Nadir
- Thread starter PURPLE Book Cat
- Start date
I think I'm mostly looking at it from the perspective of a person deciding how many resources to plan to expend to set up watch parties in my man cave this fall
I would argue this is the lowest point ever.
Back in the 80s there was no effort to be competitive. You couldn't point to a single reason for hope. Everything about the program screamed neglect and indifference to losing big.
Now we have championship and bowl trophies. Amazing, best in class facilities with the best yet to come. Membership in one of only two elite conferences. Recent first round draft choices and more. A head coach that achieved rock star status and held onto it for years. Plenty of money in the coffers. In short, we have all the indicia of a winning program. One where you would expect success.
But we are 4-20 the last 2 years. Not even remotely competitive in many of the losses. With a recruiting pipeline of mostly not so promising prospects. At a time when the BIG is elevating its game, we have rapidly digressed to Mildcat status. Just like in the 80s.
So yea. This has to be our lowest point.
GOUNUII
In the original Dark Ages, mercifully NU was rarely on TV and I would have to check the Sunday paper scores to see if NU just beat the spread, always expecting the next loss. And continuing to wonder why NU can't make a better effort. Year after year.
This may be our lowest point, but it's the second time we're here.
This may be our lowest point, but it's the second time we're here.
That Illinois loss reminded me of the nightmarish opener of Francis Peay's final; season, when we fumbled it away eight times against Rice. That was 1991, but we did upset the Illini in a rainstorm that season. No question some of the games the last two years rank with the Dark Ages. That said, Gary Barnett arrived in 1992 and things changed. Hopefully, the many new young coaches on the staff will help Fitz right the ship.
That Rice game was the first game I ever attended at NU. I still have nightmarish visions of Trevor Cobb shredding the NU defense. I guess stopping the run has always been an issue.
We are in a good position to surprise on the upside this coming season, and I don't think I'm drinking purple kool aid. Some serious pop has been added to the offense with Bryant and Henning, the running back room looks strong despite the loss of Hull. The OL has bigger shoes to fill with the loss of Skoronski, but hopefully there will be strength in numbers. The new staff on D should pay dividends quickly. A bowl game will mark a much needed turnaround. GO CATS
Or maybe the next Gary B might arrive in time to make the inaugural season in the new digs worth watching.
I agree. The talent level now is far superior to the 80s teams. The results have sucked the past two years but the team is closer to decent.
In a general sense, all of this is fact.
We have seen great athletics results mostly across the board in the rest of our sports (esp Field Hockey and Lacrosse), so that is a good thing.
National and Big Ten championships as well as mostly competitive teams abound at NU (of course baseball needs a full rebuild).
Basketball got off the mat with a phenomenal 22-23 campaign and hopefully football will as well this year. Those are the bell cows and have to produce as such. Our athletics will be judged by football/basketball success as always.
Money guarantees us nothing in the major sports, but we are a Power 2 program and have to achieve at the level expected for a program with our resources.
I have confidence that much of what we saw the past few years was an aberration and that Fitz has fixed a lot of the problems with his staff changes.
The draft picks we've seen recently shows that clearly there's a pipeline of elite talent in the program, but obviously we need wins more than anything.
Still, I think Fitz knows what needed to be fixed and got on it. Staff knows their units have to produce or they will be next on the hot seat (see Bajakian who needs to show some spark of workable offense this year or progression over past 2 years).
QB recruiting and development worries me more than anything else, and we don't have much reason for confidence going forward under Fitz/Jake.
On one hand I think to myself...you have all the resources at your disposal of a Big Ten team, especially money. You should literally be able to buy at least X wins per season. But then I look at Texas A&M and that program's ROI.
I also realize at this point, every FBS school has "reach" - social media and other tools at their fingertips to compete for interest among high school boys. Maybe not at the level of Ohio State and Alabama, but at a Northwestern level...yup.
Stumbling in college football right now and trying to fix things feels like falling out of a car moving at 65 mph and then trying to physically run to get back in the car - zigging when you should zag, or being weak at one key position (like...QB?) creates a real I've-fallen-and-I-can't-get-up predicament.
But then I also look at Bret Bielema walking in and turning Illinois around in one season. So...maybe it's the head coach? I'm sorry to say it, but if we don't make it to 6-6 this year, that's probably my answer.
I also realize at this point, every FBS school has "reach" - social media and other tools at their fingertips to compete for interest among high school boys. Maybe not at the level of Ohio State and Alabama, but at a Northwestern level...yup.
Stumbling in college football right now and trying to fix things feels like falling out of a car moving at 65 mph and then trying to physically run to get back in the car - zigging when you should zag, or being weak at one key position (like...QB?) creates a real I've-fallen-and-I-can't-get-up predicament.
But then I also look at Bret Bielema walking in and turning Illinois around in one season. So...maybe it's the head coach? I'm sorry to say it, but if we don't make it to 6-6 this year, that's probably my answer.
Yeah, its not even close. Many of those guys back in 1979-1981 were at elevated risk of serious injury when they took the field.
In 1981, we got shut out 5 times in a 6 game span.
