Bobby

[argh!]

What's incorrect in 5518's post?

And take your politics off the football board.

Hello, Was asking him a question . Let's see if you can answer smarty pants . "Who's Cadillac did he take over in 07,08,09 ? "
The political part was a "JOKE" snowflake . Get over it .

OK cupcake, I will bite... in 07,08, and 09 BH had a total of 4 losses (2 of those in NC games for which he NEVER WON)... the program he inherited from Glenn had 5 losses in a similar 3 year stint but with a NC in one of those... if you believe BH to be wildly successful in 07-09 then you must agree Glenn was at least equally successful thus turning over a wildly successful program to BH... facts hurt cupcake!

In reality, BH is no more than a poser and his post sports car record is proof of that!

Stop posting dumbass. You don’t even know how many time they even made it to the big dance. You’re just another iniformed idiot that keeps me away from here. I had screenshots of this conversation fwd to me and that’s the only reason why I’m here right now. Go back and do your homework then stay seated in the corner, shut up, & learn something. Clown.

the big dance? did you mean to post in the basketball forum?

 

[PlayerRep]

Ohhh , just let me say I'll leave it at that tough guy
With that said, I guess players don't graduate every year ! Just keep digging that hole smarty pants

Hole? What hole? I don't see any hole.

What I do see is a flat as a pancake (dammit! Now I want cupcakes AND pancakes!!) statement that BH has certainly sustained a winner, but never built one.

Again "what is so difficult about answering my question "??????????????????????????????????

I believe I HAVE answered your question. Hauck did well most years during his first stint, including those years with his own players. Which doesn't change anything: we still don't know if he can build a program. Right????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

He already built a program, when he was here before. He took a very good program and built it to a program that won all but 1 conference game his last 4 years. He took UM to the championship game 3 of 7 years, and to the semifinals 4 of 7 years. His teams, and the recruits he brought in, produced more NFL players than UM has ever had.

Do you really think that Hauck only could bring in very good recruits, because there were very good recruits here when he came? That is just plain silly, if that's what you think.

The stadium is better now. The Performance and Academic Center are here now. He has new team locker rooms. He has many recruiting advantages that he didn't have the first time.

I'm sorry, but I think that anyone who thinks Hauck might not be able to do it again, because he inherited Glenn's program and not Stitt's program, truly doesn't have a clue.

And, for people like Everett, he thought Stitt was great, doing well, and going somewhere, but now he seems to want to say that Hauck is inheriting a lesser program than he can't turn into a terrific program.

I have no doubt that Hauck can return UM to RTD or close to it. The only question is how long will it take.

And yes, the last 2 losses are disappointing and hard to explain. But, again, for the most part, coaches don't fumble; players do. Everett, when an experienced college tennis player misses a serve occasionally, do you blame that on the tennis coach?

 

[argh!]

Hole? What hole? I don't see any hole.

What I do see is a flat as a pancake (dammit! Now I want cupcakes AND pancakes!!) statement that BH has certainly sustained a winner, but never built one.

Again "what is so difficult about answering my question "??????????????????????????????????

I believe I HAVE answered your question. Hauck did well most years during his first stint, including those years with his own players. Which doesn't change anything: we still don't know if he can build a program. Right????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

He already built a program, when he was here before. He took a very good program and built it to a program that won all but 1 conference game his last 4 years. He took UM to the championship game 3 of 7 years, and to the semifinals 4 of 7 years. His teams, and the recruits he brought in, produced more NFL players than UM has ever had.

Do you really think that Hauck only could bring in very good recruits, because there were very good recruits here when he came? That is just plain silly, if that's what you think.

The stadium is better now. The Performance and Academic Center are here now. He has new team locker rooms. He has many recruiting advantages that he didn't have the first time.

I'm sorry, but I think that anyone who thinks Hauck might not be able to do it again, because he inherited Glenn's program and not Stitt's program, truly doesn't have a clue.

And, for people like Everett, he thought Stitt was great, doing well, and going somewhere, but now he seems to want to say that Hauck is inheriting a lesser program than he can't turn into a terrific program.

I have no doubt that Hauck can return UM to RTD or close to it. The only question is how long will it take.

