• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

Coach Stitt never lost like this

CDAGRIZ said:
Ringneck said:
Don't worry. According to one of Bobby's preseason interviews, the Big Sky hasn't gotten any better since he left; the only difference is that Montana is not at the top of the standings anymore. So this will all shake out by the end of November, apparently.

We were going to return to dominance, but we have to be very patient to let Bobby get his guys over the next 9-12 years. Then, we will have swagger.

It is 9-12 now?
 
grizindabox said:
CDAGRIZ said:
Ringneck said:
Don't worry. According to one of Bobby's preseason interviews, the Big Sky hasn't gotten any better since he left; the only difference is that Montana is not at the top of the standings anymore. So this will all shake out by the end of November, apparently.

We were going to return to dominance, but we have to be very patient to let Bobby get his guys over the next 9-12 years. Then, we will have swagger.

It is 9-12 now?

Yeah! He just has to have time. 11-15 years from now, you will see a difference in the team. He is just hamstrung now by what Stitt left behind, that left.
 
CDAGRIZ said:
Ringneck said:
Don't worry. According to one of Bobby's preseason interviews, the Big Sky hasn't gotten any better since he left; the only difference is that Montana is not at the top of the standings anymore. So this will all shake out by the end of November, apparently.

We were going to return to dominance, but we have to be very patient to let Bobby get his guys over the next 9-12 years. Then, we will have swagger.

All aboard...

30AF7500-13FE-430A-A1E8-6E6616ADE725.jpg
 
Ringneck said:
Don't worry. According to one of Bobby's preseason interviews, the Big Sky hasn't gotten any better since he left; the only difference is that Montana is not at the top of the standings anymore. So this will all shake out by the end of November, apparently.

Oddly enough, Bobby also cautioned Griz Nation not to be overly optimistic (because he saw the writing on the wall) about this football team and yet some here expected an 11-0 season and a long playoff run. While the rest of us, that are happy he’s back but realistic (and by realistic I mean ‘understand the game’), expected 6-5 or 7-4. I believe many of us (me) predicted that. Hauck is a man, not a miracle worker. And regardless of who he is he can only fill the hole that’s been dug over the “Engstrom years” one shovel full at a time. Anywho, despite what many of you think, NONE of us has a say in how long or short Hauck’s tenure here will be. So why not sit back, pop open a nice cold beer and stop crying on the Internet about something you have 0 control over.
 
RobGriz said:
Oddly enough, Bobby also cautioned Griz Nation not to be overly optimistic about this football team and yet some here expected an 11-0 season and a long playoff run. While the rest of us, that are happy he’s back but realistic (and by realistic I mean ‘understand the game’), expected 6-5 or 7-4. I believe many of us (me) predicted that. Hauck is a man, not a miracle worker. And regardless of who he is he can only fill the hole that’s been dug over the “Engstrom years” one shovel full at a time. Anywho, despite what many of you think, NONE of us has a say in how long or short Hauck’s tenure here will be. So why not sit back, pop open a nice cold beer and stop crying on the Internet about something you have 0 control over.

POTY
 
RobGriz said:
Ringneck said:
Don't worry. According to one of Bobby's preseason interviews, the Big Sky hasn't gotten any better since he left; the only difference is that Montana is not at the top of the standings anymore. So this will all shake out by the end of November, apparently.

Oddly enough, Bobby also cautioned Griz Nation not to be overly optimistic about this football team and yet some here expected an 11-0 season and a long playoff run. While the rest of us, that are happy he’s back but realistic (and by realistic I mean ‘understand the game’), expected 6-5 or 7-4. I believe many of us (me) predicted that. Hauck is a man, not a miracle worker. And regardless of who he is he can only fill the hole that’s been dug over the “Engstrom years” one shovel full at a time. Anywho, despite what many of you think, NONE of us has a say in how long or short Hauck’s tenure here will be. So why not sit back, pop open a nice cold beer and stop crying on the Internet about something you have 0 control over.

I've often given the same advice to my new employers. Don't expect too much from me until year 15-17, when I have my guys and stuff.
 
