(11-16-2021 03:02 PM)Ourland Wrote: [ -> ] (11-16-2021 01:12 PM)Hambone10 Wrote: [ -> ]I want an innovative offense. One that stresses defenses in unconventional ways. I would prefer one that includes RU's spacing/positioning manipulation on the outside and either Ken or Fred's lineman spacing/influence blocking... though I would also include lots of traps, motion, formation changes etc etc to create angles and perhaps confusion. I want to be opportunistic. If they're giving us the long ball, I want to take it. If you score every possession, you have a great shot at winning. You can run a lot of clock by simply staying in bounds and taking a long time at the LOS.
On defense, I want a team that is strategic. I don't care if we give up 500 yards if we can do it without giving up 30+ points. I want 3 big bodies up front to rotate in when needed or against power running teams (to keep the OL off of the backers) and speed everywhere else. I want receivers or basketball players as DBs. Guys who know how to go after a ball and to hand-fight to break up passes. Teach them that knife Jiu jitsu?? I want linebackers who know how to get off blocks and/or avoid them... not guys who simply overpower high school blocks... because they won't be able to do that at this level.
On special teams, I want technicians. For PK I want people with soccer/Aussie Rules backgrounds who are mechanically consistent like golfers... same thing, every time.... but who can also adapt.
I'd be happy to start by winning games 35-28 or even 60-52 rather than trying to win 10-7.
a) its boring. few want to watch it or play in that
b) good offense seems easier/more common.
c) getting a defense that good IMO takes having an offense that can score who could win more with a few better defensive players.... because EVERY school seems to focus on offense... so we don't want to sell out to get that offense. Hat's OL who move to DL or vice versa (one of the NFL's all-time best DL from Rice started on the OL) is great for this. Start by getting a defense who is sound and thus can make strategic stops.... THEN work on getting a defense that can dominate people.
I'd like to see a flexbone package that can also throw the ball effectively twenty times a game. I don't need to see a bunch of passes, but I do want them to be impactful when thrown. Think of Hatfield's offense with the passing capacity of The Veer. It would really even the playing field for Rice.
I'd like to see a few more passes. I think I said earlier that my idea of a balanced offense would be 45 runs for an average of 5 yards or 225 yards total, and 30 passes for an average of 7.5 yards, also 225 yards total, total offense 450 yards on 75 plays. For the passing side of that, I'd like to see RUOwls in some capacity to teach his spacing oriented West Coast passing offense.
That was pretty much the late 1980s/early 1990s Georgia Southern/Hawaii offense. The OC on those teams was Paul Johnson, who went to a more run-heavy flexbone at Navy and Georgia Tech. Johnson retired from GT a couple of years ago and has something of a Rice connection (his daughter is an alum of Shepherd School). I wonder if he'd have any interest in being an offensive consultant. I'd love to see what Johnson on the run side and RUOwls on the passing side could come up with.
Here's the thing. You can't have too much offense, or it becomes impossible to get enough reps to teach execution properly. A lot of teams/coaches have 100 plays or more, and there is no way they can execute all of them properly. I would like to see 50 or fewer plays. Also, a lot of teams/coaches have 20-30 formations, and they constantly get procedure or illegal receiver downfield penalties because they don't line up properly. I would like maybe 6-10 formations. Bill Walsh had what I think was a good rule. He wouldn't use any formation from which it was not possible to run every play in his offense. Most teams would do better to cut down the size of the playbook and focus on executing every play perfectly every time. 10 formations and 50 plays, with the prospect of threatening each play from each formation, and sufficient reps to perfect it all, would give you a very complete offense.
RUOwls's West Coast passing offense allows virtually an infinite number of plays by having each receiver learn 10 routes and then combining them in different ways. That's the kind of thing that is simple for the offense to execute, but incredibly complicated to defend. There are some combinations you would use frequently, but you might actually put together a route combination on the field during a game, if the defense were playing you a certain way. The other thing about that approach is that every receiver knows immediately what the receiver inside and/or outside him is doing, so he knows how to tweak his route to stress a defender and avoid interfering with the other receiver's "sandbox."
Defensively, I'd like to hold the opponents to 300-325 yards. Looking at it another way, I would set offensive targets of 25 first downs, 30 points, and 35 minutes time of possession, and defensive targets of 15 first downs or less, 20 points or less, and 25 minutes time of possession or less. You won't hit all of those every game, but any time you can hit 4 or more of them, you should win pretty handily.
