I cant believe he got so snobby, i was just giving him a compliment since he engaged under this thread. At any rate, i like your style bob as you call it how you see it.
This staff should be on a short leash
- Thread starter xxjfgxx
- Start date
That's because you're as dumb as a stump.
We have small crowds (less than half the size of those at PSU, OSU, Michigan) even when we're winning. Large fan bases have a huge impact on recruiting star players. It's probably the second biggest factor after the coaching staff.
Lack of fan support is not the right way to put it, IMO. It's lack of general interest in the product.
You still don't get it. 75% of all recruits at any level are off limits to us. That means, out of all the BCS conference recruits out there (approx 1200 per year based on 20 recruits per school, 60 schools, only 300 of which can we even approach. If you are correct that we are not going after the guys you (and the top 10 programs recruit, remove about 50 or so out of that group and we are limited to about 250 we can effectively recruit) We have to play the Michigans, MSU, WIS, Penn State and OSU of the conference and we need enough collective talent to do so. That further limits the pool and by the time you are finished, we have a collective pool of about 150 to pull from. That means that the 30-35 you need represents needing to be successful on about 15%. That is a very high hit rate. And these are the same guys everyone is going after, not just the academic schools.
Just saying that the pool of available talent needed to compete effectively is pretty small and while we can get a number of them, we have a hard time getting enough to be able to handle injuries. We are doing better and getting to filing the second string but hard to get further.
Well, Stupid is as stupid does. But TxAM couldn't break the top 25 but comes in second for attendance. Somebody forgot to tell the recruits. In fact, Tenn, Texas and Nebraska forgot that their top ten attendance meant they should have better players. Oh wait, since these are 2014 attendance figures, it will be reflected by this year's recruiting class, right? Um - Rivals screwed something up, I guess.Rivals says that Tennessee comes in No 16, but the rest of these 'best in class' fan bases, well, not even Top 25 recruiting classes. In fact, NU out recruited all but Tennessee, with our lousy attendance. Who would know?
Oddly, NIU, that team that beat us last year, averages less than 20K. (We average over 35K) USC can't get there stadium 75% full - but they ranked top 10 in both recruiting and results. They are a small private school, small campus in the ghetto and yet, routinely compete at a high level on a national stage in both fball and bball. If only they had a better recruiting tool, like a beautiful campus on the lake - free of nightly drive-bys. Their neighbors barely fill half of their stadium over at UCLA. Top 15 in both results and recruits and also nationally competitive in both sports.
Miami (FL) has had a few down seasons and are drawing NU-like numbers (falsely inflated too) yet are pulling in a top recruiting class. Maybe we should falsely inflate our attendance figures and then we can draw in the heavy recruits. And Duke is a not perennial top 25, but has a better recruiting class than us despite a smaller attendance number.
I'll go sit on my stump and discuss quantum physics with it while you conjure up a cute little retort.
You just described 10% of the variation around the relationship between attendance versus program success. Now how do you explain the remaining 90%? Why no WAC, MWC, Sunbelt, MAC and CUSA national champions? Why have 14 of the last 15 national champions been schools that average over 70K attendance per game? USC? >73K attendance. UCLA? >76K attendance, largest in Pac12.
Not only "cute", but accurate.
Yup. Dumb as a stump.
Change doesn't always bring the desired result (ask Vandy), it only guarantees to temporarily placate critics. We will soon see if stability pays any dividends and when I say soon, I mean this year or next. Some experiments take time to develop. We appear to continue to have good recruiting, We don't honestly believe we will suddenly be in the National Champion conversation so lets just see if we can have a winning record against a difficult schedule and go to a bowl.
USC has an undergraduate enrollment approaching 20,000 and more than 20.000 grad students. They are not a "small" private school.
Glades, I know you went to Pitt so I'd like you to elaborate on that program. They routinely only got about 30,000-35,000 fans because, imo, Pittsburgh loves their pro sports [have to compete with Steeler fans], yet they won a national championship as an independent. Isn't that the model we might ought to think about when we are thinking about low fan attendance? I know Sherrell brought in some good recruits but it wasn't like they came to Pittsburgh to play in front of thousands of fans. Even when Marino had a nice run there and no national championships, but national contenders, their fan attendance was lacking. Did you follow the Pitt program or did you spend all of your time in "Cathy"?
Also, I think your thesis question is a tough one to answer but, I think the answer has nothing to do with fan attendance, rather politics.
