I agree. If he doesn't produce 7 wins, 6 at an absolute minimum he's gone. I firmly believe that 2018 will be a pivotal year. A losing season in 2018 will produce that Hobbs Ash meeting. The problem for Hobbs is how is he going to pay the remainder of his contract while trying to hire a proven coach.
Ash just said...
- Thread starter Spare130
- Start date
Ash could not win a game this season and win 1 game next season and he won't be gone.
He has 4 years minimum here to show something.
He has 4 years minimum here to show something.
Why not? Can't get any worse...can it? Were staring at 1 - 11 in season 2. Let that sink in for a moment...and then tell me how Ash, who to-date has demonstrated that he can't out-recruit and out-coach our peer schools, is going to be successful at RU.
I guess some of this is subjective but if you compare the rankings of the last four recruiting classes from both schools, it isn't even close.
Rankings don't matter to me.
Having a transfer at starting QB and starting RB tells me a lot.
We'd like to think there is a talent gap, but I really can't assume it. 20 games on a neutral field, swapping coaches, I am not convinced RU wins more than 10. what do i know though?
The RB comment is over stated.
It's a shame Josh Hicks who ran for 6.4 yards per carry in 2014 and 4.2 yards per carry in 2015 is not seeing meaningful action. And Robert Martin should be the starter.
I am sure Edwards is better or else he wouldn't start.
What could possibly be the reason Ash wouldn't start and play the best player?
We need a little perspective. If the team had capitalized on the FG block and scored a late TD, many of the folks bashing Ash would be saying we are showing progress; especially in light of the Washington game. I did not think the team was prepared to play this week and that is on the coach but he is learning on the job and we knew that when he was hired. The jury is out on Ash but 14 games is not enough of a sample to determine if the program is going in the right direction.
At times we have heard coaches may have made handshake promises with recruits and transfers n order to get them into the uniform in the first place.
I do not know that is the case here nor do I think there is a known significant difference between Edwards and any other RB at this time. It might be the case, its just not proven yet.
It could be a case where we have so many similarly talented RBs.. each with their advantages.. that we have a hard time managing down and distance and personnel perfectly... and even if we did so.. that would be a tip tot eh defense.. over time..
Oh Edwards is in... it is going to be this kind of play..
or.. here comes Martin.. its a dive up the middle.. etc
That is a huge advantage for clear 4-5 star talent.. they tend to do it all and are in the game every snap.. no tipping of the hand strictly by personnel.. easy to call plays.
And then you clean house Hobbs and Ash and find some real AD who can bring in the right coach.
2 more awful years and season tickets could fall below 20,000, maybe 15,000. He has not won 1 game that was considered a toss up, let alone as an underdog. A win over Nebraska, as unlikely as that appears, would be huge. 1-11 might destroy recruiting for those committed that have other options.
He needs to figure out how to get a win other than Morgan St. His career and the program depend on it.
He needs to figure out how to get a win other than Morgan St. His career and the program depend on it.
Wrong hair cut? See Chris Laviano.
Could not have said it better myself.
Martin and Edwards were basically statistically even against EMU, with Martin getting 0.5 YPC more. Hicks did not get enough carries for a comparison.
Martin was 0.9 YPC better than Edwards against UW.
I stand by my statement that Martin should be the starter.
Fair enough. They only matter to me because there is a large, consistent gap between the two schools. However, to your point, we had a large disadvantage at QB which can't be understated.
I'm RU class of '79, was in the band, eventually went to grad school at Michigan, where I was also in the band. From what I saw, there were professors at UM who went to the games, talk football, follow the team/program.
Go to any big time school and you actually see banners of various departments having tailgates. I know they are all over the place at USC.
You'd be ostracized there if you weren't into the program. Really, there is no reason not to be. It's a huge part of the school.
You'd be ostracized there if you weren't into the program. Really, there is no reason not to be. It's a huge part of the school.
Sample size is too low, so if you have to compare you need to look at each run and assess what the RB could do with that specific play. If my memory is correct Martin got a lot of his yards ate the end of the 1st half vs. UW when we kept running in passing situations.
And at Rutgers there are also plenty of professors who are into the games. Nothing is monolithic! But consider this: top tier research university professors all come from the same place! They are all doctorate holding scholars and researchers, mostly educated themselves at elite research universities or ivies. Rutgers professors are not unique in their attitudes toward big time athletics. I guarantee you if you polled, say, the English professors at Ohio State you would hear the same things you hear from Rutgers professors.
My point is that the attitudes of faculty members will have close to zero impact on any of this. If there was a time their voice could have made a difference it was back in the 90s. It's over. Big Time Athletics won. Professors will gripe--sometimes with good reason!--but whether the money flows or not is going to be up to the administration and the fanbase/donors.
