This staff should be on a short leash

[xxjfgxx]

Fitz and his staff have sailed along virtually unscathed for the past 5 years despite a horrible 15-25 Conference record. Almost anywhere else, the Head Coach would be gone, but an NU not even a change in coordinators. I think its fair to say that most Wildcat fans wanted change at the end of last season, and some felt it should start at the top. Let's face it, other than 2012, it has not been good. Most astute fans recognize the deficiencies in the coaching staff, starting with the head Coach. The poor game planning, lack of in-game adjustments and ridiculously poor clock management have been pointed out ad nauseam. Unfortunately, being an alum, great guy, great player, and decent recruiter, does not automatically make you a good head coach. Will the "love affair" with Fitz continue if we see another losing conference record and no Bowl in 2015?

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

There isn't a love affair now as further evidenced by your comments. So who would you go after to replace him and why? What are the risks?

 

[Wrestlerneverdiesasacatfan]

Fitz is a good coach! Last year injuries and a few bad plays hurt us. My guess Fitz gets us to nine or more wins and is coveted by most major colleges. Just an FYI, we are lucky to have Fitz! Probably,the most articulate coach on college football. He can go anywhere he wants.

 

[gocatsgo2003]

Fitz and his staff have sailed along virtually unscathed for the past 5 years despite a horrible 15-25 Conference record. Almost anywhere else, the Head Coach would be gone, but an NU not even a change in coordinators. I think its fair to say that most Wildcat fans wanted change at the end of last season, and some felt it should start at the top. Let's face it, other than 2012, it has not been good. Most astute fans recognize the deficiencies in the coaching staff, starting with the head Coach. The poor game planning, lack of in-game adjustments and ridiculously poor clock management have been pointed out ad nauseam. Unfortunately, being an alum, great guy, great player, and decent recruiter, does not automatically make you a good head coach. Will the "love affair" with Fitz continue if we see another losing conference record and no Bowl in 2015?

Do we again have to go over the reasons Northwestern is not (and never will be) "anywhere else?"

 

[NJCat83588]

Do we again have to go over the reasons Northwestern is not (and never will be) "anywhere else?"

Don't feed the troll.

 

[Deeringfish]

Fitz and his staff have sailed along virtually unscathed for the past 5 years despite a horrible 15-25 Conference record. Almost anywhere else, the Head Coach would be gone, but an NU not even a change in coordinators. I think its fair to say that most Wildcat fans wanted change at the end of last season, and some felt it should start at the top. Let's face it, other than 2012, it has not been good. Most astute fans recognize the deficiencies in the coaching staff, starting with the head Coach. The poor game planning, lack of in-game adjustments and ridiculously poor clock management have been pointed out ad nauseam. Unfortunately, being an alum, great guy, great player, and decent recruiter, does not automatically make you a good head coach. Will the "love affair" with Fitz continue if we see another losing conference record and no Bowl in 2015?

Our most recent hire may add "Bad Coach" to balance "Good Coach".

 

[mikewebb68]

Fitz and his staff have sailed along virtually unscathed for the past 5 years despite a horrible 15-25 Conference record. Almost anywhere else, the Head Coach would be gone, but an NU not even a change in coordinators. I think its fair to say that most Wildcat fans wanted change at the end of last season, and some felt it should start at the top. Let's face it, other than 2012, it has not been good. Most astute fans recognize the deficiencies in the coaching staff, starting with the head Coach. The poor game planning, lack of in-game adjustments and ridiculously poor clock management have been pointed out ad nauseam. Unfortunately, being an alum, great guy, great player, and decent recruiter, does not automatically make you a good head coach. Will the "love affair" with Fitz continue if we see another losing conference record and no Bowl in 2015?

Already in midseason form I see. You wouldn't happen to be the guy who is singlehandedly making the comments section of every article at insidenu.com unreadable, would you?

 

[Hungry Jack]

The staff should be put on double secret probation.

 

[NURoseBowl]

Do we again have to go over the reasons Northwestern is not (and never will be) "anywhere else?"

