Kirk Ciarrocca is (objectively) a Great hire

[The RUT]

Drive for show, putt for the dough.

As far as I’m concerned, KC is a menace on the greens. He was an excellent hire.

Again, more proof that it’s all about the RIGHT hire.

 

[MADHAT1]

I'm not sure being a fan demands blind allegiance. opposing opinions are what fuel sports TV and radio shows, not to mention BBQ and bar banter. It's part of fan culture.

Actually someone disputing a positive outlook shouldn't be considered unwanted and even might stimulate conversation on the issue bringing up some things that might have been overlooked
But when someone constantly is putting down the program and hardly sings its praise after good things happen, those negitive nellies and debbie downers might just be trolls that care little for RU and only trying to give a doom and gloom feeling in feel good threads

 

[BROTHERSKINNY]

Gleeson loved running east-west and it drove Schiano nuts.

As I stated, I believe Surace and Gundy were the real brains behind those respective programs offenses. When , Gleason came to Rutgers the emperor had no clothes.

 

[HeywoodGiant]

Why does he keep getting fired?

 

[Plum Street]

Why does he keep getting fired?

Why did he just get a 500k raise ?

 

[yesrutgers01]

The optimism and love for KC, Wimsatt and Schiano is astonishing. We have the same record after 3 games that we did the last two years .

Yes, the team has won the first three this more convincingly but isn’t it premature to expect much more ?

Let’s win a game we didn’t expect to before celebrating our improvement and bowl expectations.

How about we celebrate wins as we get them. Piss on losses when we get them.
To take any 3 blowout wins against 2 P5 and a G5 and not enjoy them from where our team was previously, is a shorty way to live life.
I have enjoyed my past 3 weeks with our 3 wins adding to it. I will enjoy next week even if we lose and will enjoy my life if we don’t make the playoffs. What I won’t do- is find a way to take joy out of my life before I ever need to.
As I have said before, there are some shitty ways to live life. To shit on good stuff when you know that somewhere in your life tgere will be some other shitty stuff, well, I know I can’t live that way

 

[cubuffsdoug]

Some people like to hear themselves speak, while others like to b*tch.

 

[HeywoodGiant]

Why did he just get a 500k raise ?

That’s your answer?

 

[MADHAT1]

Seems like some feel he's a good one
Where did the Big Ten Network rank Kirk Ciarrocca among coordinators?
>Adam Breneman, who is in his first year as an analyst with the Big Ten Network, ranks Ciarrocca among the top five offensive coordinators in the conference. Ciarrocca checks in at No. 4 on Breneman’s ranking.

With Rutgers, he will have quite the task.<

https://rutgerswire.usatoday.com/20...nd-among-the-big-tens-offensive-coordinators/

 

[robjknight]

We will know more by Saturday afternoon. There are 3 broad possible outcomes
1. We lose big
2. We lose a close one
3. We win
So I think we will feel good with 2 of the outcomes. Kirk has been in situation before and I am sure he has a plan vs what ever Michigan defense does such as loading the box. With Gavin a threat to run helps Kyle or Sam ( who I hope is back close to 100%). Let’s give some kudos to Our DC as well. Joe has upgraded the defensive performance as well and they are just as critical to getting the win.
This year has been more enjoyable for the fans and I am optimistic that we will still be pleased at 4pm Saturday.

 

[RUbacker]

It’s pretty amusing that the same posters (one in particular) who ripped us last year for anemic offense vs Temple and what quickly proved to be a terrible BC team, are now labeling this year’s offense to date as “the same” based on the matching 3-0 record through 3 games.

We didn’t score more than 22 offensive points against an FBS opponent all season last year (we had a pick 6 in the Indiana game).

Of course our production so far has been an improvement. How can anyone say otherwise? As a team we rank 19th nationally right now in rushing yards per game and we’re also one of only 18 other teams who haven’t thrown a pick yet. Clearly we were worse last year Offensively against the same level (or arguably weaker) earlier competition. That’s true even if things get ugly Saturday on the road against the number 2 team in the country. What am I missing here?