My 2 cents is simple. I believe when you are a P5 team it is smart to hire a new HC who has HC experience. It doesn't have to be P5 head coaching experience (Joe Moorhead for example will be one of the hottest HC commodities in the country next year) but somebody who understands how much more responsibility it takes to be a HC as opposed to a coordinater.
Unless somebody is being groomed as a HC bc of an impending retirement (jimbo fisher) I just think it's an impossible task to expect quick results when a guy has to learn how to go from just coaching football and recruiting regionally to becoming the manager of an entire department and the head responsibility for 90+ student athletes. You become the main focus of the media and recruiting and everything it takes to manage a football team.
If I'm Rutgers and things do not turn around this season quick I'm looking at Mike Houston from James Madison. Guy runs a phenomenal program and in 2 years has turned JMU into a complete power (#1 in FCS, 2016 FCS champions). Before JMU he took the Citidel who hadn't won a conference title since 92' and won the conference in his second season there.
I'm not saying to write off Chris Ash just yet, but if the season progresses and the coaching continues to be a concern, if I'm RU (considering they most likely won't be a player for the Moorhead's and Scot Satterfields of the world) I'm campaigning HARD for Mike Houston!
Unless somebody is being groomed as a HC bc of an impending retirement (jimbo fisher) I just think it's an impossible task to expect quick results when a guy has to learn how to go from just coaching football and recruiting regionally to becoming the manager of an entire department and the head responsibility for 90+ student athletes. You become the main focus of the media and recruiting and everything it takes to manage a football team.
If I'm Rutgers and things do not turn around this season quick I'm looking at Mike Houston from James Madison. Guy runs a phenomenal program and in 2 years has turned JMU into a complete power (#1 in FCS, 2016 FCS champions). Before JMU he took the Citidel who hadn't won a conference title since 92' and won the conference in his second season there.
I'm not saying to write off Chris Ash just yet, but if the season progresses and the coaching continues to be a concern, if I'm RU (considering they most likely won't be a player for the Moorhead's and Scot Satterfields of the world) I'm campaigning HARD for Mike Houston!
This is b.s. man. Everyone who's anyone knows it takes a minimum of 5 years to get competitive.
i'd say it's pretty close. Edwards starting, whether warranted or not, is not indicative of a lack of talent. RB is a position we have a number of quality players.
But if we do ask why, could it be that Ash is more likely to go with a guy he brought in? Similar to QB.
Last edited:
I don't disagree, but Ash is working on a 3-5 year plan to rebuild the team he inherited. That's what many on this board thought when we hired him.
Nobody likes to lose to EM, but the greater goal is to develop a successful B1G team Over Time. That's why Ash is at RU, IMO.
I also believe that he and his staff are good recruiters. We are getting recruits from a wider group of states than we have in the past. I'd rather stay with Ash as long ashis recruiting is acceptable to meet the goals of the program.
So Ash goes 3 and 32 over his first 3 season and you think he'll get a 4th? No freaking way.
But winning short term helps in the long term.
We have already seen a dip in recruiting amongst the bigger name players from last year to this. If we do indeed win only 2 games, I'd expect another dip in incoming talent.
We need to actually show improvement.
I do. They aren't paying a 2 year buy out plus more for another HC.
This is Rutgers, not Alabama. They aren't making moves like that without extenuating circumstances, like emailing from your personal account that you will meet a prof in a costume to talk about fixing a players grade.
This is Rutgers, not Alabama. They aren't making moves like that without extenuating circumstances, like emailing from your personal account that you will meet a prof in a costume to talk about fixing a players grade.
baring alien abduction..... he ain't going anywhere for at least 4 years...... so, all you haters can just stop for now...
An exaggerated narrative.
http://www.scout.com/Season/2017-Football/CollegeTeamTalentComposite
RU ranked 51.
I'm not even a hater. I get bent after terrible losses, as I would think we all do. But the idea that this guy can win 1 or 2 games in each of his first 3 years? I'll def be a hater at that point.
No disrespect but at some point you have to stop using the flood excuse for the coaching on the field. Chris ash has had 2 years to implement his system and you will absolutely never convince me that RU did not have a more talented roster than eastern michigan... eastern Michigan does not have anyone on their roster with the talent of guys like grant, Austin, or Hester.
It's one thing to lose to Washington who simply has more talent which can be attributed to another coach, it's quite another to be in the midst of an 11 game losing streak and just losing at home to eastern Michigan... sometimes the truth hurts but that absolutely an ash problem at this point, not a flood problem.
I hope I'm wrong for ash's sake but I'll say at it again,if things stay the way they are, ya'll need to be looking at Mike Houston this off-season
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
FB Recruiting Irish Kicker Jack Scullion commits to Rutgers Football!
- Latest: scarlet night
-
-
FB Recruiting COACHSPEAK: Snyder HC AJ Dobson talks 2025 LB DJ McClary- Latest: Scarlett Fan
-
