(02-24-2012 09:07 AM)cajunhawk Wrote:  He is walking into a pretty cherry situation. Not many head coaches walk in to a job as the early conference favorite for their first season. But that does not guarantee success. Nor does paying coaches more than other Sun Belt schools. Nor does one year of recruiting rankings. Nor does calling yourself the next "Boise" or blathering about being in the top 25 regularly.

This is nothing new in the world of sports. Spend more money to get results. It doesn't always work. If that was all it took at the Sun Belt level you would see all football teams paying their coaches the same as Malzahn, trust me the majority can they just choose not to. Malzahn might be a name, but at this point as far as head coaching goes that is all he is, a name. Nothing more, nothing less.

The proof is in the pudding. I am pulling for you guys, except when you play the Cajuns of course, success for the SBC is good for the entire gander. I just don't see any team from the SBC ever doing anything like what is being said while still in the SBC. Too many obstacles to overcome. Too hard to build a sustainable top 25 program. They not only have to deal with Money games, but perception will always keep the Sun Belt from being what we all know it will be.

I understand your skepticism/realism.

Incidentally, it appears that going to one money game per year is part of stAte's strategy. The thought is that consistently winning 8+ games and going to a bowl will change the perception of stAte football among the unwashed and enable more fan support and fund raising.

Remember this Sun Belt football has suffered greatly in the perception battle over its first decade. I'm glad stAte is trying to change that - even if we never crack the top 50 on a Vegas oddsmaker power rating.

That said, I can't wait for the "Boise" jokes when we come up short. You stick it out there, sometimes it gets chopped off! :)

(02-24-2012 11:42 AM)WinstonTheWolf Wrote:  

(02-24-2012 09:07 AM)cajunhawk Wrote:  He is walking into a pretty cherry situation. Not many head coaches walk in to a job as the early conference favorite for their first season. But that does not guarantee success. Nor does paying coaches more than other Sun Belt schools. Nor does one year of recruiting rankings. Nor does calling yourself the next "Boise" or blathering about being in the top 25 regularly.

This is nothing new in the world of sports. Spend more money to get results. It doesn't always work. If that was all it took at the Sun Belt level you would see all football teams paying their coaches the same as Malzahn, trust me the majority can they just choose not to. Malzahn might be a name, but at this point as far as head coaching goes that is all he is, a name. Nothing more, nothing less.

The proof is in the pudding. I am pulling for you guys, except when you play the Cajuns of course, success for the SBC is good for the entire gander. I just don't see any team from the SBC ever doing anything like what is being said while still in the SBC. Too many obstacles to overcome. Too hard to build a sustainable top 25 program. They not only have to deal with Money games, but perception will always keep the Sun Belt from being what we all know it will be.

I understand your skepticism/realism.

Incidentally, it appears that going to one money game per year is part of stAte's strategy. The thought is that consistently winning 8+ games and going to a bowl will change the perception of stAte football among the unwashed and enable more fan support and fund raising.

Remember this Sun Belt football has suffered greatly in the perception battle over its first decade. I'm glad stAte is trying to change that - even if we never crack the top 50 on a Vegas oddsmaker power rating.

That said, I can't wait for the "Boise" jokes when we come up short. You stick it out there, sometimes it gets chopped off! :)

But the important thing is you have the ballz to stick it out there . . I admire Coach Malzahn for setting high yet attainable goals . . stAte finished at #35 in the BCS Standings as I recall and was just outside the Top 25 . . his goal is very attainable . . I believe . . and I admire and respect people with goals and ambitions.

Go stAte . . Go SBC !!

If we had of had a full coaching staff at the Go Daddy Bowl and had played as well as we played during the regular season I think we would have beaten NIU. If so do yall think we would have finished top 25.....and I know all about "ifs and buts". Just wondering.

They might have finished in the top25...I believed they should have been there after beating UL. If they weren't ranked after that then beating NIU wouldn't have put them in the top 25. That's one of the reason's I don't ever see an SBC team doing it. Too much perception to battle. I find it highly unlikely that a belt team can go undefeated through a full season. That would be the only way an SBC team would crack the top 25.

I'm fairly convinced if sTate would've beaten NIU by a double-digit margin they'd have been ranked in the Top 25 without much doubt.

(02-24-2012 09:11 PM)airtroop Wrote:  I'm fairly convinced if sTate would've beaten NIU by a double-digit margin they'd have been ranked in the Top 25 without much doubt.

Much doubt...Neither team was ranked. Plus its a MAC team. Take off the homer goggles.

I may be a homer as well, but I think an 11 win team with loses to AQ teams (both who went to bowls) would be really close to breaking it.

