I have read in a long time. I wish GrizFan24 would post over here more often:
http://maroonbloodblog.com/2018/10/15/hitting-the-reset-button/
http://maroonbloodblog.com/2018/10/15/hitting-the-reset-button/
VictorG said::thumb:
:lol:AZGrizFan said:I think the word he was looking for was "trajectory".
uofmman1122 said:You can be unhappy about how we're playing now (I am).
You can be unhappy about what seems like hypocrisy by those who decried Stitt last year for the same problems Bobby is having now (I am).
You can think Stitt deserved more time (I did), and that the next thing I'm going to say is unfair (it probably is).
But 24 is spot on. Bobby needs 5+ years because our program needs direction. There are teams since 2010 that have only won 10% of their games that haven't had the turnover we've experienced.
If not, we're probably going to be an average football team for a long, long time.
Silenoz said:First thing that comes to mind:
Nebraska
ordigger said:uofmman1122 said:You can be unhappy about how we're playing now (I am).
You can be unhappy about what seems like hypocrisy by those who decried Stitt last year for the same problems Bobby is having now (I am).
You can think Stitt deserved more time (I did), and that the next thing I'm going to say is unfair (it probably is).
But 24 is spot on. Bobby needs 5+ years because our program needs direction. There are teams since 2010 that have only won 10% of their games that haven't had the turnover we've experienced.
If not, we're probably going to be an average football team for a long, long time.
The logic is flawed, if you didn’t give Stitt five years (after just getting his pieces in place), you dont give Hauck five years. That’s just kissing the ass of the holy grail who can do no wrong. I do believe Hauck will be here in 5 years though, because he EARNED it, not because we have different standards for different coaches.
ordigger said:Silenoz said:First thing that comes to mind:
Nebraska
Second thing that comes to mind. No way in hell Frost gets 5 years unless he’s earned it
So we just continue the cycle of booting coaches after 3 years no matter what because we made a mistake not giving one guy enough time?ordigger said:uofmman1122 said:You can be unhappy about how we're playing now (I am).
You can be unhappy about what seems like hypocrisy by those who decried Stitt last year for the same problems Bobby is having now (I am).
You can think Stitt deserved more time (I did), and that the next thing I'm going to say is unfair (it probably is).
But 24 is spot on. Bobby needs 5+ years because our program needs direction. There are teams since 2010 that have only won 10% of their games that haven't had the turnover we've experienced.
If not, we're probably going to be an average football team for a long, long time.
The logic is flawed, if you didn’t give Stitt five years (after just getting his pieces in place), you dont give Hauck five years. That’s just kissing the ass of the holy grail who can do no wrong. I do believe Hauck will be here in 5 years though, because he EARNED it, not because we have different standards for different coaches.
Continuity is great, but let’s quit going from pro style to spread to old school to fly sweep spread to whatever it is now
Silenoz said:ordigger said:Silenoz said:First thing that comes to mind:
Nebraska
Second thing that comes to mind. No way in hell Frost gets 5 years unless he’s earned it
The new mantra for Montana should be WWNND (what would Nebraska not do). Watch them and then do the opposite
[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6c17WxIcCw[/media]
uofmman1122 said:...if stitt got a raw deal...
...wonder what it's called...
...the deal pflu/o'day got...
... :shock: ...
zengriz said:uofmman1122 said:...if stitt got a raw deal...
...wonder what it's called...
...the deal pflu/o'day got...
... :shock: ...
It's called being sacrificed......