As for special teams, Hambone (not surprisingly) nailed it. The trick is to do it exactly the same way every time--snap, hold, protection, kick, coverage. The individual skills are not difficult, just repetitive. You don't practice it until you get it right, you practice it until you cannot possibly get it wrong.
(11-16-2021 01:46 PM)Kayjay Wrote: [ -> ] (11-15-2021 05:21 PM)Middle Ages Wrote: [ -> ] (11-15-2021 05:12 PM)RiceFootball2K5 Wrote: [ -> ] (11-15-2021 04:46 PM)WIowl Wrote: [ -> ] (11-15-2021 04:27 PM)RiceFootball2K5 Wrote: [ -> ]I can tell you this for a FACT. There are people at Rice who believe just that. Or at least are telling important people that they do.
All they’re doing is postponing the inevitable. If not this year, they’ll have to do it next year. Rice will just be a further year behind and entering AAC play even shakier.
It’s the same MO as with Bailiff, they should have fired him a year earlier. And it’s the same AD.
I agree, but at least last time you could argue that deal struck by the AD with the Bailiff supporters (increased financial commitments in exchange for giving Bailiff one last shot) had the potential to benefit the program in the long run.
This time, I don't think there are any Bloomgren supporters. That I've been able to find, anyway. Outside of the AD and his henchmen, and I guess maybe the Dunlevie family.
I agree. I don't think the two situations are as alike as WIOwl states. To those of us that supported Bailiff it felt like Kaarlgard was starving the program and Bailiff didn't have even close to the resources needed to be successful. Should he have done more with less? Possibly, probably. But they opened up the checkbook for Bloomgren for staff, recruiting, and he has good faciliities that DB didn't have- and we haven't improved one iota.
Maybe Bailiff would have lost with or without the support that Bloomgren has had, but he at least had some success- Conf. Champ, multiple bowl wins. Couldn't sustain it and that was dispointing. But I don't see this situation as the same. And as 2K5 says- there are virtually NO Bloomgren supporters to be found, or they are being very quiet. Kaarlgard is on an island on this one.
I don’t remember the football team being “starved” for resources by the athletic department during Coach Bailiff’s tenure. (But that could be my deteriorating brain cells…). Didn’t the Patterson Center open up in 2016 while Coach Bailiff was still at Rice? I also seem to remember that the decision to concentrate recruiting primarily within Texas was a strategy articulated by Coach Bailiff, a decision that has been espoused by many coaches that there is enough talent in this state and little need to venture outside the borders. I don’t think his reasoning was resource related. I do recognize that the recruiting budget and $$ for assistants was increased when Coach Bloomgren arrived. However, there were several solid assistant coaches that worked for Coach Bailiff during that time (Beatty, Herman) that at least anecdotally said that salaries were competitive enough to make quality hires.
Whoever is the football coach at Rice in the immediate future needs to seriously scour the transfer portal and add significant new talent into the current mix, similar to what Coach Mel Tucker did at Michigan State. In addition to his recruiting class he brought in 20 + transfers and dramatically changed the culture. It was a high risk strategy. He could have ended up with a bunch of malcontents and whiners (team poison) instead of Kenneth Walker and several other starters that are now 9-1. Rice’s recent forays into the portal have not been anywhere near as productive.
Totally agree with your last paragraph.
Regarding the Bailiff comments- it’s not really that relevant anymore but trust me the program was being starved. Why do you think a group of former players decided to put their own money up to make up some of the difference? He had no money to recruit outside of Texas. What would you expect him to say publicly?
With respect to assistants- the good ones were young and affordable and left as soon as they could get paid market. Look at who we ended up with at the end.
In any event- I’m happy that’s not the case anymore, and hopefully no Rice coach will be put in that position again.
(11-16-2021 08:19 PM)Middle Ages Wrote: [ -> ] (11-16-2021 01:46 PM)Kayjay Wrote: [ -> ] (11-15-2021 05:21 PM)Middle Ages Wrote: [ -> ] (11-15-2021 05:12 PM)RiceFootball2K5 Wrote: [ -> ] (11-15-2021 04:46 PM)WIowl Wrote: [ -> ]All they’re doing is postponing the inevitable. If not this year, they’ll have to do it next year. Rice will just be a further year behind and entering AAC play even shakier.