And yes, the last 2 losses are disappointing and hard to explain. But, again, for the most part, coaches don't fumble; players do. Everett, when an experienced college tennis player misses a serve occasionally, do you blame that on the tennis coach?

not to answer for mount everit, greenie, but no, coaches don't fumble. they are, however, in charge of instilling a level of ball security awareness through specially designed drills. if a team turns over the ball via fumbles a relatively large number of times, it is fair to question whether the coach has run enough of those drills, discussed the importance of ball safety in a way that got player buy-in, and identified those with ball control problems for extra drills in the endeavor.

maybe the coach in question has, maybe he hasn't. we don't know, but i think at this point in the season, with all the recent key fumbles, it seems fair to ask.

 

[EverettGriz]

He already built a program

You and I have different definitions of "building a program".

 

[kemajic]

Hauck is trying to improve with what athletes he brought in, combined with what Stitt left him.

And Stitt tried to improve with the athletes he brought in, combined with what Delaney left him. That’s how it works.

And he didn’t get the job done in three years, and would not have done it in twenty years, however, it won’t take Hauck that long he did it once, and will do it again. Will match Hauck accomplishments against Stitts anytime you are willing to challenge.

Are you ready, I am.

Well so far he’s 1-2 against teams Stitt went 5-3 against.

You’re up.

Hauck has not played a single team Stitt played.

 

[spsyk]

Hole? What hole? I don't see any hole.

What I do see is a flat as a pancake (dammit! Now I want cupcakes AND pancakes!!) statement that BH has certainly sustained a winner, but never built one.

Again "what is so difficult about answering my question "??????????????????????????????????

I believe I HAVE answered your question. Hauck did well most years during his first stint, including those years with his own players. Which doesn't change anything: we still don't know if he can build a program. Right????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

He already built a program, when he was here before. He took a very good program and built it to a program that won all but 1 conference game his last 4 years. He took UM to the championship game 3 of 7 years, and to the semifinals 4 of 7 years. His teams, and the recruits he brought in, produced more NFL players than UM has ever had.

Do you really think that Hauck only could bring in very good recruits, because there were very good recruits here when he came? That is just plain silly, if that's what you think.

The stadium is better now. The Performance and Academic Center are here now. He has new team locker rooms. He has many recruiting advantages that he didn't have the first time.

I'm sorry, but I think that anyone who thinks Hauck might not be able to do it again, because he inherited Glenn's program and not Stitt's program, truly doesn't have a clue.

And, for people like Everett, he thought Stitt was great, doing well, and going somewhere, but now he seems to want to say that Hauck is inheriting a lesser program than he can't turn into a terrific program.

I have no doubt that Hauck can return UM to RTD or close to it. The only question is how long will it take.

And yes, the last 2 losses are disappointing and hard to explain. But, again, for the most part, coaches don't fumble; players do. Everett, when an experienced college tennis player misses a serve occasionally, do you blame that on the tennis coach?

Succinct, point driven, and factual.

No speculation here, drop the doesn’t have a clue, although, you proved that too.

 

[PlayerRep]

He already built a program

You and I have different definitions of "building a program".

What's your definition?

 

[PlayerRep]

Again "what is so difficult about answering my question "??????????????????????????????????

I believe I HAVE answered your question. Hauck did well most years during his first stint, including those years with his own players. Which doesn't change anything: we still don't know if he can build a program. Right????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

He already built a program, when he was here before. He took a very good program and built it to a program that won all but 1 conference game his last 4 years. He took UM to the championship game 3 of 7 years, and to the semifinals 4 of 7 years. His teams, and the recruits he brought in, produced more NFL players than UM has ever had.

Do you really think that Hauck only could bring in very good recruits, because there were very good recruits here when he came? That is just plain silly, if that's what you think.

The stadium is better now. The Performance and Academic Center are here now. He has new team locker rooms. He has many recruiting advantages that he didn't have the first time.

I'm sorry, but I think that anyone who thinks Hauck might not be able to do it again, because he inherited Glenn's program and not Stitt's program, truly doesn't have a clue.

And, for people like Everett, he thought Stitt was great, doing well, and going somewhere, but now he seems to want to say that Hauck is inheriting a lesser program than he can't turn into a terrific program.

I have no doubt that Hauck can return UM to RTD or close to it. The only question is how long will it take.

