Did he bring his etch-a-sketch to the press conference?
I see Rutgers playing in the Rose Bowl within 5 Years
- Thread starter rutgersal
- Start date
Did he bring his etch-a-sketch to the press conference?
What's held against us on the recruiting trail is losing.
Now youre getting it. It’s as much a coaching problem as it is a talent issue. When Schiano came back he blew the initial hires. That is what set him back 2-3 years. When the 2 people with the most coaching experience on the offensive side of the ball were a couple years removed from being high school head coaches there’s an issue. And that is what has been the biggest negative on the recruiting trail not field house or NIL.
Can’t win without recruiting. Can’t recruit without providing a superior experience. A new Fieldhouse would provide a superior experience, and boost recruiting.
This.
Greg basically squandered his first 3 seasons of rebuild with a substandard set of coaches on Offense.
Poor KC and the other offensive coaches are starting from ground zero. That’s why I expect little improvement with the Offense in 2023.
Id like to see someone make a case for an improved RU offense this season.
The coaching hires were intentional. Though Nunzio and Auggie were inexperienced, they busted their ass on the recruiting trail, even if the results weren’t quite what we wanted. That’s the trade off we made, recruiting vs experience. Now that the baseline of talent is there, and we are no longer horrid, we brought in coaches who will have talent they can work with, and optimize, so that we can realize better results.
Intentional? Really? So he intentionally threw away the first 3 years of development, schematics and technique for someone to bust their ass in the recruiting trail? That’s a new level of stupidity if true.
To compound that they had very little success recruiting their targets ( big north parochials)
Nunz and Augie would have been perfect additions to the staff if Greg brought them in with a very senior staff. Instead he surrounded them with people that had less experience than them.
Last edited:
Why are you people arguing with Al? If he were on the Titanic as it was sinking he’d be trying to sell round trip tickets on the next voyage.
Ok Al you have stated that it unfair to compare Colorado sition to our because the PAC-12 is a weaker conference.
Here are the teams ranked in the 2022 final 21 in that we will play in 2023:
A. Michigan ranked 3
B. OSTATE 4
C. State Penn 7
Here are the teams that Colorado will play and their final 22 ranking.
A. TCU 2
B. Utah 10
C. USC 12
D. Oregon 16
E. Oregon State 17
F. UCLA 21
So if Colorado has a better record then us, please don’t tell me about a 8 year rebuild. No excuses
He'd argue to stay on board because any minute it was going to stop sinking and float above the Atlantic Ocean.
So Schiano wasted the first three years to see if he can do something with “inexperienced coaches?” That should be a fireable offense.
I didn’t see much development the first three years. Did you? Wimsatt completed 44% of his passes last year. I can probably count on one hand the number of times one of our receivers beat a DB for a 50/50 ball. Excluding the Wagner game, I’m not sure how many times our OL made it to the second level, let alone held their blocks.
The defense had its moments, but they were ultimately fatigued.
our hoped for Bergen County recruiting pipeline didn’t materialize. Nevertheless,
Auggie and Nunzio did their best, and we are much better off then we were three years ago, thx to the undesirable work that they did that more experienced coaches wouldn’t have wanted to do. Builds are not easy.
A foundation is now in place. Now the new coaches will take things to the next level, and help kids make the most of their development.
The first three years weren’t wasted. We built the foundation. Defense is set. Offense still has a ways to go, but we have important pieces.
Wimsatt, Simon, and Ajani are our QBs. Brown, Monangai, Young, and Benjamin are our RBs. WR and TE need more talent, but at least we have some. Most importantly, we’ve got a good number of young OL, who will develop one day into competitive Big Ten linemen. We’re on our way.
Nah. He'd be arguing the ship was gonna bounce off the bottom and sail home in record time .
No as I have been saying in every post I did not see development. But you said that is because his hires were intentional. He hired for the wrong reason and got exposed your words.
The things you point out above were more coaching issues, technique and scheme issues than talent.
Sorry Al but there are many coaches that would give their left nut to coach at a B1G level program. Schiano did not have to hire 2 guys from Princeton and 2 high school coaches to do the “undesirable things” Recruiting and working long hours are not undesirable things. They are “the things” it is expected.
The offense was better in Year 1 than Years 2 or 3. That suggests he let the offensive coaches do their thing in Year 1 but afterwards tried to take the offense in a different (all too familiar) direction--and it didn't work. So it WAS planned but it was a plan that didn't take off. Now he's in a bad spot 3 years in still trying to make his plan work. Potential hires and recruits are probably well aware. Would you want to jump aboard a listing ship?