It’s the same MO as with Bailiff, they should have fired him a year earlier. And it’s the same AD.
I agree, but at least last time you could argue that deal struck by the AD with the Bailiff supporters (increased financial commitments in exchange for giving Bailiff one last shot) had the potential to benefit the program in the long run.
This time, I don't think there are any Bloomgren supporters. That I've been able to find, anyway. Outside of the AD and his henchmen, and I guess maybe the Dunlevie family.
I agree. I don't think the two situations are as alike as WIOwl states. To those of us that supported Bailiff it felt like Kaarlgard was starving the program and Bailiff didn't have even close to the resources needed to be successful. Should he have done more with less? Possibly, probably. But they opened up the checkbook for Bloomgren for staff, recruiting, and he has good faciliities that DB didn't have- and we haven't improved one iota.
Maybe Bailiff would have lost with or without the support that Bloomgren has had, but he at least had some success- Conf. Champ, multiple bowl wins. Couldn't sustain it and that was dispointing. But I don't see this situation as the same. And as 2K5 says- there are virtually NO Bloomgren supporters to be found, or they are being very quiet. Kaarlgard is on an island on this one.
I don’t remember the football team being “starved” for resources by the athletic department during Coach Bailiff’s tenure. (But that could be my deteriorating brain cells…). Didn’t the Patterson Center open up in 2016 while Coach Bailiff was still at Rice? I also seem to remember that the decision to concentrate recruiting primarily within Texas was a strategy articulated by Coach Bailiff, a decision that has been espoused by many coaches that there is enough talent in this state and little need to venture outside the borders. I don’t think his reasoning was resource related. I do recognize that the recruiting budget and $$ for assistants was increased when Coach Bloomgren arrived. However, there were several solid assistant coaches that worked for Coach Bailiff during that time (Beatty, Herman) that at least anecdotally said that salaries were competitive enough to make quality hires.
Whoever is the football coach at Rice in the immediate future needs to seriously scour the transfer portal and add significant new talent into the current mix, similar to what Coach Mel Tucker did at Michigan State. In addition to his recruiting class he brought in 20 + transfers and dramatically changed the culture. It was a high risk strategy. He could have ended up with a bunch of malcontents and whiners (team poison) instead of Kenneth Walker and several other starters that are now 9-1. Rice’s recent forays into the portal have not been anywhere near as productive.
Totally agree with your last paragraph.
Regarding the Bailiff comments- it’s not really that relevant anymore but trust me the program was being starved. Why do you think a group of former players decided to put their own money up to make up some of the difference? He had no money to recruit outside of Texas. What would you expect him to say publicly?
With respect to assistants- the good ones were young and affordable and left as soon as they could get paid market. Look at who we ended up with at the end.
In any event- I’m happy that’s not the case anymore, and hopefully no Rice coach will be put in that position again.
A lot of folks complained about David Bailiff, but I was ambivalent at times at the worst and wished better for him most of the remainder. He took Rice to more bowls than any coach since Jess Neely, including a local for me Armed Forces Bowl where the Owls pummeled a good Air Force team with a backup QB, as well as national exposure for Rice rolling over a ranked Marshall team, with the student section totally full on a very cold cloudy day. Special teams never were very competent under David but a decent special teams coach would cure that. I know times changed but still, I don’t see that trend happening in the last four years or anytime in the future with the current course. I’m just waiting to rue the day when David brings some team from the Southland in to Rice stadium and kicks our tails.
(11-16-2021 08:19 PM)Middle Ages Wrote: [ -> ] (11-16-2021 01:46 PM)Kayjay Wrote: [ -> ] (11-15-2021 05:21 PM)Middle Ages Wrote: [ -> ] (11-15-2021 05:12 PM)RiceFootball2K5 Wrote: [ -> ] (11-15-2021 04:46 PM)WIowl Wrote: [ -> ]All they’re doing is postponing the inevitable. If not this year, they’ll have to do it next year. Rice will just be a further year behind and entering AAC play even shakier.
It’s the same MO as with Bailiff, they should have fired him a year earlier. And it’s the same AD.
I agree, but at least last time you could argue that deal struck by the AD with the Bailiff supporters (increased financial commitments in exchange for giving Bailiff one last shot) had the potential to benefit the program in the long run.