As a non-alum, my voice doesn't count for much . . . but the fact that Northwestern isn't just another "anywhere else" is the main reason I support the program.

 

[shakes3858]

As a non-alum, my voice doesn't count for much . . . but the fact that Northwestern isn't just another "anywhere else" is the main reason I support the program.

You're voice counts to me

 

[Deeringfish]

You're voice counts to me

Me too. Of course, I'm not an alum either so that may not help you much depending on our status.

 

[phatcat]

you both get points for not saying "alumni", even if you shortened it to alum instead of alumnus. I don't understand why the university sells things that say "NU alumni". Are we sharing these items with imaginary friends? It sounds ignorant.

 

[Fitz51]

you both get points for not saying "alumni", even if you shortened it to alum instead of alumnus. I don't understand why the university sells things that say "NU alumni". Are we sharing these items with imaginary friends? It sounds ignorant.

I'd suggest not looking at shakes' "you're."

 

[Deeringfish]

you both get points for not saying "alumni", even if you shortened it to alum instead of alumnus. I don't understand why the university sells things that say "NU alumni". Are we sharing these items with imaginary friends? It sounds ignorant.

I can't really take any credit, I was simply responding in kind to the earlier post. I did take Latin in HS but that was 45 years ago and I have gotten sloppy with my Latin singular and plurals. The other day I was guilty of thanking people for being so welcoming to my wife and I. The shame of it is unbearable.

 

[StreamCat]

you both get points for not saying "alumni", even if you shortened it to alum instead of alumnus. I don't understand why the university sells things that say "NU alumni". Are we sharing these items with imaginary friends? It sounds ignorant.

I say the same thing constantly to my wife. She yawns. Those should only go to couples who both went to the same school. (Although, pride goeth before destruction. I recently posted a sentence that misused "your" three times. Yikes!)

 

[ubercat]

I say the same thing constantly to my wife. She yawns. Those should only go to couples who both went to the same school. (Although, pride goeth before destruction. I recently posted a sentence that misused "your" three times. Yikes!)

I've always thought that those license plate frames that say "alumni" should have the last two letters covered with electrical tape. Or spray-painted. Or something.

And don't even get me started on "Forums." (Should be "Fora.")

O tempora! O mores!

 

[realcatfan]

xxjfgxx should be on a short leash and thrown off a high ledge. To the gallows!

 

[shakes3858]

I'd suggest not looking at shakes' "you're."

Shocking thing is I'm actually an excellent writer when I try (I did graduate from this really good school in Evanston). Emails and message boards I don't care so much.

 

[shakes3858]

Me too. Of course, I'm not an alum either so that may not help you much depending on our status.

It doesn't matter if you went to NU, are going to NU, will be going to NU, can't get into NU, wish you went to NU, have kids at NU and are writing fat checks... If you come to the game stand up and scream your head off on 3rd down, all are voices are exactly the same.

 

[Aging Booster]

Fitz and his staff have sailed along virtually unscathed for the past 5 years despite a horrible 15-25 Conference record. Almost anywhere else, the Head Coach would be gone, but an NU not even a change in coordinators. I think its fair to say that most Wildcat fans wanted change at the end of last season, and some felt it should start at the top. Let's face it, other than 2012, it has not been good. Most astute fans recognize the deficiencies in the coaching staff, starting with the head Coach. The poor game planning, lack of in-game adjustments and ridiculously poor clock management have been pointed out ad nauseam. Unfortunately, being an alum, great guy, great player, and decent recruiter, does not automatically make you a good head coach. Will the "love affair" with Fitz continue if we see another losing conference record and no Bowl in 2015?

"Will the love affair with Fitz continue if we see another losing conference record and no Bowl in 2015?" Answer: YES! If you cannot accept that, go somewhere else.