Last edited:
Yea I’m not sure if that is the reason. I think it was more of some teams adapted better to the Covid restrictions of 2020 than others. Rutgers bonded and played above their talent level. 2021 and 2022 when there was supposed to be development growth and identity, specifically on the offensive side of the ball, there was none. That is where the lack of experience showed on the coaching staff. They couldn’t adapt, scheme and teach to overcome their deficiencies both in talent and experience.
Yes but then he tripped and the design was lost. They have to start from scratch.
The ship is not at all listing. This ship is slowly but surely being built into an aircraft carrier. Listing is Chris Ash finishing 1-11 in year 3. The offense was only better in year 1 because Noah Vedral got injured during summer practice. So we had a pair of first year quarterbacks who struggled at times. It was a learning season but we made progress as the quarterbacks got valuable experience, which should allow them to perform better going forward.
Recruits are taking notice and are jumping aboard, and the current class is shaping up to be our best yet. Surace is going to be a baller and lead us to winning seasons.
Bringing in talent was priority #1. So coaches were chosen accordingly.
Coaches don’t want to be involved with build’s because it’s too much work. Also, it Doesn’t make sense to spend a lot of money on coaches when you’re building the program, and you’re probably not going to be successful for a while.
Sure, recruiting and working long hours go with the college football territory. But recruiting takes longer and requires more effort at Rutgers than is required at other places, because our value proposition isn’t as strong, as peers.
There is no recent tradition of success. NIL support is lagging peers. Our facilities aren’t competitive and a new Fieldhouse is needed.
Thus we don’t usually get our first choice, unlike Ohio State and Michigan, which are selector schools. We have to go onto the second, third, fourth, fifth, etc choices.
And this is why Urban Meyer wouldn’t touch this job with a 100 ft pole.
Sure, lots of coaches want this job. But how many could actually succeed? How many coaches have the Florida connections to bring in competitive classes? We got 6 FL kids in the last class, who will enhance our competitiveness.
Sure we didn’t have to hire Princeton coaches. But then to hire experienced coaches, we would have had to pay a significant premium. Even though the foundation is built, we’re paying Ciarrocca a 40% premium to his last salary. Dave Brock is also receiving a significant premium. Thus you will see accelerated development this year.
Bringing in talent was priority #1. So coaches were chosen accordingly.
Coaches don’t want to be involved with build’s because it’s too much work. Also, it Doesn’t make sense to spend a lot of money on coaches when you’re building the program, and you’re probably not going to be successful for a while.
Sure, recruiting and working long hours go with the college football territory. But recruiting takes longer and requires more effort at Rutgers than is required at other places, because our value proposition isn’t as strong, as peers.
There is no recent tradition of success. NIL support is lagging peers. Our facilities aren’t competitive and a new Fieldhouse is needed.
Thus we don’t usually get our first choice, unlike Ohio State and Michigan, which are selector schools. We have to go onto the second, third, fourth, fifth, etc choices.
And this is why Urban Meyer wouldn’t touch this job with a 100 ft pole.
Sure, lots of coaches want this job. But how many could actually succeed? How many coaches have the Florida connections to bring in competitive classes? We got 6 FL kids in the last class, who will enhance our competitiveness.
Sure we didn’t have to hire Princeton coaches. But then to hire experienced coaches, we would have had to pay a significant premium. Even though the foundation is built, we’re paying Ciarrocca a 40% premium to his last salary. Dave Brock is also receiving a significant premium. Thus you will see accelerated development this year.
Al is at his best when using his aircraft carrier analogies.
Keep in mind that he is on record as saying he isn’t even thinking about Wins until year 6 of Greg 2.0.
Last edited:
Waiting until Year 6 for a winning season gets a coach fired at almost every school in America.
Schoano should’ve been fired for wasting the first three years if the three year plan Al laid out with”the inexperienced coaches” is anywhere near true. Esp with other coaches taking over worse programs and going to bowl games in their first 2, 3 years.
Titanic is a better analogy. Nobody else thinks a failed offense after 3 years is evidence of things moving right along as planned.
The most absurd excuses now being given for the wreck that is GS v.2.0 revolve around Kansas, a team that was easily worse than ours for far longer, in a state that's no gold mine of talent--with another, vastly better in-state program to compete for some of it. No way to deny their coach proved it very possible to be competitive with a productive offense in a couple of years.
