Football Coaching Staff

[ribsnwhiskey]

Yeah I remember everyone was really high on Sheppard when he arrived. Now he's gone and everyone's like, "Sheppard was the suck. The new guy's THE MAN".

We're in the "wtf hype" stage of a new coaching tenure. The coaches are building enthusiasm among the fanbase by telling us all what we want to hear. This is standard operating procedure. Maybe if I hadn't seen all of these things happen a mere 2 years ago with Chizik I wouldn't be this cynical.

All you really need to do is compare Cheezdicks coaching staff hires to Rhoads'. No comparison in the co-ordinator departments. Plus, Rhoads' has learned to win while not coaching bluechip talent at every stop. Cheez has never learned to win with lesser talent.

Whether there is much difference in the strength coaches is yet to be seen, but again, we now have a guy who was coaching at Rice as opposed to Texas. At least we have coaches now who are aware of the limitations players have and can use different techniques and tactics to maximize their talents as opposed to the morons who were clueless about what to do when they couldn't cover up their mistakes with talent.

Just my opinion.

 

[benjay]

I really like the looks of Rhoads's staff too. But most of us liked Chizik's staff just as much. I remember a ton of threads from people who heard them speak in their first spring here and how impressive they were as men and as coaches. Bolt was probably Chizik's only "questionable" hire at the time, and even he quickly won over fans.

The difference for me this time is I recognize it as pure hype. I'm excited about a new staff and I like Rhoads a lot. But bring me wins, not hype.

 

[KMAC_ATTACK]

I really like the looks of Rhoads's staff too. But most of us liked Chizik's staff just as much. I remember a ton of threads from people who heard them speak in their first spring here and how impressive they were as men and as coaches. Bolt was probably Chizik's only "questionable" hire at the time, and even he quickly won over fans.

The difference for me this time is I recognize it as pure hype. I'm excited about a new staff and I like Rhoads a lot. But bring me wins, not hype.

This is not an attack of any kind - but, if you want to compare the two most important figures off both staffs.....

Chiz's OC
Robert McFarland - yeah he had posted some solid numbers while at Stephen Austin Univ. but the real numbers spoke vividly. He had a lot of yards but for all those yards his system did not translate into points. That was discussed at length here, for being in the top 10 nationally in yards to not be in the top 50 in scoring said a lot. His system is flawed in that it moves well between the 20's but boggs down when the field condenses.
Rhoads OC
Tom Herman - more innovative OC and utilized the personnel he had at Rice to rank top 60 in rushing, top 5 in passing, top 10 for overall offense and 8th in the nation for scoring. To me, thats a well rounded offensive stat line and we here at ISU would take anything close to that!!!!!!

Chiz's DC
Wayne Bolt - defensive coordinator at Troy and UAB before ISU. Not sure if this defense was an accurate depiction for Coach Bolts desires. Based on word around the program, he and coach chizik had different opinions on the direction of the defense. Our defenses always seemed ill-prepared and out of place. Our defense really did very little in terms of good things last year.
Rhoads DC
Wally Burnham - has coached one of the best defenses the last 5 years while at south florida. Last years team had the 10th best rush defense, the 45th best passing defense and the 24th best scoring defense. We would love to have a defense that was near those numbers. If our defense is anywhere close to these numbers, we will have 8-9 wins. The one aspect to Coach Burnhams abilities to coach is reflected in the fact that this success is built on players of similar ratings as the players currently on the ISU roster. These are not swayed with a roster full of 4-5* guys he's recruited and coached players beyond their expectations and that will be the challenge at ISU.

So to me, this is not hype, the fact that the two coordinators actually have the numbers to substantiate their position and the respect that if players follow these formats they will see results on the field!!!! I'm not knocking Bolt and McFarland, but, to me, after JP had given Chiz more money for his assistants then any ISU coach had ever been given, the resumes did not reflect the position/salary they have been given.

Rhoads did not hire coaches because of a past working relationship etc etc, he evaluated and hired the best coaches with strong recruiting backgrounds. IMO his first three tasks as the new ISU football head coach, he's passed them with flying colors:
1. Keep existing talented players.
2. Complete a recruiting class with quality players.
3. Hire coaches that are qualified and want to be at ISU. Additionally, they must all have good recruiting connections because they will be tasked with assisting in the recruiting efforts!!!