RobGriz said:
Ringneck said:
Don't worry. According to one of Bobby's preseason interviews, the Big Sky hasn't gotten any better since he left; the only difference is that Montana is not at the top of the standings anymore. So this will all shake out by the end of November, apparently.

Oddly enough, Bobby also cautioned Griz Nation not to be overly optimistic (because he saw the writing on the wall) about this football team and yet some here expected an 11-0 season and a long playoff run. While the rest of us, that are happy he’s back but realistic (and by realistic I mean ‘understand the game’), expected 6-5 or 7-4. I believe many of us (me) predicted that. Hauck is a man, not a miracle worker. And regardless of who he is he can only fill the hole that’s been dug over the “Engstrom years” one shovel full at a time. Anywho, despite what many of you think, NONE of us has a say in how long or short Hauck’s tenure here will be. So why not sit back, pop open a nice cold beer and stop crying on the Internet about something you have 0 control over.

I don’t think people are upset that we have lost three games, it is the fashion in which we have lost two of those three games.
 
Fahque said:
RobGriz said:
Ringneck said:
Don't worry. According to one of Bobby's preseason interviews, the Big Sky hasn't gotten any better since he left; the only difference is that Montana is not at the top of the standings anymore. So this will all shake out by the end of November, apparently.

Oddly enough, Bobby also cautioned Griz Nation not to be overly optimistic (because he saw the writing on the wall) about this football team and yet some here expected an 11-0 season and a long playoff run. While the rest of us, that are happy he’s back but realistic (and by realistic I mean ‘understand the game’), expected 6-5 or 7-4. I believe many of us (me) predicted that. Hauck is a man, not a miracle worker. And regardless of who he is he can only fill the hole that’s been dug over the “Engstrom years” one shovel full at a time. Anywho, despite what many of you think, NONE of us has a say in how long or short Hauck’s tenure here will be. So why not sit back, pop open a nice cold beer and stop crying on the Internet about something you have 0 control over.

I don’t think people are upset that we have lost three games, it is the fashion in which we have lost two of those three games.

True. I can see why people might be slightly, uh, "displeased" in seeing their alma mater get skullfucked on the FB field after the fanfare and controversy associated with bringing in a coach to not let that happen. However, he just needs some time.
 
CDAGRIZ said:
RobGriz said:
Ringneck said:
Don't worry. According to one of Bobby's preseason interviews, the Big Sky hasn't gotten any better since he left; the only difference is that Montana is not at the top of the standings anymore. So this will all shake out by the end of November, apparently.

Oddly enough, Bobby also cautioned Griz Nation not to be overly optimistic about this football team and yet some here expected an 11-0 season and a long playoff run. While the rest of us, that are happy he’s back but realistic (and by realistic I mean ‘understand the game’), expected 6-5 or 7-4. I believe many of us (me) predicted that. Hauck is a man, not a miracle worker. And regardless of who he is he can only fill the hole that’s been dug over the “Engstrom years” one shovel full at a time. Anywho, despite what many of you think, NONE of us has a say in how long or short Hauck’s tenure here will be. So why not sit back, pop open a nice cold beer and stop crying on the Internet about something you have 0 control over.

I've often given the same advice to my new employers. Don't expect too much from me until year 15-17, when I have my guys and stuff.

Yes, I absolutely remember exactly no one saying it would take 15-17 years. If I’m wrong please provide proof.
 
Fahque said:
RobGriz said:
Ringneck said:
Don't worry. According to one of Bobby's preseason interviews, the Big Sky hasn't gotten any better since he left; the only difference is that Montana is not at the top of the standings anymore. So this will all shake out by the end of November, apparently.