This time, I don't think there are any Bloomgren supporters. That I've been able to find, anyway. Outside of the AD and his henchmen, and I guess maybe the Dunlevie family.
I agree. I don't think the two situations are as alike as WIOwl states. To those of us that supported Bailiff it felt like Kaarlgard was starving the program and Bailiff didn't have even close to the resources needed to be successful. Should he have done more with less? Possibly, probably. But they opened up the checkbook for Bloomgren for staff, recruiting, and he has good faciliities that DB didn't have- and we haven't improved one iota.
Maybe Bailiff would have lost with or without the support that Bloomgren has had, but he at least had some success- Conf. Champ, multiple bowl wins. Couldn't sustain it and that was dispointing. But I don't see this situation as the same. And as 2K5 says- there are virtually NO Bloomgren supporters to be found, or they are being very quiet. Kaarlgard is on an island on this one.
I don’t remember the football team being “starved” for resources by the athletic department during Coach Bailiff’s tenure. (But that could be my deteriorating brain cells…). Didn’t the Patterson Center open up in 2016 while Coach Bailiff was still at Rice? I also seem to remember that the decision to concentrate recruiting primarily within Texas was a strategy articulated by Coach Bailiff, a decision that has been espoused by many coaches that there is enough talent in this state and little need to venture outside the borders. I don’t think his reasoning was resource related. I do recognize that the recruiting budget and $$ for assistants was increased when Coach Bloomgren arrived. However, there were several solid assistant coaches that worked for Coach Bailiff during that time (Beatty, Herman) that at least anecdotally said that salaries were competitive enough to make quality hires.
Whoever is the football coach at Rice in the immediate future needs to seriously scour the transfer portal and add significant new talent into the current mix, similar to what Coach Mel Tucker did at Michigan State. In addition to his recruiting class he brought in 20 + transfers and dramatically changed the culture. It was a high risk strategy. He could have ended up with a bunch of malcontents and whiners (team poison) instead of Kenneth Walker and several other starters that are now 9-1. Rice’s recent forays into the portal have not been anywhere near as productive.
Totally agree with your last paragraph.
Regarding the Bailiff comments- it’s not really that relevant anymore but trust me the program was being starved. Why do you think a group of former players decided to put their own money up to make up some of the difference? He had no money to recruit outside of Texas. What would you expect him to say publicly?
With respect to assistants- the good ones were young and affordable and left as soon as they could get paid market. Look at who we ended up with at the end.
In any event- I’m happy that’s not the case anymore, and hopefully no Rice coach will be put in that position again.
He starved David Bailiff, then gave his own guy everything.
Do y’all trust the AD to make this hire?
(11-16-2021 11:45 PM)Converted Rice Wrote: [ -> ]Do y’all trust the AD to make this hire?
Based on his track record with other coaches, yes. Not every one has been a home run (Bloom or Bragga), but since arriving in 2013, JK has hired: Rhodes, Langley, Pera, Lee, and Cruz (I know it’s early). I think there is enough track record of success to not dread JK making the call should he do the right thing and cut ties this year.
Kind of the approach I'd like to see a coach come in with:
It all starts with recruiting. And recruiting has to start with Texas first and pick up some out-of-state recruits to go with it. I would like to see a bunch of Texas HS coaches on the staff for that purpose, along with somebody with California connections and somebody with Florida connections. Somebody with niche connections, like Patterson's Canadian pipeline, would be useful as well. With only one P5 school in the state, Louisiana should be a pretty productive state to pick up leftovers after LSU. The obvious competition would be Tulane, but a lot of western Louisiana would be closer to Houston, both geographically and attitudinally, than to New Orleans. Ken obviously had Arkansas (one P5) connections, and Ken and Todd had Oklahoma (two P5s) connections, so maybe get a few from there, too. Hire a staff to cover those areas. Also when hiring a staff, it may be useful to keep one or two from the old staff, primarily those most involved in recruiting, to maintain continuity. Off Bailiff's staff, the two I would have looked at retaining would have been Sloan (recruiting coordinator, California connections) and Patterson (Canada pipeline). Fill out the staff with three coordinators that I trusted to install the systems I wanted (and hopefully with connections to Florida and/or California), that's five of ten, and then hire five HS coaches with Rice backgrounds. Ideally, these HS coaches would have connections in both Texas and surrounding states (LA, AR, OK). Texas first, then Louisiana, Arkansas, and Oklahoma, then California and Florida would seem to be a useful recruiting base.
