"Fitz's teams don't improve."
- Thread starter VirginiaWildcat
- Start date
I had to come out of posting retirement, hell is freezing over. Villox liked a Virginiawildcat post. Guys, there is hope for humanity.
Erik
Erik
Yo. I will come back and post something neutral on the rant board sometime. Trying to build back my tolerance before I go back over there. Hope all is well!
Erik
Erik
I much prefer fans like you coming back to post after a win than the trolls coming out of the woodwork after a loss. Hope you are around quite a bit over the next few months.
This is only the second time ever that a Fitz team has started October with 2 straight 2 Big Ten wins.
The last was 2007 with those back to back Overtime wins against MSU and Minnesota.
Pretty amazing.
The last was 2007 with those back to back Overtime wins against MSU and Minnesota.
Pretty amazing.
Stupor's one post all day today, and Shivas is normally is a hyperposter. Wonder why?
There are several posters who are silent today. Winning is a great way to run the trolls off.
Same coin? Lol! Klanners actually root for the team to WIN! What a game though, huh, xyz!?
Guessing I'm one of your targets. Just got up after a long trip. The game was very impressive. Guess there is no need to change anything with the make up of the coaching or program, right? Come December, no matter how things finish, you, coral, Mike will consider this a good season. Some nice victories, maybe a bowl, maybe not but everyone will graduate and the rest will return next year to entertain some more. And that's good enough, right?
Yup, call me a troll because my standards are higher. Expecting to win vs. IL, IN and Purdue. Expecting to lose in the resulting bowl. But at least a bowl season. Anything less should result in changes. Anything more, and I will silence my call for changes and accept the nature of the program.
What about you?
It was unbelievable game. CT and the O did a really good job. I would have bet the house on MSU and give the 6. It's why I don't bet anymore. Seems like most I knew felt the same way. The guy next to me at the bar groaned all game long.
You can say I don't root for NU til you are blue in the face. Won't make it true. Difference is I don't accept mediocracy and look for the purple rainbows like the klanners. I simply call out what I perceive to crap. I'm still not sold on Cushing and we have at least five more games to judge.
Maybe some of us jumped the gun. Maybe you, coral, Mike are providing fodder for December. As I sit here, I now expect a bowl game and believe regardless of getting there, no changes will occur again.
It definitely changes by expectations - I see the clear path to 6 wins. I agree with Wood that Iowa and MSU are down. Still, IN, IL and Purdue are worse. The last two weeks have given me hope for a December game. And I'm exciting about post season play. My takeaway from yesterday? What are we: good on O, good on D, who knows? Depends on a weekly basis I guess. For all the positive on O, the D was not very good.
That's not the fodder and you know it. Nice cute play. All the posts frothing over Cushing and springer, name calling of trolls, accusing posters of not being fans - that is the fodder. By the same logic, aren't you angry when we lose? Especially when we shouldn't? Or when certain someone parts of the team seem to not develop? How did you feel after ISU?
In all honesty, I don't have as much of a problem with your criticisms as I do with how you express them. You come across as a total douche who's comments reflect poorly on the program (especially on the free board where recruits and their family's can read them). There are many who have expressed dissatisfaction with our coaching staff (i.e. corbi) but they do so in a respectful and thoughtful manner. If you can't express yourself in more measured tones, at least have the decency to keep your comments to the premium board where your negative impact will be far less detrimental to the team you profess to root for on Saturdays.
It's funny, I am reading this thread wondering why Virginia is hyperposting to no one in particular. Then I remember that it is because I have Xbob on Ignore (the only poster that has earned that distinction from me).
Here's a thought; why doesn't most EVERYONE put Xbob on ignore? Trolls feed on an audience; once he doesn't have one, he will just go away.
Here's a thought; why doesn't most EVERYONE put Xbob on ignore? Trolls feed on an audience; once he doesn't have one, he will just go away.
I hope we can win 2 of the next 3. Winning against Indy and losing the next two would be, just blah.
