I'd say it's more, "Well coached kids don't make tons of mental mistakes".
Ash: "We are not that far away."
- Thread starter Knight Shift
- Start date
So we are giving credit to Ash for the lack of turnovers yet giving him a pass for the turnover salad we enjoyed yesterday?
In essence yesterday was Flood's fault?
Is it lack of honesty or objectivity that is at play here?
Flood? What are you talking about? I'm saying no one gave Ash credit for cleaning up the turnovers before the Illinois game but now he's getting all the blame after one bad game from a turnover perspective. Typical know-nothing fans.
Last edited:
Still wondering why they did not hand the ball to Martin once at the goal line when RU could not punch it in.
very true and the point I made earlier
They are going to happen, no question about it and sometimes the ball just bounces that way but 3 of them yesterday were avoidable
Still trying to figure out why we are seeing kids fielding punts inside the 10 ALL YEAR LONG yet no one wants to hit the coach on that?
I think we have an incredible lack of objectivity here because the alternative is we hired a coach that is not only learning on the job but may not be the gameday guy we need which means, we're gonna suck for 3-4 more years.
.
We may very well suck for 3-4 years. Just like we did under GS who was also a new HC learning on the job taking over a severely decimated roster. It sucks but we've seen this movie before. It's nothing new.
You are 100% correct. Take the snap under center and have you RB pound the ball in for a score. You're not Monday morning QB'ing or picking on the new coach, instead you are clearly pointing out a very bad play calling/coaching. I believe this happened twice during the game. We have the ball on the 7 yard line and you have the QB in a shotgun formation?
I am only talking about that one series. Generally, I am OK with the offensive "playbook," as I think Mehringer is learning and seeing what works with the players he has for the system they are running. The coaches should get some leeway this year, but don't see anything wrong with questioning play calling in certain spots like that goal line stand. It's strange that the CL haters want to pile on him for that play and scream about how few points we have scored, but that series is on the coaches as much as on the players and the execution.
I agree we are not that far away. Get in a solid quarterback would be a start. Since this is a loading question anyway, I would say if we had the players who are now out due to injury, we would have won Iowa and Illinois. Grant would have had great numbers in both games. Yes, I know he's not our only player, but he gives the team that spark, that edge, that would carry through the game.
Amazing, isn't it? People claim we have all this "talent" yet the loss of ONE PLAYER has completely changed the complexion of our ability to score not only on offense but on special teams. I don't care what the recruiting rankings say...WE HAVE NO DEPTH!
It doesn't have to be this way. We could have opened up the wallet and hired a proven winner. I suggested going after Bobby Petrino when he was available or Mark Mangino. People forget that Mangino was the OC for an undefeated Oklahoma team that beat FSU in a National Championship game. How about taking Kansas a B12 bottom dweller to a BCS Bowl and winning. Here is a guy with a wealth of knowledge who knows how to win on the big stage but needed a second chance. What was the basis of hiring Ash? I'm not a Flood supporter, never been and never will be but I'm not a supporter of using 2.1 million of taxpayer dollars and flushing it down the toilet on a very inexperienced coach who may or may not get us there by 2019!! I rather take it on the chin and bring in a proven winner on a short leash regardless of reputation. Someone who will produce a 6-6 record this year and get us to 7-5 or 8-4 next year. In 2018 under Mangino or Petrino we would be guaranteed a 9-3 season or better!! With Ash I'm being told 2019, half the posters on this site including me may be dead by then.
I hear ya, but both Petrino and Mangino come with lots of baggage (which doesn't play well here) and someone like Dan Mullen would require 3x the amount of tax payer dollars to get him out of Starkville.
Seriously, Grant got hurt and the whole team seemed to collapse.
There are turnovers and there are turnovers.
Can live with effort turnovers, Martin and Gio. Part of game and learning process.
Can not live with turnovers where fielding punts inside the 10, bad snaps because man in motion or situational time and place where a good coach adjusts and takes snap under center rather than another bad snap.
