If Stitt ends up a bust next season, who would you hire?

[Blgs Griz Fan]

I think Griz Football program needs to become proactive instead being reactive as it has been since Coach Hauck moved on. They need to decide what kind of offense they are committed to. Whether it is smash mouth pro set, hurry up spread, wishbone, etc. Decide and build a plan to become a dominant power with that offense. The same can be done with regard to defense.
In essence, have a "business plan" and stick to it. Any good business plan can be amended if needed. Once this is decided, then recruiting a coach that has the credentials and skill sets that best fit would be simplified. It would make sense over recruiting a coach because he has a "good offense".
NDSU is successful because they have stayed the course as has EWU and CalPoly. I think this contributed to Griz dominance with Coach Hauck. He was around for quite some time.
Once an offensive and defensive plan has been set, the players that fit can be identified and recruited.
This is probably easier said than done. Getting all the interested parties on board would be like trying to herd cats and would take an exceptionally strong leader.

This seems pretty self evident. Is there evidence that the current coaching staff is not trying to recruit to a specific "business plan," or is it just that some people don't like the plan? :?:

I must not have been clear in my post. The Griz have been hiring coaches with different ideas on offense ands different ideas on defense since Hauck. Hauck was pro set, Pflu was west coast, Delaney back to pro set, Stitt spread or whatever he is experimenting with.
My point is setting the style of offense and/or defense the Griz program wants to be and then hire coaches that fit that style. If the pro set is preferred, then after Hauck Pflu should never been hired. Instead a coach with the pro set offense should have been hired in his place. Delaney was more in the style of Hauck but was a change from Pflu. Stitt is a radical departure from the pro set and so the programs is reinventing the wheel again.
Decide as a program what style of play you want to follow and then stick with it. Bring in staff that fit the Griz program instead of staff that wants to redirect the Griz program. I think consistency in the program is necessary and not experimenting with the offensive flavor of the month is not. NDSU has this figured out and has for a long time.
The goal is to return to being excellent reliable dominant program in the conference and in FCS. I doubt that it can be done with consistency using the "business model" now being followed.

 

[AZGrizFan]

I think Griz Football program needs to become proactive instead being reactive as it has been since Coach Hauck moved on. They need to decide what kind of offense they are committed to. Whether it is smash mouth pro set, hurry up spread, wishbone, etc. Decide and build a plan to become a dominant power with that offense. The same can be done with regard to defense.
In essence, have a "business plan" and stick to it. Any good business plan can be amended if needed. Once this is decided, then recruiting a coach that has the credentials and skill sets that best fit would be simplified. It would make sense over recruiting a coach because he has a "good offense".
NDSU is successful because they have stayed the course as has EWU and CalPoly. I think this contributed to Griz dominance with Coach Hauck. He was around for quite some time.
Once an offensive and defensive plan has been set, the players that fit can be identified and recruited.
This is probably easier said than done. Getting all the interested parties on board would be like trying to herd cats and would take an exceptionally strong leader.

This seems pretty self evident. Is there evidence that the current coaching staff is not trying to recruit to a specific "business plan," or is it just that some people don't like the plan? :?:

I must not have been clear in my post. The Griz have been hiring coaches with different ideas on offense ands different ideas on defense since Hauck. Hauck was pro set, Pflu was west coast, Delaney back to pro set, Stitt spread or whatever he is experimenting with.
My point is setting the style of offense and/or defense the Griz program wants to be and then hire coaches that fit that style. If the pro set is preferred, then after Hauck Pflu should never been hired. Instead a coach with the pro set offense should have been hired in his place. Delaney was more in the style of Hauck but was a change from Pflu. Stitt is a radical departure from the pro set and so the programs is reinventing the wheel again.
Decide as a program what style of play you want to follow and then stick with it. Bring in staff that fit the Griz program instead of staff that wants to redirect the Griz program. I think consistency in the program is necessary and not experimenting with the offensive flavor of the month is not. NDSU has this figured out and has for a long time.
The goal is to return to being excellent reliable dominant program in the conference and in FCS. I doubt that it can be done with consistency using the "business model" now being followed.