Even in the best of times, academics are going to limit Rice recruiting, so the logical goal would be to narrow the recruiting gap as much as possible, and make up the difference with scheme, discipline, and execution. The schemes are going to come from the coordinators, with the position coaches teaching the execution. And HS coaches tend to be the best teachers.
So what kind of athletes can we recruit? Ideally you want big, strong, athletic linemen, but after the P5s get through picking, we seem to be able to get big linemen who are slow or athletic linemen who are small. I would punt size and go for athleticism. At QB, we've gone through a dozen since Bloomgren as been at Rice, but still haven't found the big strong-armed pocket passer needed for "pound the rock." The QBs that I think we can get are the QBs that stood out in HS as decent passers who could run, that the P5s say, "Come here and we'll make you a safety," but he wants a shot at QB. We do seem to be able to recruit a number of decent running backs, but no one dominant back, and a number of wide receivers and tight ends. I like recruiting tight ends and fullbacks because 1) the spread teams don't use them, so we can recruit those positions a bit higher on the totem pole, and 2) those tend to be versatile athletes who can block, run, or receive, can be somewhat interchangeable, and can move to LB, DE, or possibly even safety. Finally, one position we can recruit with anyone are kickers. The P5s generally prefer to use walk-on kickers rather than spend a scholarship on a kicker, so if we are willing to offer kickers full scholarships we can pick up a Martens or Boz every year. Offer a punter and a place kicker in alternate years, so we always have two of each on scholarship for competition and depth, and find a role for each. Maybe you have one place kicker who is more accurate and one who has a stronger leg, so you let the accurate one try the shorter kicks and the strong leg try the longer ones, and maybe your backup punter can handle kickoffs. And maybe you let your punters be your holders, so along with deep snappers they can work separately all practice to focus on their skills.
With that collection of recruits, I think you want to very contrarian with your schemes. Instead of just trying to line up and do the same things as everybody else, do something different and create preparation problems for opponents. I like the approach of play sound, solid defense, win the kicking game, and do something different on offense. Since nobody in CUSA plays much defense, a focus on defense would itself be contrarian. If we can recruit superior kickers, then devoting enough attention to special teams to perfect our execution there should create an advantage that could win 2-3 games a year. That alone would have been enough to convert 2-3 last year to 3-2 and a bowl, and to generate 2 more wins this year. On offense, I still like the idea of combining the flexbone with some kind of prolific passing attack--RUOwls's West Coast spacing and stressing defenders, the Air Raid, the Run-and-Shoot, or the best of all three.
(11-16-2021 11:45 PM)Converted Rice Wrote: [ -> ]Do y’all trust the AD to make this hire?
The only reason I have some degree of confidence now is because I think he has learned something about the football program and what it'll take to win here. It's knowledge he didn't possess before. We aren't are going to 'out-athlete' or 'overpower' anyone at Rice. It's going to take something special.
(11-17-2021 10:45 AM)Ourland Wrote: [ -> ] (11-16-2021 11:45 PM)Converted Rice Wrote: [ -> ]Do y’all trust the AD to make this hire?
The only reason I have some degree of confidence now is because I think he has learned something about the football program and what it'll take to win here. It's knowledge he didn't possess before. We aren't are going to 'out-athlete' or 'overpower' anyone at Rice. It's going to take something special.
He's had a lot of evidence supporting that. Hopefully learning has been occurred.....
(11-16-2021 11:45 PM)Converted Rice Wrote: [ -> ]Do y’all trust the AD to make this hire?
Not really sure on this one, but not sure we have a choice either, given Dr. K's contract extension through the 2023-2024 school year. I would assume Dr. DesRoches gives him the next 2.5 years to prove out his hires across the board (soccer, WBB, MBB, baseball and football). If Dr. K holds onto Bloomgren for too long (e.g. lets him coach the final year of his contract next year and/or extends him), then another disastrous season by Bloom could put Dr. K's job in jeopardy.
(11-16-2021 11:45 PM)Converted Rice Wrote: [ -> ]Do y’all trust the AD to make this hire?