And yes, the last 2 losses are disappointing and hard to explain. But, again, for the most part, coaches don't fumble; players do. Everett, when an experienced college tennis player misses a serve occasionally, do you blame that on the tennis coach?

Succinct, point driven, and factual.

No speculation here, drop the doesn’t have a clue, although, you proved that too.

I'm just not an "everyone gets a ribbon guy". If a post is particularly clueless (and I don't like or have respect for the poster's posts), I just can't give them a ribbon. And I guess I feel that I should be a passive-aggressive coach to them. Mining taught me that. I can't make them run up the M, or bench them for a quarter, so I give them some tough love.

 

[EverettGriz]

He already built a program

You and I have different definitions of "building a program".

What's your definition?

Well, I imagine like most people, I'd define it as taking a team that hasn't been to the playoffs in a few years and building them a consistent playoff team. I would define a team that is a consistent playoff team (particularly one who goes to the title game 2 times in 3 seasons) a great (perhaps top) program.

What are your definitions?

 

[Fahque]

And Stitt tried to improve with the athletes he brought in, combined with what Delaney left him. That’s how it works.

And he didn’t get the job done in three years, and would not have done it in twenty years, however, it won’t take Hauck that long he did it once, and will do it again. Will match Hauck accomplishments against Stitts anytime you are willing to challenge.

Are you ready, I am.

Pure speculation

You are confusing speculation with proven results, one got it done the other was a failure, although, only in a three year period, however after the three year period it didn’t look very bright, so changes were made.

How about all the speculation about who did and who didn’t get the Rolls Royce to drive. Now that’s speculation.

How about we focus on getting it done? No point in living in the past.

 

[Fahque]

And Stitt tried to improve with the athletes he brought in, combined with what Delaney left him. That’s how it works.

And he didn’t get the job done in three years, and would not have done it in twenty years, however, it won’t take Hauck that long he did it once, and will do it again. Will match Hauck accomplishments against Stitts anytime you are willing to challenge.

Are you ready, I am.

Pure speculation

I agree with Spysk. I don't see it as speculation at all. Hauck built a very good program to an incredible program at UM. He is now older and wiser. He has a terrific staff now.

As I replied to Spysk, how about we focus on getting it done and stop living in the past? Hauck's previous success here does not correlate to any present or future success he may have. I too think he is a good coach so I hope he sticks around for the continuity this program sorely needs, though I'd like to see him make some coordinator changes.

 

[PlayerRep]

He already built a program

You and I have different definitions of "building a program".

What's your definition?

Well, I imagine like most people, I'd define it as taking a team that hasn't been to the playoffs in a few years and building them a consistent playoff team. I would define a team that is a consistent playoff team (particularly one who goes to the title game 2 times in 3 seasons) a great (perhaps top) program.

What are your definitions?

Okay. Thx.

To me, building a program is taking it from where it is/was, and building it up. Hauck took a program that had lost 3 of its last 4 games, and had lost 3 conf games in 4 years, to winning all but 1 conference game in his last 4 years and to the championship game 3 of 7 times, and both of his last 2 years. He took a program that had produced some NFL players, to a program producing a bunch of NFL players.

I don't know why you think a proven coach, who has already been very successful at UM, who has only gained knowledge and experience since he left UM, who is not over the hill, who is and will be skilled at fund-raising, who has expanded his recruiting area and contacts, including to the FBS level, and who now has a better stadium, new locker rooms, and a new performance center and academic center to recuit with, won't be successful. Seems so obvious to me.

 

[Spanky2]

Everett can’t accept that Bobby Hauck is one of the greatest coaches in UM history and his hero , Stitt, failed at UM.

 

[EverettGriz]

Everett can’t accept that Bobby Hauck is one of the greatest coaches in UM history and his hero , Stitt, failed at UM.

Have always liked Hauck and was never a huge Stitt guy, although like Hauck I certainly supported him.

Just trying to understand why we can’t hold this great coach accountable when there are obvious issues and concerns. In other words, I guess I like and respect objectivity.

 

[griz71]

Everett can’t accept that Bobby Hauck is one of the greatest coaches in UM history and his hero , Stitt, failed at UM.

Have always liked Hauck and was never a huge Stitt guy, although like Hauck I certainly supported him.