I can point to several examples, but we needn't look past last year. OSU leap frogged over the horn frogs of TCU, and Baylor. TCU was #3 and was arguably the best team in College football. Yet, they were excluded from the Playoff system as well as Baylor. Both schools averaged over 30% less than 70,000 and could have had a decent chance at being a National Champ. TCU averaged 45,000. Baylor averaged 46,000. As with most national championships, it's political. We have seen it time and again.
As an aside, TCU and Baylor both had brand new stadiums. Baylor's is gorgeous. True enough, they both have capacity crowds as the planners modeled Minnesota and made small stadiums that can fill up and be noisy. Interesting enough, Baylor's stadium has among the best locker rooms in the country, huge video boards, #15th biggest video boards in college football http://sportsvideo.org/main/blog/2014/04/baylor-taps-daktronics-for-mclane-stadium-video-display/ , and was built with a price tag of $225 million, which is a lot less than what our practice facility will cost. But at the end of the day, I think Northwestern nailed this one. I mean, if I'm a player, I would love such a wonderful practice facility that is so convenient and awesome where I spend 90% of my football time, as opposed to a wonderful football stadium where I only spend 18 hours a year in. So, I don't think players make their final decisions to come play at a college because of how many fans watch them. Maybe it's on the list somewhere after about the #10th reason, but I also don't think fan attendance has the slightest thing to do with National Championships. Glades Thesis.....DENIED!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McLane_Stadium.
While I don't disagree with many of your points, Pitt routinely played before crowds of 50,000 or more during the Marino era. Pittsburgh does like its pro sports, and it's a much smaller city than Chicago. As far as TCU, they wouldn't even have been in the hunt if West Virginia hadn't handed them one on a silver platter. You think Fitz gets conservative? Leading by 2 with almost two minutes left, WVU coach runs a plunge into the line on third and eight. After the punt, TCU hits one long pass, kicks the FG and wins a game that WVU had completely controlled for three quarters.
Outliers? Says who? You don't even do a little research, bug scientist. Sorry, but I think I could research each year and find examples to dispel your theory. But, go ahead, throw up some data. Impress me with your research skills. Then I will retire to my box of chocolates. Until then, Bubba, tell me about shrimp.
I already did with devastating effect. I never said they were outliers, they just don't explain the majority of variation around the relationship between attendance and success. Keep posting your little M&M's for each year, though, while us high-powered scientists will enjoy a good laugh.
FIrst of all, I did not say that it was the #1 factor top players choose schools. Coaching is the #1 factor.
Pitt, TCU, Baylor. (combined one MNC in 40 years?!!)..toss in Miami, GaTech, and (cough "lucky" cough) BYU. That's all you've got.
Consider recent National Champions and their attendance: Ohio State, Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Florida State, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Michigan, Nebraska...attendance is the 10th reason?...Turk's thesis proposal . . . REJECTED!
xyzbobxyz....denied admissions to grad school at Appalachian State.
If you're not bringing in a Harbaugh/Meyer type, I'd think long and hard before I'd let Fitz go.
Much better to change an assistant or two and go for better recruiters but changing HC's and starting over usually means bad stuff in the long run.
We lost two OL prospects when Chryst & company left for Pitt, have lost 3 more to head and back injuries who never played a down, along with another one or two, who we could have signed but lost to BBielema and suddenly we have huge OL problems this season, it catches up, even for deep programs.
I could argue we're short at ILB & TB too as a result of the three Coaching upheavals.
Much better to change an assistant or two and go for better recruiters but changing HC's and starting over usually means bad stuff in the long run.
We lost two OL prospects when Chryst & company left for Pitt, have lost 3 more to head and back injuries who never played a down, along with another one or two, who we could have signed but lost to BBielema and suddenly we have huge OL problems this season, it catches up, even for deep programs.
I could argue we're short at ILB & TB too as a result of the three Coaching upheavals.
NU hired Barnett. 2 Big 10 Championships.
NU hired Walker. 1 Big 10 Championship.
NU hired Fitzgerald. Did bad stuff happen?
This fear of "geez we fired a coach and the world will end" doesn't seem to be born out in fact.
Peay might have been fired but Barnett was not and neither was Walker. Lost a lot of pretty good recruits when Barnett left.
Whether or not they were fired, they represented a regime change. The world didn't stop in either case.
I would tend to agree that firing Fitz would not be the first choice. A wholesale house cleaning along with empowering the coordinators to run gameday would be a good start. I think Fitz is a good recruiter and good face for the program. I believe he not a good game day coach or special teams coach. Nothing I have seen leads me to believe that he is a strong tactical coach even on the defensive side of the ball.
But he is a very figure head and could be quite productive if surrounding by the personnel. This leads to my discontent. Fitz will not fire coaches and the admin refuses to force the issue. I would say that if Fitz threaten to quit if personnel decisions were taken from him - then I would show him the door. And I could see that as I perceive Fitz to be loyal and stubborn.