I have confidence that JK will hire a Bloomgren clone.
(11-17-2021 10:53 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ] (11-16-2021 11:45 PM)Converted Rice Wrote: [ -> ]Do y’all trust the AD to make this hire?
I have confidence that JK will hire a Bloomgren clone.
What’s needed is an intelligent innovator. Not sure JK has the strategic sense to appreciate that. If he doesn’t, I suspect his job will be up next on the chopping block.
(11-17-2021 06:55 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ] (11-16-2021 11:45 PM)Converted Rice Wrote: [ -> ]Do y’all trust the AD to make this hire?
Based on his track record with other coaches, yes. Not every one has been a home run (Bloom or Bragga), but since arriving in 2013, JK has hired: Rhodes, Langley, Pera, Lee, and Cruz (I know it’s early). I think there is enough track record of success to not dread JK making the call should he do the right thing and cut ties this year.
Cruz was dropped in our laps and was the result of OG's long history of success, long predating JK. Without that, we don't have a Cruz to hire. I really can't give all of that hire to JK... other than he certainly didn't screw it up at all and recognized the birds nest he had on the ground.
Rhodes I think I can give him from memory, but someone will correct me if I'm wrong.
Pera is still an unknown to me... and we're a few years in already... by that I mean its not at all clear to me that he was ready for the job then OR now... and while he certainly isn't a disaster, I don't see how by any measure we can say he was a GREAT hire. His lifetime record is 0.317.... which is the worst record of any head basketball coach at Rice since 1981. That's 40 years folks.
Langley was a win.... but Tudor had at least something to do with that. Edmonds shows promise but hasn't set the world on fire. I'm surprised Tina's success didn't lead to a higher profile hire.... but she may be great. Just as early as with Cruz imo.
The way he handled Wayne was atrocious... and he made a horrible hire to replace him
He kept David around too long, especially if as some suggest, he starved him.... and then again, made a poor hire to replace him.
Since football is the #1 driver of revenue and realignment... with men's basketball and baseball being distant seconds and thirds... I have to put a whole lot more weight on those items where there is a lot of competition than I do on non-revs where the competition for coaches is vastly less.
I'd also note that for non-revs, what you're really selling to get someone to come to Rice is Rice. What JK has done to improve those prospects has been to put some focus on them so that they don't look like COMPLETE afterthoughts.
When you look at the number and amount of financial investments that have been made under JK, the list is long and impressive, at least relative to the past 50 years.
Tudor slightly predates him I think, but more has been added since then
Patterson,
Tennis
millions at T&F/soccer
improvements at Reckling
MANY new academic improvements/campus relations with governance
That's where I'll ABSOLUTELY give him some props.... he's done well there by historical standards
Coaching hires?? At least in the IMPORTANT sports (no offense intended, just mean important in terms of profile and revenue) I'm nervous. I FEEL like what we've done is the same thing we've done in recruiting... where we get the guy who is the 50th best at what everyone else does... the best guy available. When you're that far down the totem pole, I feel like you're better off taking the QB that UT wants to turn into a safety and then running a different offense than UT. By that I mean you do what Coastal did with Moglia and hire a complete unknown who knows how to build a team around him OR you hire a young guy who may be a 'master' of either offense or defense who then hires someone else... like a retired HC on the back side of his career who doesn't want all of the prep work anymore to be the 'game day manager' and mentor the young guy.
I'm not talking about a complete flyer here... someone with no business coaching football. I'm just talking about being so far down in the pecking order that the odds that we find a HEAD COACH who can turn the program around are much less than the odds that we can find an OC or DC (if we pay them more than OC/DC money) who can turn the offense or defense around, and then a HC who can manage the program whom we pay less. Run a different business model.
For Moglia, I don't think he was a coaching genius or anything... I think he was just a good manager who BOUGHT assistants that they couldn't have otherwise afforded. That's essentially what people are saying about Bailiff. IIRC, Bailiff started off making like 750-1mm. His salary at the extension went to 1mm-1.25mm, but the entire budget for coaching didn't really change... so he couldn't keep his good coaches and couldn't hire good ones to replace them. I don't know if that is true but I've heard it. What if we only paid the HC 500k (because we didn't ask them to shoulder the whole load and/or hired someone whom most people thought needed a lot of seasoning) and then paid the o and dc's 500k rather than 300 or whatever we pay them? And the assistants we paid 200 rather than 150. We'd get a deeper talent pool EVERYWHERE except at the HC position. I'm just spit balling here... you guys understand the concept.