The other option is to not have 4 coaches in 7 years.

 

[sdk.catfish]

All this talk about continuity and providing a longer stint to learn how to coach has really changed my thinking. I would suggest no less than a 10 year contract. The first two years the coach would simply be required to learn Griz tradition and not be required to actually appear on the field. The team could just draw up plays with sticks during that time. I mean how can we really expect a coach to mold somebody else's recruits. The next three years expectations should only be for a couple wins each season. Coaches' recruits will be so young and still learning the system. However the next four years (6 through 9) we should be able to reasonably expect 5-6 seasons moving toward 6-5 when a bold innovative offensive genius system is in place. Finally in the tenth year our "new" coach should realize a playoff berth although there could be extenuating circumstances (changes in administration for example) that may warrant a couple of more years of extensions sans the playoff invite.

 

[2011BisonAlumni]

This talk of building "pipelines" is laughable. Build a pipeline to Texas, build a pipeline to the islands, build a pipeline to California.

Please forget this pipeline nonsense and focus on building a fence. Build a fence around Montana and create a program that caters to the strength of its high school programs. What talent can Montana consistently produce? Big, tough, sound, physical football players from within the state. Stop with this soft, spread basketball brand that Montana has become where we have to go searching for these mythical pipelines. Easy examples of teams who focus in state:

NDSU (who we are light years behind now) - http://www.espn.com/college-football/team/roster/_/id/2449/north-dakota-state-bison

Wisconsin - http://www.espn.com/college-football/team/roster/_/id/275/wisconsin-badgers

Houston (?!?) - http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2016/2/4/10910394/houston-cougars-football-tom-herman-signing-day-ed-oliver

NDSU does not focus on in-state kids anymore than UM does. And comparing UM with Houston is like comparing apples to oranges considering the number of recruitable kids in each state.

Wrong. While the number of D1 kids in ND is small, NDSU owns this state. Since 2003, I can think of one ND kid who picked UND over NDSU on an equal scholarship offer, Elijah Grady (Dad played at UND). It's not even a consideration for the ND kids on where they play D1 football.

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

This talk of building "pipelines" is laughable. Build a pipeline to Texas, build a pipeline to the islands, build a pipeline to California.

Please forget this pipeline nonsense and focus on building a fence. Build a fence around Montana and create a program that caters to the strength of its high school programs. What talent can Montana consistently produce? Big, tough, sound, physical football players from within the state. Stop with this soft, spread basketball brand that Montana has become where we have to go searching for these mythical pipelines. Easy examples of teams who focus in state:

NDSU (who we are light years behind now) - http://www.espn.com/college-football/team/roster/_/id/2449/north-dakota-state-bison

Wisconsin - http://www.espn.com/college-football/team/roster/_/id/275/wisconsin-badgers

Houston (?!?) - http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2016/2/4/10910394/houston-cougars-football-tom-herman-signing-day-ed-oliver

NDSU does not focus on in-state kids anymore than UM does. And comparing UM with Houston is like comparing apples to oranges considering the number of recruitable kids in each state.

Wrong. While the number of D1 kids in ND is small, NDSU owns this state. Since 2003, I can think of one ND kid who picked UND over NDSU on an equal scholarship offer, Elijah Grady (Dad played at UND). It's not even a consideration for the ND kids on where they play D1 football.

I believe the point was, UM recruits Montana as hard as UNDSU recruits North Dakota. I didn't make any mention if the recruiting paid the same dividends.

 

[AZGrizFan]

All this talk about continuity and providing a longer stint to learn how to coach has really changed my thinking. I would suggest no less than a 10 year contract. The first two years the coach would simply be required to learn Griz tradition and not be required to actually appear on the field. The team could just draw up plays with sticks during that time. I mean how can we really expect a coach to mold somebody else's recruits. The next three years expectations should only be for a couple wins each season. Coaches' recruits will be so young and still learning the system. However the next four years (6 through 9) we should be able to reasonably expect 5-6 seasons moving toward 6-5 when a bold innovative offensive genius system is in place. Finally in the tenth year our "new" coach should realize a playoff berth although there could be extenuating circumstances (changes in administration for example) that may warrant a couple of more years of extensions sans the playoff invite.