 

[EvanstonCat]

Fitz and his staff have sailed along virtually unscathed for the past 5 years despite a horrible 15-25 Conference record. Almost anywhere else, the Head Coach would be gone, but an NU not even a change in coordinators. I think its fair to say that most Wildcat fans wanted change at the end of last season, and some felt it should start at the top. Let's face it, other than 2012, it has not been good. Most astute fans recognize the deficiencies in the coaching staff, starting with the head Coach. The poor game planning, lack of in-game adjustments and ridiculously poor clock management have been pointed out ad nauseam. Unfortunately, being an alum, great guy, great player, and decent recruiter, does not automatically make you a good head coach. Will the "love affair" with Fitz continue if we see another losing conference record and no Bowl in 2015?

I don't know why people are crapping on this post. It's spot on. I'll say this - if Pat Fitzgerald doesn't right this ship and has another losing season, we better be firing someone. If he can't fire the position coaches that perennially underperform for coaches that will have a better chance of doing better (even if only because the unknown gives more hope than the known), then his ass should be grass.

GCG - again, I respect your knowledge of the game, but your insinuation that NU can't be better than it is because of inherent disadvantages is BS. The biggest argument against such thinking is that we've already proven that we can win and expect victory at NU and win Championships at NU. I guess for all of your experience with NU football, I'm not surprised at your stance since not a single year was with Gary Barnett's staff. Otherwise, I don't think you would be suggesting why we can't be as successful as any other program (or at least a perennial top 20 team), why we can't win 3 B1G championships in 6 years and why #16 ranked recruiting classes should be out of our reach.

 

[hdhntr1]

I don't know why people are crapping on this post. It's spot on. I'll say this - if Pat Fitzgerald doesn't right this ship and has another losing season, we better be firing someone. If he can't fire the position coaches that perennially underperform for coaches that will have a better chance of doing better (even if only because the unknown gives more hope than the known), then his ass should be grass.

GCG - again, I respect your knowledge of the game, but your insinuation that NU can't be better than it is because of inherent disadvantages is BS. The biggest argument against such thinking is that we've already proven that we can win and expect victory at NU and win Championships at NU. I guess for all of your experience with NU football, I'm not surprised at your stance since not a single year was with Gary Barnett's staff. Otherwise, I don't think you would be suggesting why we can't be as successful as any other program (or at least a perennial top 20 team), why we can't win 3 B1G championships in 6 years and why #16 ranked recruiting classes should be out of our reach.

While Fitz is safe, and likely the coordinators, I would say that a couple position coaches should be feeling the heat.

 

[gocatsgo2003]

I don't know why people are crapping on this post. It's spot on. I'll say this - if Pat Fitzgerald doesn't right this ship and has another losing season, we better be firing someone. If he can't fire the position coaches that perennially underperform for coaches that will have a better chance of doing better (even if only because the unknown gives more hope than the known), then his ass should be grass.

GCG - again, I respect your knowledge of the game, but your insinuation that NU can't be better than it is because of inherent disadvantages is BS. The biggest argument against such thinking is that we've already proven that we can win and expect victory at NU and win Championships at NU. I guess for all of your experience with NU football, I'm not surprised at your stance since not a single year was with Gary Barnett's staff. Otherwise, I don't think you would be suggesting why we can't be as successful as any other program (or at least a perennial top 20 team), why we can't win 3 B1G championships in 6 years and why #16 ranked recruiting classes should be out of our reach.

Where did I say none of those things are possible? None of that is or should be out of our reach at NU.

It is my position that we should expect to have a sustained level of success in the 6 or 7 win range with occasional "up" years where we win 9 or more games and compete for titles when things line up the right way (mostly experienced OL and DBs in my opinion). That's why my over/under for determining a successful season is 6.5 wins -- more than that means we likely won at least three out of conference games and about half our B1G games, less than that means we probably won two or less non-conference games and were a couple games under .500 in conference.

To expect NU to routinely be in contention for championships year in and year out a la Ohio State or the truly elite programs in the conference is unrealistic to me and ignores just how hard it is to consistently win at NU. We can beat our chest as much as we like while citing three titles in six years, but that also overlooks the fact that the 95 and 96 teams were exactly the "lines up right" teams I described above and the 2000 team went 8-4(6-2) while missing the elite teams in the conference. These are exactly the kind of veteran-heavy teams we should hope will rise up and compete for titles.

