The unofficial online home for fans of the Western Michigan University Broncos. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

(10-04-2017 03:12 PM)brovol Wrote:  

(10-04-2017 01:00 PM)GullLake Wrote:  

(10-04-2017 11:37 AM)uclabruin Wrote:  it is all about recruiting.. if Lester matches the PJ trend with this coaching staff, then the winning will continue...

No. It is all about results.

Recruiting is, obviously, an important part of the equation. But who cares how good of a recruiter you are if your teams are not competing for championships and beating their arch-rival?

You gotta do something with the talent you've assembled.

Recruiting is huge, obviously, but having coaches with a good philosophy, system, techniques to teach players, motivate players, and call the right plays on game day is more important.

When people say "players win or lose games, not coaches", they are flat out wrong. The difference between good teams and bad teams, at almost every level, is the coaches. This is why you will see high school teams, and college and pro too, go from a terrible record for years to dramatic improvement as soon as a new coach is hired, and from prosperity for years to a terrible record when a new coach is hired. Coaches are everything.

I've seen it both ways. New coach is brought in and the team continues to suck; new coach is brought in and they see dramatic improvements.

I do think the coach matters more at the college level then pro because the college coach is the one recruiting and assembling the team.

I'm not sold on the coach being that important at the pro levels in the major sports. If the GM's assembled a solid roster and the team sucks, then yah, it's on the coach. If the GM's assembled a solid roster and gets beat by another solid team, the roster gets tweaked ('maybe we weren't as good as we thought') before the coach gets looked at.

And if it came to Saban coaching MAC level 3 star recruits, or an Enos coaching 5 star recruits, and they played each other, I'd take Enos with the 5 star recruits. (We saw that in the Cotton Bowl, for example. At the end of the day, they had better players, like that one player we offered but went there).

I think at the higher levels, yes, coaching is everything (Saban, Dabo, Urban, etc.) because the talent disparity at the top isn’t too far apart.

But at our level in the MAC, if you can recruit high level talent, you’re going to win even with mediocre coaching. That’s a big reason why some coaches experience success and continue to move up the ladder (Kelly, Urban, Saban, etc.) and others don’t pan out (Hazell, Butch Jones, Hoke).

At our level, it’s primarily about talent.

(10-04-2017 03:12 PM)brovol Wrote:  

(10-04-2017 01:00 PM)GullLake Wrote:  

(10-04-2017 11:37 AM)uclabruin Wrote:  it is all about recruiting.. if Lester matches the PJ trend with this coaching staff, then the winning will continue...

No. It is all about results.

Recruiting is, obviously, an important part of the equation. But who cares how good of a recruiter you are if your teams are not competing for championships and beating their arch-rival?

You gotta do something with the talent you've assembled.

Recruiting is huge, obviously, but having coaches with a good philosophy, system, techniques to teach players, motivate players, and call the right plays on game day is more important.

When people say "players win or lose games, not coaches", they are flat out wrong. The difference between good teams and bad teams, at almost every level, is the coaches. This is why you will see high school teams, and college and pro too, go from a terrible record for years to dramatic improvement as soon as a new coach is hired, and from prosperity for years to a terrible record when a new coach is hired. Coaches are everything.

That's not "flat out wrong". That's insane.

(10-04-2017 08:10 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  

(10-04-2017 03:12 PM)brovol Wrote:  

(10-04-2017 01:00 PM)GullLake Wrote:  

(10-04-2017 11:37 AM)uclabruin Wrote:  it is all about recruiting.. if Lester matches the PJ trend with this coaching staff, then the winning will continue...

No. It is all about results.

Recruiting is, obviously, an important part of the equation. But who cares how good of a recruiter you are if your teams are not competing for championships and beating their arch-rival?

You gotta do something with the talent you've assembled.

Recruiting is huge, obviously, but having coaches with a good philosophy, system, techniques to teach players, motivate players, and call the right plays on game day is more important.