Oddly enough, Bobby also cautioned Griz Nation not to be overly optimistic (because he saw the writing on the wall) about this football team and yet some here expected an 11-0 season and a long playoff run. While the rest of us, that are happy he’s back but realistic (and by realistic I mean ‘understand the game’), expected 6-5 or 7-4. I believe many of us (me) predicted that. Hauck is a man, not a miracle worker. And regardless of who he is he can only fill the hole that’s been dug over the “Engstrom years” one shovel full at a time. Anywho, despite what many of you think, NONE of us has a say in how long or short Hauck’s tenure here will be. So why not sit back, pop open a nice cold beer and stop crying on the Internet about something you have 0 control over.

I don’t think people are upset that we have lost three games, it is the fashion in which we have lost two of those three games.

You bet! I know I sure as hell am.
 
CDAGRIZ said:
Fahque said:
RobGriz said:
Ringneck said:
Don't worry. According to one of Bobby's preseason interviews, the Big Sky hasn't gotten any better since he left; the only difference is that Montana is not at the top of the standings anymore. So this will all shake out by the end of November, apparently.

Oddly enough, Bobby also cautioned Griz Nation not to be overly optimistic (because he saw the writing on the wall) about this football team and yet some here expected an 11-0 season and a long playoff run. While the rest of us, that are happy he’s back but realistic (and by realistic I mean ‘understand the game’), expected 6-5 or 7-4. I believe many of us (me) predicted that. Hauck is a man, not a miracle worker. And regardless of who he is he can only fill the hole that’s been dug over the “Engstrom years” one shovel full at a time. Anywho, despite what many of you think, NONE of us has a say in how long or short Hauck’s tenure here will be. So why not sit back, pop open a nice cold beer and stop crying on the Internet about something you have 0 control over.

I don’t think people are upset that we have lost three games, it is the fashion in which we have lost two of those three games.

True. I can see why people might be slightly, uh, "displeased" in seeing their alma mater get skullfucked on the FB field after the fanfare and controversy associated with bringing in a coach to not let that happen. However, he just needs some time.
So...how much time are YOU going to allow him since you are apparently in charge of hiring and firing coaches at the “U”?
 
RobGriz said:
CDAGRIZ said:
RobGriz said:
Ringneck said:
Don't worry. According to one of Bobby's preseason interviews, the Big Sky hasn't gotten any better since he left; the only difference is that Montana is not at the top of the standings anymore. So this will all shake out by the end of November, apparently.

Oddly enough, Bobby also cautioned Griz Nation not to be overly optimistic about this football team and yet some here expected an 11-0 season and a long playoff run. While the rest of us, that are happy he’s back but realistic (and by realistic I mean ‘understand the game’), expected 6-5 or 7-4. I believe many of us (me) predicted that. Hauck is a man, not a miracle worker. And regardless of who he is he can only fill the hole that’s been dug over the “Engstrom years” one shovel full at a time. Anywho, despite what many of you think, NONE of us has a say in how long or short Hauck’s tenure here will be. So why not sit back, pop open a nice cold beer and stop crying on the Internet about something you have 0 control over.

I've often given the same advice to my new employers. Don't expect too much from me until year 15-17, when I have my guys and stuff.

Yes, I absolutely remember exactly no one saying it would take 15-17 years. If I’m wrong please provide proof.

No, I AM SAYING 15-17 years, which is why I said it. Give the man some time.
 
RobGriz said:
CDAGRIZ said:
Fahque said:
RobGriz said:
Oddly enough, Bobby also cautioned Griz Nation not to be overly optimistic (because he saw the writing on the wall) about this football team and yet some here expected an 11-0 season and a long playoff run. While the rest of us, that are happy he’s back but realistic (and by realistic I mean ‘understand the game’), expected 6-5 or 7-4. I believe many of us (me) predicted that. Hauck is a man, not a miracle worker. And regardless of who he is he can only fill the hole that’s been dug over the “Engstrom years” one shovel full at a time. Anywho, despite what many of you think, NONE of us has a say in how long or short Hauck’s tenure here will be. So why not sit back, pop open a nice cold beer and stop crying on the Internet about something you have 0 control over.

I don’t think people are upset that we have lost three games, it is the fashion in which we have lost two of those three games.

