The year that he coached with Hudspeth at North Alabama they were 13-1 and made it to the semifinals. Hmmmm... It works both ways champ. Like I said, let him consult. Evaluate the results.
Edit: The year before, they were 4-7. The year after, they were 5-5. Obviously there were other changes, but Matt Wallerstedt was part of it.
Here are some stats from 2003 when wallerstedt was Huds DC at North Alabama. And I realize it is a different level but it shows they worked well together...
PPG 14.1
YPG 295.6
106 TFL
39 Sacks
20 INTs
Not saying this guy is a savior but it can't hurt having someone who Hud trust and who has done good work with him in the past.
I'm not saying they missed on everyone, but I think you answered your own question. The suspended guy can play, and if you lose a few to attrition that can put you in a bind. Nobody expects a defense to be solid at all positions, but they seem to be lacking at many positions. When you see a player like Patt flip-flopping from Safety to DB to Safety, the other guys you recruited are not as good as projected.
I think it is important that the coaching staff step back and ask themselves if they are teachable. The reason I say this is they continue to run the same defensive scheme and expect different results. The results should "teach" that what you are currently doing is not effective. Doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results is insanity.
Interesting
Lol, just like our AD, apparently our coaches can't get their jobs done without having a consultant...
I mean really? The guy who was dismissed because he's got a drug problem? Boy I hope this works out
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)