I've been saying these things since day one and being hammered for it. I have seen a steady increase in the number of people realizing much of what is happening is coaching and coaching personnel decisions
agree on those latter games not being winnable but Jesus, the manner in which we lost had just as much to do with coaching as it did with talent. I want to see Ash coach UP
I don't think we're that far away, to be honest, but we're also not what I'd call "close".... most of the distance needs to be reached with recruiting, and that's going to take some time. (Meaning, I don't see it happening next year, either).
Even if we get some of our top remaining targets to commit (Bell, Martin, Bolds, Hand, etc) and finish with a Top 30 recruiting class, we're still going to be thin next year at a lot of positions (notably the defensive front seven and offensive line). Need back-to-back Top 30 classes to really start righting this ship.
If we're going to have a breakthrough year, it'll be 2018, and the schedule sets up for it. We'll have two full Ash recruiting classes, and the OOC and west division schedule will be: Texas State, @Kansas, Buffalo, Illinois, Northwestern, @Wisconsin.
Even if we get some of our top remaining targets to commit (Bell, Martin, Bolds, Hand, etc) and finish with a Top 30 recruiting class, we're still going to be thin next year at a lot of positions (notably the defensive front seven and offensive line). Need back-to-back Top 30 classes to really start righting this ship.
If we're going to have a breakthrough year, it'll be 2018, and the schedule sets up for it. We'll have two full Ash recruiting classes, and the OOC and west division schedule will be: Texas State, @Kansas, Buffalo, Illinois, Northwestern, @Wisconsin.
You do realize that when Schiano took over as Rutgers head coach he had no head coaching experience and we did not see real improvement from 2001 through the 2004 season. 2005 is when coach schiano and Rutgers really started to show improvement and of course we had that magical 2006 season. according to my recollection, A lot of the same questions were being asked of schiano at the time. "is he too young?", "is the job too big?", should we change this, that or the other thing?
BTW it would have been interesting to see what would have happened if schiano had stayed in 2012. He was bringing in arguably the greatest recruiting class in Rutgers history with a couple of five stars and more than a handful of four stars. By that point the rancor with schianos performance of the previous few years had grown so loud, so he decided to take the Tampa Bay job. Well that is all history now but I am excited to see what Ash can do.
BTW I think some of your expectations are out of wack with reality. We are not Michigan or Notre Dame where the tradition just gets high ranked kids to attend. For Rutgers to get to that level we are going to have to win a few national championships.
A few national championships? The list of programs/coaches that have won 3 or more national championships is very small. Schiano brought RU from nothing to something, but his success was very modest in the big picture. Success didn't start until BE started breaking up. Only 1 team was ranked in final poll.
Last edited:
It seems the consensus in big time football is to field the punt even inside the 10. No one wants to be pinned inside the 2.
Well to be fair, the pitch to Harris was there, easy TD.
I didn't much like the play calling there either, but 4th down was execution.
So we differ on this. Laviano imo, is the main issue, or maybe it is coaches playing Laviano. Let's see if Gio can build off that Illinois 2nd half.
I see turnovers as less of a problem of coaching and more of a problem of the players executing what the coaches are asking them to do. I'm sure even pee-wee teams emphasize the importance of ball security and show players how to minimize the chance of fumbling. I'm sure all teams that pass design their plays in ways that prevent interceptions if the QB and receivers do their jobs. Yes, a punt should not be caught inside the ten, but players don't always realize exactly where they are on the field. So I don't see TOs as primarily a coaching problem. I can't believe that Ash & staff don't teach the players how to carry the ball.
I'm not trying to badmouth the players when I say this. I've never played organized football, but the sport looks *hard* to me. A player has to play by instinct (there's no time to think) and the player's instincts have to be correct. I have to think that it takes a while, say, for a QB to develop an instinct on when to throw the ball away rather than take a coverage sack, or a RB to be able to know which hole to take. The best coaching goes a long way to instil those instincts but still the player has to absorb what he's being told.
As for the OP's question, I am hoping the remainder of this year, particularly with a new QB, goes better than what we've just had. One thing for sure; we don't have to play three top ten teams in the second half.