StAte have another season like last year, they will crack the top 25. Wins will bring respect. Add to that some wins over the AQ schools and it will definitely happen.

Its gonna take more than that for an SBC team to crack the top 25.

(02-24-2012 09:07 AM)cajunhawk Wrote:  He is walking into a pretty cherry situation. Not many head coaches walk in to a job as the early conference favorite for their first season. But that does not guarantee success. Nor does paying coaches more than other Sun Belt schools. Nor does one year of recruiting rankings. Nor does calling yourself the next "Boise" or blathering about being in the top 25 regularly.

This is nothing new in the world of sports. Spend more money to get results. It doesn't always work. If that was all it took at the Sun Belt level you would see all football teams paying their coaches the same as Malzahn, trust me the majority can they just choose not to. Malzahn might be a name, but at this point as far as head coaching goes that is all he is, a name. Nothing more, nothing less.

The proof is in the pudding. I am pulling for you guys, except when you play the Cajuns of course, success for the SBC is good for the entire gander. I just don't see any team from the SBC ever doing anything like what is being said while still in the SBC. Too many obstacles to overcome. Too hard to build a sustainable top 25 program. They not only have to deal with Money games, but perception will always keep the Sun Belt from being what we all know it will be.

You can hire a great coach on the cheap.

Seem to recall the league's lowest paid coach running the table last year.

May not be able to keep him if he does well.

The difference in hiring Freeze as the league's lowest paid coach and Malzahn as the league's highest paid coach?

The Freeze hire made the ASU faithful happy. Malzahn hire has created national attention and more importantly created credibility for the program state-wide.

Freeze got many ASU fans to believe the Red Wolves were serious and got them back in the stands. Malzahn makes many non-ASU fans in the region believe ASU is serious and will get them into the stands for the first time or the first time in years.

I have no idea if Malzahn will be a successful FBS head coach. I do know that he was one of the most successful high school coaches in state history (shades of Dodge) but turned around the Arkansas offense, blew up the record book at Tulsa, and set new offensive records at Auburn. At Arkansas and Auburn he worked under head coaches that did not embrace what he was doing on offense and never had full control.

We hired a coach that will lead to selling more tickets, obtaining more donations and sponsorships and does not have to explain who he is or what is system is to recruits anywhere in the Southeast. Getting a coach like that costs money.

(02-24-2012 06:45 PM)cajunhawk Wrote:  They might have finished in the top25...I believed they should have been there after beating UL. If they weren't ranked after that then beating NIU wouldn't have put them in the top 25. That's one of the reason's I don't ever see an SBC team doing it. Too much perception to battle. I find it highly unlikely that a belt team can go undefeated through a full season. That would be the only way an SBC team would crack the top 25.

ASU lost to a 6-6 Illinois and a Va.Tech team that lost twice to Clemson by a combined 48 points and then lost its bowl game. It wasn't just the Sun Belt schedule that hurt.

You need a quality win to hang your hat on and Memphis ain't it.

More than the money, that one of the nation's top OCs chose Ark State elevated the Red Wolves immensely, imo.
To get into the Top 25, any team needs an AQ scalp or two. Savvy scheduling can assist this -avoid the powers, play the mid-tier teams; and in the SEC, the lower tier will probably work. OF course, the mid-tiers don't pay the big road warrior bucks either.

They may not pay the big bucks, but they will give you a home-home series. Just look at Miss State. I'm sure Old Mrs, Vandy, Kentucky would do the same. Duke would probably be willing from the ACC.

(02-25-2012 11:26 AM)Usajags Wrote:  They may not pay the big bucks, but they will give you a home-home series. Just look at Miss State. I'm sure Old Mrs, Vandy, Kentucky would do the same. Duke would probably be willing from the ACC.

Correct, but teams need the bucks.

People keep saying Boise won all their money games on the way to the top. Let's analyze their "money" games.

1996:

#5 Arizona State-Beat Boise 56-7

1997:

Wisconsin-Beat Boise 28-24
#15 Washington State-Beat Boise 58-0(you cannot call this a money game, Boise got a return game next year at home)

1998:

Home game against Washington State-Beat Boise 33-21

1999:

#17 UCLA-Beat Boise 38-7

Boise went to it's first Bowl Game in 1999, it was at their own stadium. Imagine that, a bowl payout with zero travel costs and an attendance boondoggle. But it's money games that matter. So back to reality.

2000:

Arkansas-Beat Boise 38-31
Washington State-Beat Boise 42-35

In 2000, Boise went to their second bowl game, guess where? Yep, their own stadium again.