 

[ribsnwhiskey]

That is the biggest thing to me. Rhoads hired the OC and DC based on qualifications. The fact that both were very successful as recently as last season speaks volumes. Cheez hired his buddies because they used to take fishing trips together.

 

[benjay]

You may have said that all along KMAC, but I would guess you were in the minority. I obviously glossed it over in the cardinal-and-gold haze I was living in during Chizik's first spring here. I remember most people very excited about the new staff, including McFarland and Bolt. (although I do remember some rumblings about the hiring of Bolt)

 

[KMAC_ATTACK]

That is the biggest thing to me. Rhoads hired the OC and DC based on qualifications. The fact that both were very successful as recently as last season speaks volumes. Cheez hired his buddies because they used to take fishing trips together.

To further that Ribs....

He hired his buddies because he thought they would be loyal to him.....

How ironic it was he then turned his back on them and ran at the first opportunity - oh yeah i forgot his dream job.....

I figured his dream job was at UT........

One thing ol Chizzle won't be able to do is blame it on the players, his recruiting class and roster is loaded......good thing he hired good Coordinators this time!!!!!

 

[clone99]

I really like the looks of Rhoads's staff too. But most of us liked Chizik's staff just as much. I remember a ton of threads from people who heard them speak in their first spring here and how impressive they were as men and as coaches. Bolt was probably Chizik's only "questionable" hire at the time, and even he quickly won over fans.

The difference for me this time is I recognize it as pure hype. I'm excited about a new staff and I like Rhoads a lot. But bring me wins, not hype.

I never wrote any posts glorifying Chizik's staff. Not that we knew for sure how good any of them were at the time. However I saw a collection of good ol boys who were buddies with Chizik at one point in time during his career. I was just hoping they would be better than most of their credentials, I don't think any of them did anything to improve their credentials while they were here, and Chizik may have lost a few buddies.

It at least appears that Rhoads is at least trying to find the best people he can, we'll find out in another 3 years, and if we would win four games I would say they definitely fit their coaching roles better than the last regime.

At least these guys have some positive results to point to, it was difficult to find those with the last coaching staff. I was impressed with the Chizik hire orginally, I was never impressed with his staff he put together.

 

[mustangcy]

This is not an attack of any kind - but, if you want to compare the two most important figures off both staffs.....

Chiz's OC
Robert McFarland - yeah he had posted some solid numbers while at Stephen Austin Univ. but the real numbers spoke vividly. He had a lot of yards but for all those yards his system did not translate into points. That was discussed at length here, for being in the top 10 nationally in yards to not be in the top 50 in scoring said a lot. His system is flawed in that it moves well between the 20's but boggs down when the field condenses.
Rhoads OC
Tom Herman - more innovative OC and utilized the personnel he had at Rice to rank top 60 in rushing, top 5 in passing, top 10 for overall offense and 8th in the nation for scoring. To me, thats a well rounded offensive stat line and we here at ISU would take anything close to that!!!!!!

Chiz's DC
Wayne Bolt - defensive coordinator at Troy and UAB before ISU. Not sure if this defense was an accurate depiction for Coach Bolts desires. Based on word around the program, he and coach chizik had different opinions on the direction of the defense. Our defenses always seemed ill-prepared and out of place. Our defense really did very little in terms of good things last year.
Rhoads DC
Wally Burnham - has coached one of the best defenses the last 5 years while at south florida. Last years team had the 10th best rush defense, the 45th best passing defense and the 24th best scoring defense. We would love to have a defense that was near those numbers. If our defense is anywhere close to these numbers, we will have 8-9 wins. The one aspect to Coach Burnhams abilities to coach is reflected in the fact that this success is built on players of similar ratings as the players currently on the ISU roster. These are not swayed with a roster full of 4-5* guys he's recruited and coached players beyond their expectations and that will be the challenge at ISU.

