Bingo. Good coaching changes things. We don't have good coaching, so we get killed every Saturday
Worst RU coaching ever.
- Thread starter RUfanSinceAnderson
- Start date
Will we STOP with this nonsense? We lost 42-17 and went 1-11 that season. "Leading after three quarters?" In the immortal words of Derrick Coleman, "Whoop-de-damn-doo."
lol who cares it was arguably the greatest college football team ever, and we hung with them till deep in the second half. Chris ash can't hang for a quarter with any ranked team (besides Washington for 2). It's absolutely pitiful.
Does down 9-0 at the half against #9 PSU last year count?
Asking for a friend who is trying to keep track of moral victories.
I think some people seem to forget that when Coach Ash walked in, there were transfers, there was a ton of issues regarding depth, we didn't really have a QB for this type of offense, and we didn't have much in explosiveness at the WR position. So the cupboard just wasn't bare, there were only flies inside of it.
Some of you people are highly unrealistic when it comes to turnaround. Coach Ash really only had one recruiting class, where basically, a lot of the guys who signed in 2017 are now on the 2 deep. That right there says a lot about the talent level that was basically handpicked from the last regime. There was no balance (AT ALL) from the team, so the depth BS started years ago [FROM THE LAST REGIME]. The mass transfers that happened over a period of 5 years ( I can't recall the number of players that left), basically is around 2 to 3 recruiting cycles [in all that is nearly half a program in terms of numbers], that is a lethal death sentence to a program. It's akin to having sanctions handed down by the NCAA, except, the last coach couldn't coach, and a lot of the players saw that and decided to leave and look elsewhere, whether it was by de-commitment, or transfer.
Look, at some point we have to call a spade a spade, and see that the talent level just isn't there yet. It's gonna take a few years. We have to be realistic, and just accept that fact. We showed up against Washington (lost anyway), but I think the players took EMU lightly. It is what it is. I seriously don't know what may of you actually want at this point. The coaches cannot bake a cake with just water and flour, and expect it to taste good. This is gonna take time and patience. Obviously the latter is something that many of us just don't have.
Some of you people are highly unrealistic when it comes to turnaround. Coach Ash really only had one recruiting class, where basically, a lot of the guys who signed in 2017 are now on the 2 deep. That right there says a lot about the talent level that was basically handpicked from the last regime. There was no balance (AT ALL) from the team, so the depth BS started years ago [FROM THE LAST REGIME]. The mass transfers that happened over a period of 5 years ( I can't recall the number of players that left), basically is around 2 to 3 recruiting cycles [in all that is nearly half a program in terms of numbers], that is a lethal death sentence to a program. It's akin to having sanctions handed down by the NCAA, except, the last coach couldn't coach, and a lot of the players saw that and decided to leave and look elsewhere, whether it was by de-commitment, or transfer.
Look, at some point we have to call a spade a spade, and see that the talent level just isn't there yet. It's gonna take a few years. We have to be realistic, and just accept that fact. We showed up against Washington (lost anyway), but I think the players took EMU lightly. It is what it is. I seriously don't know what may of you actually want at this point. The coaches cannot bake a cake with just water and flour, and expect it to taste good. This is gonna take time and patience. Obviously the latter is something that many of us just don't have.
By the way, if anyone chooses to compare us to Maryland, let me give you a solid dose of reality. Prior to coming into the Big Ten, they were already in the ACC, and were somewhat competitive. We were competitive in the AAC. That's not necessarily raise the roof type of conference. It was a lot easier for Maryland to sell their program given the situation that they were coming from, and where they are now. The only problem for us, we have to start from square one all over again. Bottom line is that, we don't have much of a history, and have to create one in here.
You're right was it rly 9-0 at halftime last year, I don't remember it
It was like going 8 or 9 rounds with Mike Tyson in his prime, only to get knocked out in the 9th or 10th round in a humiliating way. I'm not one for the moral victory of hanging 2 or 3 quarters with ranked teams. The 3rd and 4th quarters separate the great teams from good or bad teams in talent, depth and conditioning.
