Bob Stein says Kill rescued and righted a football program riddled with incompetence

Donate To GopherHole
cjcarter8 said:
Brewster was fired impart because there wasnt any direction to the program. There was nothing to indicate improvement. The only thing evident was disarray.

Kill's program has a direction. Its evident in the classroom and on the field. Kill has a very tough job on his hands. Rebuilding this program is going to take time. Rome wasnt built in a day. The path to success isnt always linear. Just because the team's W-L doesn't improve every year doesnt mean they aren't getting better. If the program gets stagnant, Kill's time will come but that time isnt right now.
Click to expand...

+1.
 


scools12 said:
From my understanding members of the staff have had other offers and have decided to remain with Kill.

If this staff has success at Minnesota we will see if other job offers come or not which will show us how the staff is viewed by others.
Click to expand...

Notice anything?
 

John Galt said:
Notice anything?
Click to expand...

Not sure what you mean? As I said in my post we do not know why the staff has stayed. Could very well be loyality or some other reason. If the program under Kill has success at Minnesota in theory members of the staff should receive offers for advancements.
 

scools12 said:
Not sure what you mean? As I said in my post we do not know why the staff has stayed. Could very well be loyality or some other reason. If the program under Kill has success at Minnesota in theory members of the staff should receive offers for advancements.
Click to expand...

Sigh...and every year this is addressed. His assistants get offers and still stay with Kill.
 



dpodoll68 said:
He did have experience as a head coach at a lower division.



No, it's because you do hate him. Scarcely a post goes by without some sort of dig or yet another reminder how Kill's job isn't safe.
Click to expand...


I would agree that his experience as Head Coach at Central Catholic High School in Lafayette, Indiana would fit lower division status.
 


MNVCGUY said:
People think I hate Kill because I am critical of him. I don't hate the guy, I am just not as sold on him as many of the posters in here seem to be. There is no doubt Kill is a better head football coach than Brewster but to date his on the field results have not been even to the level of Brewsters and in regards to talent Kill inherited far more talent than Brew did when he took over.
Click to expand...

Put down the crack pipe. Go ahead and list that "far more talent". After 1st two seasons: Kill 9-16 & 4-12 Big Ten, Brewster 8-17 and 3-13 Big Ten, and Kill inherited a program in FAR worse shape with less talent.
 





Some Day...Is Coming! said:
Put down the crack pipe. Go ahead and list that "far more talent". After 1st two seasons: Kill 9-16 & 4-12 Big Ten, Brewster 8-17 and 3-13 Big Ten, and Kill inherited a program in FAR worse shape with less talent.
Click to expand...

The cupboard was bare when Brewster got here too, let's not forget that. Mason had checked out a few years before he got canned. Just look at first year results for Brew and Kill. The data doesn't support a lot of this support for Kill being so much better. Objectively they are the same, so far, with results. Subjectively sure Kill's better, but so what?

Year 3, that's when its fair game to start looking at the results. I have concerns, but I am optimistic. I also think its fair to look at other coaches hired in conference at same time as Kill (Kevin Wilson) and see if our progress matches up there.
 

JerryKillFan said:
Here's an interesting read ...

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebas...to-am-and-ignored-lots-of-negative-recruiting

There are real dirtbags in college athletics. And, yes, I suspect his seizures are being used against Kill in spots on the recruiting trail.
Click to expand...

FWIW my HS coach told me Buliemia or one of his assistants tried to use it against Kill with a kid at his HS, regardless of the public quotes BB has had about respecting Jerry.
Shouldn't surprise anyone.
 



dinkything said:
ironic these words come from 1/2 of "Wolfenstein"...whose 'leadership' in the late '80's and early '90's set the T-Wolves franchise back by decades. still tying to dig out from Stein's regime.:mad:
Click to expand...

Yeah, I found that funny/ironic as well.

I wonder if he still thinks Felton Spencer would have been the #1 overall pick if that draft were done over.
 

edma0012 said:
Year 3, that's when its fair game to start looking at the results. I have concerns, but I am optimistic. I also think its fair to look at other coaches hired in conference at same time as Kill (Kevin Wilson) and see if our progress matches up there.
Click to expand...