Outside of the first two years learning Griz tradition, you basically just described the Don Read tenure here. :lol: :lol:

 

[sdk.catfish]

Don Read:

His best success came at Montana, where he went 85–36, including three 11-win seasons and an NCAA Division I-AA National Championship in his final year of coaching, 1995.

I would guess that reading comprehension is not your strong point????????? :lol: :roll:

 

[UMGriz75]

Outside of the first two years learning Griz tradition, you basically just described the Don Read tenure here. :lol: :lol:

Except that Don never had a losing conference record, never ranked lower than fourth, and beat the Cats in his first year with Larry Donovan's recruits. Never did lose to the Cats. And a 5-3 conference record his second year. I don't ever recall Don raking his team over the coals for lacking "fire." I also don't recall that they ever did playing for Don.

Of course, the problem with "learning the Griz traditions" is that there weren't any when Don arrived. He created them all.

 

[kemajic]

All this talk about continuity and providing a longer stint to learn how to coach has really changed my thinking. I would suggest no less than a 10 year contract. The first two years the coach would simply be required to learn Griz tradition and not be required to actually appear on the field. The team could just draw up plays with sticks during that time. I mean how can we really expect a coach to mold somebody else's recruits. The next three years expectations should only be for a couple wins each season. Coaches' recruits will be so young and still learning the system. However the next four years (6 through 9) we should be able to reasonably expect 5-6 seasons moving toward 6-5 when a bold innovative offensive genius system is in place. Finally in the tenth year our "new" coach should realize a playoff berth although there could be extenuating circumstances (changes in administration for example) that may warrant a couple of more years of extensions sans the playoff invite.

Outside of the first two years learning Griz tradition, you basically just described the Don Read tenure here. :lol: :lol:

Not even close, so keep laughing. Read was in the playoffs 5 of his 10 years, including year 3 and semis year 4. Three trips to the semis and a NC. All starting from nothing.

 

[spsyk]

I think Griz Football program needs to become proactive instead being reactive as it has been since Coach Hauck moved on. They need to decide what kind of offense they are committed to. Whether it is smash mouth pro set, hurry up spread, wishbone, etc. Decide and build a plan to become a dominant power with that offense. The same can be done with regard to defense.
In essence, have a "business plan" and stick to it. Any good business plan can be amended if needed. Once this is decided, then recruiting a coach that has the credentials and skill sets that best fit would be simplified. It would make sense over recruiting a coach because he has a "good offense".
NDSU is successful because they have stayed the course as has EWU and CalPoly. I think this contributed to Griz dominance with Coach Hauck. He was around for quite some time.
Once an offensive and defensive plan has been set, the players that fit can be identified and recruited.
This is probably easier said than done. Getting all the interested parties on board would be like trying to herd cats and would take an exceptionally strong leader.

This seems pretty self evident. Is there evidence that the current coaching staff is not trying to recruit to a specific "business plan," or is it just that some people don't like the plan? :?:

I must not have been clear in my post. The Griz have been hiring coaches with different ideas on offense ands different ideas on defense since Hauck. Hauck was pro set, Pflu was west coast, Delaney back to pro set, Stitt spread or whatever he is experimenting with.
My point is setting the style of offense and/or defense the Griz program wants to be and then hire coaches that fit that style. If the pro set is preferred, then after Hauck Pflu should never been hired. Instead a coach with the pro set offense should have been hired in his place. Delaney was more in the style of Hauck but was a change from Pflu. Stitt is a radical departure from the pro set and so the programs is reinventing the wheel again.
Decide as a program what style of play you want to follow and then stick with it. Bring in staff that fit the Griz program instead of staff that wants to redirect the Griz program. I think consistency in the program is necessary and not experimenting with the offensive flavor of the month is not. NDSU has this figured out and has for a long time.
The goal is to return to being excellent reliable dominant program in the conference and in FCS. I doubt that it can be done with consistency using the "business model" now being followed.

The other option is to not have 4 coaches in 7 years.