Regardless, I will continue to say, until there is change - somewhere within the program - then I believe those that feel as I do should continue to withhold our financial support. Now, bring on the Koolaid clan of clowns to attack me
But he is a very figure head and could be quite productive if surrounding by the personnel. This leads to my discontent. Fitz will not fire coaches and the admin refuses to force the issue. I would say that if Fitz threaten to quit if personnel decisions were taken from him - then I would show him the door. And I could see that as I perceive Fitz to be loyal and stubborn.
Regardless, I will continue to say, until there is change - somewhere within the program - then I believe those that feel as I do should continue to withhold our financial support. Now, bring on the Koolaid clan of clowns to attack me
Isn't that exactly how you used to act regarding Carmody before (and a little after) he was fired?
Yes, Which is why I now see the light and call out the disbelievers.
Why can't you let it go like I did?
I just think you're hypocrisy and general negativity toward the football program is a bit much.
A hot thread on firing coaches and the season hasn't even begun? I hope we have better fans than this.
Looks like the "love affair" continues for another week. Funny how the douche bags make themselves scarce after a solid victory.
Fitz needs to continue to win like this to earn and maintain the fanbase's trust.
The leash is now loosened quite a bit. But, if we lose a bunch of games, then this game will be easily forgotten. Welcome to the real world where fans of big time teams are fickle and have expectations, unlike the little leagues where winning isn't as important and you cheer your kid no matter what.
The leash is now loosened quite a bit. But, if we lose a bunch of games, then this game will be easily forgotten. Welcome to the real world where fans of big time teams are fickle and have expectations, unlike the little leagues where winning isn't as important and you cheer your kid no matter what.
Fitz needs to continue to win like this to earn and maintain the fanbase's trust.
The leash is now loosened quite a bit. But, if we lose a bunch of games, then this game will be easily forgotten. Welcome to the real world where fans of big time teams are fickle and have expectations, unlike the little leagues where winning isn't as important and you cheer your kid no matter what.
The leash is now loosened quite a bit. But, if we lose a bunch of games, then this game will be easily forgotten. Welcome to the real world where fans of big time teams are fickle and have expectations, unlike the little leagues where winning isn't as important and you cheer your kid no matter what.
While I am at it, Fitz also doesn't have the benefit of being appreciated for his effort and not held to results like little league coaches, because unlike little league coaches, we are paying him millions to win.
Almost too tired
to write this as a Haiku
but I do disagree.
If one implies that
another is member of group
"Alumni," alumni right.
If referred to as
singular, one as alumnus
is correct usage
What one has to do
To keep the Uber Meister
on the Haiku path
Last edited:
Coral, it happens every year. Someone wants to be the first to predict the fatality of the season. That way, if the season is a disappointment, they can point out how correct they are and if the season is a success, they can slip away while everyone is cheering.
Not at all. I can't speak for the others, but I have great hopes now for the rest of the season. I thought this defense might be the best since 1995, and it certainly looked that way on Saturday. Our schedule is weak. Stanford may have been the best team on it. We have a chance to run the table. And dareIsay meet dOSU in Indianapolis. No predictions of doom here. Quite the opposite. I have great expectations now.
I expect those expectations to be met. If Fitz doesn't squeeze the potential out of this team, then I'll be on him like a duck on a june bug. As long as he keeps winning, I'm happy.
I'm with you on the defense. Didn't know what to expect although the Turk observations from watching practice were encouraging. Still not sold on the NU offense though. I think CT will struggle in Big 10 play. Take away CJ and NU receivers look pretty weak.Big 10 teams can stop 1 dimensional running games.
I read your post believing it to be written by gocatsgo, but thinking this sounds just like ECat. I love that you don't turn lemonade into pickle juice. I don't want over-optimism this early in the season to be wrong.
Last edited:
I was thinking the same thing most of the game. Our defense seemed to deflate Stanford enough that our offense was able to get going. Won't do so against Wisconsin, Minnesota and a few others if we haven't stepped it up a notch by then.
"If Fitz doesn't meet my artificially inflated expectations after one nice win, I insist that I will continue to grouse!"
It was a nice win where we saw plenty of reasons to be optimistic about the rest of the season, but let's not get carried away. We are still very young and/or inexperienced at plent of positions, so there will likely be some up-and-down swings throughout the year (especially now that teams have tape on our current personnel).
Still thinking this is a 7-8 win team if things come together well, more than that if they come together excellently... And 5-6 if we have key injuries or don't progress enough during the year.
