Charlie Strong contract

[Roaming Bull]

52 minutes ago, puc86 said:

You can’t teach a statue to run

[puc86]

3 minutes ago, Roaming Bull said:

I stand corrected.

[puc86]

19 minutes ago, Bull Dozer said:

The line was moving in the right direction until Mattox arrived with CCS and chased off 3 potential contributors and guys like Norman and Atterbury immediately stopped developing.  Were we  Wisconsin/Bama on the OL?  No, did CWT and his staff turn the offensive line around compared to how terrible it was when they came in after Skip?  That's a resounding yes.   We appeared to have some good promising young guys in the pipeline and guys that were being groomed and showed promise but somehow in 2 years we got to having to start true freshmen at the two most important positions on the offensive line.....

You seem well versed in our offensive line woes vs that of FSU;  so perhaps your conclusion that the FSU woes are entirely not CWT’s fault while the USF woes are entirely CCS’ fault and not at all CWT’s fault is correct but it certainly seems conveniently searching for conclusions about the coaches on the face of it. I guess time will tell.

[puc86]

27 minutes ago, Bull94 said:

and you don't understand context as anywhere he has coached has been a rebuilding job and his records all trended upwards.

BTW Herbert at Oregon wasn't used in the same manner as Flowers

It has seems that things often got worse following his arrival. He now has his “dream job” and we will see how that translates into long term success. At some point in order to be a good coach you have to settle down somewhere and consistently win, do you honestly believe you could conceivably be a good coach and coach for a 20 year career at a sub .500 record because you just happened to always move to struggling programs?

[Bull94]

5 minutes ago, puc86 said:

It has seems that things often got worse following his arrival. He now has his “dream job” and we will see how that translates into long term success. At some point in order to be a good coach you have to settle down somewhere and consistently win, do you honestly believe you could conceivably be a good coach and coach for a 20 year career at a sub .500 record because you just happened to always move to struggling programs?

I'd say we were far better off after he left than when he got here. he is pretty young and his career has been on a near vertical trajectory. pretty common for young up and coming coaches to be on the move.

[Bull Dozer]

26 minutes ago, puc86 said:

You seem well versed in our offensive line woes vs that of FSU;  so perhaps your conclusion that the FSU woes are entirely not CWT’s fault while the USF woes are entirely CCS’ fault and not at all CWT’s fault is correct but it certainly seems conveniently searching for conclusions about the coaches on the face of it. I guess time will tell.

If you actually read the article you will see that FSU's woes are not just because of CWT, not by a long shot.  Its a combination of recruiting neglect (look how few OL they signed Jimbo's last 3 cycles), bad development (There's a reason why Tricket didn't follow Jimbo to A&M), and bad luck with injuries and attrition.  I follow the program close enough to know our woes are actually kind of similar to FSU as they are combination of attrition due to injury or issues with kids,  the difference is FSU's offensive line coach didn't run off 3 potential upperclassmen contributors from an already thin line like Mattox did with Larkin, Polk, and Galati.....   

If anyone is searching for conclusions its you (you have already decided that CWT will not succeed at FSU And his system won't work).  I stand by what I say with every coach (Skippy included) you need to have 3 years to let the coach get his guys on the field before you make any final conclusions.   CWT had it here and our OL improved by leaps and bounds (Along with the rest of the program) and CCS deserves it here as well.   You're the only one who has passed final judgment on either staff.  Thanks for playing tho....

Edited November 15, 2018 by Bull Dozer

[IBulleve]

5 minutes ago, Bull Dozer said:

If you actually read the article you will see that FSU's woes are not just because of CWT, not by a long shot.  Its a combination of recruiting neglect (look how few OL they signed Jimbo's last 3 cycles), bad development (There's a reason why Tricket didn't follow Jimbo to A&M), and bad luck with injuries and attrition.  I follow the program close enough to know our woes are actually kind of similar to FSU as they are combination of attrition due to injury or issues with kids,  the difference is FSU's offensive line coach didn't run of 3 potential upperclassmen contributors from an already thin line like Mattox did with Larkin, Polk, and Galati.....   

If anyone is searching for conclusions its you (you have already decided that CWT will not succeed at FSU And his system won't work).  I stand by what I say with every coach (Skippy included) you need to have 3 years to let the coach get his guys on the field before you make any final conclusions.   CWT had it here and our OL improved by leaps and bounds (Along with the rest of the program) and CCS deserves it here as well.   You're the only one who has passed final judgment on either staff.  Thanks for playing tho....

Funny enough, I tend to agree with the 3 year ideology when it comes to HCs. My problems stems from the fact that this thought process is generally used for coaches coming in during a rebuilding phase. Our situation is unique as CCS came into a situation where the roster was very talented and had a weak schedule. Yes, he went 10-2. But there were some glaring issues on the field that I had hoped we would see improvement in. Would “Charlie’s players” be able to come out and dominate San Jose St and/or Elon? Or is that on the staff for not having those guys ready? 

My other issue stems from the OC (surprise surprise). Needing time to install is natural. It’s not the sloppiness that concerns me, it’s the overall philosophy. Yes, there are plenty of times where we run plays that are actually good calls but don’t work because of execution. More times than not, our athletes aren’t put in position to maximize their value. In the last 2 years, I haven’t went into a game thinking we have a schematic advantage. More times than not, I’m just hoping that our talent outweighs coaching defincies. 

I just feel like there are better (realistic) options available 

[Bull Dozer]

10 minutes ago, IBulleve said:

Funny enough, I tend to agree with the 3 year ideology when it comes to HCs. My problems stems from the fact that this thought process is generally used for coaches coming in during a rebuilding phase. Our situation is unique as CCS came into a situation where the roster was very talented and had a weak schedule. Yes, he went 10-2. But there were some glaring issues on the field that I had hoped we would see improvement in. Would “Charlie’s players” be able to come out and dominate San Jose St and/or Elon? Or is that on the staff for not having those guys ready? 

My other issue stems from the OC (surprise surprise). Needing time to install is natural. It’s not the sloppiness that concerns me, it’s the overall philosophy. Yes, there are plenty of times where we run plays that are actually good calls but don’t work because of execution. More times than not, our athletes aren’t put in position to maximize their value. In the last 2 years, I haven’t went into a game thinking we have a schematic advantage. More times than not, I’m just hoping that our talent outweighs coaching defincies. 

I just feel like there are better (realistic) options available 

I'm with you as i would prefer if Mattox, Gilbert, and Burke get told to pound sand this off season ( I would fire them if I was CCS) but I can see why a risk adverse coach wouldn't do that going into a contract year.  It's just does CCS think a unknown coming in with a new system and the inevitable growing pains  can give him more than what Gilbert and company would with their established but painfully unimaginative and predictable offense.  

Edited November 15, 2018 by Bull Dozer

[IBulleve]

12 minutes ago, Bull Dozer said:

I'm with you as i would prefer if Mattox, Gilbert, and Burke get told to pound sand this off season ( I would fire them if I was CCS) but I can see why a risk adverse coach wouldn't do that going into a contract year.  It's just does CCS think a unknown coming in with a new system and the inevitable growing pains  can give him more than what Gilbert and company would with their established but painfully unimaginative and predictable offense.  

It’s very possible that this is Charlie’s line of thinking, which scares the living day lights out of me. 

[Bullrush33]

Time to bring this back 

https://hkm.com/football/contracts/charlie-strong/

Edited August 31, 2019 by Bullrush33
adding file