|
Post by sdsustoner on Oct 1, 2012 13:22:51 GMT -8
First and only time I am going to post on here. I'm an Aztec who ACTUALLY PLAYED at SDSU years ago. And coming from my perspective having wasted my time checking out this board a few times over the past few weeks I'm in shock and appalled at what I see from "Aztec supporters" on here. Here's a great idea since you all are such harsh critics of the program and the athletic department. There should be a requirement that you each reveal the amount of you contribute and donate to Aztec athletics. Because the way many of you speak with such judgment on this board I would hope that could only come from a significant investment you have made in Sdsu athletics. Another idea for all the armchair coaches that seem to this they have all the answers. Please give us all a reason for why you are qualified to give such an amazing evaluation of these coaches and players that dedicate endless hours towards playing and coaching a game they love. So I would like to see the years any of you have been associated (playing on the field, not sitting the bench) with organized football, past your JV high school teams or when you are the assistant secondary coach of a freshman football team. In conclusion if you want to be so critical of the athletics department, the football program, the basketball program, baseball, or anything else start being a part of the solution rather than generating all these problems. If you really wanna see SDSU rise to be an athletic power open up your checkbooks or positively support the teams on the Mesa. And don't criticize Long, Sterk, Fisher, Gwynn or anyone else on a staff at SDSU because there is no way anyone on this board has more experience in each field as these great men do. Lastly stop calling 18-21 year old kids out for what they do on the field. Go and try to last one day doing what they do juggling intense workouts, film study, practice, and schoolwork. They aren't professionals or getting paid ungodly amounts of money so you have no right to demean a young man for how he performs on the field. Rant over. Go Aztecs! You're kinda of a prick, dude. As far as perspective: I know my X's and O's as a former coach. None of that matters because we're all here doing whatever, discussing football or Aztec matters that are unlrelated. Never once has that knowledge been useful here, because nobody will ever change anyone's mind here. Your intentions might have been good, but you really do come off like an arrogant jerk. Just because you played college ball, it doesn't give you some special insight on X's and O's if you know the game. It does give you some insight on the "behind the scenes" stuff because you've been there. But, you act like being there is the holy grail of obtaining sports knowledge.
|
|
|
Post by tonatiuh on Oct 1, 2012 13:31:19 GMT -8
Why should the players have to play for a coach that is 1-8 against bowl teams at SDSU and 11-44 at UNM? I support the players most because I want them to have a coach that can beat a team with a pulse. Mainly because he is the coach right Now, no one else is!!!!
|
|
|
Post by 78aztec82 on Oct 1, 2012 13:37:34 GMT -8
If you jump back in the time machine you'll see many of these same 10 post-a-day experts using the word "basketball" instead of "football" in their babble, so just laugh at them like the rest of us do. Steve Fisher doesn't have a history of mediocrity. You may have missed the middle years of his tenure here, people had unreasonable expectations of what it took to build the hoops program and were quite vocal, even if it were just a handful of psotters, they were pretty active at the time. Short-sighted. Fish was never mediocre, it just took time that some didn't appreciate.
|
|
|
Post by tttrojan4life on Oct 1, 2012 13:37:52 GMT -8
To the OP, relax, it is a message board. People have opinions, you don't need to be an expert to have one. Look at the people on TV, they've never played a down in their lives. If you are offended, why continue to visit the site? If everyone here had just nice things to say, it wouldn't be very interesting.
Thanks for the sanctimonious lecture.
|
|
|
Post by monty on Oct 1, 2012 14:58:50 GMT -8
Steve Fisher doesn't have a history of mediocrity. So it's different if a coach has a bigger name? It showed things c/would change even in the down years when we won 14 or so games. Rocky Long is doing exactly if not worse than he did at UNM 11-44 vs bowl teams at unm 1-8 vs bowl teams at sdsu Fisher got the keys to a car with no engine, Rocky got the keys to a honda civic and is running it into telephone poles, isn't changing the oil, is wearing out the breaks, etc. Where they started and what their history was were vastly different. Fisher has taken the program to a level he's been before, sadly, so is Rocky Long
|
|
|
Post by sdsustoner on Oct 1, 2012 15:09:45 GMT -8
So it's different if a coach has a bigger name? It showed things c/would change even in the down years when we won 14 or so games. Rocky Long is doing exactly if not worse than he did at UNM 11-44 vs bowl teams at unm 1-8 vs bowl teams at sdsu Fisher got the keys to a car with no engine, Rocky got the keys to a honda civic and is running it into telephone poles, isn't changing the oil, is wearing out the breaks, etc. Where they started and what their history was were vastly different. Fisher has taken the program to a level he's been before, sadly, so is Rocky Long Long did take us to our second straight bowl and still has a chance for three. That's somewhere we've never been on a positive side. We've been worse off than now. So I don't see your point. As far as Fisher, people here were demanding his firing after consecutive NITs. If this board or others like it were around (Im not sure if they were) then the same posters would've called for Fisher's head both times we made the NCAAs and followed it up with an NIT.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2012 15:13:42 GMT -8
Steve Fisher doesn't have a history of mediocrity. You may have missed the middle years of his tenure here, people had unreasonable expectations of what it took to build the hoops program and were quite vocal, even if it were just a handful of psotters, they were pretty active at the time. Short-sighted. Fish was never mediocre, it just took time that some didn't appreciate. I don't want to see this thread devolve too much into comparing Rocky with Fish. Also, as you may recall, I was not one of those who was calling for Fish's ouster at the time. Nevertheless, check his 2006 recruiting class: rivals.yahoo.com/sandiegostate/basketball/recruiting/commitments/2006/sandiegostate-93One thug and two nice kids with very modest skills. Other than one good year from the thug, that was a thoroughly wasted recruiting year. To paraphrase Mike Leach, in any sport you can afford one such bad recruiting class every 6-7 years, but two in a row can leave massive holes in your roster. I think Fish learned from that terrible class not to ever let it happen again. Sadly, our football coaches absolutely never put together the type of class that has become customary with Fish where at least half the recruits become regular contributors.
|
|
|
Post by csaztec on Oct 1, 2012 15:16:26 GMT -8
I want a coach who can beat the teams we arent supposed to beat. When was the last time SDSU football beat someone we were not supposed to beat? Although it was nice to finally beat a PAC12 school, Washington State ended up going 4-8 in the PAC12. Basketball has done it recently, why cant football?
I support the players 100% but the coaches deserve criticism. They are getting paid to get these students ready for football. I thought all the people who wanted to fire Fisher were misguided but Rocky Long hasnt won a national championship. I know alot of other coaches in big time schools where it is 'easy to recruit' who havent won a National Championship. So I knew Fisher would eventually succeed here if he got past the first 3 years. I am not convinced Rocky can do the same here.
I hope that if the record is poor and the team is not inspired and playing bad football then Rocky should be evaluated accordingly. If Sterk gives him a vote of confidence no matter what for next year then that is a mistake. Almost everyone working for someone/company is reviewed yearly by our employers.
|
|
|
Post by montyismyhomie on Oct 1, 2012 15:23:23 GMT -8
So it's different if a coach has a bigger name? It showed things c/would change even in the down years when we won 14 or so games. Rocky Long is doing exactly if not worse than he did at UNM 11-44 vs bowl teams at unm 1-8 vs bowl teams at sdsu Fisher got the keys to a car with no engine, Rocky got the keys to a honda civic and is running it into telephone poles, isn't changing the oil, is wearing out the breaks, etc. Where they started and what their history was were vastly different. Fisher has taken the program to a level he's been before, sadly, so is Rocky Long This whole argument is bunk. Once again, Fisher was at Michigan, a powerhouse school where the name practically recruits itself. He had a couple down years there but generally kept that program at the same level that he inheritted it. Rocky by comparison had to coach at New Mexico, a school with zero name cache and tons of barriers to success and kept them competitive. Making this comparison and using it to support your agenda the way you have is disingenuous at best.
|
|
|
Post by monty on Oct 1, 2012 15:40:37 GMT -8
he's one and fluffin 8 versus bowl teams here, if anything, apparently new mexico is an easier place to coach at, as he only lost 80 percent of the time to bowl teams there
Steve Fisher was also nearly ten years younger when he was hired. what, are we expecting Long to be preseason top 10 when he's 75?
|
|
|
Post by insider on Oct 1, 2012 15:54:08 GMT -8
Steve Fisher doesn't have a history of mediocrity. You may have missed the middle years of his tenure here, people had unreasonable expectations of what it took to build the hoops program and were quite vocal, even if it were just a handful of psotters, they were pretty active at the time. Short-sighted. Fish was never mediocre, it just took time that some didn't appreciate. Again Steve Fisher doesn't have a history of mediocrity. He came to SDSU with final 4s and a title, something Rocky can't come close to.
|
|
|
Post by montyismyhomie on Oct 1, 2012 15:56:25 GMT -8
serious questions for you monty.
1. would you say that our offense has for the most part improved as the season has gone on?
2. did this board not spend ungodly amounts of time during the offseason talking about the ?'s we had on the defensive line and all the problems that can arise from having a young and inexperienced defensive front?
3. are the problems on defense we are experiencing right now mostly associated with having a young and inexperienced defensive front? (i.e. lack of pressure on the quarterback giving him all day to throw)
4. if you answered yes to all 3 questions, how can you rationally call for the firing of our coach?
|
|
|
Post by montyismyhomie on Oct 1, 2012 15:57:40 GMT -8
You may have missed the middle years of his tenure here, people had unreasonable expectations of what it took to build the hoops program and were quite vocal, even if it were just a handful of psotters, they were pretty active at the time. Short-sighted. Fish was never mediocre, it just took time that some didn't appreciate. Again Steve Fisher doesn't have a history of mediocrity. He came to SDSU with final 4s and a title, something Rocky can't come close to. and again my prior response to monty is appropriate with your inane logic. This whole argument is bunk. Once again, Fisher was at Michigan, a powerhouse school where the name practically recruits itself. He had a couple down years there but generally kept that program at the same level that he inheritted it. Rocky by comparison had to coach at New Mexico, a school with zero name cache and tons of barriers to success and kept them competitive. Making this comparison and using it to support your agenda the way you have is disingenuous at best.
|
|
|
Post by insider on Oct 1, 2012 16:01:46 GMT -8
I don't care what players you recruit making a final four/title game shows you can flat out coach. I am not talking about taking a storied program to sweet 16s (ie Steve lavin), anyone that makes a final 4 is a hell of a coach. And that does include Calipari, you are nuts if you listen to the media agenda.
|
|
|
Post by insider on Oct 1, 2012 16:05:40 GMT -8
Also the coach Steve Fisher took over for had a 188–90 record with 0 final fours. Michigan has been to 6 final fours and won 1 title, Fisher has a hand in 3 final fours and 1 title.
|
|
|
Post by montyismyhomie on Oct 1, 2012 16:06:27 GMT -8
im not sure what media agenda you are talking about or how that even makes sense? at the end of the day insider, you and monty and those of your ilk are advocating poor decision making from our AD. i pose the same 4 questions to you that are above directed at monty. please answer them.
|
|
|
Post by sdsustoner on Oct 1, 2012 16:07:15 GMT -8
I don't care what players you recruit making a final four/title game shows you can flat out coach. I am not talking about taking a storied program to sweet 16s (ie Steve lavin), anyone that makes a final 4 is a hell of a coach. And that does include Calipari, you are nuts if you listen to the media agenda. Lavin also won a national title with UCLA.
|
|
|
Post by insider on Oct 1, 2012 16:10:58 GMT -8
serious questions for you monty. 1. would you say that our offense has for the most part improved as the season has gone on? 2. did this board not spend ungodly amounts of time during the offseason talking about the ?'s we had on the defensive line and all the problems that can arise from having a young and inexperienced defensive front? 3. are the problems on defense we are experiencing right now mostly associated with having a young and inexperienced defensive front? (i.e. lack of pressure on the quarterback giving him all day to throw) 4. if you answered yes to all 3 questions, how can you rationally call for the firing of our coach? 1. Yes, I see no problem with Ludwig. 2. Yes and they have not only been below the low expectations but have not shown potential. They don't show "wow" plays, they are just on the field and largely invisible and pushed around 3. No the main issue with the defense is the lack of talent and being poorly coached, there are 3 good players, 1 is a senior, and another is playing out of position. 4. I didn't.
|
|
|
Post by insider on Oct 1, 2012 16:11:49 GMT -8
I don't care what players you recruit making a final four/title game shows you can flat out coach. I am not talking about taking a storied program to sweet 16s (ie Steve lavin), anyone that makes a final 4 is a hell of a coach. And that does include Calipari, you are nuts if you listen to the media agenda. Lavin also won a national title with UCLA. As a player? Cause he didn't as a coach.
|
|
|
Post by sdsustoner on Oct 1, 2012 16:14:53 GMT -8
Lavin also won a national title with UCLA. As a player? Cause he didn't as a coach. LMAO I got him mixed up with Harrick. My mistake.
|
|