Regardless, that's not what I meant with my previous comment in this thread. What I meant is that Northwestern will ALWAYS be a place where off-field results matter about as much as on-field results. It is a different place with a different set of goals than the "football factories." That's not going to change anytime soon.

 

[klemman]

This would be a tough one if I were a NU fan. As you all so clearly state, the mission of the University and the football team differs from most other programs. It's also unrealistic to expect perennial OSU level success. Fitzgerald is a smart guy, knows his football, and of course is an "alumnus".

But as the saying goes,"You play to win the game."

If there isn't more success on the field, the question isn't "Can Fitz be the NU coach?", because the answer is yes.

The question is whether there's someone out there who can meet similar needs (which the exception of being part of the "alumni"), but is a better football coach?

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

I don't know why people are crapping on this post. It's spot on. I'll say this - if Pat Fitzgerald doesn't right this ship and has another losing season, we better be firing someone. If he can't fire the position coaches that perennially underperform for coaches that will have a better chance of doing better (even if only because the unknown gives more hope than the known), then his ass should be grass.

GCG - again, I respect your knowledge of the game, but your insinuation that NU can't be better than it is because of inherent disadvantages is BS. The biggest argument against such thinking is that we've already proven that we can win and expect victory at NU and win Championships at NU. I guess for all of your experience with NU football, I'm not surprised at your stance since not a single year was with Gary Barnett's staff. Otherwise, I don't think you would be suggesting why we can't be as successful as any other program (or at least a perennial top 20 team), why we can't win 3 B1G championships in 6 years and why #16 ranked recruiting classes should be out of our reach.

Here we go again with the Barnett love. There is little doubt Gary brought the team out of the dark ages, turned the program around and set the stage for success that future coaches can enjoy. Arguably the 2 best seasons at NU in the modern era. However, out of the 7 seasons Barnett had at NU, those two were the only two where he had a winning record. In fact, his last season he garnered zero big ten wins. Sustaining success was not easy and he demonstrated that. Walker, again IMO a fine coach, 2 winning seasons, 1 at 500 out of 7. There are some serious peaks and valleys here from both.

Fitz, 4 winning seasons and 1 at 500 out of 9 seasons. Additionally, you don't see the 3 win campaigns of previous coaches. No one is claiming this is stellar but if you want to continually invoke the history of previous regimes, realize they have some similar blemishes of their own.

 

[NJCat83588]

Arguably the 2 best seasons at NU in the modern era. .

Arguably? Please tell me which other 2 seasons could be "argued" to be better than 1995 and 1996......and don't tell me 2012, when NU beat only 4 teams who ended the season with winning records......

 

[gocatsgo2003]

Arguably? Please tell me which other 2 seasons could be "argued" to be better than 1995 and 1996......and don't tell me 2012, when NU beat only 4 teams who ended the season with winning records......

Is that really the point you choose to highlight from a well-reasoned, articulate post?

 

[EvanstonCat]

Is that really the point you choose to highlight from a well-reasoned, articulate post?

Yes, it is the right point to highlight, because the post was bull. For one, including the pre-1995 years in any assessment is ridiculous, considering where he was buliding from (just like Collins gets a pass in his first few years). Gary Barnett was handed a far thinner deck than either of his successors. The dip that we saw post 1996 was a natural one, experienced similarly by Wisconsin under Alvarez who experienced similar a two steps forward, one step back period following their initial visits to the Rose Bowl, and more recently with Stanford. Given their most recent recruiting, Stanford most certainly will be in the BCS picture and Pac title chase for years to come.

I have no doubt, with Barnett recruiting his own players and coaching forward, we would have sustained excellence, like Alvarez did at Wisconsin, post 2000. For one, his players would not have turned on him after the Wheeler tragedy. And we would not have expereinced the slough of transfers that decimated our experienced depth following 2001, the recruiting would not have dipped to the point that it did during the Walker years, and indeed in his last year, he was well on his way to another top 20 class before he moved to CU. Sure there is some speculation here, but I'm convinced nonetheless.

 

[phatcat]

Let's set aside the arguments, for just a moment, about Barney/Walk/Fitz.