I don't think that would be a very favorable comparison for Coach Wilson; Last year, while Kill was off to the Meineke Car Care Bowl with a true FR at QB, Wilson was busy fielding one of the worst defenses in the history of the Big Ten. The deck is stacked against Indiana to get to a bowl game this year also, and that's in the arguably weaker Leaders division. If Indiana dumps to Mizzou this weekend, there's no way in he!! they make it to a bowl game, and that's not a good sign. If Indiana manages to win the next two games, Mizzou and Penn State (both at home), they could actually make a bowl game though.
 

Ogee Oglethorpe said:
I don't think that would be a very favorable comparison for Coach Wilson; Last year, while Kill was off to the Meineke Car Care Bowl with a true FR at QB, Wilson was busy fielding one of the worst defenses in the history of the Big Ten. The deck is stacked against Indiana to get to a bowl game this year also, and that's in the arguably weaker Leaders division. If Indiana dumps to Mizzou this weekend, there's no way in he!! they make it to a bowl game, and that's not a good sign. If Indiana manages to win the next two games, Mizzou and Penn State (both at home), they could actually make a bowl game though.
Click to expand...

Wisco could run for 600 yards against them. I don't think that's an exaggeration either.
 

edma0012 said:
The cupboard was bare when Brewster got here too, let's not forget that. Mason had checked out a few years before he got canned. Just look at first year results for Brew and Kill. The data doesn't support a lot of this support for Kill being so much better. Objectively they are the same, so far, with results. Subjectively sure Kill's better, but so what?

Year 3, that's when its fair game to start looking at the results. I have concerns, but I am optimistic. I also think its fair to look at other coaches hired in conference at same time as Kill (Kevin Wilson) and see if our progress matches up there.
Click to expand...

That Brewster character was born to lose as a head coach. Thank Heavens "brewball" was ditched, dumped and discarded mid-season in 2010. He was a failed, fired, bought out experiment of prexy b and bjm. The two administrators proved they were capable of screwing up the opening of a beautiful new stadium by hiring an incompetent coach to bring the program into the new stadium.

That Brewster had plenty of talent on hand to win a game or two in Big Ten play IF he would have been a competent and capable coach. That Brewster character didn't even know WHAT he wanted to do or HOW he wanted to do it from season to season. And assistant coaches and coordinators wanted OUT the door after a year with that Brewster. Mason continued to make bowl games his final couple seasons. He was winning some Big Ten Games. You do NOT win ANY Big Ten Games IF you are "checked out..." However, since that Brewster was not even capable of "checking in" he was unable to win any Big Ten Games his first season AND his last partial season, it is obvious that Brewster couldn't coach diddly squat. End of story.
 

I think Wilson is a good coach who has a huge job in front of him. I think it will be interesting to see the comparison between our program and Indiana's going forward. The guideline when Kill was hired was to get someone with head coaching experience, which disqualified guys like Wilson before the search began. Maturi fumbled more than once during that process, but I think the decision to go "head coaches only" wasn't a good decision (as it looked like we back-pedaled and considered Chryst later).

That said, I'm fine with the Kill hire. Hope he stays healthy and can win here.
 

JerryKillFan said:
Here's an interesting read ...

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebas...to-am-and-ignored-lots-of-negative-recruiting

There are real dirtbags in college athletics. And, yes, I suspect his seizures are being used against Kill in spots on the recruiting trail.
Click to expand...

I would be really turned off if a coach/school spent time telling me why not to go to another school, especially if it is about this. It's part of the reason I can't stand election time. Most of the ads are not about why the candidate is the better one but rather why people shouldn't vote for the other person. Tell me why your program is good, not why the others are bad.
 

edma0012 said:
The cupboard was bare when Brewster got here too, let's not forget that. Mason had checked out a few years before he got canned. Just look at first year results for Brew and Kill. The data doesn't support a lot of this support for Kill being so much better. Objectively they are the same, so far, with results. Subjectively sure Kill's better, but so what?

Year 3, that's when its fair game to start looking at the results. I have concerns, but I am optimistic. I also think its fair to look at other coaches hired in conference at same time as Kill (Kevin Wilson) and see if our progress matches up there.
Click to expand...

So you obviously prefer the Houston Nutt method of coaching. The method where a new coach comes in rides the coat tails of the previous coach while never really establishing any sort of structure.

