PonyFans.com

Following up on my "JJ is burning this thing to the ground"

I don't think a 5 year rebuilding schedule is realistic.

One poster showed a sine wave that sums up the situation perfectly.

If we truly believe in JJ, then we should try to get him for 10 years.

It is easy to envision:
2008: 1-11
2009: 3-8
2010: 6-5 Opposing coaches "JJ is gone in 2 years" He won't be your coach. Recruiting suffers
2011: 8-3 Opposing coaches "JJ is going to the islands next year" Recruting collapses.
2012: 3-8 New coach - rebuilding once again.

Pony81 wrote:Following up on my "JJ is burning this thing to the ground"

I don't think a 5 year rebuilding schedule is realistic.

One poster showed a sine wave that sums up the situation perfectly.

If we truly believe in JJ, then we should try to get him for 10 years.

It is easy to envision:
2008: 1-11
2009: 3-8
2010: 6-5 Opposing coaches "JJ is gone in 2 years" He won't be your coach. Recruiting suffers
2011: 8-3 Opposing coaches "JJ is going to the islands next year" Recruting collapses.
2012: 3-8 New coach - rebuilding once again.

Why 3-8 next season?

kent dorfman wrote:

Pony81 wrote:Following up on my "JJ is burning this thing to the ground"

I don't think a 5 year rebuilding schedule is realistic.

One poster showed a sine wave that sums up the situation perfectly.

If we truly believe in JJ, then we should try to get him for 10 years.

It is easy to envision:
2008: 1-11
2009: 3-8
2010: 6-5 Opposing coaches "JJ is gone in 2 years" He won't be your coach. Recruiting suffers
2011: 8-3 Opposing coaches "JJ is going to the islands next year" Recruting collapses.
2012: 3-8 New coach - rebuilding once again.

Why 3-8 next season?

do you actually expect better?

Frank Beamer's 1st six years at Tech:

1987 (2-9)
1988 (3-8)
1989 (6-4-1)
1990 (6-5)
1991 (5-6)
1992 (2-8-1)

That's 2-8-1 in his SIXTH YEAR. Since then, literally bowling every yr.

jkflamebo wrote:

kent dorfman wrote:

Pony81 wrote:Following up on my "JJ is burning this thing to the ground"

I don't think a 5 year rebuilding schedule is realistic.

One poster showed a sine wave that sums up the situation perfectly.

If we truly believe in JJ, then we should try to get him for 10 years.

It is easy to envision:
2008: 1-11
2009: 3-8
2010: 6-5 Opposing coaches "JJ is gone in 2 years" He won't be your coach. Recruiting suffers
2011: 8-3 Opposing coaches "JJ is going to the islands next year" Recruting collapses.
2012: 3-8 New coach - rebuilding once again.

Why 3-8 next season?

do you actually expect better?

No I really don't expect anything next season except that JJ is going to cut out some of our older players and bring in more and more of his guys. I heard early this season that he only has 15 scholarships available for next season and yet it looks like he wants to take a full class. Is this true?

At any rate, it looks like he wants to do things all his way. You know he talks about changing the culture of losing around here and maybe that starts with telling those kids brought in by PB that JJ is the new boss and that he does not give a flip that you were the man when PB was here. Now that being said, if they are willing to buy into what JJ is trying to do here and get it through their heads that they cannot skip class or be late to practice then I'm sure JJ would be happy to keep them.

But then again I go back to something that we said about JJ when he got here and we were all trying to get to see what he was about. JJ was always known as someone who was willing to forgive people for their mistakes but he would never tolerate people who put themselves over the team. And by being late to practice and breaking JJ's 3 strike rule, that is what AR and ES did. They put themselves above the team, at least in JJ's book.

It was a relatively minor mistake- they didnt steal a dead girl's credit cards or anything like that but they didn't do what was necessary to stay on the field.

What JJ is doing is establishing his expectations for his players and by violating the 3 strike rule, AR and EX did not meet JJ's expectations and they are facing the consequences for it.

Also with a coach like JJ who is not a screamer/yeller kind of coach who puts the fear in his players he needs to draw a line in the sand and let them know that they cannot walk all over him. He treats his players with respect but he must make sure that his players do the same. (In other words, while he is not a Parcells he sure as heck does not want to be Wade Phillips!).

If we are not going to experience a Todd Graham / Rice; Stoops / OU ; Kraigthorpe / Tulsa type of turn around, then 5 years is too short.