The low football IQ rutgers negatoids continue to move the goal posts. First it was we can’t win 3 games . now that we won our first three they say we did it in boring fashion , not exciting enough . After getting all kinds of accolades from the big as a much improved team they say we did not pass enough , we did not play anyone . This week it’s we will never beat Michigan, we will get crushed and can’t keep it close blah blah Blah

 

[rutgersguy1]

The low football IQ rutgers negatoids continue to move the goal posts. First it was we can’t win 3 games . now that we won our first three they say we did it in boring fashion , not exciting enough . After getting all kinds of accolades from the big as a much improved team they say we did not pass enough , we did not play anyone . This week it’s we will never beat Michigan, we will get crushed and can’t keep it close blah blah Blah

Take things for what they are in the moment. Good start for the season and looks like an improved offense through 3 games. IMO Michigan isn’t the test, NW isn’t the test but letting the season play out through the conference schedule is when we’ll get a good idea of what we can be on offense. Then after season take things for what they are and see if we can do it again if it was good or improve if not.

 

[Miramar-RU]

Ciarrocca has definitely been a big upgrade.

Case in point was Monangi’s long TD - which was a perfect play call. Ciarrocca had Washington go in motion away from the running lane right before the snap, leaving Monangi with a clear lane to the left sideline with only 1 person to beat for a 55 yard TD. It seemed like a simple play call, but he turned half of the field into a 1 on 1 matchup with our best player having the ball in his hands.

Even little things like on the GW TD and having Monangi as a lead blocker rather than making Monangi sell a fake and go around the tackle. Without the lead block, it’s a 2-3 yard gain. With the lead block, GW ran untouched into the end zone.

That type of schematic utilization of putting our best players in the right opportunities to be successful has been missing here for a long time - maybe since the Fridge - but is exactly the type of play calling we’ve seen other teams use against us.

Getting the right talent is critical, but putting them in situations to succeed is equally valuable.

 

[DJ Spanky]

The low football IQ rutgers negatoids continue to move the goal posts.

They always will. Either they have an agenda or an axe to grind.

 

[Kbee3]

Ciarrocca has definitely been a big upgrade.

Case in point was Monangi’s long TD - which was a perfect play call. Ciarrocca had Washington go in motion away from the running lane right before the snap, leaving Monangi with a clear lane to the left sideline with only 1 person to beat for a 55 yard TD. It seemed like a simple play call, but he turned half of the field into a 1 on 1 matchup with our best player having the ball in his hands.

Even little things like on the GW TD and having Monangi as a lead blocker rather than making Monangi sell a fake and go around the tackle. Without the lead block, it’s a 2-3 yard gain. With the lead block, GW ran untouched into the end zone.

That type of schematic utilization of putting our best players in the right opportunities to be successful has been missing here for a long time - maybe since the Fridge - but is exactly the type of play calling we’ve seen other teams use against us.

Getting the right talent is critical, but putting them in situations to succeed is equally valuable.

So true.
When Kyle scored on that 3rd-and-one my first thought was that we indeed have an upgrade at OC.

 

[RUbacker]

Take things for what they are in the moment. Good start for the season and looks like an improved offense through 3 games. IMO Michigan isn’t the test, NW isn’t the test but letting the season play out through the conference schedule is when we’ll get a good idea of what we can be on offense. Then after season take things for what they are and see if we can do it again if it was good or improve if not.

Exactly right .

 

[Westcoast]

The optimism and love for KC, Wimsatt and Schiano is astonishing. We have the same record after 3 games that we did the last two years .

Yes, the team has won the first three this more convincingly but isn’t it premature to expect much more ?

Let’s win a game we didn’t expect to before celebrating our improvement and bowl expectations.

I think its ok to point out and "celebrate" obvious improvement - like the lack of offensive penalties - something that has plagued us. I think its also a bit disingenuous to say "same record as last year through 3 games" when those 3 last year did not include a B1G team and DID include Wagner.

 

[RUbacker]

I think its ok to point out and "celebrate" obvious improvement - like the lack of offensive penalties - something that has plagued us. I think its also a bit disingenuous to say "same record as last year through 3 games" when those 3 last year did not include a B1G team and DID include Wagner.

Look who the poster is , that’s all you need to know about how disingenuous he is being . He is like that in every single post .

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

I think its ok to point out and "celebrate" obvious improvement - like the lack of offensive penalties - something that has plagued us. I think its also a bit disingenuous to say "same record as last year through 3 games" when those 3 last year did not include a B1G team and DID include Wagner.