True. I can see why people might be slightly, uh, "displeased" in seeing their alma mater get skullfucked on the FB field after the fanfare and controversy associated with bringing in a coach to not let that happen. However, he just needs some time.
So...how much time are YOU going to allow him since you are apparently in charge of hiring and firing coaches at the “U”?

15-17 years.
 
CDAGRIZ said:
RobGriz said:
CDAGRIZ said:
Fahque said:
I don’t think people are upset that we have lost three games, it is the fashion in which we have lost two of those three games.

True. I can see why people might be slightly, uh, "displeased" in seeing their alma mater get skullfucked on the FB field after the fanfare and controversy associated with bringing in a coach to not let that happen. However, he just needs some time.
So...how much time are YOU going to allow him since you are apparently in charge of hiring and firing coaches at the “U”?

15-17 years.
Not 5-7? Because in that other post you said 5-7. I’m just asking, don’t want to misquote. I mean I’ll go with 5-7 if that’s what you want. Personally, I feel like he should get the same amount of time Stitt did. But than I remembered, I have the same amount of say in this deal that you do. None.
 
RobGriz said:
CDAGRIZ said:
RobGriz said:
CDAGRIZ said:
True. I can see why people might be slightly, uh, "displeased" in seeing their alma mater get skullfucked on the FB field after the fanfare and controversy associated with bringing in a coach to not let that happen. However, he just needs some time.
So...how much time are YOU going to allow him since you are apparently in charge of hiring and firing coaches at the “U”?

15-17 years.
Not 5-7? Because in that other post you said 5-7. I’m just asking, don’t want to misquote. I mean I’ll go with 5-7 if that’s what you want. Personally, I feel like he should get the same amount of time Stitt did. But than I remembered, I have the same amount of say in this deal that you do. None.

No. 15-17 years. He just needs some time to get his guys in place. He's been having to deal with the mess Stitt left him. He will get it done. You'll see.
 
RobGriz said:
CDAGRIZ said:
RobGriz said:
CDAGRIZ said:
True. I can see why people might be slightly, uh, "displeased" in seeing their alma mater get skullfucked on the FB field after the fanfare and controversy associated with bringing in a coach to not let that happen. However, he just needs some time.
So...how much time are YOU going to allow him since you are apparently in charge of hiring and firing coaches at the “U”?

15-17 years.
Not 5-7? Because in that other post you said 5-7. I’m just asking, don’t want to misquote. I mean I’ll go with 5-7 if that’s what you want. Personally, I feel like he should get the same amount of time Stitt did. But than I remembered, I have the same amount of say in this deal that you do. None.

I feel the answer lies somewhere in between
 
CDAGRIZ said:
Ringneck said:
Don't worry. According to one of Bobby's preseason interviews, the Big Sky hasn't gotten any better since he left; the only difference is that Montana is not at the top of the standings anymore. So this will all shake out by the end of November, apparently.

We were going to return to dominance, but we have to be very patient to let Bobby get his guys over the next 9-12 years. Then, we will have swagger.

That soon? Can't wait!
#RTD | eta | 2030.
 
Fahque said:
RobGriz said:
CDAGRIZ said:
RobGriz said:
So...how much time are YOU going to allow him since you are apparently in charge of hiring and firing coaches at the “U”?

15-17 years.
Not 5-7? Because in that other post you said 5-7. I’m just asking, don’t want to misquote. I mean I’ll go with 5-7 if that’s what you want. Personally, I feel like he should get the same amount of time Stitt did. But than I remembered, I have the same amount of say in this deal that you do. None.

I feel the answer lies somewhere in between

The true answer is the program can’t afford one more damn coaching change - period. The last two games were embarrassing, but Hauck should be given four years minimum, maybe five. Why? Consistency. Recruiting and coaching consistency. Anybody thinking this team was going to rule the BSC was crazy. New coaches. New system, different expectations. Players leaving because they did not buy in, etc. Hauck can coach and the Griz will be fine in a few years. He deserves to get his recruits in his system. I am pissed at BH because he reverts to old habits and plays favorites. Cam H deserves some damn time on the field. Snead was his guy and was ahead going into the season. I get why he was starting. Last two games have been pretty rough. He cannot throw a deep ball. He rarely checks off (does not have much time to in reality) and he throws rockets on quick slants and passes to the flats. The other thing that just makes no sense is burning a year of Sulser’s eligibility. Kid will be phenomenal. His playing this year is just a damn waste. Having one extra year when the program finally starts turning around makes sense. Playing him now is just plain stupid.
 
