Question about Chizik and coaching

I was listening to Cotler's replay this morning with one of the Bowden's (don't remember which one it was). He actually said something that I've been thinking about. Bowden said that many young coaches forget what got them to the level or position they are in. In Chizik's example, his defense.

Since Chizik is going to have a Defensive Coordinator, is he going to let the DC run his own defense and we won't see what Chizik can really do?

I was excited about this guy coming in and running his style of defense but I'm worried that we may not see it.

Thoughts?

Chizik may or may not be actually calling the game day shots, but I'm sure he has chosen assistants that will run the types of schemes that he envisions.

Here is a good thread kind of discussing this matter. Shoot your two cents and see what others have to say.

CF thread

guitarchitect7 has now given his blessing to this thread.

actually when coach chizik was introduced, he said he didnt know what offense and defense they would be running, he said it depended on personel. i thought this was a terrific answer, to adapt your system to your players. you recruit to what you want to run, but the ability to be flexible and make adjustments is a pretty good trait in a coach.

Just so the backfield people do not give a ten yard cushion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clonefan1

one of the Bowden's (don't remember which one it was).

---

If any Bowden said it, I give no credence to it whatsoever. Unless it was Bobby. Then I'd think about it first. If it was Terry, ignore it completely. Terry Bowden is possibly the worst football commentator I have ever listened to in my life. Last year, during the Nebraska game, the only thing he talked about, whether they were out on the field or not, was the "blackshirt defense". He made repeated statements about blitzes, and how the Nebraska defense was "rushing six guys", when it was easily seen on replays that they were only rushing four. I know this is just ranting, but I really can't stand that guy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wesley

Just so the backfield people do not give a ten yard cushion.

---

It would be so nice to see some bump converage!! I'd love to have a couple physical corners bumping the reciever off there routes on the line of scrimmage!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sodakjoe

If any Bowden said it, I give no credence to it whatsoever. Unless it was Bobby. Then I'd think about it first. If it was Terry, ignore it completely. Terry Bowden is possibly the worst football commentator I have ever listened to in my life. Last year, during the Nebraska game, the only thing he talked about, whether they were out on the field or not, was the "blackshirt defense". He made repeated statements about blitzes, and how the Nebraska defense was "rushing six guys", when it was easily seen on replays that they were only rushing four. I know this is just ranting, but I really can't stand that guy.

---

I'm no Terry Bowden apologist and I did not see the broadcast you speak of but the guy did go undefeated one season at Auburn back in the '90s.

As for how much input the head man has on either side of the ball...it depends on the head coach. Who do you think calls the plays on a team where Steve Spurrier is the head coach? I don't think it is the O.C.! The same applies for the defense on a team where Nick Saban is the head coach.

My sense is that Chizik will be quite "intimately" involved on the defensive side of things.

This isn't going to be a popular "thought" and I hope I don't get dinged for it too much, but I've got these little "caution lights" going off in my head regarding the asst. coach / coordinator hirings thus far. Pollard gave Chizik an unprecedented (for ISU anyway) pot of money to hire assistants. He's hired an OC from a D1AA school that was no better than mediocre and a DC that was fired by Alabama-Birmingham. These guys have each been around for awhile; why haven't any other "higher level" programs sought them before?

When the reporter at the press conference asked GC whom he might be bringing with him from Texas, I don't think he meant S.F. Austin!

I've read that McFarland signed on for $300k. Brian Kelly, a certified offensive genius, was only making $180k at Central Michigan. I'm not suggesting we could have acquired BKelly as our OC, but why in the heck are we paying that amount to McFarland?

I understand that the "coaching profession" is an old-boy network, but this also plays into my concerns. Wayne Bolt was fired by Watson Brown, brother to Mac Brown, professed mentor to Gene Chizik. WB did a nice job at Troy, but did not at UAB. Was he hired for his connections?

I've seen vague comparisons made between GC and Bobby Stoops, both of whom parlayed an "assistant coach of the year" award into head coaching jobs. I won't go any further with that other than to compare the assistant staffs they built. Stoops went to Oklahoma with young aggressive assistants (Chuck Long, Mike Leach, Mike Stoops, etc.) looking to make a name for themselves. It would rather appear at this point that GC is hiring "old cronies" to repay them for help in getting to where he is today...

In conclusion; please don't question my loyalty to ISU football! Nobody wants ISU under Chizik to suceed more than I do and I like what little I've seen of the man. I just have these little "warning bells" going off and was wondering if anybody else was feeling just the slightest bit uncomfortable. Is the acquisition of assistants progressing in the direction you expected?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knownothing

guitarchitect7 has now given his blessing to this thread.

---

what is that suppose to mean?

The only points I would make to that is he hired a head coach from a 1AA not an OC (he was an OC previously) and from all accounts I've read was getting the program at SFA back to where they wanted it. As far as Bolt, it sure looks to me like he got fired at UAB because of circumstances more than anything. Not saying Im as happy as I could be with the hires but they certainly dont worry me as of yet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HGPuck

The only points I would make to that is he hired a head coach from a 1AA not an OC (he was an OC previously) and from all accounts I've read was getting the program at SFA back to where they wanted it. As far as Bolt, it sure looks to me like he got fired at UAB because of circumstances more than anything. Not saying Im as happy as I could be with the hires but they certainly dont worry me as of yet.

---

Not to sound defensive, but I was aware McFarland was the HC at SFA; ISU hired him as the OC. I've read conflicting accounts as to the condition of the SFA program when he inherited it; one at the time of hiring talked about him taking them to higher levels (suggesting the program wasn't in turmoil). Later releases make it sound more like a rebuilding job. I'm not saying he's not good (TBD); just wondering why he's making such tall cash with the credentials he brings...

That is why he hired Wayne Bolt, because he felt that he was on the same page as him defensively, they understood what he eachother wants in a defense! That is why I think we see the hires we have seen, guys who know what eachother wants, Pelton knows what Bolt wants, Bolt knows what Chizik wants, Rodgers knows what McFarland wants, I am sure McFarland and Chizik are prolly on a similar page as well!

I can understand the concern that some of you have about these "no-name coaches"...it is typical to fear the unknown.

However, there appears to be a pattern or two developing in the assistant coach hiring process:

-Hiring from programs that do not necessarily get the top line recruits year in and year out. UAB just moved to D-I in the mid '90s and they have to recruit against Alabama, Auburn, FSU, Georgia, LSU, etc. They have had to recruit kids with potential and "coach them up" as they say. Frankly, they have been quite successful. Watson Brown was at UAB the exact same years as McCarney was at ISU and his record is better...62-74 versus McCarney's 56-85 (remember that UAB went D-I in his first or second season). Alabama and Auburn won't play them but they have scheduled numerous SEC, ACC, and Big 12 teams over the last 10-12 years...putting scares into many and actually beating some of them (including LSU). Ditto for Troy which went D-I in 2002. Obviously, SFA gets guys that UT and A&M don't have scholarships for. I think he is looking for guys that can develop players.

-Hiring coaches that have contacts in very deep recruiting areas...UT, A&M, Alabama, Auburn, etc. can't sign everybody! Make no mistake, we are probably not going to be stealing the top recruit in Texas away from UT or A&M or the top recruit in Alabama away from Auburn or Alabama. But if we can get the best of the rest in these talent deep states...guys that are diamonds in the rought that can be coached into greatness...good things are in store!