So to me, this is not hype, the fact that the two coordinators actually have the numbers to substantiate their position and the respect that if players follow these formats they will see results on the field!!!! I'm not knocking Bolt and McFarland, but, to me, after JP had given Chiz more money for his assistants then any ISU coach had ever been given, the resumes did not reflect the position/salary they have been given.

Rhoads did not hire coaches because of a past working relationship etc etc, he evaluated and hired the best coaches with strong recruiting backgrounds. IMO his first three tasks as the new ISU football head coach, he's passed them with flying colors:
1. Keep existing talented players.
2. Complete a recruiting class with quality players.
3. Hire coaches that are qualified and want to be at ISU. Additionally, they must all have good recruiting connections because they will be tasked with assisting in the recruiting efforts!!!

+1

I remember a vast majority of people shaking their heads a little when Gene announced his staff. No where near the excitement about his staff that I've percieved about PR's staff. Of course everyone had blind faith that Bolt/McFarland were "diamond in the rough" type coaches but I don't remember one single person excited about them.

 

[IsUaClone2]

I thought I had heard that Chizik, Bolt, and McFarland had a pact that if one got hired as a head coach, he would hire the others on as assistants. I know I can't explain why McFarland didn't take the boys to Step-n-Fetch-It but I can easily believe that Chizik didn't think enough of IState to try to put aside an agreement made with his fishing buddies in favor of the best assistants he could get for the job. If he would have put McFarland on the o. line and Bolt on the linebackers in the first place, we might not have struggled so much and Chiz would still have his old buddies. I think he has not only burned some bridges, he has also developed some more enemies from all the assistant coaches that are looking for work.

Rhoads has seemed to take a more professional approach to his hiring. Good track records and a desire to be there for more than the dollar.

 

[pujolsman]

Rhoads doesn't need background music on promos to get you to want to see his team play. Iowa State has never had a more passionate coach then Paul Rhoads.

 

[clone99]

Rhoads doesn't need background music on promos to get you to want to see his team play. Iowa State has never had a more passionate coach then Paul Rhoads.

And that is what we need!

 

[cycloneboogie]

Where is the old strength coach, Sheppard? Did he go back to Texas?

 

[swimmercy]

I'll be the first to admit that I don't know much about S&C coaches or their philosophies, so all of the above could be completely accurate. But I distinctly remember when Sheppard came on board with Chizik, that he was praised for being from the speed and explosiveness school of thought as well. Everyone was excited because he was a vast departure from Getty, who everyone said was about size/mass.

I guess my point is that I don't really believe any hype about S&C programs until I see the results on the field.

I agree. Where is this evaluation of Sheppard coming from?

 

[CrossCyed]

I thought I had heard that Chizik, Bolt, and McFarland had a pact that if one got hired as a head coach, he would hire the others on as assistants. I know I can't explain why McFarland didn't take the boys to Step-n-Fetch-It but I can easily believe that Chizik didn't think enough of IState to try to put aside an agreement made with his fishing buddies in favor of the best assistants he could get for the job. If he would have put McFarland on the o. line and Bolt on the linebackers in the first place, we might not have struggled so much and Chiz would still have his old buddies. I think he has not only burned some bridges, he has also developed some more enemies from all the assistant coaches that are looking for work.

Rhoads has seemed to take a more professional approach to his hiring. Good track records and a desire to be there for more than the dollar.

This is fairly true. If Chiz would have hired assistants like he did at Auburn, we would have performed better.

 

[woodie]

the moral of this blog is,"chizzllestick din't know schmidt!!!!":biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh:

 

[bmuff]

You may have said that all along KMAC, but I would guess you were in the minority. I obviously glossed it over in the cardinal-and-gold haze I was living in during Chizik's first spring here. I remember most people very excited about the new staff, including McFarland and Bolt. (although I do remember some rumblings about the hiring of Bolt)

I was optimistic about Chizik's staff, but mostly because I gave him the benefit of the doubt that he knew what he was doing. He evidently didn't and proved it by his Auburn hires. McFarland was a decent hire based on his work at UCF. I thought he'd be a better OL coach, but IMO we were hurt more by his moving people around and not letting them get settled than by fundamental teaching. I thought that Bolt was hurt most by having a different philosphy than Chizik and the D never recovered from that. IMO Peterson, Pelton, Fountain and Rodgers were solid hires, but I said from Day 1 that Chizik would be better served to keep Tony Alford on board.