This 100%. Blatant cherry picking of when MOV is representative of improvement and when it’s not. These same people are just waiting for us to take a pasting from a top 10 team to point out - see same old Rutgers. Either how you win or lose matters all the time, or it doesn’t. Make up your mind and don’t back track on it.

 

[wheezer]

Ciarrocca has definitely been a big upgrade.

Case in point was Monangi’s long TD - which was a perfect play call. Ciarrocca had Washington go in motion away from the running lane right before the snap, leaving Monangi with a clear lane to the left sideline with only 1 person to beat for a 55 yard TD. It seemed like a simple play call, but he turned half of the field into a 1 on 1 matchup with our best player having the ball in his hands.

Even little things like on the GW TD and having Monangi as a lead blocker rather than making Monangi sell a fake and go around the tackle. Without the lead block, it’s a 2-3 yard gain. With the lead block, GW ran untouched into the end zone.

That type of schematic utilization of putting our best players in the right opportunities to be successful has been missing here for a long time - maybe since the Fridge - but is exactly the type of play calling we’ve seen other teams use against us.

Getting the right talent is critical, but putting them in situations to succeed is equally valuable.

I had seen that play a couple of times, and it seemed like Monangi's first move, or the intended play, was a run into the line. Then he kicked it outside since it
was wide open.
Maybe the play is designed for a little fake towards the line, then we could credit the play call more than individual effort

 

[RUTGERS95]

I had seen that play a couple of times, and it seemed like Monangi's first move, or the intended play, was a run into the line. Then he kicked it outside since it
was wide open.
Maybe the play is designed for a little fake towards the line, then we could credit the play call more than individual effort

no it's intended inside guard but wasn't there. That was all the man, the myth, the future legend KM!

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

no it's intended inside guard but wasn't there. That was all the man, the myth, the future legend KM!

No - the blocking scheme opened up the side route. There was no hesitation whatsoever. It had to be a design play. It was 3rd and a short 1. We weren’t going to get stuffed there - if Kyle wanted he could’ve pushed through to get the yard. That wasn’t the play call.

 

[Captain Hogleg]

Our run schemes are much more well constructed and designed under Kirk as many have pointed out. That’s a good indicator of the OC knowing what he is doing. It gives the players confidence too as they are starting to see how the plays can work when executed properly. Very impressed with KC so far even though we got a little too conservative at times.

 

[RUTGERS95]

No - the blocking scheme opened up the side route. There was no hesitation whatsoever. It had to be a design play. It was 3rd and a short 1. We weren’t going to get stuffed there - if Kyle wanted he could’ve pushed through to get the yard. That wasn’t the play call.

watch it again, stunt blocked the inside cover and km punched it outside. They clearly saw film as the db gave up any semblance of outside contain on 3rd and 1

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

watch it again, stunt blocked the inside cover and km punched it outside. They clearly saw film as the db gave up any semblance of outside contain on 3rd and 1

A lot of off ball moving parts there - but the reaction time seems way too fast to have been an on the fly adjustment.

 

[Shelby65]

As I stated, I believe Surace and Gundy were the real brains behind those respective programs offenses. When , Gleason came to Rutgers the emperor had no clothes.

He wasn’t the emperor. The other guy was, you know, the megamicromanager.

All this love for KC…you’re forgetting it’s Schiano who decides playcalling philosophy, balance and tendencies. Gleeson followed the HC’s rules just like every OC does. He was fired as a scapegoat so GS could try to reset the narrative. Gleeson was 3-0 last year too.

Ciarocca’s perceived success so far is due to Schiano’s changed approach. Remember we went on 4th down twice in the first quarter against NU. That’s Schiano….not a KC or Gleeson decision.

In short, what you are seeing so far isn’t a better OC but a HC allowing more creativity since the prior model clearly didn’t work Remember, it was a PR reset not an competence upgrade.

 

[wheezer]

A lot of off ball moving parts there - but the reaction time seems way too fast to have been an on the fly adjustment.

Just watched it again
He definitely looks inside, it was blocked up, took two steps straight ahead, before veering outside

This in no way discredits the play, the play resulted in a td, where the running back found a different opening
It happens all the time and we can still credit the blocking and credit the offense

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

He wasn’t the emperor. The other guy was, you know, the megamicromanager.