After losing four of the last five games of a season, and not because of inadequate athletes, just being flat out coach, this seems a viable option.

 

[yogi]

if you are coach stitt, this is an inauspicious thread; your friend, yogi

 

[Griz Man]

All this talk about continuity and providing a longer stint to learn how to coach has really changed my thinking. I would suggest no less than a 10 year contract. The first two years the coach would simply be required to learn Griz tradition and not be required to actually appear on the field. The team could just draw up plays with sticks during that time. I mean how can we really expect a coach to mold somebody else's recruits. The next three years expectations should only be for a couple wins each season. Coaches' recruits will be so young and still learning the system. However the next four years (6 through 9) we should be able to reasonably expect 5-6 seasons moving toward 6-5 when a bold innovative offensive genius system is in place. Finally in the tenth year our "new" coach should realize a playoff berth although there could be extenuating circumstances (changes in administration for example) that may warrant a couple of more years of extensions sans the playoff invite.

Outside of the first two years learning Griz tradition, you basically just described the Don Read tenure here. :lol: :lol:

Not even close, so keep laughing. Read was in the playoffs 5 of his 10 years, including year 3 and semis year 4. Three trips to the semis and a NC. All starting from nothing.

The uptempo west coast-based offense that Stitt runs is more likely to result in big wins but also is less consistent than a power offense. An example of a big win is the first NDSU game last year. There's no way we win that game with a power offense. Edwards at BYU and Walsh with the 49ers created the west coast O to defeat bigger teams. In power football, the more talented team almost always wins, but the Stitt / west coast system disrupts that equation. The already discussed key seems to be QB play - a very good QB will vastly improve the W-L record in Stitt's system (think of the great QB's with BYU and the Niners - they weren't necessarily physical standouts, but they made great decisions).

Since Stitt is going to be dealing with a new QB this year, I'd roll the dice and give him 2 more years to prove himself. He was doing pretty well until the midpoint of this season, even without one of his own QB recruits. A return to power football may result in more immediate wins, but will lower the chances of the Griz ever bringing home another national trophy. Disappoint over the season ending aside, I have believed, and continue to believe, that Bob Stitt gives us a pretty good shot eventually, even though our team may never be the most physically talented FCS team.

 

[Blgs Griz Fan]

All this talk about continuity and providing a longer stint to learn how to coach has really changed my thinking. I would suggest no less than a 10 year contract. The first two years the coach would simply be required to learn Griz tradition and not be required to actually appear on the field. The team could just draw up plays with sticks during that time. I mean how can we really expect a coach to mold somebody else's recruits. The next three years expectations should only be for a couple wins each season. Coaches' recruits will be so young and still learning the system. However the next four years (6 through 9) we should be able to reasonably expect 5-6 seasons moving toward 6-5 when a bold innovative offensive genius system is in place. Finally in the tenth year our "new" coach should realize a playoff berth although there could be extenuating circumstances (changes in administration for example) that may warrant a couple of more years of extensions sans the playoff invite.

Outside of the first two years learning Griz tradition, you basically just described the Don Read tenure here. :lol: :lol:

Not even close, so keep laughing. Read was in the playoffs 5 of his 10 years, including year 3 and semis year 4. Three trips to the semis and a NC. All starting from nothing.

The uptempo west coast-based offense that Stitt runs is more likely to result in big wins but also is less consistent than a power offense. An example of a big win is the first NDSU game last year. There's no way we win that game with a power offense. Edwards at BYU and Walsh with the 49ers created the west coast O to defeat bigger teams. In power football, the more talented team almost always wins, but the Stitt / west coast system disrupts that equation. The already discussed key seems to be QB play - a very good QB will vastly improve the W-L record in Stitt's system (think of the great QB's with BYU and the Niners - they weren't necessarily physical standouts, but they made great decisions).

Since Stitt is going to be dealing with a new QB this year, I'd roll the dice and give him 2 more years to prove himself. He was doing pretty well until the midpoint of this season, even without one of his own QB recruits. A return to power football may result in more immediate wins, but will lower the chances of the Griz ever bringing home another national trophy. Disappoint over the season ending aside, I have believed, and continue to believe, that Bob Stitt gives us a pretty good shot eventually, even though our team may never be the most physically talented FCS team.

