Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2014 10:04:31 GMT -8
All three of those have been solid wins, I'll grant you that. Of course, you omit to mention that two years ago, Rocky's rebuilt SDSU team choked away a 10-point second half lead to SJSU and then stunk it up on national TV in our bowl game against BYU and then last year played like total horse plop and got blown out by two schools with markedly inferior talent to us, EIU and UNLV. Rocky is what he's always been, a good coach. However, SDSU can do better and at least IMO, Hoke is somebody who was and would be better. Hoke's team collapsed to WYO. He also lost to Idaho and UNLV. Listen, Hoke was not all that great of coach and I don't think he was better than Rocky is today. Does this mean Rocky is awesome, no, far from it. The latter two losses were with a team which the year before had been the only one in SDSU history to lose ten games. Rocky's two pathetic performances of 2013 were with a totally rebuilt roster.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2014 10:23:54 GMT -8
We're playing two more "good" teams every year so we have two additional losses every year. Back when BYU, TCU, and Utah were on the schedule, that was three more losses. the answer is to play JC's in the OOC games. /s/ Jeff Schemmel---The stadium was newer and smaller. There were real live ushers in coats and ties. The concession stands were open. The cool souvenir store was open. The marching band was HUGE. The place felt alive. Now, you walk in and it feels like a shopping mall on its last legs.
This.Alas by this time football had become a bottom-line business and the bottom line is that we couldn't win the games that mattered most. We could never close the deal, and we lost fans with every one of those ballbuster losses. No college team known to man has choked away every opportunity to get on the national sports like SDSU football has. The absence of poise under pressure has been just amazing frankly.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2014 11:03:37 GMT -8
Hold on. If we are giving out prizes for coming close, than you need to give Rocky Oregon State Last year. And if we are counting collapses, then you have to ask what happened with Wyoming with Hoke. Hoke was a good coach, but frankly he doesn't have the actual wins that Rocky has notched. 2 Boise 1 WSU This is like who can run faster a new born baby giraffe or a tortoise. Neither are truly fast, but you can compare them, if you want. Oregon State is distinguishable for three reasons. One, the Mizzou game was on the road whereas OSU was at our house. Two, we didn't lose to OSU because of the failure of an official to call a penalty which was right in front of his face. And three, OSU wasn't as highly ranked at Missouri was. As to WSU, JYP may be correct that they're generally garbage but at that point in time, they had destroyed their first two opponents and had the highest PPG average in the country yet Rocky's defense almost totally throttled the Cougars the entire second half. Regarding Boise, winning there two years ago was huge as well. No better example than that only three other opponents have managed that in the last 15 years or so. Is Hoke an immensely better coach than Rocky? No. However - again IMO - he IS better and I'd rather have him than Rocky. Of course, I'd also rather have probably available guys like Mark Hudspeth, but that's for a different thread. Chuckle, chuckle. Did you watch Michigan play last year? Their bowl game absolute beatdown?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2014 11:14:48 GMT -8
Chuckle, chuckle. Did you watch Michigan play last year? Their bowl game absolute beatdown? If Michigan's 17-point loss to Kansas State was any worse than TWO of Rocky's losses, a 21-point loss to an FCS school and a 26-point loss to UNLV, I fail to see it.
|
|
|
Post by RockNFish on Apr 18, 2014 14:13:01 GMT -8
To be Fair, Rocky has beaten Boise twice, WSU once. So actually he has done better than Hoke. All three of those have been solid wins, I'll grant you that. Of course, you omit to mention that two years ago, Rocky's rebuilt SDSU team choked away a 10-point second half lead to SJSU and then stunk it up on national TV in our bowl game against BYU and then last year played like total horse plop and got blown out by two schools with markedly inferior talent to us, EIU and UNLV. Rocky is what he's always been, a good coach. However, SDSU can do better and at least IMO, Hoke is somebody who was and would be better. The problem for Hoke, is that half his value is energizing the base and being a great salesman (in the best sense of the word) - given that he alienated a lot of fans with the way he left, right or wrong, it would take more than a few press conferences to bring them back on board. Also, assuming he “fails” at um (only way we would get him), it would be more difficult for him to convince recruits that we are on our way up with a up and coming or proven coach. I’m not a Hoke hater at all, but sometimes it’s true what they say… you can never go back (although I’d have no problem if he was given another shot).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2014 14:26:28 GMT -8
I personally don't think folks should dislike Hoke for leaving SDSU to take his dream job. However, you make a great point that regardless of whether they SHOULD hold that against the guy, the fact is that many DO. So I'll agree that perceived bridge burning is problematic with regard to him ever returning.
|
|
|
Post by smoothcat on Apr 18, 2014 15:58:49 GMT -8
at this point, we should seriously consider going indy after this year. Interesting idea actually, not sure the schedule could be any worse if we did so.
|
|
|
Post by laaztec on Apr 18, 2014 17:13:03 GMT -8
Boise and SDSU wouldn't have moved the needle on the AAC deal. It's not a coincidence that both leagues get about the same money, they are both viewed as filler, and mixing up the teams in any combination for football won't make a difference. Also remember that SDSU would only get a partial share of the AAC revenue, so they'd need to find an extra 600k a year from the big west just to break even. The real revelation from the big east debacle was how valuable basketball has become. With all the talk of football driving the bus, the real big east showed that a top tier basketball conference is much more valuable than a best of the rest football conference. Butler gets more than twice what UCONN gets for their tv rights. UCONN could have stayed in the big east for $4m a year and owned their own football rights, so they basically gave up 2.5m+ a year to "save" football. Given that fact, people thinking some new football conference will bring in a ton of revenue aren't watching what's happening. I hate to admit it, but BYU showed the path for the schools left out of the big boy conferences. I think I read on another thread on here that the NCAA tournament has become the 2nd or 3rd highest grossing athletic event in the country. So the writing is on the wall, at least the Aztecs appear to be on the right path in the sport that is trending upward. Football is getting a lot of negative PR lately with all of the concussion issues. I saw a documentary on PBS, can't think of the title now, but someone speaking in interview stated that surveys show parental consent for children to play football is at an all time low since the surveys began. Not sure if that is a good means squat but the future might not be football oriented. I actually agree that the sport of football days might be numbered because of everyone freaking out about concussions. I played football through Junior College and had at least 2 concussions while playing. It was worth it. I love the game. But that being said the Safety Police are after football and will eventually change the game to a version nobody cares about or do away with it all together. Because of the wussification of society football will be done away with and basketball with thrive. College Basketball will be King of College sports and SDSU well positioned to be a player.
|
|
|
Post by fowl on Apr 18, 2014 21:14:57 GMT -8
Is Hoke an immensely better coach than Rocky? No. However - again IMO - he IS better and I'd rather have him than Rocky. At least Hoke runs a legitimate DI defensive set. That alone makes him preferable. Still there will be dozens of better options when the glorious time finally comes that we need a new HC. This comment shows your lack of knowledge or rather lack of independence. I love you JYP but Hoke ran the same "gimmick" defense that we run now. Remember that Rocky was brought in by Hoke to run the defense and we have been running the 335 ever since. The difference between Hoke and Rocky is psychology. Hoke knew it and Rocky has no clue. Read jimmy Johnson's book. The ability to motivate 18-22 year old men is what separates the good coaches from the bad. It's not scheme.
|
|