RU surprised people in year 1. Schiano actually prepared the team well during the pandemic. The switch to the all too familiar 3 yards in a cloud of punts offense led to the regression in years 2 and 3. It remains to be seen if KC is going to put a functional offense on the field, or if any of the QBs is going to get the real coaching they need for that to happen.
Last edited:
It's clear that Schiano tolerated the offense in Year 1 because he had no choice if he wanted a chance in any game that year--but that once he started to have more confidence in his defense he tried to revert to his old style of ball control/eat the clock/don't take chances on offense because it might lead to TOs, with the all-too-familiar result of crippled offense, close games but mostly losses, and mind-numbingly boring football. He's probably still convinced that this model of close games will work as long as he can just get 1 to 2 more TDs out of his offense and turn some of those close losses into wins. The fact that nobody--nobody--is still doing this in the Era of High Octane Offense eludes him.
He doesn't realize that in order to win that way in this era, your defense can't just be adequate, it has to be lights out, shut down dominant. There really aren't that many defenses at that level outside of Georgia, Alabama, and Clemson. Even Alabama's defense, which was full of players who had their names called in the NFL Draft, got torched for 7 TDs against Tennessee last season. As much as the defense has improved, it isn't at that level.
Iowa gets away with playing this way, but their OL blocks people and their defense is at least better than average.
None of the 250 words and 1484 characters used in that reply make any sense. Specifically the last paragraph. So you think the fact that we are paying someone 40% above fair market value is a sign of advancement in the program? Ciarrocca was not 1st 2nd 3rd or 4th choice. If he was a primary target he would have been here 40 days earlier. Paying up is not a sign of success in a program. It actually may be a sign of the opposite.
It actually makes more sense to pay more for coaches and recruiting contacts in a rebuild than in an established program for all the reasons you state above. Outside of Fran brown no one on that first staff O or D warranted their paycheck. Fran brown is not being paid because he is a great teacher of the game. He is being paid because he is a lights out recruiter. As others have said many programs do a helluva lot more with less. Schiano chose to blow up his assistants budget in the wrong way. Gleeson,aurich, Nunz,Augie, underwood were not paid poorly. They were all paid above value actually. The issue is there was no one with real experience and it showed.
Last edited:
Exactly. Don’t recall exactly, but wasn’t Gleeson something like the 3rd or 4th highest paid coordinator in the country at the time he signed his contract?
Aircraft Carrier is great but not when your opponents are building the Death Star. We all want RU to show some spark, some life and not get the obligatory bend over beating when we play any team with a pulse. You got to like how our D played and I’m hoping to see even more improvement this year. If Brown is 100%, can’t wait to see how he does under Kirk and if we can have any semblance of a passing game, who knows, maybe we surprise and win 6 games. As everyone here, getting tired of Schiano Schitck, it’s time to show progress on the offensive side of the ball and come out of the Stone Age. It’s going to be disheartening to watch your D play it’s heart out only to be back on the field in 2 mins because your offense keeps going 3 and out. Tired of the predictable run on 1st, run on 2nd, pass and punt, last year was so predictable.
The blue chip teams realize that even if their defense can stop most offenses they can't stop all of them and so they need to be able to put up a lot of points, if only for those few big games per year when 38 or 45 or 54 will be necessary. It can make the difference between 11-1 and 9-3 or 8-4. I suspect that Schiano doesn't even try this strategy in part because he doesn't even to aim to ever beat the big boys. He thinks the current model is good enough, with a little more effective offense, to win 6 or 7 games per year--always against the mediocre and weak teams, always close, never against anyone great--and that's what his goal is. Sadly, we have fans who would be happy with this.
Our fanbase still donates at Big East levels, which is why additional time is needed to get the program to big ten standards. There is very little nil support and our facilities are not up to standard. This puts us at a competitive disadvantage, hence the additional needed time.
You’ve got to walk before you can run, and yes, the next milestone is to get to 6 or 7 wins. Now if we can get a group of us to donate 10K to to NIL, we can recruit a WR1, so that we would have a better chance, against big boys. Talent is what is lacking, but we are quickly closing the gap.
Teams beat big boys because someone writes a big check. Posting on a message board does nothing.
If you are sincerely concerned about getting better, then it’s time to pony up, and support NIL, if you aren’t already doing so. We can play action on 1st down, if you have the WRs who can make plays. Those have been missing from our offense since Bo
Left.
Then may I suggest you stop. You’d be doing us all a favor. Stop seeking out attention.
Similar threads