I guess I look at the teams that have playoff success and have championships at both the FBS and FCS level. It is hard to argue with the success of NDSU but I think that is due to consistency in the offense and defense they have chosen to play. Klieman just extended Bohl's style and has done so with success. It appears that Bohl is taking his style and doing well with it at Wyoming.
I am not convinced the up tempo west coast offense will lead to success and league dominance. I think it is too QB dependent. Here is an interesting read:
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2417925-do-high-tempo-offenses-equal-more-wins-in-college-football#
My main point is that the Griz program as a whole needs to establish what style of play they want and stick to it. I would caution against the west coast up tempo though.

 

[Griz Man]

I guess I look at the teams that have playoff success and have championships at both the FBS and FCS level. It is hard to argue with the success of NDSU but I think that is due to consistency in the offense and defense they have chosen to play. Klieman just extended Bohl's style and has done so with success. It appears that Bohl is taking his style and doing well with it at Wyoming.
I am not convinced the up tempo west coast offense will lead to success and league dominance. I think it is too QB dependent. Here is an interesting read:
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2417925-do-high-tempo-offenses-equal-more-wins-in-college-football#
My main point is that the Griz program as a whole needs to establish what style of play they want and stick to it. I would caution against the west coast up tempo though.

That was a good read. I'm not as convinced of the uptempo offense as I was when we hired him, that's for sure. But hope springs eternal!

 

[AZGrizFan]

Outside of the first two years learning Griz tradition, you basically just described the Don Read tenure here. :lol: :lol:

Except that Don never had a losing conference record, never ranked lower than fourth, and beat the Cats in his first year with Larry Donovan's recruits. Never did lose to the Cats. And a 5-3 conference record his second year. I don't ever recall Don raking his team over the coals for lacking "fire." I also don't recall that they ever did playing for Don.

Of course, the problem with "learning the Griz traditions" is that there weren't any when Don arrived. He created them all.

Good lord you guys are sensitive. :roll: :roll:

 

[AZGrizFan]

All this talk about continuity and providing a longer stint to learn how to coach has really changed my thinking. I would suggest no less than a 10 year contract. The first two years the coach would simply be required to learn Griz tradition and not be required to actually appear on the field. The team could just draw up plays with sticks during that time. I mean how can we really expect a coach to mold somebody else's recruits. The next three years expectations should only be for a couple wins each season. Coaches' recruits will be so young and still learning the system. However the next four years (6 through 9) we should be able to reasonably expect 5-6 seasons moving toward 6-5 when a bold innovative offensive genius system is in place. Finally in the tenth year our "new" coach should realize a playoff berth although there could be extenuating circumstances (changes in administration for example) that may warrant a couple of more years of extensions sans the playoff invite.

Outside of the first two years learning Griz tradition, you basically just described the Don Read tenure here. :lol: :lol:

Not even close, so keep laughing. Read was in the playoffs 5 of his 10 years, including year 3 and semis year 4. Three trips to the semis and a NC. All starting from nothing.

Well, my comment was mostly tongue-in-cheek, but since you asked, AFTER that semi's year he followed it up with two less-than-stellar 7-4 seasons, capped off by an even less stellar 6-5 season...a period in which he went 0-3 against no less than Eastern Fucking Washington. Let's give Bob 7 years and see where he stands, hmmm?

 

[Blgs Griz Fan]

I guess I look at the teams that have playoff success and have championships at both the FBS and FCS level. It is hard to argue with the success of NDSU but I think that is due to consistency in the offense and defense they have chosen to play. Klieman just extended Bohl's style and has done so with success. It appears that Bohl is taking his style and doing well with it at Wyoming.
I am not convinced the up tempo west coast offense will lead to success and league dominance. I think it is too QB dependent. Here is an interesting read:
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2417925-do-high-tempo-offenses-equal-more-wins-in-college-football#
My main point is that the Griz program as a whole needs to establish what style of play they want and stick to it. I would caution against the west coast up tempo though.