Copper Griz said:
Fahque said:
RobGriz said:
CDAGRIZ said:
15-17 years.
Not 5-7? Because in that other post you said 5-7. I’m just asking, don’t want to misquote. I mean I’ll go with 5-7 if that’s what you want. Personally, I feel like he should get the same amount of time Stitt did. But than I remembered, I have the same amount of say in this deal that you do. None.

I feel the answer lies somewhere in between

The true answer is the program can’t afford one more damn coaching change - period. The last two games were embarrassing, but Hauck should be given four years minimum, maybe five. Why? Consistency. Recruiting and coaching consistency. Anybody thinking this team was going to rule the BSC was crazy. New coaches. New system, different expectations. Players leaving because they did not buy in, etc. Hauck can coach and the Griz will be fine in a few years. He deserves to get his recruits in his system. I am pissed at BH because he reverts to old habits and plays favorites. Cam H deserves some damn time on the field. Snead was his guy and was ahead going into the season. I get why he was starting. Last two games have been pretty rough. He cannot throw a deep ball. He rarely checks off (does not have much time to in reality) and he throws rockets on quick slants and passes to the flats. The other thing that just makes no sense is burning a year of Sulser’s eligibility. Kid will be phenomenal. His playing this year is just a damn waste. Having one extra year when the program finally starts turning around makes sense. Playing him now is just plain stupid.

Four or five years? The same argument could’ve been made for Stitt
 
Fahque said:
Copper Griz said:
Fahque said:
RobGriz said:
Not 5-7? Because in that other post you said 5-7. I’m just asking, don’t want to misquote. I mean I’ll go with 5-7 if that’s what you want. Personally, I feel like he should get the same amount of time Stitt did. But than I remembered, I have the same amount of say in this deal that you do. None.

I feel the answer lies somewhere in between

The true answer is the program can’t afford one more damn coaching change - period. The last two games were embarrassing, but Hauck should be given four years minimum, maybe five. Why? Consistency. Recruiting and coaching consistency. Anybody thinking this team was going to rule the BSC was crazy. New coaches. New system, different expectations. Players leaving because they did not buy in, etc. Hauck can coach and the Griz will be fine in a few years. He deserves to get his recruits in his system. I am pissed at BH because he reverts to old habits and plays favorites. Cam H deserves some damn time on the field. Snead was his guy and was ahead going into the season. I get why he was starting. Last two games have been pretty rough. He cannot throw a deep ball. He rarely checks off (does not have much time to in reality) and he throws rockets on quick slants and passes to the flats. The other thing that just makes no sense is burning a year of Sulser’s eligibility. Kid will be phenomenal. His playing this year is just a damn waste. Having one extra year when the program finally starts turning around makes sense. Playing him now is just plain stupid.

Four or five years? The same argument could’ve been made for Stitt

It could have and for the record - I was a fan of Stitt and could be classified as an apologist for his time at the helm. I am not making a pro Stitt or pro Hauck argument. I am making an argument for the program. An argument that says - quit making coaching changes. Firing Pflugrad was about the most stupid thing on earth. Having Delaney take the reigns as an “interim” or whatever the hell they called it - stupid! Hiring Stitt May have worked if they had stayed the course. Maybe not. Especially considering he had his own damn stubborn streak and would not replace his DC. Regardless, more coaching changes are not going to solve the problem. Look at the Oline. There lies the first key to the puzzle. I don’t want to hear about coaching those positions. Just look at the Oline. Do you see a Quinn or Dow? Hell no. Hauck or any other coach who was hired needs time. Five years? Yep. Five years.
 
Back
Top