Can anyone point out where I said that that's the only reason our WR's under performed? That's right, I didn't. I merely pointed out another variable to go into the reasons that athletes underperform. Kyle improved in his senior season because he wanted to. Some guys decline in theirs because they don't want it enough. It's how it goes sometimes. Some guys get injured. Some guys don't respond to coaching. Some do.
And now we wait....and wait....
- Thread starter stpaulcat
- Start date
It could very well be a number of reasons colliding. How about just the fact that everybody is running the same offense now (well, a lot of schools anyway)? Everybody is placing a premium on wideouts and we're simply experiencing tougher recruiting competition for those guys.
I have been reading this thread with interest for the past week, but was not really wanting to comment to the various debates until I saw Catreporter's comment:
I would hope the end-of-season review meeting between Fitz and Dr Phillips (and possibly Mortyy) -- whenever they occur or have occurred -- would delve a bit deeper than "we were 10-3 with a redshirt freshman QB ..." when it comes time to discuss the offense.
NU has access to far better metrics than we have, but the fact that the offense has been on a steady decline over the past three years would open my eyes if I were a CEO (Phillips) running a business, which the NU Athletics program essentially is. I would want the business leader responsible for a division (i.e. Fitz for Football) explain what he thought there was such a deterioration in performance over a medium term and what steps he planned to put in place to address the problem. If this does not happen and the shareholders (i.e. those of us who make contributions or purchase season tickets) are not made aware of the plans in place to address the deficiency, then the shareholders have and should question management. If they do not get the correct answers, then the shareholders can choose to withhold funds.
I do not know enough about football to say whether we need new assistant coaches, better players or god knows what. All I know is that our offensive production, particularly the passing offense, was not up to expectations during the entire season and it was downright putrid during several games, including a New Year's Day bowl game seen nationwide.
If hard questions are not asked about the offense and a rendition plan put in place, then I think we have a situation where top management (Phillips and Morty) are actually working for a subordinate (Fitz).
I would hope the end-of-season review meeting between Fitz and Dr Phillips (and possibly Mortyy) -- whenever they occur or have occurred -- would delve a bit deeper than "we were 10-3 with a redshirt freshman QB ..." when it comes time to discuss the offense.
NU has access to far better metrics than we have, but the fact that the offense has been on a steady decline over the past three years would open my eyes if I were a CEO (Phillips) running a business, which the NU Athletics program essentially is. I would want the business leader responsible for a division (i.e. Fitz for Football) explain what he thought there was such a deterioration in performance over a medium term and what steps he planned to put in place to address the problem. If this does not happen and the shareholders (i.e. those of us who make contributions or purchase season tickets) are not made aware of the plans in place to address the deficiency, then the shareholders have and should question management. If they do not get the correct answers, then the shareholders can choose to withhold funds.
I do not know enough about football to say whether we need new assistant coaches, better players or god knows what. All I know is that our offensive production, particularly the passing offense, was not up to expectations during the entire season and it was downright putrid during several games, including a New Year's Day bowl game seen nationwide.
If hard questions are not asked about the offense and a rendition plan put in place, then I think we have a situation where top management (Phillips and Morty) are actually working for a subordinate (Fitz).
What a bunch of crap. This is mostly the same coaching staff that led to monster offensive performances when the personnel was right (2010 outback bowl comes to mind, but there were many others). I blame the players, especially Thorson and the receivers. Let's get these ducks in a row, then see whether the OC position needs to be changes.
It so happens that the two positions where there have been coaching changes relative to the monster performances you are referring to, are the positions where we are having the most problems. I don't think that is a coincidence.
60657, I think you hit on something that I have felt for quite sometime. Although it's probably only true for a small number of NU athletes that they do seem to stop improving the longer they stay in school. These are highly intelligent young men and can see down the road that their future lies somewhere other then pro sports and just maybe lose interest or can't afford the time needed to work and make themselves better football, basketball, softball or baseball players. That's not a bad thing but it is a fact when examining some NU players.
I'm with you on this. It is interesting that the poll that has been posted indicates about a 50-50 split between those of us that believe coaching is part of the problem and those that don't. To me the evidence points to a coaching problem. In that regard, I think a bit more candor from Football is in order. Something like coaching either is or is not part of the problem, along with a statement of whatever the program will be going forward to improve the offense. We fans support this program big time, both financially and to create the atmosphere in which the game is played, and do deserve some accountability. We are not simply pains in the butt who happen to show up at football games.
No football program in the country would do that. Not a single one. I'm sure that if you watch Coach Fitz on BTN on signing day he'll talk about moving forward and working every day to get better (which is the truth) but to imagine that Fitz, for one second would come out with a statement that in part publicly criticizes his players, coaches and says what next year's offensive plan is, is...well I don't know. It's never going to happen.
Not exactly what I was saying. Fitz can make the point about coaches by hiring a new one or two. Or not--take a stand supporting his current coaching staff like he did last year. No one expects him to say what next year's offensive plan is specifically, but he can be truthful and not obfuscating about what he does say. This silence makes me think two things. Either they are planning changes and waiting until they are in place to announce, or nothing will change and they will say nothing about it. The latter would cause me to question the commitment of the University to its motto: "Quaecumque Sunt Vera"
There will be no statement that even remotely resembles anything you're hoping for. If i'm coming across as adversarial, then I apologize, but there's no way it happens.
Also, this is College Football in the 21st Century. Unfortunately any resemblance college football had to the university motto disappeared a very long time ago. Obfuscation and piles of cash are what's important now and unfortunately it's naive to expect it from any football coach, especially one in the Power Five. You're just setting yourself up for disappointment.
