Fritz Denies Interest
- Thread starter spitfyr36
- Start date
Also posing its own challenge will be the Eagles' likely transition from Monken's triple-option offense -- a Georgia Southern staple -- to the spread-option approach favored by Fritz. Though the Bearkats ranked sixth in the FBS in rushing offense in 2013, they also threw for better than 185 yards a game and for 33 touchdowns.
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/eye-on-college-football/24404843/georgia-southern-names-shsus-wille-fritz-head-coach
He runs what style is best for the players he has. Mostly running but will pass some too.
You were implying that it was easy to get a record of 35 wins and 14 losses at Toledo. They were not a good team before Campbell became a coach there.
Toledo has been a pretty good team in the Mac since Nick Saban coached there. He just set them up to have continued success. I'm not saying Campbell is a bad coach because I wouldn't be mad if he got the job, but he definitely didn't build them from garbage to success.
Nick Saban coached at Toledo for one year. Gary Pinkel had greater success than Saban. Toledo has had some good seasons. Hell, Frank Lauterbaur had 2 undefeated seasons there before he went to the Hawkeyes in 1971. But the fact remains that the Toledo had some bad teams for several years just before Campbell and Beckman arrived in 2009. They were not a good team before those two got there.
Hell, Iowa State had some good teams under Earle Bruce in the late 1970's. Has no bearing on what we have at Iowa State today. Purdue used to have good teams not that long ago. I suppose you would say that the coach who turns them around now should not get credit for it?
But they were a good program with advantages over their peers. Do you understand the difference between teams and programs?
This is one of the reasons I really like Fritz is because he is a true coach and I mean that he can coach whatever style he needs to based on his players. Do you think TTU HC Kingsbury could change the style of offense he coaches - probably not. I'm not saying system coaches can't be successful just that a coach that can adapt to his personnel would work well at ISU because then you go after the best offensive players you can get and run an offense that fits them.
and when he was at Sam Houston St, his QB set school passing records, he's a ball coach that knows how to win.
Yes. And the coach prior to Campbell and Beckman did not have success even with advantages.
Many other MAC teams have more advantages than Toledo. Toledo has had a decent program but they are not the football juggernaut you are trying to portray them to be.
Is anyone else here as annoyed with the "system" talk as I am? Honestly, the system really doesn't matter. What makes a successful coach, is being able to adapt to the changing scenarios as the game progresses. If you look at most first halves of our games this year, we had a successful system. The problem was the inability to adapt, once the Defense figured it out and was able to shut it down.
Football is an ever changing game, there are coaches on both sides of the ball. We are doing this so they counter with that. It seemed out biggest problem this year was that we came in with "Plan A" if that didn't work, we stuck with Plan A. A successful offense usually works when you are able to look at the defense and take what they are giving you. This year, ISU never seemed to want to do that, until it was too late in the year to make a difference. Even then, we still struggle like crazy to score points in the second half.
If we want to discuss what system would be best, I would think looking at what these guys are running and what seems the most adaptable would be the best system to have. And I want a coach who sees that when the screen passes are consistently going for 3 yard losses, that we stop throwing screen passes.
Football is an ever changing game, there are coaches on both sides of the ball. We are doing this so they counter with that. It seemed out biggest problem this year was that we came in with "Plan A" if that didn't work, we stuck with Plan A. A successful offense usually works when you are able to look at the defense and take what they are giving you. This year, ISU never seemed to want to do that, until it was too late in the year to make a difference. Even then, we still struggle like crazy to score points in the second half.
If we want to discuss what system would be best, I would think looking at what these guys are running and what seems the most adaptable would be the best system to have. And I want a coach who sees that when the screen passes are consistently going for 3 yard losses, that we stop throwing screen passes.
Not a fan of Navy's offense. Going the whole game without a pass. IMO, there are better more entertaining options.
Why go back to the triple option of the 1970's? OU had even more success in the 1940's with the Split-T formation. Three yards and a cloud of dust! The single wing would be truly revolutionary, in a roundabout kind of way. Pop Warner coached it at ISU before, with success, just sayin. We could plant our flag on that!
Meh, winning is entertaining to me. I'm not really concerned how we get there as long as we figure out how to do it. I'm not trying to say Navy's offense is right or wrong. I really don't know. I just know that I'll take a boring win over and exciting loss any day. Over the last 3 years we've had plenty of boring losses, plenty of exciting losses, but not many wins.
I guess with my original post, I wasn't trying to say weather or not Navy's offense was right or wrong for ISU as much as point to the fact that coming in with Plan A and only having Plan A probably won't work. The scheme being used isn't as important as being able to take what the defense gives you. Maybe in Navy's case, the run works, people have trouble stopping it, so why pass if you don't have to?
I'm just kind of tired of everyone thinking that a certain scheme will work or won't work. It's not as much about the sceme as the coach who's running it. Power run, Pro Style, Spread, Option, I don't think there is one cover all solution for ISU that will work, we have to adapt to changing conditions and get the most out of what we have, because for the most part, we aren't lining up against teams who we out talent.
Not really. And yes, Beckman did a good job in returning Toledo to having good teams. Campbell was a position coach you nut. He has only been at places that are big fish in their small ponds, all in Ohio. Not ******* up a good situation is very little to go on for your stance on him, but then given your stance on Rhoads over the past two years, these things are not your strong suit.
Interesting thread on GSU board http://www.gsufans.com/tsc/showthread.php?32787-McGee-Promoted-to-Assistant-Head-Coach
Third post shows how fast coaching carousel is spinning http://www.gsufans.com/tsc/showthread.php?32968-COACHING-CANDIDATES
55 years old and an opportunity for a 5yr 2 million/yr contract. That's called retirement money *****. If it works out for all keep reupping him until he retires for real.
I'm beginning to wonder if the person close to the sidelines that told me last May that Pollard flew to Atlanta to do background work on a coach down south was going down there to check out Willie Fritz and not Charlie Partridge as I suspected?
I think that's possible, maybe probable.
I think that's possible, maybe probable.