Record-wise, the is no arguing that 2022's 1-11 season was the worst since the 0-11 season in 1989. At the same time, the program is overall in a better place than the "Dark Ages" because of (1) some recent history of success, (2) better recruiting now relative to the 1980s, and (3) better facilities and overall investment in the program. The variable that seems to be influencing performance is coaching. I don't pretend to be the football expert, but as a long-time college and pro football fan, it feels like Northwestern does better when it innovates on offense (Randy Walker/Kevin Wilson) and/or has solid coaching on defense (e.g., Vanderlinden, Hankwitz). In the post-Hankwitz years, the sound or solid defense has gone and is matched up with an uninventive, predictable offense that just can't score points consistently - hence the descent into purgatory with 3-9 season followed-up with a 1-11 year.
I sense that Fitzgerald wants to play Tresselball. However, Tresselball was predicated on being able to suffocate inferior opponents with ball control offense, strong special teams, and a stifling defense. One downside of Tresselball is that it harder to compete against elite competition:
sports.yahoo.com
It seems like there is no strategy to minimize the talent advantage against the elite teams (other than to pray for rain).
The other downside of Tresselball is that the game is more compact with the scores being lower, which puts you in a precarious position of sometimes allowing inferior competition to stay uncomfortably close and puts you in a position of getting in trouble if you make mistakes against that inferior competition.
sports.yahoo.com
This second downside of Tresselball might explain recent losses to teams like Miami (OH) and Southern Illinois.
I had more angst around the time of the 2002 season. After being favored to win the Big Ten coming into 2001, there was the Rashidi Wheeler tragedy and a massive losing streak starting with a last-minute loss to Penn State after leading most of the game. Even though the records were not as bad (4-7 in 2001 and 3-9 in 2002), I wasn’t sure where the program was headed. Now, I think there is a more solid program infrastructure, but there needs to be a quicker and stronger willingness to shift from non-effective strategies (or make appropriate staff changes).
I sense that Fitzgerald wants to play Tresselball. However, Tresselball was predicated on being able to suffocate inferior opponents with ball control offense, strong special teams, and a stifling defense. One downside of Tresselball is that it harder to compete against elite competition:
Deconstructing: The grisly demise of 'Tressel Ball'
Post-facto Xs and Os from Saturday's Ohio State-USC showdown from the proprietor of the essential Smart...
The other downside of Tresselball is that the game is more compact with the scores being lower, which puts you in a precarious position of sometimes allowing inferior competition to stay uncomfortably close and puts you in a position of getting in trouble if you make mistakes against that inferior competition.
Pryor, Ohio State fall through the ice at Purdue
Join the Doc's game day live blog, covering every game, all day long. Purdue 26, Ohio State 18.
I had more angst around the time of the 2002 season. After being favored to win the Big Ten coming into 2001, there was the Rashidi Wheeler tragedy and a massive losing streak starting with a last-minute loss to Penn State after leading most of the game. Even though the records were not as bad (4-7 in 2001 and 3-9 in 2002), I wasn’t sure where the program was headed. Now, I think there is a more solid program infrastructure, but there needs to be a quicker and stronger willingness to shift from non-effective strategies (or make appropriate staff changes).
Imagine that. We have to be good at on least one side of the ball. Who woulda thunk it.
Actually, it would be nice to be good at both at the same time.
My perception about why this never happens is we don't have enough talent depth to share on both sides of the ball. Like...we go through periods where we are streaming the best athletes more to defense (opposite pre-Fitz), imbalance in scholarship distribution, etc. Is that how other people have seen this issue over the years?
Sort of, but it also seems like the innovation of the coaching has been mostly on one side or the other. All the years we had Hankwitz, there was no equivalent Kevin Wilson and when there was a Wilson there was no Hankwitz, for example. The recruiting rankings aren't a perfect indicator, but the average rating of the offensive vs. defensive recruits is probably close over the years and from year-to-year, so I'm thinking it has more to do more with coaching skill or strategy.
To be fair, we also had a head coach who was an offensive-minded guy in RW at the same time we had Wilson/Dunbar, and now we have a head coach who is a defensive-minded guy in Fitz, at the same time we had Hank. I'll even say that the early years of McCall showed slow and steady improvement until 2013/14 before crashing. We'll ignore the last two years on defense...
Personally, Rashidi Wheeler's death was a bigger nadir than today's although today's recent record is probably worse.
It was for his teammates and coaches as well.
That was a knife in the heart to the 2001 squad. His locker was turned into a remembrance shrine for a few seasons, but his early passing fractured the team & program in ways that took seasons to heal.
Well, we’re here now, that’s for sure. And it might get lower.
It is most certainly going to get worse before it gets better. To think that a few days ago we were debating about our starting QB. Now wondering if we’ll have ANY of the same coaches come opening day.
I thought "not" at the time, but that was prophetic and likely still is... we're now just in the first chapter of this new adventure and can't see the end of it.
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
FB RECRUITING Familiar faces give Owen Fors a 'great' Prospect Day visit
- Latest: EvanstonCat