New Recruits

[skersfan]

Both Wagner and BC are proven line coaches. That is why I have a little less concern about them not taking to many linemen.

 

As stated I noticed a decline the year Tom left. Not so much in what we got, but who would not even look at us. 1997 Michigan had over 50 of the top 100 on Rivals looking at them. We had 4. We got zero of the top 100, Michigan got 14.. That is when my concern started. It is far better to take a chance with a 5 star than taking the same chance with a 3 star. Most likely the 5 star will pan out, of course some fail no question. But the chances are the proven track record will continue on both sides.

 

The reason for this in my opinion is we were running the option, most wanted nothing to do with it then. The ironic thing wit the option you need good linemen and top running backs. Not one listed Nebraska. Has to be some reason.

 

With this offense we seem to be getting the interest. I doubt any are coming for the coaching, allthough I am sure it helps, and none are coming because of the history and tradition, after the fact yes. But not the reason for signing. They want ot make it to the big dance and the ticket in their eyes is here.

[DJR313]

Both Wagner and BC are proven line coaches. That is why I have a little less concern about them not taking to many linemen.

 

As stated I noticed a decline the year Tom left. Not so much in what we got, but who would not even look at us. 1997 Michigan had over 50 of the top 100 on Rivals looking at them. We had 4. We got zero of the top 100, Michigan got 14.. That is when my concern started. It is far better to take a chance with a 5 star than taking the same chance with a 3 star. Most likely the 5 star will pan out, of course some fail no question. But the chances are the proven track record will continue on both sides.

 

The reason for this in my opinion is we were running the option, most wanted nothing to do with it then. The ironic thing wit the option you need good linemen and top running backs. Not one listed Nebraska. Has to be some reason.

 

With this offense we seem to be getting the interest. I doubt any are coming for the coaching, allthough I am sure it helps, and none are coming because of the history and tradition, after the fact yes. But not the reason for signing. They want ot make it to the big dance and the ticket in their eyes is here.

Very well put!

[Eric the Red]

Dont know much about Menelik Holt. Oh, I will tell you about Menelik holt. The man is big, I mean like Randy Moss big. Not quite as fast, runs about a 4.6 consistantly. Has great hands, and is a Javon Walker, Randy Moss kind of receiver. Lots of fly routes and posts and jump balls. Good red zone receiver. Almost reminds me of Mike Williams from USC.

Please don't forget we have a bio of Holt, with lots of free video

 

Holt WR

[junior4949]

When legends quit, how many turnovers in coaches does the school have before they get it right again. You may be concerned that the talent fell off when Osbourne retired, but it is common when a legend quits or retires to go through several coaches and have a drop in talent. Look at Oklahoma when Switzer quit. They had a drop off in both talent and coaching. Until Stoops rode into town to save the day, OU was in trouble. Look at Colorado when their legendary coach quit. They still can't seem to get it right. Look at North Carolina's basketball team. Some have found returned to promise land, but all of them went through some ugly seasons.

 

In some regards you could even look in your own back yard after Devaney retired. A lot of fans were ready to send TO packing 30 years ago. It's tough to follow a legend. I'm sure there are cases when the next guy came in and had success, but more times than not there are coaching turnovers after a legend hangs his hat up. Notre Dame is another program going through the same things.

 

Really, TO left Solich's kitchen bare in terms of offensive skill positions. He left him with a redshirt freshman QB and a true sophomore QB who'd never played a down at QB. Ahman was gone, and the jokers following him were not very good. The receivers really didn't matter as long as they could block because in the option attack we rarely utilized them anyway. Also, how many TO recruits on the offensive line made it to the pros and had any success? Raioli made it but I wouldn't put him in the same place with Stai, Wiegert, etc. Franky London was a TO recruit expected to take over the reigns at QB, but he was a bust.

 

Solich rode the Eric Crouch horse as long as he could, but one man can't do it all in an 11 man sport. It should be no surprise to anyone in football that Solich couldn't meet the expectations of the fans following a legend. However, I do pose this question to all of you football gurus: how many guys who have led schools back to the promise land actually had a worse year their first year than the guy they replaced?

[StuckinChicago]

Fonoti

[DJR313]

However, I do pose this question to all of you football gurus: how many guys who have led schools back to the promise land actually had a worse year their first year than the guy they replaced?

Bill Belichek did, on the pro level.

 

Pats were 8-8 in 1999, 5-11 in 2000. He got a few things accomplished, didn't he?

 

That's a difficult question though, because there haven't been many coaches fired after 10-3 seasons.

[Pedro Guerrero]

However, I do pose this question to all of you football gurus: how many guys who have led schools back to the promise land actually had a worse year their first year than the guy they replaced?

Hayden Fry was 7-5 his final season. Kirk Ferentz was 1-10 and 3-9 his first two seasons. Does this make me a football guru?

[junior4949]

I'll give you the Iowa situation. I never even thought of that one. However, I'm not willing to give the Pats situation because "Tuna" while being a legend really wasn't at the Pats long enough to be considered legendary there. I don't know how the Jets faired after he left either, but I consider his legendary status at the Giants where he had multiple years of success. If he quit at the Cowboys today, I still couldn't grant the next coach following legendary success.

 

I did just think of one. Didn't JJ follow Landry at the Cowboys? I guess that one could be considered even though Landry had multiple rough seasons before retiring. My mind isn't real good when considering the Cowboys but Jimmy did follow Landry didn't he.

 

I guess my point was more times than not when a legend quits or retires especially at the top, the next guy fails more times than not. Look at Zook at Florida. He was loved by the players, and was a great recruiter. However, the alumns were spoiled by success from Spurrier. If Urban takes them to the top, he'll be doing it once again with someone else's players, i.e. Utah! The first guy really doesn't have much of a chance.

 

I could go into the NBA but that wouldn't be fair considering Jackson's departure from Chicago and LA due to the legendary players exiting the team as Jackson does.

[AR Husker Fan]

Go back in time a bit more, and it becomes easier. The coaches who followed Bear Bryant. The coaches who followed Darryl Royal. The coaches who followed Woody Hayes.

 

Generally speaking, the immediate successor to a "legend" coach never does perform well - by the standards that the legend set. There are some exceptions, of course, but they are rare.

 

What's more interesting is...why? Why is this the case?

[DJR313]

I'll give you the Iowa situation.  I never even thought of that one.  However, I'm not willing to give the Pats situation because "Tuna" while being a legend really wasn't at the Pats long enough to be considered legendary there.

Belichek didn't succeed Parcells, he succeeded Pete Caroll, who is becoming somewhat of a legend himself at another place. Parcells took the Pats to the super bowl and the playoffs 3 straight years there I believe. Not legendary, but good. Caroll has 2 straight national titles and 3 straight BCS bowl wins since being cut loose.