Just trying to understand why we can’t hold this great coach accountable when there are obvious issues and concerns. In other words, I guess I like and respect objectivity.

:thumb:

 

[griz71]

And he didn’t get the job done in three years, and would not have done it in twenty years, however, it won’t take Hauck that long he did it once, and will do it again. Will match Hauck accomplishments against Stitts anytime you are willing to challenge.

Are you ready, I am.

Pure speculation

I agree with Spysk. I don't see it as speculation at all. Hauck built a very good program to an incredible program at UM. He is now older and wiser. He has a terrific staff now.

As I replied to Spysk, how about we focus on getting it done and stop living in the past? Hauck's previous success here does not correlate to any present or future success he may have. I too think he is a good coach so I hope he sticks around for the continuity this program sorely needs, though I'd like to see him make some coordinator changes.

Like the Offensive Coordinator. Never been enamored with Rosie.

 

[Ursa Major]

Was it quarter beer night at the Senior Center last night? 'I hope Spanky, PR and 'Sissy' Spsyk all got home safely last night.

 

[PlayerRep]

Again "what is so difficult about answering my question "??????????????????????????????????

I believe I HAVE answered your question. Hauck did well most years during his first stint, including those years with his own players. Which doesn't change anything: we still don't know if he can build a program. Right????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

He already built a program, when he was here before. He took a very good program and built it to a program that won all but 1 conference game his last 4 years. He took UM to the championship game 3 of 7 years, and to the semifinals 4 of 7 years. His teams, and the recruits he brought in, produced more NFL players than UM has ever had.

Do you really think that Hauck only could bring in very good recruits, because there were very good recruits here when he came? That is just plain silly, if that's what you think.

The stadium is better now. The Performance and Academic Center are here now. He has new team locker rooms. He has many recruiting advantages that he didn't have the first time.

I'm sorry, but I think that anyone who thinks Hauck might not be able to do it again, because he inherited Glenn's program and not Stitt's program, truly doesn't have a clue.

And, for people like Everett, he thought Stitt was great, doing well, and going somewhere, but now he seems to want to say that Hauck is inheriting a lesser program than he can't turn into a terrific program.

I have no doubt that Hauck can return UM to RTD or close to it. The only question is how long will it take.

And yes, the last 2 losses are disappointing and hard to explain. But, again, for the most part, coaches don't fumble; players do. Everett, when an experienced college tennis player misses a serve occasionally, do you blame that on the tennis coach?

not to answer for mount everit, greenie, but no, coaches don't fumble. they are, however, in charge of instilling a level of ball security awareness through specially designed drills. if a team turns over the ball via fumbles a relatively large number of times, it is fair to question whether the coach has run enough of those drills, discussed the importance of ball safety in a way that got player buy-in, and identified those with ball control problems for extra drills in the endeavor.

maybe the coach in question has, maybe he hasn't. we don't know, but i think at this point in the season, with all the recent key fumbles, it seems fair to ask.

I don't disagree with you. However, Bobby has a big reputation for teaching ball security.

It seems odd that the team has had 1 fumble in 4 wins, and 9 fumbles in 3 losses. If I got my numbers right.

 

[Butte5518]

I don't disagree with you. However, Bobby has a big reputation for teaching ball security.

It seems odd that the team has had 1 fumble in 4 wins, and 9 fumbles in 3 losses. If I got my numbers right.

with all due respect Hauck teams are always at the bottom of the league for turnover stats. His record at UNLV includes
2010 - 7th worst of 9
2011 7th worst of 8
2012 8th worst of 10
2013 7th worst of 9
2014 9th worst of 12
Bobby is a poser with no actual success other than taking over a once successful program!!

 

[PlayerRep]

I don't disagree with you. However, Bobby has a big reputation for teaching ball security.

It seems odd that the team has had 1 fumble in 4 wins, and 9 fumbles in 3 losses. If I got my numbers right.

with all due respect Hauck teams are always at the bottom of the league for turnover stats. His record at UNLV includes
2010 - 7th worst of 9
2011 7th worst of 8
2012 8th worst of 10
2013 7th worst of 9
2014 9th worst of 12
Bobby is a poser with no actual success other than taking over a once successful program!!

I believe Hauck had terrific turnover stats at UM, which is the most relevant comparison. UNLV stats were influenced by having a bad team in a good conference.