I think the situations are similar. Shea handed Schiano a team with 1AA talent playing in the big east with two top schools but a softer schedule. Flood handed Shea mid level AAC / MAC talent, facing NCAA sanctions and a recent national scandal. Ash has to play in arguably the best conference in the nation. Both had no QB and both are short on talent.
How about we wait and see how Rutgers actually plays against Purdue before we start comparing the two.
That is actually a more realistic comparison than what we have to be compared to at this point.
Not really sure Maryland was worse than us, we beat them in 2014 and they beat us in 2015 in close games.
I think football wise we have a bigger, more devoted fanbase.
I think football wise we have a bigger, more devoted fanbase.
I love these kinds of posts because you can research and respond with facts... NOT even close.
Three prior years before coming into B1G ('11,'12,'13)
Marylands record was 13-24 with average SOS of 64.3 .
2-10, 4-8, 7-6
Rutgers record was 24-15 with SOS of 67.3
9-4, 9-4, 6-7
here' the ink if you want to check out reality.
https://www.teamrankings.com/college-football/ranking/schedule-strength-by-other?date=2014-01-07
Compare rosters and depth chart. What I like to compare is how many P5 offers players have on the two deep. I think that's a better metric as I think that it shows how many other professional evaluated the players and wanted them. I looked at Maryland and RUs two deep on the OL Marylands 2 deep has over 100 P5 offers, with one play who had no P5 offers. RU's OL has a total of about 40 P5 offers with 3 players with 0 P5 offers. Clark has the most with 16 P5 offers.
Maryland has a better history, a hesimen runner up, a national championships, and the 3rd most conference championships in the ACC.
However, at the time Randy Edsall had 2-10 season and everyone hated him, so Rutgers was better at the entry time to the B1G. I know we both made bowls our first year, but we had a really easy schedule.
I think Brohm shows you what a good coach can do in one season. Purdue has the WORST talent in the B1G. They were 9-33 under Hazel. There is no way anyone can claim Rutgers has worst talent. Brohm nearly beat Louisville, destroyed Missouri, and gave Michigan a hard time.
DJ seems great, he has charisma, makes good hires, and can recruit. Beating Texas was huge for our fan base, we brought 8000 down to Austin for that win.
Ash MAY fix things by year 5-6, he is not a recruiter like DJ, he's not a offensive guru like Brohm. He seems defense is his thing, but there is no reason to lose as badly as Rutgers has. It's not Flood things are this bad. It's more coaching than talent.
what GS brought..persona. Flood and Ash..not so much. Ash = no risk hire given the Flood mess. That's what Rutgers wanted. A safe bet.
Yes, I was referring to more recent history being similar. Overall, RU does not have 5 or 6 years. That would "Kansas" this program. Ultimately while we were in same place with you guys and Purdue, you guys and Purdue did not whiff and we seemed to. A lot of our fans do not seem to recognize that.
People act like Brohm, Fleck, Durkin are forgone conclusions of what their careers will end up being. They aren't.
I like Brohm and think he was a solid choice but what's he done yet other than be competitive with some teams and a couple solid games. It's nice especially in the first year but it's nothing right now. I'm sure ND and many others thought wow Charlie Weis what an incredible "LOSS" to USC he must be great....we see how that turned out and how much it cost them.
I was indifferent to Durkin just like many others. Same feel I had for Ash. A coordinator from of a top coach. BTW why all the love for a coordinator, I thought that was the "cheap" route. He's likely got more money and higher base to work with than us so that helps a little. Good recruiting, experienced staff and that's nice but still hasn't done anything consistently yet. I did like how they bounced back with Max "mouthful" 3rd string qb but again let's see.
