Jump to content


Caliborn72

Members
  • Posts

    1,097
  • Joined

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

1,945 profile views

Caliborn72's Achievements

Scout Team

Scout Team (7/21)

582

Reputation

  1. Definitely a bit of the nature of the beast but always welcome if it’s good attrition. Can think of a handful of players where it’s best for both sides if they move on.
  2. Have to be a tad careful with this because it can be a great band-aid but we don’t want to overly rely on it. It’s also the type of thing that can make younger players transfer away, have to have a lot of trust with the players. But ultimately it’s probably the right thing for this year at this point. Should have some spots open up for immediate PT.
  3. I know that it’s from 2 years ago, I was using it to illustrate that teams were attacking our ILBs before. And while some of it can be blamed on personnel, I also just think there was a natural learning curve for Ruud. It’s all good, he’s gotten better since.
  4. It’s also just how the scheme plays. Barry finished 2nd in the conference in tackles per game and Young had a bunch of tackles too. I’m more interested in TFLs where Wisconsin’s ILB Sanborn has the same amount of TFLs as Reimer and Henrich combined and their other ILB has more than both of them individually as well. I do think Ruud has done a much better job here after his first few seasons and the ILB group has a lot of potential.
  5. I would think we were a 9 win team if all I did was read your posts and skip the games on Saturdays.
  6. I don’t disagree now but it’s definitely been a bit of a learning curve for him here. We’ve had a few opponents say they knew the key to beating us was to attack our ILBs: Now granted that was some personnel stuff too which isn’t entirely his fault. The key to attacking Mo Barry was clearly getting him to run sideways and that’s not really Ruud’s fault, just a flaw that he had to work around. But Honas was also a ridiculously unguided missile his first couple years here and I remember Colorado specifically saying they could count on him always being out of position. All good, it was just an easy hire to make instead of branching out. He’s definitely gotten better on the job.
  7. Fwiw from reading tea leaves, it sounds like the staff got burned with NPG and Jackson Hannah in this way so I do buy that they’ve learned from some mistakes identifying frame types for this conference. There was a post on 247 that said that those two didn’t have the frame the coaches thought they had which is ??? Because you get measurables on visits. But I think it more means they don’t have frames for this conference and the staff now knows how much that matters. Mostly what I’ve heard and read, NPG and Hannah would already be all-conference AAC players but they just can’t hold up in this conference, let alone in practice against our guys. Prep recruiting isn’t going well though and this might just be an excuse.
  8. One of the qualifications should always be: would our peers hire this person? Mostly I mean the greats in the conference, but at this point, I even mean just any team in the B1G West. I’m still mostly okay with bringing over Frost’s staff from UCF because it seems that was a sticking point and they had earned the benefit of the doubt. Ideally, you spend big on a DC for Frost but I also get why Chins had to come and I’ve been impressed with the fight out of his side so all good. But Barrett Ruud was always a questionable hire for the last assistant at the time. Would any peer hire him or did he get hired just because he was a former player? He was a quality control guy for 2 years at UCF with no position coaching on his resume and he’s had to learn on the job. Don’t get me wrong, I love Ruud and think he’s done better each year here but that was the kind of hire where we could have grabbed a big time LB coach/recruiter and instead made the easy hire.
  9. Was a great listen. I think it was pointed and intentional how much Benning used the word trust overall.
  10. Mike Leach was the only definite one I remember seeing due to his and Moos time at WSU. I don’t know how much to believe from Moos back then though lol. He had to hire Frost and I’m not sure there was ever a plan B or C no matter how much he claimed there was.
  11. Here’s the picture you’re referencing I believe.
  12. I will preface this by saying I know I’m about to say something ridiculous and will understand if I deservedly get laughed out of the thread for it. I can definitely see your scenario playing out. We bring Frost back, he has a solid bowl year, and gets another year out of it. My biggest concern if that happens is what next then. We’ve had some recruiting misses and some weird recruiting takes but generally speaking, Frost and his staff have kicked butt on the recruiting trail. They didn’t just stop putting energy into it or somehow lose the ability to recruit. Even if Frost’s seat isn’t remotely hot in the confines of the city or athletic department, that’s not what public perception sees and it seems pretty evident that coaches are using the uncertainty against us in recruiting. Can we realistically have one to two more recruiting classes with that uncertainty looming overhead? If we were to bring Frost back for another 2023, I almost think you have to extend him at that point if nothing else but for the sake of recruiting. I understand how ridiculous that sounds considering that’s a big reason for the questions currently. Maybe Trev can get creative without buyout clauses in a hypothetical extension lol.
  13. Lol I was confused by that post for a minute. Was gonna say old Bob Diaco just got one year.
×
×
  • Create New...