add to their development, or red-shirting them all lead to long term benefits.

Quote:8 players out of 22 will be an improvement from 2-20 in your last 22 games, but realistically I don't see it getting you bowl eligible.

That's hard to gauge. It's potentially a big step up. Is it big enough?

Quote: I don't know who the players are, how good they are compared to what they were thought to be coming out of high school, or what positions they play, but that's only 36% of your starters and not even close to adding depth.

I disagree there. It adds a lot of depth b/c they bump former starters down on the depth chart. Your entire depth chart, including ST, sees an improvement.

Quote:You need depth to win more than a few games in a season, even in the MAC.

The team loses nothing by this, they still have the depth they would have had. Effectively you are replacing your worst players w/ your best ones in this scenario. That's why the improvement can be dramatic.

Quote: One thing they have going for them is that they play in the East Division and there is considerably less depth from top to bottom in the East than there is in the West.

I don't think it's that considerable. I personally believe the difference can be seen w/ improving 1-3 positions for most teams. That's why the NFL sees such dramatic swings.

(11-17-2011 12:59 PM)DrTorch Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-17-2011 12:46 PM)BrianNowicki Wrote: [ -> ]Actually, I am not arguing both ways. I said the freshmen with talent is far and in between, not non-existent, and I am talking about the talent to win now, not that they can't develop into players. A coach has to look at the situation and say "I can't fix any mistakes I or anyone else made in the past, but I can fix the program now by recruiting good young players that won't be very good right away but can develop into a good team with depth in a few years. But after one year with 8 transfers and at least a handful of JUCO's (well 2 years there) playing in front of those guys you are limiting their development for a short answer instead of taking your lumps now to get these guys better by their senior seasons.

Playing guys too early can lead to problems too. Having those players practice against better talent, playing them in situations that add to their development, or red-shirting them all lead to long term benefits.

I totally disagree with this train of thought. If you are a good coach, your practices are harder than games. The notion that a young kid benefits from practice but putting him into games can stunt his development does not make sense to me. The key is that the player has to know that he will make mistakes and it is okay because he is learning. Too many mistakes.......no, but mistakes will happen and he will learn from them.

Quote:

Quote: I don't know who the players are, how good they are compared to what they were thought to be coming out of high school, or what positions they play, but that's only 36% of your starters and not even close to adding depth.

I disagree there. It adds a lot of depth b/c they bump former starters down on the depth chart. Your entire depth chart, including ST, sees an improvement.

8 players is not a lot of depth. Again, it might be enough to go from 1-11 to 4-8 or 5-7, but even that is debatable. Real depth is not 36% of your starters.

Quote:

Quote:You need depth to win more than a few games in a season, even in the MAC.

The team loses nothing by this, they still have the depth they would have had. Effectively you are replacing your worst players w/ your best ones in this scenario. That's why the improvement can be dramatic.

They do lose something by this. Akron already has less than 85 scholarships. They now have 8 less scholarships to give out to youth to build the program until the following year, and again I'm talking about the JUCO approach too and not just the 8 transfers.

Dramatic improvement? Going from 1-11 to 5-7 (heck let's even say 6-6, 6-6 in the MAC won't likely get you into a bowl game either) would be dramatic for Akron, wouldn't it? But then the season is over and those 8 transfers are gone and you are back to square one. At this point the administration is getting tired of you going back to square one instead of knowing that you are slowly building depth.

(11-16-2011 06:25 PM)BrianNowicki Wrote: [ -> ]Seriously, as bad as Akron has been you need to build the program up......not take a bunch of one year players. Even if it improved the team considerably in 2012, it doesn't help after that and I am not sure that 8 guys is enough to put Akron in the MAC East title race for 2012. Build the program up and hope to compete in 2013 or 2014.

that is about as desparate a move as I have seen. Just because a guy was an asst at ND doesn't make it a sure thing he is suited for a head job. Hiring a recruiting coordinator usually is not the way to go.