Where the program is at the moment, how much longer should we tolerate a program that is in the bottom quartile? It isn't like he is Dennis Green, winning 3 games on the heels of oh-for-a-decade. The program has been on very solid footing for 20 years. Rebuilding, if that's what we want to call it, shouldn't take 4 years. It's his own program he's rebuilding.

I think we will win 6 games. The defense is talented, and I am hopeful for fewer injuries. But - if we continue to lose games in hilarious fashion like Mich 2012-14, we might be a 4 win team.

Also - those of you that think Fitz will still be the best option even if more failure - who would hire the guy if we have two more losing seasons? I could conceive of him not being a head coach again if he is fired.

 

[EvanstonCat]

Where did I say none of those things are possible? None of that is or should be out of our reach at NU.

It is my position that we should expect to have a sustained level of success in the 6 or 7 win range with occasional "up" years where we win 9 or more games and compete for titles when things line up the right way (mostly experienced OL and DBs in my opinion). That's why my over/under for determining a successful season is 6.5 wins -- more than that means we likely won at least three out of conference games and about half our B1G games, less than that means we probably won two or less non-conference games and were a couple games under .500 in conference.

To expect NU to routinely be in contention for championships year in and year out a la Ohio State or the truly elite programs in the conference is unrealistic to me and ignores just how hard it is to consistently win at NU. We can beat our chest as much as we like while citing three titles in six years, but that also overlooks the fact that the 95 and 96 teams were exactly the "lines up right" teams I described above and the 2000 team went 8-4(6-2) while missing the elite teams in the conference. These are exactly the kind of veteran-heavy teams we should hope will rise up and compete for titles.

Regardless, that's not what I meant with my previous comment in this thread. What I meant is that Northwestern will ALWAYS be a place where off-field results matter about as much as on-field results. It is a different place with a different set of goals than the "football factories." That's not going to change anytime soon.

In the context of the OP, your comment can only be taken as the standard to win is not the same at NU. At any other program AND AT NU, Fitzgerald's on the field record merits discussion of dismissal, if there is no improvement. I have no qualms against and wholly embrace the idea that off-field results matter about as much as on-field results, unlike other schools, but it doesn't mean that winning isn't any less important. We should excel both on the file and off the field. If we fail at either, then it is still failure. I would agree that it is too much to expect NU should be compete for championships like dOSU and Bama every year (especially since these schools cheat their asses off), but, I do think attaining the level of success that Stanford or that Wisconsin has enjoyed is certainly within the realm of reality and reason. Stanford debunks the idea that a school with high academic standards cannot succeed, and Wisconsin has been recruiting a caliber of athlete not at all out of our reach. Attaining the level of success that we had in 1995-2000 would make me happy (even if a losing season or two were sandwiched in between championships). Consistent six win seasons and minor bowl appearances (even if we actually attained that which we have not) do not make me happy at all. Where are the championships that Fitz talks about? What is with the back to back losing seasons?

 

[EvanstonCat]

Let's set aside the arguments, for just a moment, about Barney/Walk/Fitz.

Where the program is at the moment, how much longer should we tolerate a program that is in the bottom quartile? It isn't like he is Dennis Green, winning 3 games on the heels of oh-for-a-decade. The program has been on very solid footing for 20 years. Rebuilding, if that's what we want to call it, shouldn't take 4 years. It's his own program he's rebuilding.

I think we will win 6 games. The defense is talented, and I am hopeful for fewer injuries. But - if we continue to lose games in hilarious fashion like Mich 2012-14, we might be a 4 win team.

Also - those of you that think Fitz will still be the best option even if more failure - who would hire the guy if we have two more losing seasons? I could conceive of him not being a head coach again if he is fired.

We should not tolerate it at all.

Sounds like the arguments for retaining Fitz are the same as Carmody. Our academic standards are too high, we can't possibly recruit better players because we're recruiting from a different pool. Baloney. Stanford and Barnett proved that wrong. If we fire him, who else could we get? No one would want the job. BS. I know exactly who I'd go after - top assistants who have never been a head coach, but have national championship rings and know how to win at the highest level and win major conference titles. No more mid-major experiments like Carmody and Walker. Rather, I'd go after coaches like Barnett and Collins.