That was a good read. I'm not as convinced of the uptempo offense as I was when we hired him, that's for sure. But hope springs eternal!

I was skeptical of the uptempo but open to it. I think it relies too much on having the right QB and exceptional receiver talent. I think the pro set does not rely as much on QB talent but is not as fun to watch.
My point is still the same. The Griz, as a program. have to decide what kind of football they want to play next year and years to come. That decision can be ammended some as circunstances justify. If it is up tempo then recruit accordingly. If it is pro set then recruit for that as well. By recruiting I mean starting with the head coach all the way down to the players.
Going from Delaney to Stitt was a pretty drastic change. Coach Delaney returned the Griz to the pro set that Coach Hauck had so much success with.
Someone made a comment that Haslam called Stitt because he "heard he had a good offense." That may be fine but the question becomes does this candidate have a coaching philosophy that fits the Griz program or will the Griz adjust the program to fit the coach?
It depends entirely on whether you want to be proactive or reactive. Do they have a plan they want to follow or are they going to wing it from here on?
Time will tell.

 

[Spanky]

Many comments about the offense....what about defense and special teams?

 

[Blgs Griz Fan]

Many comments about the offense....what about defense and special teams?

Great point but the current coach was hired because of his offense.

 

[UMGriz75]

Many comments about the offense....what about defense and special teams?

Great point but the current coach was hired because of his offense.

There is something to be said for the School setting the strategy, and recruiting the coach that fits. Fits with the corporate model: the Board sets policy, the hires the CEO that can best implement the policy. It makes, in many regards, more sense than the coach trying to set his policy, and basing it on his success at identifying, and then recruiting, the kids that somehow -- at age 17 -- "fit" his strategy (which I think a fools errand). As someone here famously predicted when Stitt was at the apogee of the fan hero-worship, "Stitt is going to recruit quarterbacks that are fast and smart!!!" as though this thought verified what many were trying to claim, that "Stitt was an offensive genius" and that recruiting "fast and smart" quarterbacks was this amazing new thing that had been discovered at the DII level in Colorado!

So much has transpired since then. As I noted at the time, its harder than it looks to move up from DII to DI in coaching, offense, defense, and recruiting. A lot of sniffers are resentful, not at how Stitt turned out, but that Stitt did not validate how great they thought they were! I can still hope he proves me wrong; but so far, the record is not good. Haters can hate all they want; it's a far worse record than even I expected, not seen since the days of Larry Donovan.

Would not changing overall strategies between coaches reduce the chance of this every happening again?

I think it's more than just the strategies. Another poster made this observation:

Re: Does Stitt Have Supporters?
Postby acehunter65 » Mon Nov 21, 2016 12:07 pm
Amazing the reactions to this coach and his abilities, coming to the Griz as a great offensive mind with innovation rarely seen in college. Being a student of both Pro and college offensives over the years, I have come to the conclusion that Stitt has probably the worse offense I have ever witnessed at any college level, his schemes are terrible and his play calling is beyond that. Cut the losses and get rid of him before the Griz become a Big Sky cellar dweller!!

Before getting to the policy question, it seems like UM would need to understand the current situation with this coach: Is it the strategy, the change in strategies, or the coach? The post above clearly asserts that in our case, it is the coach.

There's not a lot of good data out there. The little that's been done on student/athletes has been negative, that in those cases of whole programs moving up, "the University’s decision to move to DI-AA cost this student-athlete (and likely many others) an opportunity to achieve high levels of success both personally and collectively." Certainly, just moving the coaches up has caused this effect at UM.

In an example where the coach moved up with the team, the team had a successful first year. The player interviewed in one study "suggested that in hindsight, the reason for the team’s success
in the first year as a Division I-AA school was due to the players’ loyalty to the coaching staff despite the fact that there was a possibility that they would not be as competitive as a DI-AA school. The “loyalty to old coaches” carried over into Jim’s fourth year as several key players from his third year moved to along with the coach that left, which was certainly a possible cause for the team’s poor performance during that year." http://thesmartjournal.com/transition.pdf