When people say "players win or lose games, not coaches", they are flat out wrong. The difference between good teams and bad teams, at almost every level, is the coaches. This is why you will see high school teams, and college and pro too, go from a terrible record for years to dramatic improvement as soon as a new coach is hired, and from prosperity for years to a terrible record when a new coach is hired. Coaches are everything.

That's not "flat out wrong". That's insane.

I'd be more, there is a wide range of possible outcomes. Wide ranges of coaches and styles, systems, player inventory, culture, location, affiliations, alumni booster involvement, community support. Etc. anything could happen.

(10-04-2017 08:10 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  

(10-04-2017 03:12 PM)brovol Wrote:  

(10-04-2017 01:00 PM)GullLake Wrote:  

(10-04-2017 11:37 AM)uclabruin Wrote:  it is all about recruiting.. if Lester matches the PJ trend with this coaching staff, then the winning will continue...

No. It is all about results.

Recruiting is, obviously, an important part of the equation. But who cares how good of a recruiter you are if your teams are not competing for championships and beating their arch-rival?

You gotta do something with the talent you've assembled.

Recruiting is huge, obviously, but having coaches with a good philosophy, system, techniques to teach players, motivate players, and call the right plays on game day is more important.

When people say "players win or lose games, not coaches", they are flat out wrong. The difference between good teams and bad teams, at almost every level, is the coaches. This is why you will see high school teams, and college and pro too, go from a terrible record for years to dramatic improvement as soon as a new coach is hired, and from prosperity for years to a terrible record when a new coach is hired. Coaches are everything.

That's not "flat out wrong". That's insane.

If by that you mean insanely correct, then you are right.

(10-04-2017 02:20 PM)tayles mullet Wrote:  And now Boise has fallen back to the rest of the pack as a mediocre G5 program. Hard to sustain that level of success, but they had a very good run.

Boise hired a Bono/Enos-level coach in Bryan Harsin when Petersen moved on to Washington. They are now reaping what they’ve sown.

I mean... Boise St. was still a 10-win team last year.

They are 2-2 this year but their two losses are to #11 Washington St. and Virginia.

I think it's still a pretty darn good program until they show otherwise.

Yeah, Harsin isn't Bono/Enos he had OC experience in the SEC and experience at that school. He had a lot of things going for him.

It isn't just about stars next to a HS school kids name come recruiting time. It's about how a staff develops the recruits over 4-5 years. It takes a special HC and staff to take kids shunned by P5 schools and make them players at the G5 level. i didn't see any breaking headlines in 2013 when Corey Davis signed with WMU, Terrell the year before, Jennings years before that, Delmas, Biggers. The list is endless. Michigan has been top ten recruiting in "star rankings" for two decades. How's that working for them?

(10-05-2017 11:51 AM)BuickBronco Wrote:  It isn't just about stars next to a HS school kids name come recruiting time. It's about how a staff develops the recruits over 4-5 years. It takes a special HC and staff to take kids shunned by P5 schools and make them players at the G5 level. i didn't see any breaking headlines in 2013 when Corey Davis signed with WMU, Terrell the year before, Jennings years before that, Delmas, Biggers. The list is endless. Michigan has been top ten recruiting in "star rankings" for two decades. How's that working for them?

Leadership can't win alone without talent.

Talent can't win alone without leadership.

Should be obvious.

Quote:The difference between good teams and bad teams, at almost every level, is the coaches.

I agree. It takes both, but the coaches make the difference. In G5-land, recruiting is part of it. Not necessarily to be rated #1 in recruiting in their mid-major conference, but definitely to be in the top-half. That's the coach's setup. And not just the HC, but who he hires for recruiting, being OC, being DC, etc.