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

Bull? Everything I stated is fact, you state conjecture. A natural dip? To a zero win season in the Big, laughable. I am glad YOU had no doubt future success was sustainable. Let me remind you of another fact, year 6 and 7 of Barnett's tenure were LOSING records. His recruits, his coaches etc.

You completely miss my point that sustainability of wins has not been an easy accomplishment for anyone. You hammer on Fitz for the last two seasons and act like some of our more esteemed coaches were on some type of continual upward trend. Predict all you want on what could have been, but you stating it like it is fact is where the bull comes in.

 

[pawildcat]

Let's set aside the arguments, for just a moment, about Barney/Walk/Fitz.

Where the program is at the moment, how much longer should we tolerate a program that is in the bottom quartile? It isn't like he is Dennis Green, winning 3 games on the heels of oh-for-a-decade. The program has been on very solid footing for 20 years. Rebuilding, if that's what we want to call it, shouldn't take 4 years. It's his own program he's rebuilding.

I think we will win 6 games. The defense is talented, and I am hopeful for fewer injuries. But - if we continue to lose games in hilarious fashion like Mich 2012-14, we might be a 4 win team.

Also - those of you that think Fitz will still be the best option even if more failure - who would hire the guy if we have two more losing seasons? I could conceive of him not being a head coach again if he is fired.

I'm not sure of that. Nebraska just hired Mike Riley, who has had losing seasons three out of his last five seasons, including a 2-7 conference record last year.

 

[EvanstonCat]

Barry Alvarez's record in his first 9 years - who like Barnett was handed a much worse deck than Coach Fitz:

Year Team Overall Conference Standing Bowl/playoffs Coaches# AP°
Wisconsin Badgers (Big Ten Conference) (1990–2005)
1990 Wisconsin 1–10 0–8 10th
1991 Wisconsin 5–6 2–6 T–8th
1992 Wisconsin 5–6 3–5 T–6th
1993 Wisconsin 10–1–1 6–1–1 T–1st W Rose 5 6
1994 Wisconsin 7–4–1 4–3–1 4th W Hall of Fame
1995 Wisconsin 4–5–2 3–4–1 T–7th
1996 Wisconsin 8–5 3–5 7th W Copper
1997 Wisconsin 8–5 5–3 5th L Outback
1998 Wisconsin 11–1 7–1 T–1st W Rose† 5 6
1999 Wisconsin 10–2 7–1 1st W Rose† 4 4

Barnett's path was not that different, considering where his recruits were in 2000. The expected dip happened, perhaps the valley was lower, but the peak was much higher. It was clear that we'd be back on the rise once those post-1995 classes matured, just like what the post Rose Bowl classes at Wisconsin did in pushing the second peak (that Walker benefitted from in 2000 with players like Anderson, Harris, Bentley, Silva, Clelland, etc... that were recruited by Barnett).

I hammer on Fitz not just for the last two seasons but the fact that in 9 years as head coach, we have never once gone to a BCS bowl or won a Big Ten title or even the West. Consistent mediocrity, which is the legacy of his immediate predecessor, is not at all what I expect, nor should it be a ticket to job security.

 

[EvanstonCat]

This would be a tough one if I were a NU fan. As you all so clearly state, the mission of the University and the football team differs from most other programs. It's also unrealistic to expect perennial OSU level success. Fitzgerald is a smart guy, knows his football, and of course is an "alumnus".

But as the saying goes,"You play to win the game."

If there isn't more success on the field, the question isn't "Can Fitz be the NU coach?", because the answer is yes.

The question is whether there's someone out there who can meet similar needs (which the exception of being part of the "alumni"), but is a better football coach?

Hate to say it but the Buckeye hits the nail on the head. Except he forgot to mention that it is unrealistic to expect perennial dOSU level success because we won't cheat like them.

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

Let's set aside the arguments, for just a moment, about Barney/Walk/Fitz.

