|
|
Post by k5james on Jun 20, 2010 11:27:38 GMT -8
As a huge Brady Hoke fan, you just hit it on the head as to why I called his hire a "lateral move".  Sure Steve. That's why you continue to bash him with inaccurate "facts." He wasn't even at Ball State for seven years first of all. Secondly, he turned them around in five. Get your facts right if you're going to bash the guy. I think three years is just fine to turn around the mess that the last three stooges left him. WHEN we get to a bowl game this year I think we should try to extend him. For him to get us from where we were at to that would be nothing short of remarkable. |
|
|
|
Post by monty on Jun 20, 2010 11:53:20 GMT -8
Seriously, if he gets a team that hasn't been to a bowl game in a dozen years, and in that dozen years only has one 6 win season and 2 5 win season would be fantastic. Lots of people have expectations that it should have happened, while it didn't happen in the previous decade, if it does we should be happy, but many will still find fault. Which, as I've pointed out before, is odd since many of those people are the same people that make excuses for why basketball, with the same coach the last 11 years, can't win a tourney game.
|
|
|
|
Post by steveaztec on Jun 20, 2010 11:55:37 GMT -8
As a huge Brady Hoke fan, you just hit it on the head as to why I called his hire a "lateral move". Sure Steve. That's why you continue to bash him with inaccurate "facts." He wasn't even at Ball State for seven years first of all. Secondly, he turned them around in five. Get your facts right if you're going to bash the guy. I think three years is just fine to turn around the mess that the last three stooges left him. WHEN we get to a bowl game this year I think we should try to extend him. For him to get us from where we were at to that would be nothing short of remarkable. Who is bashing Brady Hoke? I apologize for being wayyyyy off. Brady was at Ball State 6 years, instead of the 7 years I mentioned. I think he should have won 6 last year. Extension if he makes a Bowl this year? I don't think so. Maybe the following year if he wins 7 or 8. |
|
|
|
Post by sdsuphilip on Jun 20, 2010 12:14:29 GMT -8
just reading this exchange, I still don't understand why you have a personal problem with the guy. I can't imagine any coach winning with the team we had last year. He seems to have done what was most needed - change the culture of losing and make them accountable. Monty, Brady Hoke and staff should have won 6 games last year. not with the talent we had |
|
|
|
Post by monty on Jun 20, 2010 12:39:52 GMT -8
Monty, Brady Hoke and staff should have won 6 games last year. First I posted that I agree with you, but after a moment of thought I'd say we should have won either five or six. The collapse at the end of the season was very Longlike, and I now fear that Hoke might be a sheep in wolf's clothing. As I've said, I like his words but let's see about the observable results (and not just in terms of wins and losses). It is rather hard to judge a coach on how he could turn around a losing franchise in one year. Let us at least see what the team looks like with a year to toughen up the flat-out pu#$ies that we have had. I'm all for bitching about poor performances, but can't we at least give a coach a modicum of a chance? If this year looks as bad then you might be on to something, but last year deserves a pass. |
|
|
|
Post by monty on Jun 20, 2010 12:57:14 GMT -8
I'm all for bitching about poor performances, but can't we at least give a coach a modicum of a chance? If this year looks as bad then you might be on to something, but last year deserves a pass. You are right, and I'm trying to put aside last year's bad stuff and keep at the front of my mind the good stuff I saw (and there was quite a bit of good stuff). However, if we go worse than 3-1 OOC, then... I'm not read to deliver an ultimatum after 16 games. If the team looks embarrassing and plays like $#!+ next year, then ... But, I don't think it is quantifiable as to football progress. But if we go 2-2 I will be very disappointed. |
|
|
|
Post by aztech on Jun 20, 2010 13:17:10 GMT -8
Monty, Brady Hoke and staff should have won 6 games last year. First I posted that I agree with you, but after a moment of thought I'd say we should have won either five or six. The collapse at the end of the season was very Longlike, and I now fear that Hoke might be a sheep in wolf's clothing. As I've said, I like his words but let's see about the observable results (and not just in terms of wins and losses). Those collapses were on Rocky. If he allows such a thing to happen again, then he's way overrated. Not so much Hoke, yet. |
|
|
|
Post by monty on Jun 20, 2010 14:27:31 GMT -8
Lest we forget that if the oline and rbs can get two yards on two plays and when they didn't. if yoshida can make a 34 yarder the first one likely doesn't happen or at the very least it goes to OT. Coaches can only affect so much - players have to be able to do something, we just didn't have players that were mentally or physically strong (or talented) enough. He'll have had 20 months or so and a chance to infuse some more talent, let's really start holding their coals to the fire this year.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2010 15:16:05 GMT -8