I'm not trying to badmouth the players when I say this. I've never played organized football, but the sport looks *hard* to me. A player has to play by instinct (there's no time to think) and the player's instincts have to be correct. I have to think that it takes a while, say, for a QB to develop an instinct on when to throw the ball away rather than take a coverage sack, or a RB to be able to know which hole to take. The best coaching goes a long way to instil those instincts but still the player has to absorb what he's being told.
As for the OP's question, I am hoping the remainder of this year, particularly with a new QB, goes better than what we've just had. One thing for sure; we don't have to play three top ten teams in the second half.
I don't really blame the coaches either. I've seen one fumbler get fixed, Tiki by Coughlin, it seemed to be the blue print for fixing fumblers, but I don't think I've seen another fumbler get fixed.
One could make the argument that Martin has had ball security issues throughout his career, where as Hicks has not. So that is in the realm of player evaluation more then coaching.
But my main point is to not rag on Ash, sure I do critique, but I'm a fan of his. I'm really arguing against the notion that we have no talent, or that it is going to take YEARS to get this fixed. We have OK talent, and I think Ash can get this turned much quicker then what some fans are saying.
One could make the argument that Martin has had ball security issues throughout his career, where as Hicks has not. So that is in the realm of player evaluation more then coaching.
But my main point is to not rag on Ash, sure I do critique, but I'm a fan of his. I'm really arguing against the notion that we have no talent, or that it is going to take YEARS to get this fixed. We have OK talent, and I think Ash can get this turned much quicker then what some fans are saying.
Want another coach? It's very simple. Contact the RU AD and tell him you'll personally write a check for the millions of dollars it will take to cover the rest of CA's contract. And after that, tell him you'll also be writing another check for the millions it will take to hire and pay a new HC. -In other words, what you're suggesting is not happening.
Ash has been here for 7 games. How anyone can think that's truly a measure of what this staff can or can't do is amazing. And if I recall correctly, when the former "ace" we had here was in his initial season he won his first 7 games. Was that an indication he was a good, or even a reasonably capable, head coach? Nothing could be further from the truth. It was because the competition level was dramatically lower and he inherited a highly talented team. (And even with that he was so inept he underachieved, blowing not one, but two, chances in the final 2 games of the season to win the Big East title outright.)
Whether people agree with it or not, or like it or not, this staff is going to be given its shot to try and get things going in the right direction, and just from the standpoint of financial reality that's where things stand.
Last edited:
I always like posts like this, they show just how retarded people can be and demonstrative of the lack of objectivity.
If you don't think you can get a feel for how a coach is going to do on gameday by watching 7 games then you need to go back to film class. Many of knew early on Greg would suck on gameday because of his first season behind the chalk and Ash is no different I'm afraid. We've yet to see him actually coach up, make necessary adjustments and not get myopic in his view across the sideline.
I will hope for the best but this guy does not come across as a gameday coach
Saw it in Giant's game yesterday.
I vaguely remember an announcer talking about a couple years ago how the philosophy has changed.
Now that could be more pro's, where the kickers are more proficient in pinning the ball deep, but it is def more of a thing now.
Re punts inside 10 yrd line.
http://thebiglead.com/2015/11/18/fielding-punts-inside-the-10-in-the-nfl-what-do-the-facts-show/
"There are some interesting observations here. First, these include all punts. You may be surprised to learn that only 22% of all balls allowed to bounce between the 5 & 9 yard lines reached the end zone. If we take out punts that traveled more than 50 yards, then we take out over half of those touchbacks. The chances of a pitching wedge type punt bouncing into the end zone if it is dropped between the 5 and 9 yard line is only 10%."
http://thebiglead.com/2015/11/18/fielding-punts-inside-the-10-in-the-nfl-what-do-the-facts-show/
"There are some interesting observations here. First, these include all punts. You may be surprised to learn that only 22% of all balls allowed to bounce between the 5 & 9 yard lines reached the end zone. If we take out punts that traveled more than 50 yards, then we take out over half of those touchbacks. The chances of a pitching wedge type punt bouncing into the end zone if it is dropped between the 5 and 9 yard line is only 10%."
The yardage total is a premise in the argument against the notion that we have no talent.
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
Buying season tickets, but selling them? Looking for feedback...- Latest: greenknight