TV ratings will determine out football future.

[businesslawyer]

Good numbers could make us very attractive for the next round of conference roulette.

However, under Edsall we play one of the most boring, unwatchable styles of football imaginable. That's just a fact.

Excellent, excellent attempt to try to hide yet another useless Edsall sucks thread with a headline and first sentence that makes it seem like you really wanted to discuss something else.

 

[Exit 4]

Excellent, excellent attempt to try to hide yet another useless Edsall sucks thread with a headline and first sentence that makes it seem like you really wanted to discuss something else.

hilarious

 

[freescooter]

In all seriousness we made a fatal mistake when we made 2 consecutive bad hires. It sets you up for disaster in so many ways. First of course losing lots of games but in addition there is no continuity and you also end up with multiple bad recruiting classes because you have 3 coaches who basically take the last guys class just to fill scholarships not because those are guys he wanted. We absolutely know Edsall did that. Finally we had Diaco. Terrible is not the word to describe his tenure. At least Pasqualoni could recruit even though coaching had passed him by. Diaco couldn’t coach nor could he recruit. That put us in a huge hole. When you recruit FCS level players you just can’t compete. And it takes at least 4 years to get that out of the system. We saw that at Rutgers when Schiano replaces Terry Shea. We are seeing it here. I’m not 100% certain that Edsall can pull this off but I like his chances better with the recruiting he has been doing If you didn’t love the 2 receivers he had last year you don’t watch football. Looks like we have more coming. Plus the schedule is way more manageable than the AAC was.

 

[huskyrob1]

In all seriousness we made a fatal mistake when we made 2 consecutive bad hires. It sets you up for disaster in so many ways. First of course losing lots of games but in addition there is no continuity and you also end up with multiple bad recruiting classes because you have 3 coaches who basically take the last guys class just to fill scholarships not because those are guys he wanted. We absolutely know Edsall did that. Finally we had Diaco. Terrible is not the word to describe his tenure. At least Pasqualoni could recruit even though coaching had passed him by. Diaco couldn’t coach nor could he recruit. That put us in a huge hole. When you recruit FCS level players you just can’t compete. And it takes at least 4 years to get that out of the system. We saw that at Rutgers when Schiano replaces Terry Shea. We are seeing it here. I’m not 100% certain that Edsall can pull this off but I like his chances better with the recruiting he has been doing If you didn’t love the 2 receivers he had last year you don’t watch football. Looks like we have more coming. Plus the schedule is way more manageable than the AAC was.

Granted, they were big mistakes, but fatal? Maybe, but only time will answer that question.

 

[Woof 101]

Granted, they were big mistakes, but fatal? Maybe, but only time will answer that question.

No argument here @huskyrob1, not always perfect english on this forum. Maybe only near fatal but it is plain for all to see the impact of nine losing seasons. When you go from The Fiesta Bowl and regular crowds of 30K to rankings in the last five of 130 schools and crowds of sit anywhere you want, it's easy to understand some using the word fatal.

 

[huskyrob1]

No argument here @huskyrob1, not always perfect english on this forum. Maybe only near fatal but it is plain for all to see the impact of nine losing seasons. When you go from The Fiesta Bowl and regular crowds of 30K to rankings in the last five of 130 schools and crowds of sit anywhere you want, it's easy to understand some using the word fatal.

Thank you Mr Zuckerberg.

 

[metsfan2323]

In before @Guapo says “triple option.”

I very much want Edsall to succeed but if UCONN is forced to make a change in the next couple years they must try the triple option, it just makes soooo much sense for UCONN. I personally have a mild obsession with the Paul Johnson offense and can't get enough of it. I even watch Cal Poly & Citadel highlights for fun.

FCS Citadel beat GTech last year running the Triple option. Just amazing.

 

[Guapo]

I very much want Edsall to succeed but if UCONN is forced to make a change in the next couple years they must try the triple option, it just makes soooo much sense for UCONN. I personally have a mild obsession with the Paul Johnson offense and can't get enough of it. I even watch Cal Poly & Citadel highlights for fun.

FCS Citadel beat GTech last year running the Triple option. Just amazing.

<3

 

[billybud]

Programs are set in the FBS world, in terms of relevance, as almost all distributions are, on a Bell Curve.

Reaching the midpoint of that curve in the near future would be quite an undertaking but is do-able.

 

[billybud]

<3

GT won three games last year and lost to the Citadel by a field goal...

 

[metsfan2323]

GT won three games last year and lost to the Citadel by a field goal...

Which kept them from winning 4 games or two more than we did. Think we could recruit better than FCS Citadel? Yup, Much better.

 

[billybud]

The Citadel. with their triple option...did lose to Towson, Elon, Wofford, Samford, VMI, and Chattanooga...