I'd just as soon do both but which would have the greater AQ value, beating Utah or Missouri? Missouri, because Utah will probably have a losing record in a lesser league. You think Utah is going to have a losing record this year? While they could certainly lose at ND now that Tuna II is gone and they could lose the season opener hosting Pitt, the other two OOC games against SJSU and Iowa State are gimmes and I can't see the Utes failing to have a winning record in the MWC considering their conference record is 14-2 the last couple years. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2010 15:18:41 GMT -8
Brady Hoke and staff should have won 6 games last year. not with the talent we had And not with the lack of toughness in the players he inherited from the milquetoasts who preceded him. |
|
|
|
Post by aztech on Jun 20, 2010 16:13:35 GMT -8
Lest we forget that if the oline and rbs can get two yards on two plays and when they didn't. if yoshida can make a 34 yarder the first one likely doesn't happen or at the very least it goes to OT. Coaches can only affect so much - players have to be able to do something, we just didn't have players that were mentally or physically strong (or talented) enough. He'll have had 20 months or so and a chance to infuse some more talent, let's really start holding their coals to the fire this year. Let's be fair. The offense had already done their share since they were far enough ahead in the 4th quarter. Why else would those games be called a collapse? It was mental. If they weren't physically strong or lacking a lot of talent, then the game would have been over in the first half. |
|
|
|
Post by retiredaztec on Jun 20, 2010 16:40:50 GMT -8
You failed to answer the question. What's your beef with the guy? What is his "business model" from Ball State? So because your guy wasn't hired, you're not on board either way? Ok, I'll tread carefully here. Yes, he had a 12-1 record his last year, but he had losing seasons his first four years as HC at Ball ST. I would truly hope that this isn't in the cards for State if he remains HC past the coming season. I was cautiously optimistic when he was hired, but his first season as HC, (especially the last four games), gave me NO reason to feel optimistic for the coming season. I have NO CLUE what to expect. My personal feelings toward him, I'll pretty much keep to myself. It's my hangup. As I said, he turns this program around more power to him. As I believe would have been the case with Chuck Long, if he DOES find success, I believe he'll be gone. But all this said, at the risk of sounding trite and to no one in particular who would care, I will make a concerted effort to be more supportive of Coach Hoke. As the gods already know, I've suffered with this program longer than any sane person should. As luck would have it, as soon as I left California, ('98), and had to schlep on an airplane to catch Aztec home games, the teams have pretty much, with all due respect, been crap. Something has to happen soon, I'm getting too old for this..  |
|
|
|
Post by aztecjake on Jun 20, 2010 18:49:30 GMT -8
I think the first four games of the season are of the most important as these games will mount the mental capacity of the team as it approaches conference play. Looking at the past five years, the Aztecs started with first four game records of 1 win and 3 loses, except for 2006, where the record was 0-4. In each of these five years, the seasons ended in losing records. Best was 2005 at 5 - 7. I can't say enough for having a positive outlook as that first conference game comes about.
As for the comments about Brady Hoke, I feel the man is a winner on and off of the field and has really attempted to promote Aztec Fever throughout most of the San Diego region as well as in the MWC. These are a few reasons to support my belief.
1) Has worked his ass off in the recruiting arena - I don't think anyone can argue this.
2) Is attempting to involve the student body with Aztec Football excitement:
- Hiring a group of Student Football Mangers, and an on campus Mascot of sorts (will there be on-campus rallies in the near future?)
3) Participates in the Aztec Caravan increasing Aztec awareness and communication in the west.
4) Created Hoke's Heroes - a charity organization for San Diego's youth
5) Developed the Woman's Football Academy to help raise funds for breast cancer research
6) Extends into the community thru participation in a radio show ( The Brady Hoke Show with Chris Ello at the Claim Jumper each Wednesday before games providing communication and information to the community
7) Participates in numerous Athletic Foundation events such as Golf tournaments, dinners, etc.
8) Go Aztecs!!!!!................Fight On!!!!!