Does anyone here believe that Tom Herman has anything left? Sure, the guy can abrasive and unprofessional, but could he be the head coach we're looking for? When he was at UH, he did well, but he had an outstanding quarterback. I don't know what happened to him at Texas. Maybe someone can fill me in. Maybe he should be considered, but only if he really is the right coach for the job.
So, Tom Herman and Gary Patterson are my first two candidates up. Who else do we have?
(11-17-2021 11:13 AM)Ourland Wrote: [ -> ]Does anyone here believe that Tom Herman has anything left? Sure, the guy can abrasive and unprofessional, but could he be the head coach we're looking for? When he was at UH, he did well, but he had an outstanding quarterback. I don't know what happened to him at Texas. Maybe someone can fill me in. Maybe he should be considered, but only if he really is the right coach for the job.
So, Tom Herman and Gary Patterson are my first two candidates up. Who else do we have?
a thousand assistant coaches and a few other retreads.
(11-17-2021 11:29 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ] (11-17-2021 11:13 AM)Ourland Wrote: [ -> ]Does anyone here believe that Tom Herman has anything left? Sure, the guy can abrasive and unprofessional, but could he be the head coach we're looking for? When he was at UH, he did well, but he had an outstanding quarterback. I don't know what happened to him at Texas. Maybe someone can fill me in. Maybe he should be considered, but only if he really is the right coach for the job.
So, Tom Herman and Gary Patterson are my first two candidates up. Who else do we have?
a thousand assistant coaches and a few other retreads.
I think a lot can be done with Jovani and McCaffery... IF you build an offense around them. We need more speed and better blocking. We are an option team... spread/speed/triple/veer doesn't matter to me. We are an RPO team. MOST schools want to turn RPO QBs into RBs or Safeties.... not QBs. You need a line to protect them. I have NO CLUE why the OL coach from Stanford who coached in the NFL can't recruit or teach good line play.... but I have to believe there is at least some size and/or talent in there that can be exploited (perhaps on the other side of the ball?) if we use formations, angles and misdirection to give them an advantage
I feel like we need better/more WRs. Maybe some of our backs are better suited there, but we've bulked them up so maybe they've lost speed?? We need both speed and power on defense up front. again, maybe from the other side of the ball. Our DBs seem okay, but we ask them to cover for too long... especially when we blitz or stunt. I rarely see our blitzes not get picked up.... I often see our linemen get turned and allow a blitzer a free pass. I'd love to see a stat on that to confirm or refute what my eyes see... how often we miss a blitz vs how often we exploit one.... especially when the game is still on the line (but not the first series).
Bones, don't blame JK for keeping Bailiff too long. He wanted to fire him 3 years earlier, but his hands were tied by a couple BOT members who were VERY loyal to Bailiff.
Cruz didn't exactly fall in his lap. He did not originally apply for the job, and from what I've heard, his name wasn't raised up to JK (by a couple RBI Club Board members who are very close to Cheito) until after the initially chosen candidate decided to pass on the opportunity. Unlike Bragga, who played lapdog to JK, Jose came in with a very clear vision and plan for what he needed to succeed-- which included significant increased funding, and to JK's credit, he got it-- both from quickly raising additional funds for specific projects (e.g., the pitching and hitting labs) and from the University, which has chipped in a sizable amount of money to the cause.
The Pera promotion was a necessary move in an effort to limit a mass exodus after the sudden departure of Rhodes. It didn't work in that regard. However, Pera has been a terrific recruiter and player developer, and the players love playing for him. He's improved the team's record every single season and is on the verge of a 20+ win season, barring serious injuries.
As for Edmonds, her hiring is almost identical to the hiring of Langley-- in almost every way (except she's even younger than Tina). Both came from elite, final four programs where they were Assistant Head coaches. Both had built a reputation as exceptional recruiters. Both were extremely highly regarded and well liked by their players. My only beef so far with Lindsey is that she elected to neglect the transfer portal despite the depleted roster and short bench. Having said that, her first recruiting class is as good or better than any class Tina brought in-- #1 in CUSA, #32 in the country according to at least one publication.