Where the program is at the moment, how much longer should we tolerate a program that is in the bottom quartile? It isn't like he is Dennis Green, winning 3 games on the heels of oh-for-a-decade. The program has been on very solid footing for 20 years. Rebuilding, if that's what we want to call it, shouldn't take 4 years. It's his own program he's rebuilding.

I think we will win 6 games. The defense is talented, and I am hopeful for fewer injuries. But - if we continue to lose games in hilarious fashion like Mich 2012-14, we might be a 4 win team.

Also - those of you that think Fitz will still be the best option even if more failure - who would hire the guy if we have two more losing seasons? I could conceive of him not being a head coach again if he is fired.

You mean just like Dennis Green after he left NU?

 

[gocatsgo2003]

Yes, it is the right point to highlight, because the post was bull. For one, including the pre-1995 years in any assessment is ridiculous, considering where he was buliding from (just like Collins gets a pass in his first few years). Gary Barnett was handed a far thinner deck than either of his successors. The dip that we saw post 1996 was a natural one, experienced similarly by Wisconsin under Alvarez who experienced similar a two steps forward, one step back period following their initial visits to the Rose Bowl, and more recently with Stanford. Given their most recent recruiting, Stanford most certainly will be in the BCS picture and Pac title chase for years to come.

I have no doubt, with Barnett recruiting his own players and coaching forward, we would have sustained excellence, like Alvarez did at Wisconsin, post 2000. For one, his players would not have turned on him after the Wheeler tragedy. And we would not have expereinced the slough of transfers that decimated our experienced depth following 2001, the recruiting would not have dipped to the point that it did during the Walker years, and indeed in his last year, he was well on his way to another top 20 class before he moved to CU. Sure there is some speculation here, but I'm convinced nonetheless.

Holy revisionist history, Batman! Barnett did indeed get the chance to coach Northwestern teams that were entirely "his guys," and he landed with a solid thud.

Gary Barnett was named head coach at Northwestern following the 1991 season. That means the class of 1992 was partially recruited by Peay and the 1993 class was Barnett's first. That 1993 class would have seen seniors in 1996 (1997 if they took a redshirt), so the team was entirely Barnett recruits starting with the 1997 season... when the team reeled off 5-7(3-5) and 3-9(0-8) seasons before Barnett bailed.

If anything, Barnett's years at NU prove just how hard it is to sustain success at Northwestern, from the highest of highs to the lowest of lows.

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

Arguably? Please tell me which other 2 seasons could be "argued" to be better than 1995 and 1996......and don't tell me 2012, when NU beat only 4 teams who ended the season with winning records......

We made it to a number 1 ranking in both 1936 and 1962. Not saying they were better, but if that wasn't in the Stone Age, someone may make the case.

 

[gocatsgo2003]

Bull? Everything I stated is fact, you state conjecture. A natural dip? To a zero win season in the Big, laughable. I am glad YOU had no doubt future success was sustainable. Let me remind you of another fact, year 6 and 7 of Barnett's tenure were LOSING records. His recruits, his coaches etc.

You completely miss my point that sustainability of wins has not been an easy accomplishment for anyone. You hammer on Fitz for the last two seasons and act like some of our more esteemed coaches were on some type of continual upward trend. Predict all you want on what could have been, but you stating it like it is fact is where the bull comes in.

We keep making the same points. Is this a first?

 

[hdhntr1]

We should not tolerate it at all.

Sounds like the arguments for retaining Fitz are the same as Carmody. Our academic standards are too high, we can't possibly recruit better players because we're recruiting from a different pool. Baloney. Stanford and Barnett proved that wrong. If we fire him, who else could we get? No one would want the job. BS. I know exactly who I'd go after - top assistants who have never been a head coach, but have national championship rings and know how to win at the highest level and win major conference titles. No more mid-major experiments like Carmody and Walker. Rather, I'd go after coaches like Barnett and Collins.

The problem NU has had for at least 60 years is quality depth. It happened under Parsegian and every coach since. While we might find one guy at a position that meets the criteria for success and is willing to come here but three is a different matter. So when injuries occur, we often take a huge step back when we have to put in backups.