Jacobs column on Edsall with player quotes

[ZooCougar]

You guys do realize that almost all coaches are anal-retentive control freaks right? One of whom isn't... well his claim is that he didn't realize his decades long assistant was abusing underage boys.

The quotes are great and all, but someone should tell those guys that they are 5-6 and might miss a bowl for the first time in a while.

And you guys wonder why we call you apologists. Tsk tsk.

Bruce Carter loves FUCRE btw.

 

[buckley503]

best line, credit to Jacobs if he came up with it:

Nothing was more ironic than Edsall's enforcing his "no-name" rule on the back of jerseys while wearing the most ridiculous "look-at-us" uniforms in college football history.

 

[Husky68]

That's rhetorical, correct? Because many here act as if we accomplished nothing the past five years (or, that if we did, it was a gift from the gods).

Or that no one but fhcRE could have accomplished this 5 year record of excellence, being 17-18 in the worse AQ league (maybe the ACC gave the BE a run for worse a couple of years) during that 5 year span, during a time that the league had Robinson and Kragthorpe as league coaches (and the 'stach and the crazy acting guy from USF). Yes that is quite the 5 year record.
Should coach P get a victory and finish 4-3 in league he will have blown away the 5 year winning % of fhcRE.
Of course tieing with 37.5% of the league for the championship is great, and winning the tie breaker for BCS was great, and for the other two coaches that tied for the title getting fired probably wasn't so great but that's what their schools thought of their accomplishment of tieing with fhcRE.
I'll take fhcRE's word for it "I didn't get dumb overnight"; 2-10 in a real AQ conference with teams in top 25 (and even top 5) is what it is.

 

[businesslawyer]

Or that no one but fhcRE could have accomplished this 5 year record of excellence, being 17-18 in the worse AQ league (maybe the ACC gave the BE a run for worse a couple of years) during that 5 year span, during a time that the league had Robinson and Kragthorpe as league coaches (and the 'stach and the crazy acting guy from USF). Yes that is quite the 5 year record.
Should coach P get a victory and finish 4-3 in league he will have blown away the 5 year winning % of fhcRE.
Of course tieing with 37.5% of the league for the championship is great, and winning the tie breaker for BCS was great, and for the other two coaches that tied for the title getting fired probably wasn't so great but that's what their schools thought of their accomplishment of tieing with fhcRE.
I'll take fhcRE's word for it "I didn't get dumb overnight"; 2-10 in a real AQ conference with teams in top 25 (and even top 5) is what it is.

There is nothing I could do to make my point more clearly than this post does by making it seem like inheriting the defending league champion can produce a record that can be easily compared to someone inheriting a middle road Colonial team. Obviously, some will get understand that our former coach did not start anywhere near on equal footing to his conference peeers and some will continue to think this is like a video game where a good player can overcome anything immediately so the record is a more indicative of the accomplishment.

 

[jpm25]

There is nothing I could do to make my point more clearly than this post does by making it seem like inheriting the defending league champion can produce a record that can be easily compared to someone inheriting a middle road Colonial team. Obviously, some will get understand that our former coach did not start anywhere near on equal footing to his conference peeers and some will continue to think this is like a video game where a good player can overcome anything immediately so the record is a more indicative of the accomplishment.

Who said it was a video game? You talk like Edsall built Rome in a day. Is Edsall's accomplishment any different than Jim Levitt's? USF started their program in 1997 from scratch. Boise State upgraded from D1-AA one year earlier.

BTW, three BE coaches inherited the defending league champion this year. Why compare that to inheriting a "middle road Colonial team"? Why not compare that to inheriting a 5-3 ACC team?

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

Or that no one but fhcRE could have accomplished this 5 year record of excellence, being 17-18 in the worse AQ league (maybe the ACC gave the BE a run for worse a couple of years) during that 5 year span, during a time that the league had Robinson and Kragthorpe as league coaches (and the 'stach and the crazy acting guy from USF). Yes that is quite the 5 year record.
Should coach P get a victory and finish 4-3 in league he will have blown away the 5 year winning % of fhcRE.
Of course tieing with 37.5% of the league for the championship is great, and winning the tie breaker for BCS was great, and for the other two coaches that tied for the title getting fired probably wasn't so great but that's what their schools thought of their accomplishment of tieing with fhcRE.
I'll take fhcRE's word for it "I didn't get dumb overnight"; 2-10 in a real AQ conference with teams in top 25 (and even top 5) is what it is.

You guys are funny. You guys really think that the apologistas think only Edsall could have accomplished what he did and that he's the 2nd greatest coach of all time behind Lombardi? You think the apologistas didn't see and acknowledge Edsall's flaws?

Or, do you hate the man so much that you deny what we acheived under his leadership and crap all over our accomplishments? Does that make you guys feel any better?

There are other coaches who could do what Edsall did for us or more. But there are much more that can't.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

Who said it was a video game? You talk like Edsall built Rome in a day. Is Edsall's accomplishment any different than Jim Levitt's? USF started their program in 1997 from scratch. Boise State upgraded from D1-AA one year earlier.

BTW, three BE coaches inherited the defending league champion this year. Why compare that to inheriting a "middle road Colonial team"? Why not compare that to inheriting a 5-3 ACC team?

Another one.

Yes, Edsall accomplished more than Jim Leavitt. Even without the fertile Florida recruiting grounds.

The jobs done at Boise by Hawkins and Peterson were/are remarkable. Much more impressive than what Edsall accomplished. But then again, I haven't heard anyone compare the jobs that they did at BSU to what Edsall did here. Except you.

 

[businesslawyer]

Who said it was a video game? You talk like Edsall built Rome in a day. Is Edsall's accomplishment any different than Jim Levitt's? USF started their program in 1997 from scratch. Boise State upgraded from D1-AA one year earlier.

BTW, three BE coaches inherited the defending league champion this year. Why compare that to inheriting a "middle road Colonial team"? Why not compare that to inheriting a 5-3 ACC team?

My last comment on this, because there is nothing to say that hasn't been said before and it's not like some people will ever be convinced. But

1. Randy Edsall failed epicly this year with a 5-3 ACC team. Not one person on this board has implied otherwise. And yet it is 100% irrelevant to what he accomplished here.

2. No one has said there is no other coach that could have accomplished what he did. But you don't get to cherry pick the handful of rises in I-A football and pretend that is the universe. You could name a score of programs that have been unable to rise above their historic bases. We were. In five years from when we became a full blown I-A team, from that moment to the present, we reached a level where no school from the Northeast (not BC, not Syracuse, not Pitt) with the lone exceptions Pitt and Penn State were aboev us. That is a tremendous accomplishment of everyone involved with the program.

More importantly, as I have challenged people here for half a decade, find me one real, reknowned sportswriter or broadcaseter -- just one (but a real one -- not a blogger because you can read about unicorns on a blog if you want to)-- who, while Edsall was here, thought he was not overperforming the situation he inherited. You won't. What you'll find are tons of people (Scout, Phil Steele, Bill King, etc., etc, etc.) who think he accomplished a great deal with the situation he inherited. I have found that, when you're attached to something emotionally, looking at how people are judging it from the outside is often useful. But hey, you live your life your way.

 

[sdhusky]

Obviously, some will get understand that our former coach did not start anywhere near on equal footing to his conference peeers and some will continue to think this is like a video game where a good player can overcome anything immediately so the record is a more indicative of the accomplishment.

I think he was in as good a position as Brian Kelly or Schianno or Petrino.

Look, we can all agree that Edsall wasn't a disater and did OK. No question. But this idea that he is responsible for a "football miracle" is nuts. He never beat a top 25 team, lost out on every big recruiting battle, became a bland, bland, bland guy who never created excitement in CT.

He did a nice job. He is a competant coach. If given time, I'm sure he have years in MD where he will go 9-3. So could about 100 other coaches.

I think the biggest thing you can credit Edsall for is NOT BEING GROB. Not being Terry Shea. He didn't suck. He didn't get the program stuck in disaster spiral.

For that, I appreciate his work.

But let's not pretend he did something like Calhoun or Geno did with basketball. He is more Dom Perno than Jim Calhoun.

 

[jpm25]

Another one.

Yes, Edsall accomplished more than Jim Leavitt. Even without the fertile Florida recruiting grounds.

The jobs done at Boise by Hawkins and Peterson were/are remarkable. Much more impressive than what Edsall accomplished. But then again, I haven't heard anyone compare the jobs that they did at BSU to what Edsall did here. Except you.

I must be wrong to compare the two then since no one else has.

 

[Carl Spackler]

Players build football programs BL, not coaches. Coaches are management. Players build. Edsall was perfect for what we went through growing from the end of the yankee conference in 1998, through a year in the A-10, and then d-1A independance and ten entering the Big eASt - a year earlier than projected.

And that's a guy that valued his system above all else. They're a dying breed. But they fit certain needs.

Players put this team in the BCS bowl last year. That's the one thing that gets missed a lot, especially by uninvolved outside spectators.

I do not believe for one second that Edsall had anything to do with the way we finished last season. He had everything to do with why we started 3-4.

Players got together last season, and made that run happen, and gave Edsall the spring board to his dream job.

Players have put us in position to make another bowl game this year, and the players on the field this saturday, and every saturday from here on and before, are what build this program.

This game is about players, not plays. The time of coaches that specialize in systems and plays over players is a dying breed in the modern world.

 

[mattp]

I think he was in as good a position as Brian Kelly or Schianno or Petrino.

Look, we can all agree that Edsall wasn't a disater and did OK. No question. But this idea that he is responsible for a "football miracle" is nuts. He never beat a top 25 team, lost out on every big recruiting battle, became a bland, bland, bland guy who never created excitement in CT.

you're the only one that ever said anything about a football miracle. why is it that the people that bash Edsall don't have any real legitimate arguments over us "apologists" so they make things up? i guarantee you'll never find one "apologist" that said RE performed a miracle, or is the best coach ever, or did more with less than anyone else ever could. you won't find one, but for some reason those are the statements you waste everyone's time refuting. what we say is he did a good-great job depending on the poster. is it really that hard for you to admit that he did that? you sound like a damned fool trying to prove otherwise. every "apologist" can admit what Edsall did poorly, why can't the "bashers" admit to one thing he's done right? are you stubborn or ignorant?

 

[businesslawyer]

But let's not pretend he did something like Calhoun or Geno did with basketball. He is more Dom Perno than Jim Calhoun.

And there it is. The unspoken criteria for much of the Edsall bashing and hatred -- and I thank you my friend for putting it out there. We have Jimmy and Geno and Randy ain't them.

You are correct SDH -- Randy is not Jimmy or Geno. But, other than you, who even brought them into this discussion? Geno only invented a sport, at least as far as the general populace is concerned, and Jim has done something that not one coach has done in the history of basketball (with the possible exception of John Wooden) -- won three times with a school that was not used to playing at the top tier of the sport before he got there.

Of course, if that is the standard by which we're going to judge football coaches, we should just agree we're never going to hire another one now (because any coach we get who approaches that level will be gone to a higher paying job at which it is easier to win a championship in a hearbeat). I will judge future coaches by whether they accomplish more, less or about what was rationally expected of them when they were hired. And, I again challenge you to find me one reknown sportswriter or broadcaster who doesn't think our former coach did a good job by that criterial

 

[sdhusky]

The best I can say about Esdall is that he wasn't GROB, he wasn't a disaster.

Other than that, I think the majority of BCS coaches would have done a better job. Some much better.

 

[CTMike]

What a thread.

 

[mattp]

SD, earlier i asked if you were stubborn or ignorant. judging by your above post i guess it's pretty obvious the answer is ignorant. the majority of BCS coaches are fired in less than 4 years, yet you think they're better than a coach that took a team from 1AA to a BCS bowl in a decade. un freakin believable.

 

[sdhusky]

. And, I again challenge you to find me one reknown sportswriter or broadcaster who doesn't think our former coach did a good job by that criterial

I think I can find a few in MD who don't think he is that great

And anyway, this is a really dumb comment. What does a national sportswriter really know/care about CT Football? How much do they know about our facilities?

They don't bash coaches they want access with. Duh. I hear wonderful things about Schianno every RU game. I heard great things about Wanny. GROB was complemented most of the time until the biter end. Every coach is complemented during every game - especially by former coaches.

 

[sdhusky]

SD, earlier i asked if you were stubborn or ignorant. judging by your above post i guess it's pretty obvious the answer is ignorant. the majority of BCS coaches are fired in less than 4 years, yet you think they're better than a coach that took a team from 1AA to a BCS bowl in a decade. un freakin believable.

The expectations are lower at UCONN. Period. I think Wanny was a much better coach than Edsall, but at Pittsburgh, they expect you to beat a top 25 team more than once a decade.

Don't give me last year - that was the luck of the system - it was an 8-5 team without a meaningful win over a good team and some losses to very mediocre teams.

Edsall's best year(s) would get you fired in the majority of BCS schools so your comment drips of ignorance.

 

[businesslawyer]

The expectations are lower at UCONN. Period. I think Wanny was a much better coach than Edsall, but at Pittsburgh, they expect you to beat a top 25 team more than once a decade.

Don't give me last year - that was the luck of the system - it was an 8-5 team without a meaningful win over a good team and some losses to very mediocre teams.

Edsall's best year(s) would get you fired in the majority of BCS schools so your comment drips of ignorance.

UConn under Edsall beat Pitt 4 out of 7. And if you really think the same coach can't win more games at Pitt than at UConn .... well, we disagree.

 

[mattp]

this isn't exactly rocket science, the expectations for a school just joining from 1AA should be lower than most BCS schools. to say Wanny is a better coach, despite him having a worse record despite taking over a Pitt team that was lightyears beyond where we started is beyond ignorant. it's just idiotic. in less than a decade he took us beyond schools that had been playing BCS level football for almost a century. if the majority of BCS coaches could do it, why did he have a better record than the majority of BCS coaches, despite moving from 1AA?

 

[sdhusky]

why did he have a better record than the majority of BCS coaches, despite moving from 1AA?

Because he had a far easier schedule than the majority of BCS coaches. Played in the worst BCS conference and played the weak sisters of the other BCS conferences sprinkled with the Towson State of the world.

You really think its the same going 8-5 with Edsall record as it is in the SEC, Big 12 or Big 11?

 

[mattp]

you seem to have forgotten that there's 6 BCS conferences, you can't just cherry pick the best ones. the PAC 10, ACC, and Big12 outside of TX and OU are all pretty comparable to the BE. we may not have that top 10 team, but many BCS teams don't even play the top 10 team in their conference.

he did a good job, why is that so hard for you to admit? admitting you were wrong isn't a sign of weakness, it's as sign of character.

 

[buckley503]

you seem to have forgotten that there's 6 BCS conferences, you can't just cherry pick the best ones. the PAC 10, ACC, and Big12 outside of TX and OU are all pretty comparable to the BE. we may not have that top 10 team, but many BCS teams don't even play the top 10 team in their conference.

he did a good job, why is that so hard for you to admit? admitting you were wrong isn't a sign of weakness, it's as sign of character.

are you saying The Fonz had no character?

 

[businesslawyer]

are you saying The Fonz had no character?

In that episode, at least the Fonz was trying to say he was wrong. He just was physically unable.

LOL. Man, I loved that show.

 

[sdhusky]

he did a good job, why is that so hard for you to admit?

I think he didn't suck. Thats different from a "good job"

 

[Husky68]

There is nothing I could do to make my point more clearly than this post does by making it seem like inheriting the defending league champion can produce a record that can be easily compared to someone inheriting a middle road Colonial team. Obviously, some will get understand that our former coach did not start anywhere near on equal footing to his conference peeers and some will continue to think this is like a video game where a good player can overcome anything immediately so the record is a more indicative of the accomplishment.

You picked the time frame. He had 6 years at Uconn before the time frame you picked. Last 5 years. Team was 17-18. Had two of the worst coaches in AQ recent history amongst the other 7 coaches in the conference. Two others (not amongst the 2 worst) got fired for tieing with Uconn at 5-2 last year. Now its "equal footing". Drop out the oldest year and was 16-12, better but not great; drop out the next oldest year and was 11-10, and so it goes. 50% winning % in league is ok, at a real BCS football school that would get you fired (ask Charlie W and the 'stach).

 

[Husky68]

I think he didn't suck. Thats different from a "good job"

That's what I have been trying to say. Everytime I see a "how do you know" someone else could have done better than fhcRE or some other drivel I overstate the obvious - he "was no great shakes". "Didn't suck" - gets the essence.

 

[businesslawyer]

You picked the time frame. He had 6 years at Uconn before the time frame you picked. Last 5 years. Team was 17-18. Had two of the worst coaches in AQ recent history amongst the other 7 coaches in the conference. Two others (not amongst the 2 worst) got fired for tieing with Uconn at 5-2 last year. Now its "equal footing". Drop out the oldest year and was 16-12, better but not great; drop out the next oldest year and was 11-10, and so it goes. 50% winning % in league is ok, at a real BCS football school that would get you fired (ask Charlie W and the 'stach).

The obvious answer is that he didn't start with a "real BCS football school." He did, however, leave us at a lot, lot, lot closer to that point.

 

[jpm25]

you seem to have forgotten that there's 6 BCS conferences, you can't just cherry pick the best ones. the PAC 10, ACC, and Big12 outside of TX and OU are all pretty comparable to the BE. we may not have that top 10 team, but many BCS teams don't even play the top 10 team in their conference.

he did a good job, why is that so hard for you to admit? admitting you were wrong isn't a sign of weakness, it's as sign of character.

Can you name another BCS conference where you don't play a ranked conference foe, i.e., BE 2010?

 

[sdhusky]

The obvious answer is that he didn't start with a "real BCS football school." He did, however, leave us at a lot, lot, lot closer to that point.

I'm calling BS. We had real BCS facilites and budgets. I can argue it was a better situation or equal to SU, BCU or Rutgers.

Again, he did better than sucking (SU), not as good as Jags at BCU and about the same as Schinno at Rutgers (didn't suck)