In the end, it's how he sets the tone, atmosphere, the bases he covers, the people he hires, etc. But yeah, players alone? No. Otherwise Texas would have never gotten into a bunch of sh!t. Players can make a team go from #1 to #4 in their conference (injuries, key ones graduating/new ones in on a certain year once in a while) -- but just a re-loading year. Bad coaching will make them sink.

Quote:Leadership can't win alone without talent. Talent can't win alone without leadership.

I agree. But a good coaching staff & atmosphere can make class C talent beat not-so-good coaching staff with class B talent. To be a conference championship team -- you need Both on the high end. When you're not conf champ... to be below-average or above-average in it, that all comes down to the coaching, assuming you're not abysmal in the talent category.

Big game for Fleck and Golden Gophers Saturday - their first Big Ten road game.

At Purdue, who also has a new coach in Jeff Brohm who seems to have energized the fan base and the team playing better (especially defensively) than in recent years.

One of them is going to be 0-2 in Big Ten Saturday night.

(10-05-2017 03:59 PM)MajorHoople Wrote:  Big game for Fleck and Golden Gophers Saturday - their first Big Ten road game.

At Purdue, who also has a new coach in Jeff Brohm who seems to have energized the fan base and the team playing better (especially defensively) than in recent years.

One of them is going to be 0-2 in Big Ten Saturday night.

I think in some ways Brohm is overshadowing Fleck, because Purdue was worse then UofMinnesota and now they seem like a contender. Should be a good game either way. I still think UofMinnesota will finish with just 2, 3, or 4 losses.

(10-05-2017 08:41 AM)ejd_5277 Wrote:  

(10-04-2017 02:20 PM)tayles mullet Wrote:  And now Boise has fallen back to the rest of the pack as a mediocre G5 program. Hard to sustain that level of success, but they had a very good run.

Boise hired a Bono/Enos-level coach in Bryan Harsin when Petersen moved on to Washington. They are now reaping what they’ve sown.

Not really. Take a look at Boise St’s record under him. He’s also way more qualified than Enos and Bono were.

(10-05-2017 11:51 AM)BuickBronco Wrote:  It isn't just about stars next to a HS school kids name come recruiting time. It's about how a staff develops the recruits over 4-5 years. It takes a special HC and staff to take kids shunned by P5 schools and make them players at the G5 level. i didn't see any breaking headlines in 2013 when Corey Davis signed with WMU, Terrell the year before, Jennings years before that, Delmas, Biggers. The list is endless. Michigan has been top ten recruiting in "star rankings" for two decades. How's that working for them?

Yep, exactly. No doubt Fleck changed us by recruiting well, but some were ‘diamonds in the rough.’ Weren’t Corey Davis and Zach Terrell just 2 star recruits?

Fleck didn't recruit Terrell.

He recruited Thomas, Stewart, Little, and Flacco.......all gone. He could recruit them, just couldn't keep them. Corey Davis has stated that if Enos had offered he'd have gone to CMU to play with his brother.

Well, who wants Stuart Little?

With Corey, yeah, regardless of how good your WMU/Ohio/Toledo recruiting is -- he's going to play with his Bro if desired. Thank gawd Enos was an idiot. Wasn't a fault on Fleck.

And Fleck didn't lose Flacco -- Tim Lester (probably for good reason) did.

But I agree Fleck could have done a better job trying to keep some guys. Heck, he told Terrell to transfer if he wanted, BECAUSE he didn't recruit him. :)

(10-05-2017 08:09 PM)Chipdip2 Wrote:  Fleck didn't recruit Terrell.

He recruited Thomas, Stewart, Little, and Flacco.......all gone. He could recruit them, just couldn't keep them. Corey Davis has stated that if Enos had offered he'd have gone to CMU to play with his brother.

Cam Thomas was actually a Cubit commit that Fleck decided to keep his scholarship.

Flacco left because he lost the starting job once Fleck left. So you’re basically down to just Stewart (who wasn’t cut out for D1) and Little (didn’t qualify).

