CFB Coaching Carousel 2015-16

Status
Not open for further replies.
#226      

sigint

S
sigint
blmillini said:
:thumb: I completely agree with you. Beckman was building the program through developing a foundation first. Most people on here, and most fans in general, are not patient enough to allow that approach to take place, even though that is probably the best way to build long-term success. It is what we have seen happen at Wisconsin, Northwestern and Michigan State.
Click to expand...

It's too bad nobody will be given the opportunity to build upon that foundation.

Honestly, Beckman was never given enough credit for the things he did correctly, but his recruiting and coaching were never going to get us any further than where we are now: 5-7 wins a year. We absolutely do have a good roster for next year, though.
 
#227      

PaytonHighstep

PaytonHighstep
Downers Grove, IL
PaytonHighstep
sigint said:
It's too bad nobody will be given the opportunity to build upon that foundation.

Honestly, Beckman was never given enough credit for the things he did correctly, but his recruiting and coaching were never going to get us any further than where we are now: 5-7 wins a year. We absolutely do have a good roster for next year, though.
Click to expand...

I agree with the depth and foundation was a positive for Beckman.

Zook had better top end talent.

Both were terrible coaches and their assistant coaching hires left little to be excited about most of the time.

I argue, the only reason this team is on pace to have a good year in 2016 (6 or 7 wins) is more due to the schedule and the upperclassmen heavy roster. I like our players and potential of some of them, but the schedule is more reason to be optimistic than the players, but together I can understand the optimism.

My fear is the new AD will see a 6-7 win season from Cubit and extend him. I didn't feel he was the answer for next season and I definitely don't feel he is the answer long-term.
 
#228      

AutoPoster 3000

AutoPoster 3000
AutoPoster 3000
blmillini said:
:thumb: I completely agree with you. Beckman was building the program through developing a foundation first. Most people on here, and most fans in general, are not patient enough to allow that approach to take place, even though that is probably the best way to build long-term success. It is what we have seen happen at Wisconsin, Northwestern and Michigan State.
Click to expand...
One out of Beckman's three recruiting classes were ranked in the top half of the conference (and one was dead last) according to Rivals. Our conference records in the Beckman/Cubit eras have been 0-8, 1-7, 3-5, and 2-6. And that 3-5 season was a fumble and failed third-down conversion away from being 1-7. The 2016 roster does appear to be deeper and more upper-classmen heavy than previous years, but it is widely thought that we're going to fall off a cliff talent-wise in 2017 which is primarily due to Beckman's weak 2012 and 2013 recruiting classes, as much or more so than the Cubit fiasco.

It's all well and good to say that Beckman was building a foundation simply because his name was on the door for three (going on four) years but from an empirical standpoint, there isn't a lot of evidence that long-term success was the direction he was taking us. And as for your comparibles, our eyes and ears were enough for us to know he was no Mark Dantonio, Pat Fitzgerald, or Barry Alvarez.

A lack of patience isn't our problem. We've probably been subjected to more extended football mediocrity than any fanbase in the nation over the past two decades. Inertia is more the issue. Inertia and moderate ambitions from the folk in charge. As demonstrated by ... gee, I wonder if I can think of any recent examples?
 
#229      

Illinnoying Orange

Illinnoying Orange
Illinnoying Orange
I wanted Babers to be hired instead of Beckman 4 yrs ago. If that had happened I really believe our football program would be much further along than we are (not hard to do) right now.

I again hoped Babers would've been hired at the end of this past season.

imo, we missed out on two golden opportunities that will come back to bite our program again and again until we finally hire a solid, long-term competent HC.
 
#231      

Second and Chalmers

S
Second and Chalmers
Illinnoying Orange said:
I wanted Babers to be hired instead of Beckman 4 yrs ago.
Click to expand...

No you didn't. Babers was Baylor's special teams coach at that point and had no head coaching experience or ties to the Midwest. If we would have hired him in 2012, everyone would have rioted and with good reason.

Babers has gone out and proven something people didn't know or have any reason to know he had in 2012.
 
#232      

sigint

S
sigint
AutoPoster 3000 said:
One out of Beckman's three recruiting classes were ranked in the top half of the conference (and one was dead last) according to Rivals. Our conference records in the Beckman/Cubit eras have been 0-8, 1-7, 3-5, and 2-6. And that 3-5 season was a fumble and failed third-down conversion away from being 1-7. The 2016 roster does appear to be deeper and more upper-classmen heavy than previous years, but it is widely thought that we're going to fall off a cliff talent-wise in 2017 which is primarily due to Beckman's weak 2012 and 2013 recruiting classes, as much or more so than the Cubit fiasco.

It's all well and good to say that Beckman was building a foundation simply because his name was on the door for three (going on four) years but from an empirical standpoint, there isn't a lot of evidence that long-term success was the direction he was taking us. And as for your comparibles, our eyes and ears were enough for us to know he was no Mark Dantonio, Pat Fitzgerald, or Barry Alvarez.

A lack of patience isn't our problem. We've probably been subjected to more extended football mediocrity than any fanbase in the nation over the past two decades. Inertia is more the issue. Inertia and moderate ambitions from the folk in charge. As demonstrated by ... gee, I wonder if I can think of any recent examples?
Click to expand...

I don't think you're giving Beckman enough credit. Obviously, he wasn't out recruiting OSU, Michigan, etc, but he did recruit enough talent to win a decent amount of games in the B1G west. He wasn't actually capable of moving past the 5-7 win area in a weak division, but, in the sense that we'd be handing this specific roster over to a theoretically more capable coach, you could say he built a foundation for the next guy to transition in much more easily than any of the last few coaches had a chance to.

Obviously, this is all out the window now.
 
#233      

Illinnoying Orange

Illinnoying Orange
Illinnoying Orange
Second and Chalmers said:
No you didn't. Babers was Baylor's special teams coach at that point and had no head coaching experience or ties to the Midwest. If we would have hired him in 2012, everyone would have rioted and with good reason.

Babers has gone out and proven something people didn't know or have any reason to know he had in 2012.
Click to expand...

I stand corrected. I guess I was in the mindset of dumping Beckman for Babers after year one when Babers was the HC of EIU ... or at least trying to get him when he was ready to leave EIU.
 
#234      

Second and Chalmers

S
Second and Chalmers
Illinnoying Orange said:
I stand corrected. I guess I was in the mindset of dumping Beckman for Babers after year one when Babers was the HC of EIU ... or at least trying to get him when he was ready to leave EIU.
Click to expand...

Ah, sure. Yeah, when MT let EIU use our indoor practice facility in 2013, I sure wouldn't have minded him sneaking in there with a contract.
 
#235      

blmillini

B
Bloomington, IL
blmillini
AutoPoster 3000 said:
One out of Beckman's three recruiting classes were ranked in the top half of the conference (and one was dead last) according to Rivals. Our conference records in the Beckman/Cubit eras have been 0-8, 1-7, 3-5, and 2-6. And that 3-5 season was a fumble and failed third-down conversion away from being 1-7. The 2016 roster does appear to be deeper and more upper-classmen heavy than previous years, but it is widely thought that we're going to fall off a cliff talent-wise in 2017 which is primarily due to Beckman's weak 2012 and 2013 recruiting classes, as much or more so than the Cubit fiasco.

It's all well and good to say that Beckman was building a foundation simply because his name was on the door for three (going on four) years but from an empirical standpoint, there isn't a lot of evidence that long-term success was the direction he was taking us. And as for your comparibles, our eyes and ears were enough for us to know he was no Mark Dantonio, Pat Fitzgerald, or Barry Alvarez.

A lack of patience isn't our problem. We've probably been subjected to more extended football mediocrity than any fanbase in the nation over the past two decades. Inertia is more the issue. Inertia and moderate ambitions from the folk in charge. As demonstrated by ... gee, I wonder if I can think of any recent examples?
Click to expand...

At the level we recruit I truly believe those recruiting rankings mean almost nothing. With the eye test we have seen over the past few years that we have decent football players on this team that are also good students and citizens who are likely to stay in the program all four years.

I never said he was going to achieve long-term success, nor do I believe he probably would have. What I do believe is that he was building what none of our recent coaches had, which was a foundation of players that were capable of playing the game at a reasonable level. Unfortunately, he struggled to recruit any of the top end players we need that would be complemented by that foundation. I don't know if he would have ever gotten them but as long as he was rebuilding the mess Zook had left, we were at least in a position where the next coach would have something as a base and maybe he would be able to close the deal on the higher level talent (and hopefully higher level talent without baggage).

With respect to impatience, I assume you are referring to Guenther's actions and from that perspective you are absolutely right. He was far too patient with all his terrible hires. I'm referring more to a fanbase that is impatient. It seems to be the way of the college sports world now so it's not like Illinois is the only place but we most certainly want the quick fix and seem ready to make a change within a couple years. It takes far more than a couple years to get a good start on building a consistently good football program.
 
#236      

Deleted member 10676

D
Guest
Deleted member 10676
#237      

BZuppke

BZuppke
Plainfield
BZuppke
BS list. MSU is 23 because of recent success. Having to share a state with Michigan, in a state with no more talent (less even) than Illinois and no real tradition since the 1960s (until recently) make it a tough place. Dantonio has done a great job and has benefitted from Michigan being down for the last 7 years (coincidently with MSU's rise). That's one example. Baylor at 26? Again due to recent success. They were irrelevant for 30 years prior to Briles. Cal at 27? No tradition, and until recently horrible facilities (did they ever make improvements as promised?). They say Cal has a lot of talent around it. They also have the entire PAC 12 recruiting it. If I have to hear about Maryland and the Under Armour connection one more time, I'll scream. Let's see them knock heads with the top of the East division and I'll believe it. My bottom line is teams with success on the field recruit better and add better facilities. It takes someone to build the program like Dantonio, Briles and Alvarez among others.
 
#238      

Second and Chalmers

S
Second and Chalmers
The list wasn't as bad as I thought it would be. Tough to pull apart the strands of what makes a job good.

The one thing that stands out, that I really agree with: No B1G West teams in the Top 36 out of 65.
 
#239      

GeorgiaIllini

G
GeorgiaIllini
miggytorres said:
This was the argument I made two years ago for getting rid of Beckman but I got beat up around here. Both Beckman and Cubit have value.....maybe as a DC/OC at a MAC-type school? And these are the guys we are retaining. So we are going to have 3 years of Beckman, 2 years of Cubit, a few lame-duck years of Ron Zook.....can anyone name a worse coaching tree than U of I in the last 7 years?
Click to expand...

Purdue's? Syracuse until now?
 
#242      

Doak1960

D
Doak1960
I think we need to give Cubit a chance. Look at the Iowa situation prior to this year. After mediocre seasons he is now the King of Iowa City
 
#244      

Joel Goodson

Joel Goodson
dawgville
Joel Goodson
Doak1960 said:
I think we need to give Cubit a chance. Look at the Iowa situation prior to this year. After mediocre seasons he is now the King of Iowa City
Click to expand...

He's a caretaker, place holder, whatever you want to call it. Nothing more.
 
#246      

Doak1960

D
Doak1960
Buyout clauses don't appear to matter from what I have seen lately!
 
#247      

HoustonIllini

H
Houston, TX
HoustonIllini
Nice perspective in the WSJ this morning . .

http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-best-coach-approach-promote-or-poach-1449792464

"The results found that hiring a college assistant from another program produced more disappointment than success. The 12 assistants who landed head coaching jobs during that period combined for a win percentage of just .438 during that span.

By contrast, assistants promoted from within posted a combined .632 win percentage. Florida State’s Jimbo Fisher won a national championship, while Dabo Swinney, who went from offensive coordinator at Clemson to head coach in 2009, has his Tigers ranked No. 1 this season."

Hiring coaches away from another school was a mixed bag (we certainly have experience with that - Beckman), and hiring from the NFL was just over 50% if you exclude Spurrier and Saban.

Without stability in our program, hiring from within doesn't look like a good option for the faithful . . . .
 
#248      

Second and Chalmers

S
Second and Chalmers
HoustonIllini said:
Nice perspective in the WSJ this morning . .

http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-best-coach-approach-promote-or-poach-1449792464

"The results found that hiring a college assistant from another program produced more disappointment than success. The 12 assistants who landed head coaching jobs during that period combined for a win percentage of just .438 during that span.

By contrast, assistants promoted from within posted a combined .632 win percentage. Florida State’s Jimbo Fisher won a national championship, while Dabo Swinney, who went from offensive coordinator at Clemson to head coach in 2009, has his Tigers ranked No. 1 this season."

Hiring coaches away from another school was a mixed bag (we certainly have experience with that - Beckman), and hiring from the NFL was just over 50% if you exclude Spurrier and Saban.

Without stability in our program, hiring from within doesn't look like a good option for the faithful . . . .
Click to expand...

Assistants from within is a HUGE adverse selection bias. Only programs that are humming in great shape do that. Chip Kelly and Mark Helfrich alone skew the sample.

Not going to go too hard at a one-off blog post, but that article is methodologically screwed up six ways from Sunday.
 
#249      

HoustonIllini

H
Houston, TX
HoustonIllini
Second and Chalmers said:
Assistants from within is a HUGE adverse selection bias. Only programs that are humming in great shape do that. Chip Kelly and Mark Helfrich alone skew the sample.

Not going to go too hard at a one-off blog post, but that article is methodologically screwed up six ways from Sunday.
Click to expand...

I agree that it's highly subjective from the perspective that there's a lot of interpretation that occurred on the writer's part, and certainly there's factors unaccounted for - however the conclusions are pretty consistent with what's happened in the real world, regardless of the reasons.

Hiring from within would imply great stability in the program, and little is changed. Hiring outside obviously creates a much greater turnover in the staff, and impacts the program much more. And this is regardless of whether it is a HC, and assistant, or an NFL escapee . . .

Not scientific by any means, but a quantifier for a world with people that like to see numbers
 
#250      

Second and Chalmers

S
Second and Chalmers
HoustonIllini said:
I agree that it's highly subjective from the perspective that there's a lot of interpretation that occurred on the writer's part, and certainly there's factors unaccounted for - however the conclusions are pretty consistent with what's happened in the real world, regardless of the reasons.

Hiring from within would imply great stability in the program, and little is changed. Hiring outside obviously creates a much greater turnover in the staff, and impacts the program much more. And this is regardless of whether it is a HC, and assistant, or an NFL escapee . . .

Not scientific by any means, but a quantifier for a world with people that like to see numbers
Click to expand...

You would need to create some sort of "expected wins" variable in order to really do something rigorous with that.

I've considered trying something like that, but I'm no Excel whiz and it's harder than it looks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.