Randy Edsall’s first season fractured Maryland football; can he repair it?

[J187Money]

Please do not blame me for your faulty memory. These types of statements were made by posters numerous times.

People said a lot of things. I think what people generally meant is that they were surprised how well we fared during the transition, and the program far exceeded most people's expectations up until the last couple of years. On an absolute basis, I don't think anyone ever meant to say that if we had Nick Saban (for example) that we wouldn't have ended up with a better record and better recruits.

But I think it is fair to say that most people feel that Edsall did a very good job during the transition, and if there was someone out there (that we could have actually hired at the time which I think is an important point) that could have done a better job it would have probably been marginal. And this is where I stand.

 

[Carl Spackler]

With the way the things were shaking out around upgrading and building a stadium in 1998, 1999 and 2000, can anyone have any wonder at this point why Edsall going 4-7, 3-8 and 2-9 in consecutive seasons was largely ignored?

What was happening on the football field was irrelevant to what was happening off the football field, and that was essentially the case for the first several years of Edsall's tenure.

This guy has the audacity to get up in front of the Maryland/DC press and say that what he's going through in Maryland, he's gone through before. Nope, Randy, they're not going to ignore what's happening on the field down there, especially given that the entire athletic department's future is riding on the success of that football program in generating money.

Very different situation than what we've got at UConn, and what we had early on.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

People said a lot of things. I think what people generally meant is that they were surprised how well we fared during the transition, and the program far exceeded most people's expectations up until the last couple of years. On an absolute basis, I don't think anyone ever meant to say that if we had Nick Saban (for example) that we wouldn't have ended up with a better record and better recruits.

But I think it is fair to say that most people feel that Edsall did a very good job during the transition, and if there was someone out there (that we could have actually hired at the time which I think is an important point) that could have done a better job it would have probably been marginal. And this is where I stand.

Leave him alone. He's almost done building his strawman.

 

[Carl Spackler]

Last tidbit of Randy Edsall history, according to me, is that the fall 2000 football season was the first sason played as d-1A independant. There were provisions made w/ the NCAA to allow that to happen, bleachers had to be installed at Memorial stadium. Stuff like that. That season was going to be played as a 1-A independant, regardless of what the other stuff was happening around the program. The future of 1-A football was majorly in question. A big IF, that adrien's landing project doesn't pass through the state legislature in summer 2000, there would have been no future stadium for uconn football to be division 1-A in the ncaa's view, and the entire upgrade most likely falls apart and we go back to a 1-AA conference for football in 2001.

That summer and fall of 2000, after that stadium funding was finally approved, also happens to be the same time that Edsall was able to do the most important (in my opinion) single thing he ever did for the UConn program, and that's successfully recruit Dan Orlovsky.

If that stadium legislation doesn't pass, Orlovsky most likely never suits up for UConn, and it's no coincidence that Edsall's string of consecutive losing seasons turned around we started having significant success in 1-A football after successfully recruiting a QB that could play at the level. (I'm not saying you only need a QB, please nobody take this in the wrong direction) but everything snowballed from there.

This football program, the facilities, all of it, trully belong to the State of Connecticut, as it's division 1 football program at the state land grant university. THat's something that I hope, becomes more and more evident under new leadership at the athletic department, university and head coach level. Every resident of this state needs to have pride in that program. Jim Calhoun did build UConn basketball. But the state of CT built the football program. Not Randy Edsall.

It bothered me to no end, to see how Edsall turned UConn football into everything about him, and how people, bought into it.

The uconn football program, while never consistently a championship contending program for any extended period of time in it's 120 year existence up to 2001, had PLENTY of history. The story of how it transitioned from the yankee conference division 1 status in the 70s, through the 80s, and then into the 90's and then back to 1-A, Edsall is a very small part of that.

The program exists as it does right now, not because of Randy Edsall, but because the governing body of the state of CT, our representatives, decided by majority vote, that they wanted it, and because one of our home grown players, Orlovsky, decided to stay home and be the most significant player to start laying bricks in the foundation of the program.

Players build programs, not coaches. Coaches just drive the ship for a little while.

 

[jpm25]

it doesn't get more likes because most of the opinions regarding Edsall were fabricated by Palatine. by far the most annoying part of thinking Edsall did a good job (which even Pal admits he did) was that i was constantly told that i love him, don't think anyone else could do the job and that i think he should be coach for life. i never heard one person say anything like any of that, expect Pal and a few others when attributing it to the "apologists". all i've heard people say was that he did a good job and probably a better job at building the program than most (that means more than 50%, not 99.9%, and when you consider 50% of coaches are probably fired in 3 years it's hard to argue that he didnt do a better job than most would). all the superlatives have come from Pal and his anti edsall cronies, not from the apologists

Statements like this is why apologists get a bad rap

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

Statements like this is why apologists get a bad rap

In your world of make believe....what do you think mattp is trying to say there? Please share with the rest of us what your false interpretation of that quote is.

 

[jpm25]

People said a lot of things. I think what people generally meant is that they were surprised how well we fared during the transition, and the program far exceeded most people's expectations up until the last couple of years. On an absolute basis, I don't think anyone ever meant to say that if we had Nick Saban (for example) that we wouldn't have ended up with a better record and better recruits.

But I think it is fair to say that most people feel that Edsall did a very good job during the transition, and if there was someone out there (that we could have actually hired at the time which I think is an important point) that could have done a better job it would have probably been marginal. And this is where I stand.

I believe that one other finalist that was not chosen in favor of Edsall went on to be a head coach in the NFL and achieved some moderate success. Another is still an NFL coordinator on a successful team. Neither would likely have been marginal and either could have matched or exceeded Edsall's achievements.

 

[jpm25]

In your world of make believe....what do you think mattp is trying to say there? Please share with the rest of us what your false interpretation of that quote is.

That 50% of coaches are failures and make the top half possible, so Randy is automatically no worse than "better than most". A typical, grossly misleading and non-factual apologista argument.

 

[jpm25]

In your world of make believe....what do you think mattp is trying to say there? Please share with the rest of us what your false interpretation of that quote is.

Are you now going to provide your false interpretation, too?

 

[mattp]

That 50% of coaches are failures and make the top half possible, so Randy is automatically no worse than "better than most". A typical, grossly misleading and non-factual apologista argument.

?? that's not what i said. Edsall did a good job. actually looking at the 2008 new BCS HC hires they pretty much break down as follows:
good job: Petrino, Briles, P Johnson, Pelini (really the jury is still out on this one, but i'll give it to you)
fired/close to fired:Cutliffe, RRod, Nutt, Sherman, Neuheisel, Stewart

4 out of 10 have done what could be considered a good job. the success rate for hiring a BCS coach good enough to keep his job is less than 50%. that's why i wanted to keep a coach that did a good job rather than torpedo the whole thing by hiring GRob II. that's what us apologists call "rational thinking". now the edsall bashers translate that into "i want Edsall to raise my kids because he can do everything better than anyone else" and that's just plain ridiculous

 

[Carl Spackler]

Edsall might be the luckiest college football head coach in history. He managed to find a situation in his first head coach job where he was able to take a recently successful football program and go 4-7, 3-8, and 2-9 and then 6-6 in his first four seasons and not be in any danger of losing his job whatsoever, due ot circumstances off the field, to another situation where he can take a recently successful football program and go 2-10 in his first season and still have very little threat to his job security at any time in the near future due to circumstances off the field in the athletic department.

Only difference in Maryland is if the public will allow it.

 

[mattp]

his job here is different than his job in maryland. he did well at building something here, but that's a lot different than taking something to the next level. even besides that difference if RRod (or Chizik) can teach us anything it's that success (or failure) at a past job doesn't at all translate into future success (or failure).

either way lets just kick Maryland's ass next year so we can move on

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

That 50% of coaches are failures and make the top half possible, so Randy is automatically no worse than "better than most". A typical, grossly misleading and non-factual apologista argument.

My interpretation of this comment leads me to conclude that it's not possible to carry on a rational conversation with you on this topic.

 

[Dann]

lol

 

[Brad Palmer]

"This is real life.”​

Oh Randall...this is just college football.​

 

[Sean]

I am pretty sure that JPM is going to suggest that Palatine would have been a better coach than Edsall soon...