(12-10-2019 02:30 PM)RamDawg Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 01:57 PM)Dukester Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 01:24 PM)RamDawg Wrote:  A post from the UD board: "recruiting recruiting recruiting...It ain't rocket science....We need better more athletic players...That simple....

Yes, it really is that simple. Success breeds Success.

Success allows us to not only recruit FBS talent but it allows us to recruit specific talent. We need a TE, we go out and recruit a TE. We don't need to go out and find a big, athletic HS QB to play TE. We don't need to try to drive a square peg in a round hole.

Successful "lower level" programs like us are very attractive to transfers that may be 2nd or third string FBS. They work hard here and they have a reasonable opportunity to play a lot.

Unlike basketball where recruits make decisions based on who the HC is, recruits make decisions based more on position coaches and support staff such as trainers, condition coaches and less on the HC.

Modern day recruits look hard at facilities, fan support, success of other sports.

We're not a school where a recruit is expected to only play football. They are expected to get an education. These type of recruits look at the university as a place to not only play sports but to also get a education, live and play for 4 or 5 years. Mom & Dad need to feel comfortable sending their babies off on their own.

NDSU offers similar opportunities, but they also have a lot less choices for the local quality recruits to choose from. That area of the country isn't exactly a basketball "hotbed" so those good basketball players tend to travels out of state to play but if NDSU continues to build their BB program, we could see them making some noise in the future.

Recruiting certainly is a big part of the equation, but I give more value to coaching than others.

For example - Look at what Houston did with roughly the same players as Withers. I think JMU was 3 touchdowns better under Houston than Withers. Look at the difference what Mathews got from Woods players. I think if Larranga coached our present Men's basket ball team they would easily be a to 100 team.

It's like the chicken and the egg thing (pun intended) Does a good football coach make bad players good or do good football players make bad coaches appear better than the are?

With football I think it's 70% talent and 30% coaching. Basketball it's like 80% players and 20% coaching. We could hire Coach K this week to take over for Coach Rowe and we still aren't winning a NCAAT game. Changing culture doesn't happen over night.

Where does culture come from talent, or coaching?

I could not disagree with you more. So you think our basketball players are not talented and just play with a bad culture. I think our freshman class is impressive - but you think it will take years to improve their culture?

Houston talked about how he changed the culture in 2016. Did it really not happen in one season/overnight?

To clarify (unless you are in the playin game) you are roughly a top 32 team if you win a game in the NCAAT. I'm not saying a coaching change with the same players can make a #250 team a top 32 team. But in basketball Coach K or L could make this current top 250 team a top hundred or perhaps 75 team.

(12-10-2019 02:30 PM)RamDawg Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 01:57 PM)Dukester Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 01:24 PM)RamDawg Wrote:  A post from the UD board: "recruiting recruiting recruiting...It ain't rocket science....We need better more athletic players...That simple....

Yes, it really is that simple. Success breeds Success.

Success allows us to not only recruit FBS talent but it allows us to recruit specific talent. We need a TE, we go out and recruit a TE. We don't need to go out and find a big, athletic HS QB to play TE. We don't need to try to drive a square peg in a round hole.

Successful "lower level" programs like us are very attractive to transfers that may be 2nd or third string FBS. They work hard here and they have a reasonable opportunity to play a lot.

Unlike basketball where recruits make decisions based on who the HC is, recruits make decisions based more on position coaches and support staff such as trainers, condition coaches and less on the HC.

Modern day recruits look hard at facilities, fan support, success of other sports.

We're not a school where a recruit is expected to only play football. They are expected to get an education. These type of recruits look at the university as a place to not only play sports but to also get a education, live and play for 4 or 5 years. Mom & Dad need to feel comfortable sending their babies off on their own.

NDSU offers similar opportunities, but they also have a lot less choices for the local quality recruits to choose from. That area of the country isn't exactly a basketball "hotbed" so those good basketball players tend to travels out of state to play but if NDSU continues to build their BB program, we could see them making some noise in the future.

Recruiting certainly is a big part of the equation, but I give more value to coaching than others.

For example - Look at what Houston did with roughly the same players as Withers. I think JMU was 3 touchdowns better under Houston than Withers. Look at the difference what Mathews got from Woods players. I think if Larranga coached our present Men's basket ball team they would easily be a to 100 team.

It's like the chicken and the egg thing (pun intended) Does a good football coach make bad players good or do good football players make bad coaches appear better than the are?

With football I think it's 70% talent and 30% coaching. Basketball it's like 80% players and 20% coaching. We could hire Coach K this week to take over for Coach Rowe and we still aren't winning a NCAAT game. Changing culture doesn't happen over night.

I think a good coach makes good players reach their potential.

(12-10-2019 10:10 AM)jmufan2008 Wrote:  Since 2004...
2004 - Championship win
2006 - First round loss - Stupid 4pt loss to YSU
2007 - First round loss - Most heartbreaking loss ever to eventual NC champ Appy
2008 - Semifinal loss to Montana after RL got hurt and 4 TOs
2011 - Second round loss @NDSU (closest game they played all postseason)
2014 - First round loss to Liberty
2015 - Second round loss to Colgate (after 1st round bye)
2016 - Championship win (after winning @NDSU in semifinal)
2017 - Championship loss (way too many mistakes and still had a chance to win)
2018 - Second round loss to Colgate (the MH-leaving debacle)
2019 - Deep run and some projects give us the best chance to win it all

11 appearances in 16 years
5 quarterfinal appearances
4-5 semifinal appearances
3-4 championship appearances
2-3 championships

Over a 16 year period that's super impressive. Not going to take the time to compare against other top teams I can think of, but I'd think we're only behind NDSU and arguably Appy. EWU is close behind us.

06,07 & 08 were all games that shoulda woulda coulda. Those seemed to be heading our way aaaaaand Ooooof. One kind of a “wall” or another.

Still this has ALL been a fantastic run over the 15+ years

Let’s get er done on Friday!

(12-10-2019 02:58 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 10:10 AM)jmufan2008 Wrote:  Since 2004...
2004 - Championship win
2006 - First round loss - Stupid 4pt loss to YSU
2007 - First round loss - Most heartbreaking loss ever to eventual NC champ Appy
2008 - Semifinal loss to Montana after RL got hurt and 4 TOs
2011 - Second round loss @NDSU (closest game they played all postseason)
2014 - First round loss to Liberty
2015 - Second round loss to Colgate (after 1st round bye)
2016 - Championship win (after winning @NDSU in semifinal)
2017 - Championship loss (way too many mistakes and still had a chance to win)
2018 - Second round loss to Colgate (the MH-leaving debacle)
2019 - Deep run and some projects give us the best chance to win it all

11 appearances in 16 years
5 quarterfinal appearances
4-5 semifinal appearances
3-4 championship appearances
2-3 championships

Over a 16 year period that's super impressive. Not going to take the time to compare against other top teams I can think of, but I'd think we're only behind NDSU and arguably Appy. EWU is close behind us.

06,07 & 08 were all games that shoulda woulda coulda. Those seemed to be heading our way aaaaaand Ooooof. One kind of a “wall” or another.

Still this has ALL been a fantastic run over the 15+ years

Let’s get er done on Friday!

BTW - I'm sure someone has commented somewhere, but I like the back to back playoff games on Friday night.

Coaching is certainly much, much more than 30% in football.

(12-10-2019 03:49 PM)KickItToScotty Wrote:  Coaching is certainly much, much more than 30% in football.

Agree, but also far less than 100%, there are other elements too. It takes time to build a winning culture and have it snowball.

Far easier to destroy a program with a bad coach than to rebuild a bad one. Good programs attract good coaches, because they know it’s easier to succeed in the right environment.

Having a good coach hasn’t “fixed” Delaware yet, at least not as quick as they would like.

Penn St has been relatively successful, in spite of what they felt is a bad OC that they are replacing. The bar is higher for successful programs.

A good program with a good/great coach can be nearly unstoppable. A great program with a bad coach can turn into a mess in a few years.

(12-10-2019 10:37 AM)JMU08 Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 06:56 AM)Potomac Wrote:  I’m sorry but championships talk. I’m not downplaying our program but you won’t hear me compared us to actual dynasties without the trophies to show for it.

Same here. We've done very well, but we haven't had a dynasty.

Thank you. That’s literally my point.

You can’t compare yourself to a program that won 3 consecutive titles when we’ve never won 2 consecutive titles.

(12-10-2019 05:57 PM)Potomac Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 10:37 AM)JMU08 Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 06:56 AM)Potomac Wrote:  I’m sorry but championships talk. I’m not downplaying our program but you won’t hear me compared us to actual dynasties without the trophies to show for it.

Same here. We've done very well, but we haven't had a dynasty.

Thank you. That’s literally my point.

You can’t compare yourself to a program that won 3 consecutive titles when we’ve never won 2 consecutive titles.

I would say if we can win the Natty this year then we are in the discussion for a dynasty. Certainly not up to the level of App St or NDSU, but 3 title games and 2 wins in 4 years and a 30-2 CAA record sounds pretty dynastic to me. BUT we HAVE to win it all this year before you can even entertain that kind of talk.

cause dukes are the best

We're in a different league because of the Marching Royal Dukes. Everything else is just details.

Coaching is the BIG difference. People don't understand that there are very few really great coaches out there. They have a different mind set; a different understanding and vision. They succeed where others fail. There are tons of coaches who could have succeeded Mike Houston and not achieved what HCCC has done. Just so happens that HCCC is probably an even better coach that HCMH. HCMH was the more dynamic coach, but CC is all about those Xs and Os. We are fortunate to have had them both.

(12-11-2019 02:48 PM)BSKB 24 Wrote:  Coaching is the BIG difference. People don't understand that there are very few really great coaches out there. They have a different mind set; a different understanding and vision. They succeed where others fail. There are tons of coaches who could have succeeded Mike Houston and not achieved what HCCC has done. Just so happens that HCCC is probably an even better coach that HCMH. HCMH was the more dynamic coach, but CC is all about those Xs and Os. We are fortunate to have had them both.

Agree 100% but would like to add; great coaches understand their own strengths and weaknesses. They understand other's strengths and weaknesses. They may have their own program and hire and recruit to them but don't have problems with adjusting. They have a talent for getting the most out of their people. I know very little about how the football coaching system works but if it's like running a business, the key is in the quality of your management staff.

(12-10-2019 02:45 PM)Dukester Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 02:30 PM)RamDawg Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 01:57 PM)Dukester Wrote:  [quote='RamDawg' pid='16536685' dateline='1576002254']
A post from the UD board: "recruiting recruiting recruiting...It ain't rocket science....We need better more athletic players...That simple....

Yes, it really is that simple. Success breeds Success.

Success allows us to not only recruit FBS talent but it allows us to recruit specific talent. We need a TE, we go out and recruit a TE. We don't need to go out and find a big, athletic HS QB to play TE. We don't need to try to drive a square peg in a round hole.

Successful "lower level" programs like us are very attractive to transfers that may be 2nd or third string FBS. They work hard here and they have a reasonable opportunity to play a lot.

Unlike basketball where recruits make decisions based on who the HC is, recruits make decisions based more on position coaches and support staff such as trainers, condition coaches and less on the HC.

Modern day recruits look hard at facilities, fan support, success of other sports.

We're not a school where a recruit is expected to only play football. They are expected to get an education. These type of recruits look at the university as a place to not only play sports but to also get a education, live and play for 4 or 5 years. Mom & Dad need to feel comfortable sending their babies off on their own.

NDSU offers similar opportunities, but they also have a lot less choices for the local quality recruits to choose from. That area of the country isn't exactly a basketball "hotbed" so those good basketball players tend to travels out of state to play but if NDSU continues to build their BB program, we could see them making some noise in the future.

Recruiting certainly is a big part of the equation, but I give more value to coaching than others.

For example - Look at what Houston did with roughly the same players as Withers. I think JMU was 3 touchdowns better under Houston than Withers. Look at the difference what Mathews got from Woods players. I think if Larranga coached our present Men's basket ball team they would easily be a to 100 team.

It's like the chicken and the egg thing (pun intended) Does a good football coach make bad players good or do good football players make bad coaches appear better than the are?

With football I think it's 70% talent and 30% coaching. Basketball it's like 80% players and 20% coaching. We could hire Coach K this week to take over for Coach Rowe and we still aren't winning a NCAAT game. Changing culture doesn't happen over night.

Not disagreeing at all but my two cents worth and we know what that gets you:

Where does culture come from talent, or coaching? It starts with the program, then the coach and then the talent buying into the culture. No one wants to be the team that underperforms the previous teams. Maintain or exceed the culture.

So you think our basketball players are not talented and just play with a bad culture. I think our freshman class is impressive - but you think it will take years to improve their culture? I think our talent is well above the results we are seeing. We have a BB coach that is trying to run a "system" without the proper tools. Square peg meet round hole. Our talent is quick, athletic, and looks to have a decent BB IQ, pretty deep bench but not overly big. Play fast, defend the 3 with hands in face, zone press. Play inside out. This team says street ball but trying to play like Princeton. Start a "street ball" culture and see where it goes in 2 or 3 years.

Houston talked about how he changed the culture in 2016. Did it really not happen in one season/overnight?
I didn't seem much change since the success was there with Withers. However I think MH expanded the "pride" and "discipline" quite a bit. The JMU football culture has been around quite a while. It may change slightly from year to year but the foundation of "you don't want to play JMU" doesn't seem to change.

(12-11-2019 01:00 PM)chicagoduke Wrote:  We're in a different league because of the Marching Royal Dukes. Everything else is just details.

The band absolutely lit a fire in the crowd for the 2nd half of the ‘17 Champ game. They crushed ‘Start Wearing Purple’ and had the JMU side of the stadium in a frenzy. Team ran out right after the last note and the energy was palpable between the bench and the crowd. I was absolutely convinced we were gonna win, everyone was. Too many dropped passes.

Side note, you could definitively tell the NDSU fans were sensing that tide was turning. The MRD’s dominated that halftime, other side of the stadium got reeeeal antsy. Such a shame we messed it all up.

JMU should be in a different league.

We are the last remaining founding member of the CAA; everyone else capable of leaving has left

(12-11-2019 05:58 PM)Dukeman2 Wrote:  JMU should be in a different league.

Yeah, they call it FBS.

(12-11-2019 02:48 PM)BSKB 24 Wrote:  Coaching is the BIG difference. People don't understand that there are very few really great coaches out there. They have a different mind set; a different understanding and vision. They succeed where others fail. There are tons of coaches who could have succeeded Mike Houston and not achieved what HCCC has done. Just so happens that HCCC is probably an even better coach that HCMH. HCMH was the more dynamic coach, but CC is all about those Xs and Os. We are fortunate to have had them both.

I couldn't agree more. If you want an example of the reverse, look no further than the transition from Scherer to Wood. Rip left us with the preseason #3 team in the country. Wood took that team and barely made the playoffs. We finished 1995 at 8-3 when we should've probably been undefeated. We had virtually everyone back from a 10-3 team that took Marshall to overtime in the playoffs on their field. Wood could not coach, did not establish any kind of a culture and no one bought the snake oil he was trying to sale. Our records got increasingly worse as the Wood years continued (1996--7-4, 1997--5-6, 1998--3-8).

(12-12-2019 11:58 AM)JMU_71 Wrote:  

(12-11-2019 02:48 PM)BSKB 24 Wrote:  Coaching is the BIG difference. People don't understand that there are very few really great coaches out there. They have a different mind set; a different understanding and vision. They succeed where others fail. There are tons of coaches who could have succeeded Mike Houston and not achieved what HCCC has done. Just so happens that HCCC is probably an even better coach that HCMH. HCMH was the more dynamic coach, but CC is all about those Xs and Os. We are fortunate to have had them both.

I couldn't agree more. If you want an example of the reverse, look no further than the transition from Scherer to Wood. Rip left us with the preseason #3 team in the country. Wood took that team and barely made the playoffs. We finished 1995 at 8-3 when we should've probably been undefeated. We had virtually everyone back from a 10-3 team that took Marshall to overtime in the playoffs on their field. Wood could not coach, did not establish any kind of a culture and no one bought the snake oil he was trying to sale. Our records got increasingly worse as the Wood years continued (1996--7-4, 1997--5-6, 1998--3-8).

Dead on accurate. What was left of Scherer’s recruits after Wood bailed (thank goodness) MM then took to the playoffs. After which the cupboard was bare and MM had to rebuild from the ground up.

71 I’m so very sorry you and other members of that team had to suffer Wood as HC. What a missed opportunity to build on what Rip had established.

(12-12-2019 03:50 PM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(12-12-2019 11:58 AM)JMU_71 Wrote:  

(12-11-2019 02:48 PM)BSKB 24 Wrote:  Coaching is the BIG difference. People don't understand that there are very few really great coaches out there. They have a different mind set; a different understanding and vision. They succeed where others fail. There are tons of coaches who could have succeeded Mike Houston and not achieved what HCCC has done. Just so happens that HCCC is probably an even better coach that HCMH. HCMH was the more dynamic coach, but CC is all about those Xs and Os. We are fortunate to have had them both.

I couldn't agree more. If you want an example of the reverse, look no further than the transition from Scherer to Wood. Rip left us with the preseason #3 team in the country. Wood took that team and barely made the playoffs. We finished 1995 at 8-3 when we should've probably been undefeated. We had virtually everyone back from a 10-3 team that took Marshall to overtime in the playoffs on their field. Wood could not coach, did not establish any kind of a culture and no one bought the snake oil he was trying to sale. Our records got increasingly worse as the Wood years continued (1996--7-4, 1997--5-6, 1998--3-8).

Dead on accurate. What was left of Scherer’s recruits after Wood bailed (thank goodness) MM then took to the playoffs. After which the cupboard was bare and MM had to rebuild from the ground up.

71 I’m so very sorry you and other members of that team had to suffer Wood as HC. What a missed opportunity to build on what Rip had established.

It's water under the bridge now--so to speak. "A missed opportunity" is an understatement.

Alex Wood was the worst coach in the history of NCAA football.