These are only the things that come to my immediate mind and I'm sure there are many many other events he has participated in that promote the university, the football team and the San Diego community. And, he has done all these things in a very short period of time.
|
|
|
|
Post by steveaztec on Jun 20, 2010 18:59:13 GMT -8
Brady Hoke is working very hard in the community.
|
|
|
|
Post by sdsuphilip on Jun 20, 2010 19:45:16 GMT -8
You think Utah is going to have a losing record this year? While they could certainly lose at ND now that Tuna II is gone and they could lose the season opener hosting Pitt, the other two OOC games against SJSU and Iowa State are gimmes and I can't see the Utes failing to have a winning record in the MWC considering their conference record is 14-2 the last couple years. My mistake. I keep thinking they're already out of the MWC. they won't have a losing record in the PAC 10 |
|
|
|
Post by monty on Jun 20, 2010 19:53:20 GMT -8
My mistake. I keep thinking they're already out of the MWC. they won't have a losing record in the PAC 10 Maybe not right away, but there is a difference between being the marquee team and being at least the 4th choice. Look at the difficulty ASU has had being a consistent top flight program and they were winning as big if not bigger than Utah before they joined - but the presence of USC/UCLA and the emergence of Oregon is a difficult beast to go against. In a couple years they will be competing with ASU/Washington (if/when they turn it around)/Cal and the other team of the rest that makes a run every once in a while for the middle and every few years for the top. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecfan1 on Jun 20, 2010 20:42:23 GMT -8
There is now not any doubt about it. It's Utah. 1. They're leaving us so we owe them a payback. 2. We may never get a chance to play them again. 3. Most importantly, beating the Utes would apparently help the MWC's AQ bid. Here's why. Under the arcane formula the BCS uses, although the Utes will be playing in the MWC for one more season, assuming they go to the Pac in 2011, their BCS points for 2009 will be transferred to the Pac-12. (Boise's 2009 points will be transferred to the MWC.) SDSU doesn't figure to be exactly outstanding this year so losing to us would put a real crimp in Utah's football RPI. (I have no idea what the thing is formally called.) Simultaneously, because Utah figures to be very good, beating them would really help our RPI. We get the Utes at a perfect time. First, the game is at Qualcomm. Second, it's the epitome of a sandwich game for the Utes since they make their first-ever trip to South Bend the week before and they play BYU the week after. Bottom Line: If I'm Brady Hoke, I'm already thinking about how I'm going to defeat the Utes. Disagree. Utah is way too strong for us still. Most important game is to find a way to beat AF Oct. 16. That is potentially a winnable game and with a hoped for 3-1 OOC, would position us to go at least 3-5 if not 4-4 in conference and a bowl bid. Lose and we'd have to beat CSU, NM and UNLV to get there. Beating AF would be THE statement game for the season. Despite the reloading they must do on OL, they always handle turnover of personnel so very well. It would be a reach to beat them, but perhaps our new OL will be firing on all cyliders by then. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2010 21:07:53 GMT -8
Fan1, Utah loses its five leading tacklers and two other starters from its defense so I don't see them being any better this year than BYU was in 2009 and we came very close to knocking off the Borg, to a large extent, I believe, because we caught them looking ahead a week to TCU. As I said above, Utah should not only be looking ahead, but looking behind when we play them. I'm certainly not predicting a win but unless Lindley is hurt, I fail to see why we shouldn't be able to keep it close deep into the fourth quarter like we did with BYU and if that happens, with a break or two (and it's about time that happened) I think we can beat them.
|
|
|
|
Post by tonatiuh on Jun 20, 2010 21:49:09 GMT -8
Every game is important each week. But, beating Mizzou would be the best for us since we have not beaten them in two tries. It sure
would look good on the road. I would not discount the Utah game though because they have done so well lately. True we have won
twice against them since we have been in the MWC, but take a look at the series record overall vs. the Utes. It has been close, and
they lead only 16-12-1. They do not own a Big series lead on us like BYU, or Air Force. In fact, neither team has ever beaten the
other more than 3 times straight. They just won their third last year. Plus, right after they had their undefeated season in '04
we played them in Salt Lake City, and beat them pretty handily the following season even when they had Johnson as their new QB.
Right now it looks like things are lining up for a victory for us this season. It may not happen, but it is funny sometimes how things
stay true to form. We tend to match up well against them, and I would not bet on an easy victory by them over us. Not this year
for sure.
|
|
|
|
Post by sdsuphilip on Jun 21, 2010 9:55:32 GMT -8
they won't have a losing record in the PAC 10 Maybe not right away, but there is a difference between being the marquee team and being at least the 4th choice. Look at the difficulty ASU has had being a consistent top flight program and they were winning as big if not bigger than Utah before they joined - but the presence of USC/UCLA and the emergence of Oregon is a difficult beast to go against. In a couple years they will be competing with ASU/Washington (if/when they turn it around)/Cal and the other team of the rest that makes a run every once in a while for the middle and every few years for the top. Utah could not have joined at a better time, they are already more attractive school to most than UA, ASU, WSU, WU... Then you look at OSU, Cal and Stanford who are upper mid tier program.... Usc is in sanctions, UCLA hasn't had a very good year in a while, and there biggest competition is only Oregon imo, they will be fine. |
|