NU will be playing with house money against OSU and Wisky. The Bucks are one of the two best teams in the country and odds that NU beats them in CBus are not great. Wisky is playing really well and will need the win to have any shot of catching NE. Which makes beating Indy so critical.
Actually, winning a game or two is a great way to embolden the trolls who seem to have nothing to add to these boards other than to flock here after every win and instead of rightly celebrsting victory, choose instead to criticize other posters who expert more than mediocrity.
That's funny. Good for you. And those of us who expect a little better than 0-3 after a decade to build a program are labeled trolls?
LOL!
While some of that may be due to variance in scheduling, that was a silly narrative considering the 2011 season (season of the loss to Army) where the 'Cats started 2-5 (0-4) and turned things around enough to make a bowl.
However, there is some legitimacy to claims that certain positions haven't seen much improvement over the course of certain seasons (such as the O-line).
The dOSU and Wisky games will be telling; if the 'Cats lose both but play a close game, then despite the losses, will point to considerable improvement.
Also will depend on whether the 'Cats win both the IU and Minny games or split them (diff. btwn being a middle of a pack team to good, but not quite a contender).
However, there is some legitimacy to claims that certain positions haven't seen much improvement over the course of certain seasons (such as the O-line).
The dOSU and Wisky games will be telling; if the 'Cats lose both but play a close game, then despite the losses, will point to considerable improvement.
Also will depend on whether the 'Cats win both the IU and Minny games or split them (diff. btwn being a middle of a pack team to good, but not quite a contender).
Last edited:
Beating a 2-3 team to make them 2-4 is not a huge win. I think your standards and expectations are just a tad low.
Uh we scored the most points of any opponent who has traveled to Michigan State EVER. In 120 years of Michigan State football.
Stupor gonna Stupor
No, you are labeled a troll because you start unnecessary threads such as this gem:
https://northwestern.forums.rivals....he-aggregate-score-of-the-last-8-games.27899/
Ow that I've taken G
Was that a question? It seemed more like a declarative statement to me.
Was that a question? It seemed more like a declarative statement to me.
I thought Wisky looked fast on defense and their frosh QB is good, they are for real this year. They will be a huge challenge for the Cats, even with history being on our side when we play them at Ryan Field. But yeah, we must beat Indy first. It's been a crazy season to say the least, so let's see what the next game brings.
Ironically, we feel similarly about each other.
As for who reads it, if a recruit, player or family doesn't like my posts, dont read them. Ignore me. I suppose i have grown more agressive in response to the way i have been treated. You are a contributor.
The old balancing act between risk and reward, and at what point does increasing risk become, well, too risky. Certainly, we've had coaches who've achieved more than Fitz has (and perhaps by luck), but finding an effective coach for NU's academic landscape is not easy. Where do we strike a healthy balance?
To me, the issue is how do you evaluate coaching personnel when recruiting, player attitude, development, and injuries also greatly influence the success of a unit. Looking at this season so far, we've seen tremendous improvement in our WR's over the problems we've had in the past few years. Drops must be down 80% over last year. Austin Carr is currently rated as the most sure-handed WR in the country (highest number of catches without a drop), and Nagel has been reliable while making some very difficult catches. I'm also impressed with Wilson. Last year, everyone was sure the WR coach was to blame and had to be fired. We'd be nuts to fire the WR coach after what we've seen so far this season in terms of overall performance and in-season. improvement. Through the grapevine, I heard that certain personnel who have graduated made little effort to study film or improve their game, and they had a stunting influence on others. Possible support for this has come from some of Fitz's comments about the improvement we've seen this year. Furthermore, our best WR is a highly motivated walk-on who has improved (or sold) his game to where it is now, above that of our recruits. This suggests to me that recruiting may have been an issue. Fitz has also hinted that they could have recruited better.