 

[Guapo]

GT won three games last year and lost to the Citadel by a field goal...

Right. That’s awesome. I hate Tech.

but love the triple option

 

[Palatine]

Excellent, excellent attempt to try to hide yet another useless Edsall sucks thread with a headline and first sentence that makes it seem like you really wanted to discuss something else.

And what did I say that was wrong? We do not play an exciting watchable style of football. You disagree with that?

Our ratings, if high, could make us very attractive? You disagree with that?

 

[businesslawyer]

Our ratings arent going to be high or someone would be paying us more than MAC money per game. We have no following, weve sucked for a decade and our home opponents arent for the most part any good. Of course good rating would make us more valuable but thats as useless as saying if i looked like Ashton Kushner i wouldnt have to work so hard to earn money

 

[billybud]

Right. That’s awesome. I hate Tech.

but love the triple option

So many teams now run what amounts to a double option...the zone-read. The beauty of the veer or triple O was that it would put 11 on 10 with a running QB. The spread zone-read takes advantage of a spread defense and "space" to achieve their result.

The triple O is successful to an extent now because it is an outlier offense and defenses haven't played teams lthat use it nor practiced much against it...preparing for GT in a week was always a tough go.

Rich Rodriguez is credited with being the father of the read-option that now has many variants, Memphis, under Norvell, developed a potent offense with run centric ball that forces a D to commit to stopping the run with 7-9 in the box, which opens up the play action pass...

Georgia State, when it won three IAA championships, successfully ran a "flex-bone" modified triple O. The same offense that Monken at Army used. Now Monken is (2020) offensive coordinator at Georgia and I am curious if he will have scheme impact there under Kirby Smart.

Miami (and FSU) changed college ball with speed on defense and changed the use of the triple option...with their emphasis on speedy defenders...Miami beat Nebraska in the Orange Bowl and beat Oklahoma's option three straight times. The only three losses Oklahoma had in the three seasons of 85-87, were to the Canes. After Nebraska lost to FSU in back to back Orange Bowls...Osborne changed their offense.

I have watched the Darwinian survival of the fittest over the past 60 years...offenses evolve to solve defenses and defenses evolve to stop offenses...it will never be static.

And we will see triple options adopted by programs who think that will give them an advantage....the disadvantage in recruiting is that cut block specialists aren't an NFL commodity and great receivers may not be attracted.

 

[Waquoit]

Right. That’s awesome. I hate Tech.
but love the triple option

I feel the same way about the triple option as Jerry feels about sweatpants:

 

[Palatine]

Our ratings arent going to be high or someone would be paying us more than MAC money per game. We have no following, weve sucked for a decade and our home opponents arent for the most part any good. Of course good rating would make us more valuable but thats as useless as saying if i looked like Ashton Kushner i wouldnt have to work so hard to earn money

Our ratings could be high if we were an interesting offensive team. Lots of big plays. Wow factor.

 

[businesslawyer]

Our ratings could be high if we were an interesting offensive team. Lots of big plays. Wow factor.

Lots of interesting football gets played in in FCS and small FBS conferences. How often do you watch?

No one is going to watch a meaningless football game just because teams score a lot. If they did, the Big XII would be the most watched conference in the country. I don't doubt that, at the margins, more people find high scoring games entertaining, but talking about our tv ratings is utterly meaningless until we're good enough to play meaningful football.

 

[freescooter]

Actually our ratings would improve if we WON football games. Almost doesn’t matter how. If we were to figure out how to clamp down on offenses, nearly impossible with the current rules which heavily favor offense, but if we did and won games 21-7 and upset a few teams doing it we’d get as much burn as if we won games 56-49. Maybe more because everyone does that now

 

[billybud]

San Diego State has had two 11 win seasons and two 10 win seasons in their last five...I don't know how much that has propelled them into the ratings.

It is winning...and it is winning against teams that grab national notice that may raise ratings.

 

[CL82]

Our ratings arent going to be high or someone would be paying us more than MAC money per game. We have no following, weve sucked for a decade and our home opponents arent for the most part any good. Of course good rating would make us more valuable but thats as useless as saying if i looked like Ashton Kushner i wouldnt have to work so hard to earn money

"What? I work plenty hard pal! You know what..."

 

[metsfan2323]

I feel the same way about the triple option as Jerry feels about sweatpants:

Nope, this is how Jerry feels about the triple option. (He would have to get new players / friends)

 

[Nostical]

If I looked like Ashton Kushner I wouldn't have to work so hard to earn money

That's Jared Kushner, not Ashton-- and you'd be working in the White House.

 

[huskyblooz]

it’s a little early to be drinking.

Says you.