I am still shocked - as is I think JJ is - that SMU couldn't muster 3-4 wins in this pitiful conference, with a coaching staff of "NFL caliber" coaches who took over essentially the same team from a group of glorified high school coaches.

If next year isn't a 6-7 win season, then 5 years isn't enough runway to get the program airborne. We are back to the sine wave of being competitive every 4th year. Then the new coach and the collapse as he "installs his system and gets his guys".

Pony81 wrote:If we are not going to experience a Todd Graham / Rice; Stoops / OU ; Kraigthorpe / Tulsa type of turn around, then 5 years is too short.

I am still shocked - as is I think JJ is - that SMU couldn't muster 3-4 wins in this pitiful conference, with a coaching staff of "NFL caliber" coaches who took over essentially the same team from a group of glorified high school coaches.

If next year isn't a 6-7 win season, then 5 years isn't enough runway to get the program airborne. We are back to the sine wave of being competitive every 4th year. Then the new coach and the collapse as he "installs his system and gets his guys".

I think you are on to something Pony81. Coaches are expected to produce results quickly and most of the time it is just not fair. And good God it's especially not good in our situation.

I wonder out of all CFB head coaches who have been a HC at the same (successful) program for 10-15 years, what were their records for their first 6 seasons? We have Beamer's posted but who else?

Pony81 wrote:If we are not going to experience a Todd Graham / Rice; Stoops / OU ; Kraigthorpe / Tulsa type of turn around, then 5 years is too short.

I am still shocked - as is I think JJ is - that SMU couldn't muster 3-4 wins in this pitiful conference, with a coaching staff of "NFL caliber" coaches who took over essentially the same team from a group of glorified high school coaches.

If next year isn't a 6-7 win season, then 5 years isn't enough runway to get the program airborne. We are back to the sine wave of being competitive every 4th year. Then the new coach and the collapse as he "installs his system and gets his guys".

An old coach I had once told me you can take a good defence and average offence and win a conference - A good defence and a fair offence
and win a conference and a bowl - A good defence and a good offence and win a national title ( He had won a national title) - So I believe that if
You check and see what real good coaches do for success when starting at a new location - They build their defence first. Even if Jones pulls the plug in 5 as long as he leaves the defence in a good condition a new coach should still be able to win a fair percentage of games till his pet offence is working.

[quote="kent dorfman]I think you are on to something Pony81. Coaches are expected to produce results quickly and most of the time it is just not fair.[/quote]

Then why do 1- 2-year turnarounds happen all the time? Price at UTEP is a good example. Hell, Vandy, Rutgers and Ball State are now "powerhouses."

mr. pony wrote:[quote="kent dorfman]I think you are on to something Pony81. Coaches are expected to produce results quickly and most of the time it is just not fair.[/quote]

Then why do 1- 2-year turnarounds happen all the time? Price at UTEP is a good example. Hell, Vandy, Rutgers and Ball State are now "powerhouses."[/quote]

Brady Hoke took over at Ball State in 2003. It took him 5 seasons to make the top 25.

Bobby Johnson has been at Vandy for 7 years and now they are a "powerhouse".

It did not take these guys overnight to hit "powerhouse" status. It took them a few years.

Read up on Bobby Johnson and how his plan is showing dividends.
http://vucommodores.cstv.com/sports/m-f ... bby00.html

As for Schiano at Rutgers:

Schiano, who grew up in Wyckoff and graduated from Ramapo High School, took over as the 27th head coach of the nation's oldest college football program on Dec. 1, 2000. On that day, Schiano proclaimed his vision of excellence for Rutgers football. "This program will be built on a rock foundation," he said. "It will take longer than building it on stilts, but when it's built, it will be built forever. This is where I started; this is where I was striving to get back to. I'm thrilled to be here. It's time."

Have a great Saturday reading up on how these coaches put in a plan and made turned these also-ran programs into winners!

kent dorfman wrote:

mr. pony wrote:[quote="kent dorfman]I think you are on to something Pony81. Coaches are expected to produce results quickly and most of the time it is just not fair.[/quote]

Then why do 1- 2-year turnarounds happen all the time? Price at UTEP is a good example. Hell, Vandy, Rutgers and Ball State are now "powerhouses."[/quote]

Brady Hoke took over at Ball State in 2003. It took him 5 seasons to make the top 25.

Bobby Johnson has been at Vandy for 7 years and now they are a "powerhouse".

It did not take these guys overnight to hit "powerhouse" status. It took them a few years.

Read up on Bobby Johnson and how his plan is showing dividends.
http://vucommodores.cstv.com/sports/m-f ... bby00.html

As for Schiano at Rutgers:

Schiano, who grew up in Wyckoff and graduated from Ramapo High School, took over as the 27th head coach of the nation's oldest college football program on Dec. 1, 2000. On that day, Schiano proclaimed his vision of excellence for Rutgers football. "This program will be built on a rock foundation," he said. "It will take longer than building it on stilts, but when it's built, it will be built forever. This is where I started; this is where I was striving to get back to. I'm thrilled to be here. It's time."

Have a great Saturday reading up on how these coaches put in a plan and made turned these also-ran programs into winners![/quote]

You know my favorite part about that quote is when he said "but when it's built, it will be built forever."

1-2 year "turnarounds" are common for teams that "quit" on the previous coaching staff and were underperformers. Not sure that is the case here. These guys were 1-11 last year, but they fought all the way (as evidenced by all the games that were lost on the last possession). We are not exactly playing a bunch of veterans this year, so hard to expect much.

5 years is enough time to know whether a guy can build a competitive program and them sustain it. We've had several references on this board to Frank Beamer at Va Tech, who had an ugly 6th year but managed to survive and has been successful from his 7th year on. Times have changed...and if SMU isn't competitive by Jones' 5th year...it might be time to say hello to the Sun Belt (if not the Southland Conference)

kent dorfman wrote:

kent dorfman wrote:

mr. pony wrote:[quote="kent dorfman]I think you are on to something Pony81. Coaches are expected to produce results quickly and most of the time it is just not fair.[/quote]

Then why do 1- 2-year turnarounds happen all the time? Price at UTEP is a good example. Hell, Vandy, Rutgers and Ball State are now "powerhouses."[/quote]

Brady Hoke took over at Ball State in 2003. It took him 5 seasons to make the top 25.

Bobby Johnson has been at Vandy for 7 years and now they are a "powerhouse".

It did not take these guys overnight to hit "powerhouse" status. It took them a few years.

Read up on Bobby Johnson and how his plan is showing dividends.
http://vucommodores.cstv.com/sports/m-f ... bby00.html

As for Schiano at Rutgers:

Schiano, who grew up in Wyckoff and graduated from Ramapo High School, took over as the 27th head coach of the nation's oldest college football program on Dec. 1, 2000. On that day, Schiano proclaimed his vision of excellence for Rutgers football. "This program will be built on a rock foundation," he said. "It will take longer than building it on stilts, but when it's built, it will be built forever. This is where I started; this is where I was striving to get back to. I'm thrilled to be here. It's time."

Have a great Saturday reading up on how these coaches put in a plan and made turned these also-ran programs into winners![/quote]

You know my favorite part about that quote is when he said "but when it's built, it will be built forever."[/quote]

Yeah forever, how is Rutgers looking right now?

White Helmet wrote:

kent dorfman wrote:

kent dorfman wrote:

mr. pony wrote:[quote="kent dorfman]I think you are on to something Pony81. Coaches are expected to produce results quickly and most of the time it is just not fair.[/quote]

Then why do 1- 2-year turnarounds happen all the time? Price at UTEP is a good example. Hell, Vandy, Rutgers and Ball State are now "powerhouses."[/quote]

Brady Hoke took over at Ball State in 2003. It took him 5 seasons to make the top 25.

Bobby Johnson has been at Vandy for 7 years and now they are a "powerhouse".

It did not take these guys overnight to hit "powerhouse" status. It took them a few years.

Read up on Bobby Johnson and how his plan is showing dividends.
http://vucommodores.cstv.com/sports/m-f ... bby00.html

As for Schiano at Rutgers:

Schiano, who grew up in Wyckoff and graduated from Ramapo High School, took over as the 27th head coach of the nation's oldest college football program on Dec. 1, 2000. On that day, Schiano proclaimed his vision of excellence for Rutgers football. "This program will be built on a rock foundation," he said. "It will take longer than building it on stilts, but when it's built, it will be built forever. This is where I started; this is where I was striving to get back to. I'm thrilled to be here. It's time."

Have a great Saturday reading up on how these coaches put in a plan and made turned these also-ran programs into winners![/quote]

You know my favorite part about that quote is when he said "but when it's built, it will be built forever."[/quote]

Yeah forever, how is Rutgers looking right now?[/quote]

Oh can it.

All I was saying was that it took him awhile to turn things around at Rutgers. Programs ebb and flow and sometimes they take extended downturns. It is not always the case that programs are going to be solid forever but all I was trying to point out was that Schiano did make Rutgers a winner again, even if only for a few seasons. Would you be okay with that?