Re: the OL. The OL has not been a strength in several years. Why? I don't know exactly. What I do know is it is hard to develop and gel as a unit if several players are dealing with serious injuries and down time for rehab. Each injured player loses ground and has to catch up to where he was before the injury, and then try to catch up to his peers. From what I've experienced, these can be MAJOR setbacks in development. I also question recruiting, because OL are pretty hard to evaluate because of the huge size difference between linemen in HS and college football. It's a huge jump. So far, the OL is blocking much better than the horrid performance I saw in the first two games. If our OL coaching is so horrible, then how does one explain the OL improvement we've seen so far this year? I suspect injuries set us back a bit coming out of last year extending through Spring ball and into fall camp. However, I don't know exactly why we started out so poorly and have shown improvement. Perhaps pressure from disgruntled fans has created more urgency to address the problem? Perhaps not. Anyway, I leave those sort of evaluations to Fitz and the athletic department rather than fanatics. Those who think they can divine the good coaches from the bad ones from silly comparisons between years really can't differentiate between the factors listed above.
Everybody admired Jerry Kill and his staff of guys with no resumes beyond Kill who would resurrect moribund programs. The same could be said for the NDSU coaching staff and other successful coaching staff at smaller programs. On these boards, such resumes are viewed suspiciously by people who know little about the subject matter or evaluating the quality of position coaches in college football. I just shake my head. Everyone's an expert. The guys who really are experts are the ones criticized. I've seen this before on various subject matter. It's called bullshit.
To me, the issue is how do you evaluate coaching personnel when recruiting, player attitude, development, and injuries also greatly influence the success of a unit. Looking at this season so far, we've seen tremendous improvement in our WR's over the problems we've had in the past few years. Drops must be down 80% over last year. Austin Carr is currently rated as the most sure-handed WR in the country (highest number of catches without a drop), and Nagel has been reliable while making some very difficult catches. I'm also impressed with Wilson. Last year, everyone was sure the WR coach was to blame and had to be fired. We'd be nuts to fire the WR coach after what we've seen so far this season in terms of overall performance and in-season. improvement. Through the grapevine, I heard that certain personnel who have graduated made little effort to study film or improve their game, and they had a stunting influence on others. Possible support for this has come from some of Fitz's comments about the improvement we've seen this year. Furthermore, our best WR is a highly motivated walk-on who has improved (or sold) his game to where it is now, above that of our recruits. This suggests to me that recruiting may have been an issue. Fitz has also hinted that they could have recruited better.
Re: the OL. The OL has not been a strength in several years. Why? I don't know exactly. What I do know is it is hard to develop and gel as a unit if several players are dealing with serious injuries and down time for rehab. Each injured player loses ground and has to catch up to where he was before the injury, and then try to catch up to his peers. From what I've experienced, these can be MAJOR setbacks in development. I also question recruiting, because OL are pretty hard to evaluate because of the huge size difference between linemen in HS and college football. It's a huge jump. So far, the OL is blocking much better than the horrid performance I saw in the first two games. If our OL coaching is so horrible, then how does one explain the OL improvement we've seen so far this year? I suspect injuries set us back a bit coming out of last year extending through Spring ball and into fall camp. However, I don't know exactly why we started out so poorly and have shown improvement. Perhaps pressure from disgruntled fans has created more urgency to address the problem? Perhaps not. Anyway, I leave those sort of evaluations to Fitz and the athletic department rather than fanatics. Those who think they can divine the good coaches from the bad ones from silly comparisons between years really can't differentiate between the factors listed above.
Everybody admired Jerry Kill and his staff of guys with no resumes beyond Kill who would resurrect moribund programs. The same could be said for the NDSU coaching staff and other successful coaching staff at smaller programs. On these boards, such resumes are viewed suspiciously by people who know little about the subject matter or evaluating the quality of position coaches in college football. I just shake my head. Everyone's an expert. The guys who really are experts are the ones criticized. I've seen this before on various subject matter. It's called bullshit.
Last edited:
