Printable View
This is going to come across as a frivolous post because I am not posting why I feel this way (I will later)
I am posting to hear the thoughts of any who feel the same way and will add my concrete thoughts later even if no one adds to this thread.
I will say this now, there is nothing wrong with the football program it is on track (even if it has been sidetracked) and will produce huge results in the near future.
Turbine, I share your optimism about the team. I see nice talent in skill positions that get me excited to see them play. But they need to get some W's on the board; especially against the teams that we are "supposed" to beat. I'm not sure how many of those are left on the schedule this year. One, maybe two. I'd love to be wrong; but regardless, won't stop supporting the team. Cheers, and hope to see you at HC.Quote:
Originally Posted by Turbine
Shof
Based on what do you see these huge results soon to be coming?Quote:
Originally Posted by Turbine
Please tell.
thanks turbine, for having good common sense.....it's funny, how things work, remember when babb, started played, got in trouble and was relieved by rekieta(spelling)he wasn't ready, this time however we have no one now to relieve michael des, he's a talent and will get better but for now he is struggling, you know....i warned people who wanted him to play and i'd tell them "he's not ready."Quote:
Originally Posted by Turbine
I am reminded of a couple of seasons in the early 90s in the Stokley era. 91 and 92 team record 2-8-1 and 2-9. In 1993 we got a new defensive coordinator, Vic Eumont, and a new attacking scheme. We also got stability at QB with a guy named Delhomme and went on to finish 8-3 with losses to Florida, Miami of Ohio, and Utah State. The defense finished the year ranked third in the nation against the run and somewhere around 15th in total defense. The personnel was nearly identical from the year before, only the scheme changed. My point is, our talent level is increasing but not translating into wins. We need a change of philosophy on defense. With Babb and our young RBs, our offense is headed in the right direction. I know the kids are fighting because I played from 90 to 93 and went through what they are going through now. I have been at the bottom but the 93 season and a Big West Championship is what I really remember of my time on the field. Bustle may be the right guy, but there needs to be a change on D!!!
I'm frustrated just like the rest of you guys but the kids deserve to see us in the stands at the remainder of our home games. Its sad to look up into the stands from the sideline and see only parents and the diehards in the stands.
Good words (C4Evr), and I think you're preaching to the choir here. Most of us will be there come rain or shine, win or loss. Its the casual fans that are hard to bring in without the W's; and unfortunetly they are the ones that help us fill the house. I often wish we lived closer so we could make more games and some spring sports as well.
<p align=justify> I guess it depends on your definition of "soon" my general definition of "near future" is the seasons to come.Quote:
Originally Posted by HOTBOUDIN
I really wanted to separate games from program, and post info on why some good things take time, and how there are some good things happening because of the program. NOW!
When Bustle was hired he was hired on the basis of his success with Virginia Tech. When you hire based on success you're hiring a model, or a system. Virginia Tech’s model was building their program for the long haul and it was done in a slow methodical way.
Are there programs out there that have turned things around in 3 or 4 years or even less? Perhaps, but they are the exception not the rule, and often they simply had good teams but failed to create good programs.
There is a huge difference between building a team for a season or two and building a program for the long haul. Bustle could have gone out and signed 21 or so junior college players and had a fair season, but I don’t think it’s very likely it would have helped the program?
So do we panic when the first 4 years of the Bustle era start slower than any fan coach or player would like? No because UL bought into a system for the long haul. In Frank Beamer's first 6 seasons with now perennial national power Virginia Tech the Hokies averaged 4 wins a year. Rickey Bustle is averaging 3.67 through 3 years. Just one win less than the Hokies.
In one form or another both temporarily and permanently Bustle has lost 3 starting quarterbacks in 3+ seasons, forcing the program to go with freshmen 2 of the 4 years. Can anyone find 2 more wins with the normally expected starting quarterbacks in the lineup? If you can the programs are tied for production
A few program positives :<li> The program is signing quality athletes who will be with the program for 4 years. <li>The program is signing Quality students who are making the grades. <li>The programs facilities are being upgraded. <li>The program is putting players in their best position and getting defensive players into the NFL. <li>The program is developing the most accurate passer in school history. <li>The program is developing a running game that has shown improvement from year to year.
A few team positives: <li>For the first time in years the Offensive Line is leading the way for multiple and duplicate players to have games with over 80 yards gained. <li> For the first time in a decade the rushing attack has a better average per rush than its opponents. <li>Not even half way into the season the team has rushed for over 1000 yards and will only get better <li> The program is out adjusting opponents at halftime and is currently outscoring opponents 2-to-1 in the third quarter.
There are more good things happening with the program but I will save it for a rainy day, after the season. In the mean time, there is nothing wrong with "The Program"
Quote:
Originally Posted by cajundiehard <font size="1"> on <a href="http://forums.delphiforums.com/n/mb/message.asp?webtag=ragincajuns&ctx=&cacheTag=48-47&msg=18985.1">Delphi</a></font size="1">
Great post Turbine...I can admit that you listed some valid point that I and many other didn't point out. Not scared to say you made sence...Keep up the great post... :ms08:
1000 yards already why hasn't this been reported in the Advertiser?Quote:
Originally Posted by Turbine
Just wanted to present an argument to a few things.
It goes both ways.Quote:
Originally Posted by Turbine
I remember when Tech replaced Joe Raymond Peace with Gary Crowton.
Crowton's first class was around 30 players. More than half of them were JC recruits. People "in the know" on the airwaves around here were very critical of Tech's chosen route of recruiting.
Result?
3 years of Crowton:
21-13 record
wins over Alabama, California, and Mississippi State
next 3 years of Bicknell:
18-17 record
win over Alabama
WAC championship
I would say it worked out pretty well for them.
Funny you should mention years 3 and 4. also, I see you like to reference Va Tech. Let's compare.Quote:
Originally Posted by Turbine
In years 3 and 4, Beamer's record was 12-9-1
1-A wins: North Carolina State(twice), West Virginia(twice), Virginia, Southern Miss, East Carolina, Vanderbilt, Tulane, Temple, Bowling Green, and Akron
In years 3 and 4, Bustle's record is 5-11
1-A wins: Middle Tennessee State, Arkansas State, Florida International(provisional)
How many more will we win this season?
The program is not prepared well to play, and is being outscored 2.5-to-1 in the first half.Quote:
Originally Posted by Turbine
C.C. Brown is the only one. Brad Franklin was a Stokley signee. Kyries Hebert was a Stokley signee. Charles Tillman was a Baldwin signee. Wendell williams was a Baldwin walk-on.Quote:
Originally Posted by Turbine
Bustle has SIGNED on signing day around 95 players so far. On the 2-deep depth chart listed on the athletic website, 14 of the 44 players listed are either Baldwin signees or walk-ons. That's 32% of the 2 deep we didn't sign. In year 4?Quote:
Originally Posted by Turbine
The 2 starters at DT are a Baldwin signee and a walk-on. ????? This HAS to be adressed in the off-season with JC recruits.
Finally, for the first time, EVER, a coaching staff will start it's tenure here with 4 losing seasons in a row. :eek:
"Hot" post HB....
My only question to everyone is...How can the other state schools find success in their football programs but UL continues to fall short. What is it that they have over us? L.Tech, Tulane, ULM, NWestern.....Are their facilities better than ours? Is it the fan support? OR is the COACHES? (recruiting methods, coaching styles, competence, etc....) I know it can take one great player to make a difference in a programs ability to win...ie, Brian Mitchel & Jake Delhomme....so, with regards to that, are we playing our BEST players? I know everone will not stop supporting UL in football, however....I know they are, just as I am... sick of losing!
Here is another way of looking at things.
There are 52 teams in the SBC, CUSA, WAC, MWC, and the MAC
'02-'04, Bustle's tenure, we have 9 Division 1-A wins.
Of the 52, there are only 12 schools with less than 9 1-A wins in that same timeframe: FIU, FAU, Idaho, Buffalo, Western Michigan, Central Michigan, Eastern Michigan, Ohio, Temple, Central Florida, East Carolina, SMU.
We've already lost to 3 of schools on this list THIS YEAR.(EMU,UCF,FAU) :/\:
In case you missed it, FAU and FIU are the only SBC schools with fewer 1-A wins than us in the SBC over the last 3 seasons.
Winning at any level would cure things...How can Western Kentucky play football D-II but all other sports at D-I? I would be good it we could do this...
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMVCAJUNS
WKY plays Division I in all sports.
Division 1-AA in football.
Division 1 in everything else.
Division II football is played by schools smaller than WKY.
You want us to drop to 1-AA?
Better yet, let's just drop football all together! Then, we could REALLY spend money and improve our Basketball and Baseball teams, right?
I mean, it worked for Lamar. right? Right?? :(
You miss the question...I ask how are they able to do this D-I all sports except football. Yes I'm saying we should play D-II in football but not drop the sport.. .~. We would win more which would increase fan base, attitudes, recruits, etc...Quote:
Originally Posted by HOTBOUDIN
HOTBOUDIN I don't have time (at the moment) to address all your arguments, but I would remind you we are talking about building a program.Quote:
Originally Posted by HOTBOUDIN
The programs you mentioned had just that "programs" going in. Bustle came into no program to speak of. The schools that are in fact upstarts either have twice the budget or benefited from the free transfer rule, or both.
Do you happen to know the record of Tech in the years leading up to Crowton?
Frank Beamer’s inherited much more of a program when going to V-Tech than Bustle did coming to UL. He inherited a program producing somewhere between 5 and 6 wins a year on average in the previous 12 or so before he took the V-Tech job.
We are talking about building a program (almost) from scratch with no money, and all Bustle has to do is win 12 games in the next two and a half years and UL will be on pace (in number of wins) with what Frank Beamer did at now national power house Virginia Tech.
The UL program is on track for success.
I'm thinking attitudes by some of the diehards might improve but overall interest would disappear.Quote:
Originally Posted by JMVCAJUNS
I know I would not be jacked about the lesser challenge.
For me the challenge is the fun, or at least part of it.
jmo :)
Why do all the proponents of 1AA football assume we would win and sudenly draw more fans? We draw more fans when we have mediocre to good 1A teams. I don't think we could ever expect to get 20,000 for Southland conference games even if we were going undefeated. And as far as the argument that we would be winning, you are assuming we would be getting the same level of talent. Our level of talent would actually be lower. The guys we have recruited came here for the opportunity to play D1A football, not D1AA. Other than guys who went to a D1AA team to play a specific position there rather than come here as an athlete, tell me how many players did we lose to a D1AA team that we offered a scholarship for the same position. I would bet the answer is very few if not none at all. The guys playing D1AA football are talented but they are playing D1AA football because they were lacking size, quickness, speed or some other aspect of their talent was just a little lacking for D1A football. There may be an exception here or there but overall I think that is a true statement.Quote:
Originally Posted by JMVCAJUNS
You tell me not to compare us to Va Tech. Then, you turn around and do the very same thing?????Quote:
Originally Posted by Turbine
"Do you happen to know the record of Tech in the years leading up to Crowton?"
La Tech was 16-28 in the 4 years previous to Crowton with 3 losses to the Cajuns. 4 losing seasons in a row.
"The programs you mentioned had just that "programs" going in. Bustle came into no program to speak of. The schools that are in fact upstarts either have twice the budget or benefited from the free transfer rule, or both."
The best comparisons to our situation just happen to be in our state and in our conference.
1)La Tech when Crowton took over.(see above)
2)ULM when Weatherbie took over.
-They also have 9 1-A wins from '02-'04. But, the '02 year was Keasler. So, a truer comparison would be since '03.
-From '03-'05, ULM has 8 1-A wins, we have 6 1-A wins
-From '03-'05, ULM is 6-6 against current SBC schools, we are 5-6
-They finished in a tie for third in the the SBC last year, we finshed in a tie for last
-If you are going to say we are poised for success, you had better say Weatherbie has ULM poised for success.
Don't recall telling you that. What post # was it?Quote:
Originally Posted by HOTBOUDIN
I encourage the comparison to Va Tech. I just ask that you remember the status of Va Tech's program when Beamer took over and the status of the program that Bustle took over.
Beamer took over a program with 7 straight winning seasons.
Bustle took over a program with 6 straight losing seasons.
Everyone knows that football fuels the athletic engine and the success of the football program breathes life into each and every other sport.
With the above statement in mind and referencing the "success of the other state schools" the following statement is a fact.
When the Ragin Cajuns and La Tech were in the same conference (that is playing the same teams for a conference championship), NEVER, AT NO TIME, UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES did La Tech surpass the SLII, SLI, USL, ULL, or UL in overall achievement in the all sports trophy.
Turbine, you referred to Wins/Losses on a game vs. Success/Failure on a program. You are correct the football program is making strides, the athletic department is a very successful one.
Dare I say PENTATHLELAM again. Ragin Cajuns win.
I made a comparison to years 3 and 4. You say it doesn't matter because Va Tech was a winning program already when Beamer got there. Yet, you say if Bustle does x,y, and z, like Beamer in years 5,6, and 7 then, it's a success.Quote:
Originally Posted by Turbine
You can't have it both ways.
Quite frankly, Beamer should have been let go after year 6. He inherited a program that went 54-23-1 in 7 winning seasons in a row and a Peach bowl victory in 1985.
Over the next 6 seasons, Beamer went 24-40-1. with 4 losing seasons in that time frame.
The fact that the mid-90's saw a RETURN to prominence of Va Tech football had little to do with Beamer or Bustle and everything to do with Virginia Tech as an ever growing presence on the East coast, politically and academically.
The football program was already an established winner against quality competition before Frank Beamer/Ricky Bustle.
I've never understood the constant comparison to Va Tech.
Apples and Oranges.
I understand. When I said the below I didn't mean don't bring up VT as talking points, just keep in mind relative starting points.Quote:
Originally Posted by HOTBOUDIN
But you are right, based on relative programs I would expect a slighly higher production curve for VT in years 3 and 4.Quote:
Originally Posted by Turbine
Would I have prematurely fired Beamer? Yes. I would have been wrong.
Is it time to get frustrated with Bustle? No. I could be wrong. (don't think so) :)