Oh. You aren't being adversarial. I guess it is just dawning on me that college football is a game within a game. Plus there's our game of speculation.
Not "me", "us." I think we deserve more information than we've gotten thus far after a dismal season offensively (actually three dismal seasons offensively). I keep forgetting, though--10-3, what has it come to that we're complaining after such a season--one game away from a record number of wins for NU?
My memory fails me (as usual) - have we discussed whether the 2012 team would beat the 2015 team? I think the 2012 had enough offense to score some points even against the stout 2015 defense, and the 2012 defense was good enough to control the feeble 2015 offense.
Considering the 2012 offense was similar to Tennessee's in some respect, I'd say yes. Eventually our 2015 defense would wear down.
Not sure it'd be a blowout, but yeah, our 2015 defense might hold the 2012 offense to less than 2 TDs, but the 2015 offense would not score more than that.
It's only 50-50 (if it even is) since people who criticize coaches are more likely to post on message boards about it (as with people who complain about anything) than people who support coaches.
I would question the poll because of the small sample, rather than because there are not people who don't complain on this message board. You do have a point though, since Aging Booster's current thread is a complaint about posters who complain all the time.
Thing is, it's not. We are a small board. 35 voters. How many regular posters do we get here during offseason? 50? 75? 100!?! Dugan would tell you that the sample size is more than sufficient for the underlying population. Now, does that accurately reflect the population? That's a question hounding the Repubican party right now. ( rooting for a Trump / Sanders general election. All who said I was crazy are a little quieter these days...)
As we all know, what we think is meaningless (sarcasm alert). It is interesting that with our small sample, whether accurately reflecting the population or not, the coaching-not coaching issue is approximately 50-50, suggesting that while we all may be complainers, we discriminate as to what we complain about.
The sample size is meaningless because we're self selecting. It's not a random sample whatsoever, not even a simple one. Maybe it's a sample of idiot Wildcat Report posters, but it's not even a sample of Wildcat Report readers since many of them just lurk.
I guess it's meaningful if you wanted to know what a bunch of forum whiners and loud mouths (myself included of course) think about NU football.
Surely you're joking. Have you gone to an NU football game? Many people in my usual section are politely clapping parents of players and most of the other people seem to be 50+. Then you have the dads and moms bringing little kids for popcorn and hot dogs. None of them probably visit this board, let alone post here.
I don't think that NU football has many fans beyond people who attend games, either as STHs or casual attendees. Among alumni, football is hardly worth mentioning and in fact NU itself is not a priority to alumni, which is evident in our absolutely atrocious alumni giving rate.
So any poll on here reflects Wildcat Report posters who do not lurk and who choose to respond to polls. Many posters don't bother with polls. Many forum visitors do not bother with posting. It's really meaningless.
"So any poll on here reflects Wildcat Report posters who do not lurk and who choose to respond to polls. Many posters don't bother with polls. Many forum visitors do not bother with posting. It's really meaningless."
Not necessarily. This sample MAY be representative of NU fans across the board. I know a number of significant supporter sof NU football who do not participate on this board who are not at all happy about certain aspects of this program (complainers in other words).
While I agree with your right to voice your opinion, I think it is wrong. And, through your logic, you would suggest that WR removing the polling option as wasteful.
I think we do represent a cross section. Some are STs, some are alumni, some attend all the games, others all the home games, some no games, we have non-alumni, etc. And it has been years since I took statistics (my least favorite of the various math classes...), but I seem to recall it only takes a percentage point or two to create a good sample size.
Another question might be - what population we are sampling? NU alums, NU FB supports, NU FB fans? I think the last category - which runs from Purple Koolaid clan to the sky is falling fan. And within that population, I think we are approaching a fair sample.
It's not an opinion as far as sampling goes. If you put up a poll and invite people to respond, that's called a self-selection bias.
Here's a textbook example. If you hold a MSNBC phone-in poll about Donald Trump and then had a FOX News phone-in poll on the same topic, you'll probably get very different polling results. If you were hoping to get a result indicative of the American population or even the news-watching public, those polls are not representative. In fact, the MSNBC results are not necessarily representative of the MSNBC viewership population because some people just don't participate in that kind of "polling" and it could be that non-participants would respond very differently from those who do dial in.
Another thing to consider is how the poll question is worded, as well as how the answer options are worded, but that's another issue.
Yes, and Donald Trump may be a double agent for Hillary and there may be intelligent life beyond earth. A lot of things may be possible.
Maybe Coach is waiting until after signing day to make changes. I doubt it though. The silence is like waiting for the girlfriend who has dumped you to call, even though you know she's never going to.
We had this same discussion last year, and almost no one could believe Fitz did not make coaching changes then. Another year of the same? Maybe not hard to believe. This is becoming "Ground Hog Day," the movie.
We had this same discussion last year, and almost no one could believe Fitz did not make coaching changes then. Another year of the same? Maybe not hard to believe. This is becoming "Ground Hog Day," the movie.
Of course for gamers, Godot is already here. (godotengine.org)
Not sure if that is what the playwright envisioned though back in 1949.
Actually, I could believe that he did not make coaching changes. And I was not the only one.
That was not meant as a slight--I just remember a huge amount of hand-wringing and carrying on when it was announced that there would be no coaching changes last year after two dismal years. Maybe it was mostly Turk, but I was surprised and disappointed also. On offense, although I don't have the stats, I believe we had overall worse offensive production this year than the previous two years.
If I recall correctly, the handwringing was by most of the usual suspects who have started countless 'coaching changes' threads on this board and have hyperposted in them. I think that they truly believe that, if they wish hard enough and hyperpost enough, coaches will be fired.