All this love for KC…you’re forgetting it’s Schiano who decides playcalling philosophy, balance and tendencies. Gleeson followed the HC’s rules just like every OC does. He was fired as a scapegoat so GS could try to reset the narrative. Gleeson was 3-0 last year too.

Ciarocca’s perceived success so far is due to Schiano’s changed approach. Remember we went on 4th down twice in the first quarter against NU. That’s Schiano….not a KC or Gleeson decision.

In short, what you are seeing so far isn’t a better OC but a HC allowing more creativity since the prior model clearly didn’t work Remember, it was a PR reset not an competence upgrade.

No chance. Gleeson was fired for not being conservative against Nebraska. Schiano was convinced we would’ve won that one his way but he obviously let Gleeson do his thing. Gleeson also let our 3rd string QB fire away on a dangerous vertical on 3rd and 8 from our own 18 up 3-0 vs Iowa. Clearly not a Schiano driven move.

This time, Greg decided to go with someone who agrees with his overarching philosophies at a higher level. Someone he worked with before. Kirk is making the calls but he and Greg are on the same page about the importance of protecting the ball above all else.

 

[BROTHERSKINNY]

He wasn’t the emperor. The other guy was, you know, the megamicromanager.

All this love for KC…you’re forgetting it’s Schiano who decides playcalling philosophy, balance and tendencies. Gleeson followed the HC’s rules just like every OC does. He was fired as a scapegoat so GS could try to reset the narrative. Gleeson was 3-0 last year too.

Ciarocca’s perceived success so far is due to Schiano’s changed approach. Remember we went on 4th down twice in the first quarter against NU. That’s Schiano….not a KC or Gleeson decision.

In short, what you are seeing so far isn’t a better OC but a HC allowing more creativity since the prior model clearly didn’t work Remember, it was a PR reset not a competence upgrade.

Shelby65, just stop! You obviously have no idea what you are talking about. Nobody on this board was a bigger fanboy of Gleason than me, and he wasn’t getting it done in every respect on the offense.
Gleasons offense the o line was porous, the running game non existent, the QB play was terrible and forget about the passing game.
Schiano is a much improved head coach and he learned from his stints at Ohio state under UM that you have to let your coordinators run their units as they see fit. Yes, HCGS is the ultimate responsible person but I think he gave both OCSG and OCKC the room they needed to succeed.
KC is getting it done while SG couldn’t. I am still a fan of SG but he needs more experience.
Kudos to HCGS for giving Gleason a shot and for making the really tough decision to have to part ways. Something needed to change and the offense is much improved because of it.

 

[Shelby65]

Shelby65, just stop! You obviously have no idea what you are talking about. Nobody on this board was a bigger fanboy of Gleason than me, and he wasn’t getting it done in every respect on the offense.
Gleasons offense the o line was porous, the running game non existent, the QB play was terrible and forget about the passing game.
Schiano is a much improved head coach and he learned from his stints at Ohio state under UM that you have to let your coordinators run their units as they see fit. Yes, HCGS is the ultimate responsible person but I think he gave both OCSG and OCKC the room they needed to succeed.
KC is getting it done while SG couldn’t. I am still a fan of SG but he needs more experience.
Kudos to HCGS for giving Gleason a shot and for making the really tough decision to have to part ways. Something needed to change and the offense is much improved because of it.

I completely disagree. There isn’t any OC in college or pro football who can ‘call plays as he sees fit’. Further, don’t you think Schiano would have intervened and reminded Gleeson of the ‘rules’? Of course he would have.

Sure, Greg didn’t like the results but it was his own philosophy was failing. So he fired Gleeson for the optics. He deflected blame.

That’s how it works in politics, and high profile CFB is no different.

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

Shelby65, just stop! You obviously have no idea what you are talking about. Nobody on this board was a bigger fanboy of Gleason than me, and he wasn’t getting it done in every respect on the offense.
Gleasons offense the o line was porous, the running game non existent, the QB play was terrible and forget about the passing game.
Schiano is a much improved head coach and he learned from his stints at Ohio state under UM that you have to let your coordinators run their units as they see fit. Yes, HCGS is the ultimate responsible person but I think he gave both OCSG and OCKC the room they needed to succeed.
KC is getting it done while SG couldn’t. I am still a fan of SG but he needs more experience.
Kudos to HCGS for giving Gleason a shot and for making the really tough decision to have to part ways. Something needed to change and the offense is much improved because of it.