I'm not a fan of Fleck but again we'll see how he does. Fleck inherited a good situation so he should at least win around 8 games this year to keep status quo. Minnesota has won 8-9 games overall and been .500 or better in conference 3 out of the last 4 years. So he should at least do that, to take it up a notch if he starts winning double digits that would be something. Right now we don't even know if he'll reach status quo yet, season isn't over and even after it is consistency is still in question because there hasn't been enough time.
I don't know if Ash will be good or not but I don't get the fawning over others who haven't done anything yet. Who's to know if these choices were whiffs or not, it's too early. There's a long line of names that have been fawned over on this board when they became hot who later turned out to be whiffs and never spoken of again or forgotten. It's just rinse repeat of the same thing.
I think one thing you have to give Durkin and Brohm is they got the most of what they inherited- in the case of Purdue in particular- with not much talent.
It's not so much certainty about their careers. It's certainty that they got teams in a bad spot into a better one quickly. Ash did not. There was no guarantee with any of them.
MD was certainly at an advantage with the two tackles Prince and Gray in the program already but about 100 of those P5 offers are from recruits Durkin brought in himself.
Like I've said in the past you can say yup "good game," or "good year" even but in the end consistent winning is what we're looking for (at least I am) and that we don't know. So I can't get worked up about what others are doing in a very short term view even if some are coaches I actually like. In the big picture, the good game or good year don't mean anything yet...they just are what they are at that moment.
Just as example I mentioned recently Mike London and UVA and his contract extension.
First 2 years.
4-8/1-7
8-5/5-3
Wow he must be awesome right. Look how quickly he righted that ship. Look at the next handful of years.
4-8/2-6
2-10/0-8
5-7/3-5
4-8/3-5
This is my point and he's not the only one. You can't get too carried away and have envy (or handout big contract extensions) over short term results. You take it for what it is at the moment and that's it.
I believe all theses guys know and knew how to coach, they just didn't want to put the time. Yes, Schiano put the time in and some which is why he had positive results on the field. Shea, Flood and Ash are check collectors. I believe Graber busted his butt which is why he had a good season in 1992.
And see how we play against Illinois, Indiana, Maryland, and MSU
Prince had 34 P5 offers including Alabama and Gray had 16 including Ohio State. If Ash had those two guys anchoring his tackle spots we wouldn't be having this conversation and I would agree with the Ash is in over his head crowd.
Last year we mailed it in against MSU and Maryland and lost to Illinois, a team with less talent than us. Damning like EMU.
With Schiano's WTH losses a smart guy could see what he was trying to do with the defense and how that learning curve contributed to the losses.
I am not smart enough to see what Flood and now Ash is trying to do with the offense. I cannot see what paying the price in a learning curve thing is doing there. Maybe if we converted to a read-option and could see the guys struggling to get on the same page.. then the failures could be seen as an investment in pursuing a specific goal on offense.... but I just don't see it.
If we red-shirted a whole class and were told 5 years down the road they will all be super-seniors with a lot of experience and should be able to run an offense and defense like a machine... I could buy into a vision like that.. once articulated by Ash... but I have yet to hear that.
I am speaking strictly about the speed of turnarounds. Nothing more. Of course, I have no idea if Durkin or Brohm will be there 5 years from now and what that will look like.
All I am saying is, they turned around bad situations faster.
Well it's not even that yet because the season isn't over. I mean the Mike London example I gave was an actually speedy turnaround in year 2 and we see how that ended up.
Would it be nice to see better results? Of course but I can't get caught up in others when it really doesn't mean much yet.
Allow me to clarify. I personally believe the time and effort dedicated to the development of athletes and game day preparation
varies with each coach. Not one coach is the same, some delegate responsibilities and others are taskmasters like coach Schiano
who personally oversaw every aspect of the team. I was told that Doug Graber was a hands on coach as well. Not sure which
category Coach Ash fit into as this point in his coaching career. Having a MAC team pick your secondary apart for 260 yards
when your specialty is developing defenses does not bode well with fans.