Official UND Football Regime Change Thread

[gundy1124]

10 minutes ago, UNDColorado said:

Ha that's great but shouldn't the real argument have been: Sir, either put down the Mike's or hand over your man card right now!

 

[UNDColorado]

2 minutes ago, gundy1124 said:

 

 

[Midwestern Hawk]

28 minutes ago, gundy1124 said:

 

Now there is a nice way to break up the day!  Thanks!

[Irish]

1 hour ago, gundy1124 said:

On one extreme if a team was so overly talented they could run 4 plays and win every game.  On the other end teams like an emerging Boise St. and even Utah in the '09 Sugar Bowl used schematics, grit, heart, and coaching to overcome and be successful against more talented team(s).  I can't stand the approach of waiting for better players until 'our system' works.  Gotta play and coach with what you have.  (and win)

I could not agree more - I would venture to say that most here don't have a basic disagreement with a ball control offense.  In addition to not having the horses, Rudolph has shown absolutely no talent for keeping the defense guessing or for making adjustments.  O against D is a big chess match and Rudolph has no feel for the game.  There are ways to defend against a run-first ball control offense and one of them is 8 or 9 in the box.  When that happens, other things should be wide open.  We have shown no ability to exploit any overplaying by the defense.  We are utterly predictable.  I was accused on another thread of polluting the discussion because I am so totally frustrated with Bubba's decision to keep things the same.  How can he watch the amount of game film he has and not see the problems that are right in front of his face?  I could not be more upset with Bubba at this point - more than with Rudolph who is what he is and will never see the light.  We pay Bubba big bucks to see the light for him.  

[Sioux>Bison]

11 hours ago, UND-FB-FAN said:

Let's not get desperate here. 

Moving forward, when UND makes hires in the future, UND needs to consider those who may not have previous ties to UND. The guys who helped UND have Division II success will only be able to contribute so much in the modern Division I era. The whole "good ol' boys" idea is dangerous and can (has) get UND into trouble. 

I'm for hiring young coaches with bright futures but limited experience (former position coaches or quality control) and/or experienced coaches with DI FBS experience. Places outside of UND most certainly have ideas that UND could desperately use right now and into the future. 

So when is Bubba going to dismantle the good ole boy coaching staff and bring in some real D1 coaches? This whole ND connection thing is not working.

here is a good question. Which offense scored more points in the D1 era ? The Mussman offenses or the Bubba ones ?

[homer]

1 hour ago, Sioux>Bison said:

So when is Bubba going to dismantle the good ole boy coaching staff and bring in some real D1 coaches? This whole ND connection thing is not working.

here is a good question. Which offense scored more points in the D1 era ? The Mussman offenses or the Bubba ones ?

Which staff made the play offs and got snubbed from the playoffs?

[SlowHand]

I have said this a few times, but will say it again.  Coaching is not the issue, player skills are not the issue, conditioning is not the issue, CULTURE is the issue.   A few toxic elements were introduced and poisoned the team.  Its not that hard to repair.

[Csonked Out]

A team is only as good as it's assistant coaches. We simply need a bigger budget to recruit better talent. heck, we lost our old running backs coach to another program at the same position. That should not happen. We are simply scraping the bottom of the barrel with money and it is showing on the field.

[SiouxBoys]

13 hours ago, geaux_sioux said:

Extra points for being dead serious?

yes

[ND1]

9 hours ago, Csonked Out said:

A team is only as good as it's assistant coaches. We simply need a bigger budget to recruit better talent. heck, we lost our old running backs coach to another program at the same position. That should not happen. We are simply scraping the bottom of the barrel with money and it is showing on the field.

Ask anyone internally and it was in the best interest of everyone that the old running backs coach left.  

[Csonked Out]

On 11/23/2017 at 8:08 AM, ND1 said:

Ask anyone internally and it was in the best interest of everyone that the old running backs coach left.  

that may be, but getting the same position at another Big sky School for a significant raise shouldn't happen. We need to have a coaching budget like NDSU does to stay competitive.

[green_sioux]

On ‎11‎/‎22‎/‎2017 at 8:29 PM, homer said:

Which staff made the play offs and got snubbed from the playoffs?

Which of those staffs only coached for 2 years while UND was playoff eligible? One coach's team in their 4th year, won the conference, finished 8-3 and the final poll had us ranked #23, unfortunately while still in the era of 20 FCS playoff teams.   (FCS went from 20 to 24 teams in 2013)   The other staff won the conference and made the playoffs in their 3rd year.  More similarities than differences.   One big difference is the total salary for current football staff is more than twice it was during the transition.  We transitioned with some staffs that had an average age almost equal to the team's average age.

Frankly, I'm more concerned about our recruiting, depth, coaching philosophy and game management now, than I was with the previous staff.   I never thought I"d think that a few years ago.