It wasn’t just that he wasn’t getting it done. You don’t fire someone mid season for that reason. It happened when it did, because Schiano fundamentally disagreed with the risks that were being taken.

Schiano probably told Gleason to be conservative once Noah went down. Working in new QBs who weren’t in the original preseason plan. We followed that blueprint for BC and Temple. But then the media and such came out attacking with the offensive performance in the Temple game. Gleason couldn’t have liked that. It wasn’t the offense he wanted his name associated with - win or loss (at least that’s my stipulation). That game was a crossroad of sorts. I think he said to Greg - we can’t win that way in the BIG so now I have to do my thing. Greg backed off and we gift Iowa 14 defensive points in situations where we should’ve just protected the ball and punted. Should’ve been a 3-3 game at halftime. Deep in our own end zone against one of the best defenses in the country Greg had to have been furious with the play calling. Heck he’d probably have preferred we take a knee back there.

Then we blew the Nebraska game by letting Evan throw 50/50 balls to accumulate yardage instead of grinding out the win on the ground with Sam. There was really nowhere to go from there with Gleason. Greg wanted the ball to stay mostly on the ground. Not Gleason’s style. He decided it was time for the break.

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

I completely disagree. There isn’t any OC in college or pro football who can ‘call plays as he sees fit’. Further, don’t you think Schiano would have intervened and reminded Gleeson of the ‘rules’? Of course he would have.

Sure, Greg didn’t like the results but it was his own philosophy was failing. So he fired Gleeson for the optics. He deflected blame.

That’s how it works in politics, and high profile CFB is no different.

Say what? His philosophy won the Temple game. It wasn’t pretty, but we didn’t lose.

You can’t say with a straight face that we lost the Nebraska or Iowa games because we deployed Greg’s conservative philosophy. It’s literally the opposite of what your saying.

 

[NickRU714]

No chance. Gleeson was fired for not being conservative against Nebraska. Schiano was convinced we would’ve won that one his way but he obviously let Gleeson do his thing. Gleeson also let our 3rd string QB fire away on a dangerous vertical on 3rd and 8 from our own 18 up 3-0 vs Iowa. Clearly not a Schiano driven move.

This time, Greg decided to go with someone who agrees with his overarching philosophies at a higher level. Someone he worked with before. Kirk is making the calls but he and Greg are on the same page about the importance of protecting the ball above all else.

That's not fully accurate.
Neither interception was in a dangerous situation and passing was the correct call both times.
If fact, the idea of running out the possession in both situations is crazy.
This is why you don't look at the result and focus on the process.
Yes the result was bad - two interceptions. But the process was correct.
Good process will lead to better results over time.

The idea that OC Gleeson was "too aggressive" in the two passing calls would likely only be held by HC Schiano and nobody else.

1st interception:
3rd and 8 from the NEB 36.
The alternative is running for likely a couple and then kicking a nearly 50 yard FG?

2nd interception:
2nd and 17 from out 35
Alternative is just give up on the possession with 9min left in the game and leading by 6?

https://www.espn.com/college-football/playbyplay/_/gameId/401405111

 

[NickRU714]

Say what? His philosophy won the Temple game. It wasn’t pretty, but we didn’t lose.

You can’t say with a straight face that we lost the Nebraska or Iowa games because we deployed Greg’s conservative philosophy. It’s literally the opposite of what your saying.

The opposite side is how many other games have we lost over the years because of HC Schiano's conservative philosophy?

Is the Temple game even that close without a conservative philosophy?

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

That's not fully accurate.
Neither interception was in a dangerous situation and passing was the correct call both times.
If fact, the idea of running out the possession in both situations is crazy.
This is why you don't look at the result and focus on the process.
Yes the result was bad - two interceptions. But the process was correct.
Good process will lead to better results over time.

The idea that OC Gleeson was "too aggressive" in the two passing calls would likely only be held by HC Schiano and nobody else.

1st interception:
3rd and 8 from the NEB 36.
The alternative is running for likely a couple and then kicking a nearly 50 yard FG?

2nd interception:
2nd and 17 from out 35
Alternative is just give up on the possession with 9min left in the game and leading by 6?

https://www.espn.com/college-football/playbyplay/_/gameId/401405111

The opposite side is how many other games have we lost over the years because of HC Schiano's conservative philosophy?