Wassink was also Fleck’s recruit. He stuck around.

What’s you’re point with Davis? I bet if Alabama came calling, Davis would’ve committed there too.

He kept plenty of players, enough to win 13 games. Such a dumb pivot, stop.

(10-05-2017 08:09 PM)Chipdip2 Wrote:  Fleck didn't recruit Terrell.

He recruited Thomas, Stewart, Little, and Flacco.......all gone. He could recruit them, just couldn't keep them. Corey Davis has stated that if Enos had offered he'd have gone to CMU to play with his brother.

Cam Thomas was actually a Cubit commit that Fleck decided to keep his scholarship.

Flacco left because he lost the starting job once Fleck left. So you’re basically down to just Stewart (who wasn’t cut out for D1) and Little (didn’t qualify).

Wassink was also Fleck’s recruit. He stuck around.

He kept plenty of players, enough to win 13 games. Such a dumb pivot, stop.

He had ample time to recruit a QB when he signed on, he chose to keep Thomas, so it's his recruit.

Wassink, Stewart, Little, Thomas, Flacco. He's batting .200

The only time he ever recruited 2 QBs to a class was last year with Tanner Morgan and Estes so from St Louis.

(10-05-2017 11:20 PM)Chipdip2 Wrote:  He had ample time to recruit a QB when he signed on, he chose to keep Thomas, so it's his recruit.

Wassink, Stewart, Little, Thomas, Flacco. He's batting .200

The only time he ever recruited 2 QBs to a class was last year with Tanner Morgan and Estes so from St Louis.

Maybe it wasn't necessarily a priority considering we had a 4-year starter?

How many of these guys do you recognize:
Darrien Boone ('13)
Ryan Lamb ('14)
Zach Oakley ('14)
Brandon Childress ('15)
Dakota Kupp ('15)
Jake Johnson ('15)
Tommy Lazzaro ('16)
Austin Hergott ('16)
Tony Poljan ('16)

Those are all committed (and signed) CMU quarterback's during the same time span. I guess you could say CMU is batting .000 (0-8).

Point being, you're attempting to make something out of nothing to fit your narrative, but what's new. Quarterbacks come and go in every program. That's college football.

(10-06-2017 07:11 AM)Hoekjeness Wrote:  

(10-05-2017 11:20 PM)Chipdip2 Wrote:  He had ample time to recruit a QB when he signed on, he chose to keep Thomas, so it's his recruit.

Wassink, Stewart, Little, Thomas, Flacco. He's batting .200

The only time he ever recruited 2 QBs to a class was last year with Tanner Morgan and Estes so from St Louis.

Maybe it wasn't necessarily a priority considering we had a 4-year starter?

How many of these guys do you recognize:
Darrien Boone ('13)
Ryan Lamb ('14)
Zach Oakley ('14)
Brandon Childress ('15)
Dakota Kupp ('15)
Jake Johnson ('15)
Tommy Lazzaro ('16)
Austin Hergott ('16)
Tony Poljan ('16)

Those are all committed (and signed) CMU quarterback's during the same time span. I guess you could say CMU is batting .000 (0-8).

Point being, you're attempting to make something out of nothing to fit your narrative, but what's new. Quarterbacks come and go in every program. That's college football.

Was Fleck a douche-bag? Yes or no. Yes
Did Fleck win a championship at WMU? Yes or no. Yes
Did Fleck beat CMU regularly while at WMU? Yes or no. Yes
Did Fleck leave the program in better shape than what he inherited? Yes or no. Yes.
Is Fleck gone? Yes or no. Yes.
Is Fleck coming back? Yes or no. No

So, we have a douche-bag, who is no longer at WMU, is not coming back, who won a championship, beat CMU regularly, and left the program in better shape than how he received it....

Why are we still dwelling on this? STFU and enjoy today. WMU remains undefeated in the MAC and has not lost a conference game since 2015.

In Lester We Trust!