2001:

#21 South Carolina-Beat Boise 32-12
Home game against Washington State-Beat Boise 41-20

2002:

Arkansas-Beat Boise 41-14

Boise made their third bowl ever in 2002. Guess where? Yep...once again they played a bowl game with zero travel costs and almost guaranteed attendance to cover tickets purchased.

2002 also marked Boise's entrance into the top 25.

2003:

Oregon State-Beat Boise 26-24

Boise traveled for their fourth bowl game, first time they had to leave Idaho for a bowl game. What an advantage to have?

2004:

Home game against Oregon State-Boise wins 53-34.

Boise goes to its fifth bowl game in the Liberty Bowl. Seems like NCAA realized how they screwed up by giving Boise a bowl game in its own stadium and letting them basically whack that cash pinata 3 times in 4 years.

2005:

#13 Georgia-beat Boise 48-13
Oregon State-beat Boise 30-27

Once again, Boise gets to attend a bowl game with no travel costs.

2006:

Home game against Oregon State-Boise wins 42-14

This is the magical Fiesta bowl year...and the beginning of the BCS payouts. All would not have been possible without playing 4 of 6 of their bowl games in their own stadiums basically pocketing large chunks of money.

2007:

Washington-Beat Boise 24-10

Travels to Hawaii Bowl...first time they really have to take a bath on a bowl game.

2008:

#17 Oregon-Boise wins 37-32

Gets shut out of BCS, gets sent to San Diego. NCAA learned their lesson on keep a team from playing a bowl in their own spot.

2009:

Home game against #16 Oregon-Boise wins 19-8

Boise gets the BCS payout again playing TCU in the Fiesta Bowl.

2010:

Neutral Site game against #13 Virginia Tech-Boise wins 33-30
Home game against Oregon State-Boise wins 37-24

Lose to Nevada, revisit Nevada for Las Vegas Bowl.

2011:

Neutral Site game against #19 Georgia-Boise wins 35-21

Lose to TCU, get your butt to Vegas again.

Summary:

What Boise had a bunch of at the beginning is more home and home agreements with regional BCS opponents. Did that have as big an effect as having 4 bowl games at your own house, where you basically make out like a bandit win or lose? Was Boise lucky? Yes. Is there a way to replicate Boise's success? Not really. I'm sure the NCAA won't allow a team to do that again. Neutral site close to your home is about as far as you will get these days.

If the Little Rock Bowl(my choice is the Bill Clinton Saxophone Bowl) becomes a reality, there is a chance ASU can rig up the cash pinata and take a few whacks. That would set up ASU with a Little Rock Bowl, USA with the Godaddy.com Bowl, and UL with the New Orleans Bowl as three teams that can really strike it rich with small bowl payouts by minimizing costs and using those to supplement money games in their budgets. That's the real Boise model.

And here I thought Boise did it by consistently winning a sh!tload of games against relatively weak schedules.

(02-25-2012 06:54 PM)WinstonTheWolf Wrote:  And here I thought Boise did it by consistently winning a sh!tload of games against relatively weak schedules.

Not a lot of money in fisting WAC opponents. The money to be made is in bowl games, especially when you get to sleep in your own bed. They don't get 4 bowl games in 6 years at their own stadium, they are not where they are now.

More then anything, having that bowl gave them a bowl game to be in, no matter where it was, and that results in another month of practice for the team. Advantage, it's at home and they get paid with no travel expense. Without that bowl, they don't go to a bowl, they don't get that practice time, they aren't as good the next season.

As the SBC is having more teams bowl eligible, we need a place for them to go, start a new bowl. That is hopefully what they are doing in LR, Montgomery, AL has a newly renovated stadium, let's get one there too. I have a feeling some of the bowls we saw this year, poor crowds, in bad buildings, may not last to long. I could see a city like Montgomery really get behind a bowl just like Mobile has done.

They must have spent that extra 750K on recruits . . .

(02-25-2012 08:16 PM)cajunhawk Wrote:  

(02-25-2012 06:54 PM)WinstonTheWolf Wrote:  And here I thought Boise did it by consistently winning a sh!tload of games against relatively weak schedules.

Not a lot of money in fisting WAC opponents. The money to be made is in bowl games, especially when you get to sleep in your own bed. They don't get 4 bowl games in 6 years at their own stadium, they are not where they are now.

?? 90% of their wins are against WAC teams.
They don't make as much money off of a Humanitarian Bowl appearance as they do a home game.
They do have an advantage in the PAC 10 teams more amenable to home and home.
But the biggest reason for their success is first-rate coaching. The execute like a precision machine.