I don’t disagree with you on either point. All I’m saying is this was why Gleason was fired mid season - not what Shelby said.

Schiano all but said so in multiple pressers and in a sense, learned from the experienced. He obviously favors conservative style so he selected an OC who deploys a more ground oriented philosophy. In hindsight, it would have been worse to continue for the rest of the season with the OC and HC in fundamental disagreement on overarching philosophy of play.

 

[rutgersguy1]

There was a good article in the Athletic on new Miami OC Shannon Dawson (Air Raid guy via Holgorsen). It demonstrates how the coordinators and the HC are better off if they're in sync in philosophy. I think Cristobal is actually a tough run the ball hard nosed coach but may have come around lately after his failure with Gattis.

I've always thought HCs may give suggestions from a 1000 foot level (run the ball more, kill time, be aggressive etc.. ) but they don't get down into the nitty gritty of calls, especially if it' not on their side of the ball.

From the article:

Miami led No. 23 Texas A&M 41-33 with 5:02 left in the game. The Aggies had just made the contest a one-score game, and they had two timeouts remaining.

“What’s your mentality right now?” Mario Cristobal asked his new offensive coordinator, Shannon Dawson.

What happens over a headset in the heat of a tight game often is much different from what gets kicked around in coaching interviews. Dawson had noted how hands-off his new boss was as Miami battled back from a 10-0 hole to light up an Aggies defense stacked with four- and five-star recruits. Dawson had been at places where he and the head coach liked and respected each other but, when it really mattered, the fit of what each man wanted was just “off.” That’s how it was when he was the offensive coordinator for Mark Stoops at Kentucky.

And now, with the Canes clinging to a lead against a big SEC squad, it was crunchtime. And Dawson knew what he wanted.

“I don’t think we can run the clock out,” Cristobal said. “Stay aggressive.”

“Run the clock out?” Dawson replied. “I’m trying to end this motherf—– right here. If they match up, we’re gonna throw the vertical.”

Cristobal loved what he heard.
Dawson called a GT counter run to get the clock moved. It hit for 13 yards. Dawson called it again out of a different offensive look, but it got stuffed for a 3-yard loss. The Canes threw an option route to slot receiver Xavier Restrepo to get it to third-and-7. Then, for Van Dyke, it was go time. The veteran quarterback looked over the defense and saw the Texas A&M corners were in man coverage. Dawson got the matchup he was hoping for.

George, who already had two touchdown receptions in the game, beat his man off the line, breaking outside, leaving the Aggies corner trailing. Van Dyke lofted a perfect ball 30 yards downfield. The Canes wideout caught it in stride, got bumped by the A&M safety and raced into the end zone. Game over.

 

[Shelby65]

That's not fully accurate.
Neither interception was in a dangerous situation and passing was the correct call both times.
If fact, the idea of running out the possession in both situations is crazy.
This is why you don't look at the result and focus on the process.
Yes the result was bad - two interceptions. But the process was correct.
Good process will lead to better results over time.

The idea that OC Gleeson was "too aggressive" in the two passing calls would likely only be held by HC Schiano and nobody else.

1st interception:
3rd and 8 from the NEB 36.
The alternative is running for likely a couple and then kicking a nearly 50 yard FG?

2nd interception:
2nd and 17 from out 35
Alternative is just give up on the possession with 9min left in the game and leading by 6?

https://www.espn.com/college-football/playbyplay/_/gameId/401405111

Right. What does KC call there? Lame handoffs to give up the ball ? Or does he do what Gleeson did and call what should be low risk throws and take a chance at the first down. 100% he would call what Gleeson did. Gleeson was the scapegoat bc the hc has a losing philosophy and needed to deflect blame

 

[DJ Spanky]

Gleeson was the scapegoat bc the hc has a losing philosophy and needed to deflect blame

Sure, Greg didn’t like the results but it was his own philosophy was failing. So he fired Gleeson for the optics. He deflected blame.

He wasn’t the emperor. The other guy was, you know, the megamicromanager.

Just dripping with hate for Schiano.

 

[RUTGERS95]

Just dripping with hate for Schiano.

but any objective person will find some truth in his statements. Anyone that thinks the offensive game plan and situational doesn't go through Greg is high as fk:)

 

[Kbee3]

Just dripping with hate for Schiano.

And to think I put Shelby on IGNORE so I didn't have to read crap like that.