[Irish]

45 minutes ago, green_sioux said:

Which of those staffs only coached for 2 years while UND was playoff eligible? One coach's team in their 4th year, won the conference, finished 8-3 and the final poll had us ranked #23, unfortunately while still in the era of 20 FCS playoff teams.   (FCS went from 20 to 24 teams in 2013)   The other staff won the conference and made the playoffs in their 3rd year.  More similarities than differences.   One big difference is the total salary for current football staff is more than twice it was during the transition.  We transitioned with some staffs that had an average age almost equal to the team's average age.

Frankly, I'm more concerned about our recruiting, depth, coaching philosophy and game management now, than I was with the previous staff.   I never thought I"d think that a few years ago.

Totally agree with your concerns.  Part of my extreme irritation is that I expected so much more from Bubba.  We knew we would get a conservative philosophy, but the total lack of adjustments and play calling on the offensive side were ridiculous - It showed us a coach who was overmatched not only by other coaches, but by his own Xs and Os.  Every week he would come out in his presser and state how we "needed to find a way to get better".  I'm not so sure that if we increased the assistant coaches' salary he wouldn't just give Ruldoph a raise.  I just don't know why we put up with this lack of coaching skill.  And not that he needs advise from the fan board, but he doesn't seem to listen to anyone (or has a staff of yes-men).  

[SiouxBoys]

1 hour ago, green_sioux said:

Which of those staffs only coached for 2 years while UND was playoff eligible? One coach's team in their 4th year, won the conference, finished 8-3 and the final poll had us ranked #23, unfortunately while still in the era of 20 FCS playoff teams.   (FCS went from 20 to 24 teams in 2013)   The other staff won the conference and made the playoffs in their 3rd year.  More similarities than differences.   One big difference is the total salary for current football staff is more than twice it was during the transition.  We transitioned with some staffs that had an average age almost equal to the team's average age.

Frankly, I'm more concerned about our recruiting, depth, coaching philosophy and game management now, than I was with the previous staff.   I never thought I"d think that a few years ago.

More concerned with this staff than with Mussman's. Okay.

[UND-FB-FAN]

28 minutes ago, SiouxBoys said:

More concerned with this staff than with Mussman's. Okay.

Bubba and his staff are far superior than Mussman. Good God people, Mussman was awful as a head coach. 

Don't exaggerate too much folks. There's always a line and some have crossed it with the above comments. 

[homer]

2 hours ago, green_sioux said:

Which of those staffs only coached for 2 years while UND was playoff eligible? One coach's team in their 4th year, won the conference, finished 8-3 and the final poll had us ranked #23, unfortunately while still in the era of 20 FCS playoff teams.   (FCS went from 20 to 24 teams in 2013)   The other staff won the conference and made the playoffs in their 3rd year.  More similarities than differences.   One big difference is the total salary for current football staff is more than twice it was during the transition.  We transitioned with some staffs that had an average age almost equal to the team's average age.

Frankly, I'm more concerned about our recruiting, depth, coaching philosophy and game management now, than I was with the previous staff.   I never thought I"d think that a few years ago.

Your comparing it to 8-3?   The year we had Sioux Falls, Montana Western and Black Hills on the schedule. 

Get a clue.  

[Midwestern Hawk]

Just now, homer said:

Your comparing it to 8-3?   The year we had Sioux Falls, Montana Western and Black Hills on the schedule. 

Get a clue.  

Not the equivalent of Utah, Missouri State and South Dakota? 

[geaux_sioux]

2 hours ago, Midwestern Hawk said:

Not the equivalent of Utah, Missouri State and South Dakota? 

Derek Carr led Fresno St > da bears or da Yotes 

[homer]

52 minutes ago, geaux_sioux said:

Derek Carr led Fresno St > da bears or da Yotes 

They lost to Fresno.  What’s your point?

[green_sioux]

3 hours ago, homer said:

Your comparing it to 8-3?   The year we had Sioux Falls, Montana Western and Black Hills on the schedule. 

Get a clue.  

That year our wins included S. Utah, UC Davis, Northern Colorado, and South Dakota.  Lost to Fresno by 5

This year we lost to S. Utah by 26, lost to UC Davis by 24, beat UNC by 10 and lost to South Dakota by 38

What's your point?

[geaux_sioux]

24 minutes ago, homer said:

They lost to Fresno.  What’s your point?

People were knit picking the schedule and neglecting the two fbs games. Our schedule sucked because of the Sioux nickname and because of an incredibly low buyout for UCA.

[homer]

9 minutes ago, green_sioux said:

That year our wins included S. Utah, UC Davis, Northern Colorado, and South Dakota.  Lost to Fresno by 5

This year we lost to S. Utah by 26, lost to UC Davis by 24, beat UNC by 10 and lost to South Dakota by 38

What's your point?

Barely won the rematch with Sioux Falls

[green_sioux]

1 minute ago, homer said:

Barely won the rematch with Sioux Falls

So you don't have a point.

[Teeder11]

6 minutes ago, homer said:

Barely won the rematch with Sioux Falls

Excellent point. 

[UND1983]

Am I sensing a Mussman supporter coming out if the woodwork in a time of vulnerability?