On Rhoads' staff, I think that he hit home runs with the coordinator hires, S&C and Ash. Most of the rest of the guys are unproven and it is yet to be seen how good of a hires they really are. Wells and the younger Burnham need to prove they belong at this level and Bleil is taking a big step up coaching the entire OL. We'll see how they do, but even though I'd easily take CPR's staff over Chizik's, I don't think that you can say that they are better at every position with a straight face.

At S&C, it just seemed to me that Getty focused more on conditioning and injury prevention (whether it was his call or not), Sheppard focused on gaining muscle mass and McKnight (at Rice) focused on explosiveness and agility.

 

[d4nim4l]

Back when Chizik hired his staff I had a lot of reservations about both McFarland and Bolt due to their lack of BCS experience. It looked to be worthwhile reservations. Some of the position coaches were good hires as mentioned above and is the area I am closely watching for Rhoads' tenure. Ash was the best hire of them all and hopefully he will coach up the DBs we have and bring in ones that are comparable to the great secondary we had only a few years ago. Pope seems solid as well. My biggest concern is actually on Special Teams. Losing Boulware after the progress we made last year might sting more than we would like. Especially here, where we need to make Special Teams an area that is important to winning.

Right now I'm sold on Burnham and hope he does serve his last 10ish years here at ISU and builds us in to a team that will win with defense. Circa 2004 and 2005.

Herman has all the tools on paper and his teams have performed at every level. My biggest concern will be what happens when he faces teams that are loaded with more talent than ours. Texas, OU, etc. His Rice team didn't fare too well against Texas last year and I would say they have players similar to what ISU brings to campus. There may be more of a gap than I think but I have to wonder how different we are from Rice talentwise. I do believe what will separate Herman from McFarland is his track record to try different things and not rest on only a handful of ideas to win.

 

[Aclone]

I do believe what will separate Herman from McFarland is his track record to try different things and not rest on only a handful of ideas to win.

I just hope that we can hold onto Herman for more than a year or two.

One thing I found interesting, and which CPR has stressed, was that he built his coaching team around recruiting--and even Wally Burnham has said that he expects to spend a lot of time in Florida recruiting.

Of course, I assume he'll keep his house there. :wink:

 

[KMAC_ATTACK]

There may be more of a gap than I think but I have to wonder how different we are from Rice talentwise.

2009
ISU recruiting class rank - 72 (4*-1, 3*-10)
Rice recruiting class rank - 78 (4*-0, 3*-3)

2008
ISU recruiting class rank - 62 (4*-1, 3*-6)
Rice recruiting class rank - 113 (4*-0, 3*-1)

2007
ISU recruiting class rank - 60 (4*-1, 3*-9)
Rice recruiting class rank - 100 (4*-0, 3*-3)

3* or above ISU 28 Rice 7 - thats a big difference, of course Texas signs that many each year and their 4* or above!!!!!

Now, just based on recruiting services comparisons, there's a lot of difference in the talent between ISU and Rice. Actually, the big difference in talent will be on the offensive side of the ball - Herman has a lot to work/play with and variations-gadget plays because our offensive players have a lot of diverse talent!!!!!

Burnham's got his hands full in making this defense respectable. That said, i think his coaches brought in have a great background in coaching. The talent in the defense will be in schemes and their ability to actually coach up players. We have some talent on the defensive side, but not enough to make it a stout defense. The rest will be in schemes and adjustments.

Lastly, regarding special teams, obviously this coach understands the importance of special teams as he's overseeing this facet of the game much like Frank Beamer, if only we have similar successes!!!!!!

 

[jdoggivjc]

I have a different recall on this issue. Mac would drag out the taking over a winless program card even in the last half of his coaching tenure when the entire roster were his recruits.

Not sure where you're getting that - that was mostly us fans playing that card, not him from what I remember...