Lets try one more comparison. Lets compare this to a human trying to lose weight. Brewster went for the crash diet. While it looked good for a short time inevitably it all came back. That year 4 team was terrible. Kill is going for eating a balanced diet and exercise approach. The road less travelled nowadays but a tried a true method that people just dont have the patience for in this time of instant gratification.

If it doesn't work he will get shown the door but using the box score to compare him to Brewster is foolish. Watch the film. Then tell me how the teams compare. I have a feeling you will see a significant difference in execution, discipline and probably depth and talent.
 

cjcarter8 said:
So you obviously prefer the Houston Nutt method of coaching. The method where a new coach comes in rides the coat tails of the previous coach while never really establishing any sort of structure.

Lets try one more comparison. Lets compare this to a human trying to lose weight. Brewster went for the crash diet. While it looked good for a short time inevitably it all came back. That year 4 team was terrible. Kill is going for eating a balanced diet and exercise approach. The road less travelled nowadays but a tried a true method that people just dont have the patience for in this time of instant gratification.

If it doesn't work he will get shown the door but using the box score to compare him to Brewster is foolish. Watch the film. Then tell me how the teams compare. I have a feeling you will see a significant difference in execution, discipline and probably depth and talent.
Click to expand...

A+. Absolutely rock solid. Best post I've read on this board, and a GREAT analogy between the two regimes.
 

Ogee Oglethorpe said:
A+. Absolutely rock solid. Best post I've read on this board, and a GREAT analogy between the two regimes.
Click to expand...

I don't get the Houston Nutt analogy, if its based on something he's talked about since becoming a broadcaster, I have no clue about it. If you look at his record as a coach, he clearly wasn't the sort that jumped program program for quick fixes so I struggle to get the analogy.


There is a lot of double speak going on here in an effort to contort yourselves into "knowing" Coach Kill is a good coach.

In Brewsters first year he won one game. In year two he won 7 and 3 out of 8 in the Big Ten. In his 3rd year he won 6 games, half coming in conference. In his 4th year he was fired mid-season, he was 1-6 at the time and 0-3 in the conference, but his players, and it can not be argued they weren't his players, went 2-3 in the BIG after he was fired.

So Brew wins nothing with Mason's players, gets some of his own in, wins a little, then, because he can't coach worth a lick, somebody else takes his guys and wins 2 games with them.

Enter Jerry Kill. He wins 2 BIG games with Brewsters players too. Then the next year, with some of his guys now, he wins only 2 games in the BIG again. We are in year three now of Kill's tenure. He MUST win 3 games in the BIG to be on par with what Brewster did. Kill can't hide behind this subjective "program was in shambles" argument after this year. If a program was in such shambles and Brewster was such a moron (he was, clearly) how on earth where they able to win 3, 3 and 2 BIG games, whereas Kill has gone 2, 2?

Players, coaching , schedule and luck all have their place in factoring a team's record. The players appear better, but that's just a subjective appearance right now. The schedule IS softer, that's objective. Luck, well so far we've been unlucky I think but the coaching, well its been good and its been bad. I don't want to re-hash some of the really bone-headed in-game decisions Kill made in 2.5 years. He's made more than his fair share I think.


Finally, I saw some postings on Kill never having to change his assistants. While some call that a good thing, I am more suspicious of it. Why wouldn't we want ambitious positional coaches? If they are getting offers for promotions and are turning them down for less money, why? Will there ever be a new or creative thought brought into the fold if its the same guys all the time? I am not so sure its a negative, but its not a lock positive either. We had excessive turnover before. We now over-correct with a coaching squad with no turnover. Somewhere in the middle feels like a better place to be.
 

edma0012 said:
I don't get the Houston Nutt analogy, if its based on something he's talked about since becoming a broadcaster, I have no clue about it. If you look at his record as a coach, he clearly wasn't the sort that jumped program program for quick fixes so I struggle to get the analogy.


There is a lot of double speak going on here in an effort to contort yourselves into "knowing" Coach Kill is a good coach.

In Brewsters first year he won one game. In year two he won 7 and 3 out of 8 in the Big Ten. In his 3rd year he won 6 games, half coming in conference. In his 4th year he was fired mid-season, he was 1-6 at the time and 0-3 in the conference, but his players, and it can not be argued they weren't his players, went 2-3 in the BIG after he was fired.

So Brew wins nothing with Mason's players, gets some of his own in, wins a little, then, because he can't coach worth a lick, somebody else takes his guys and wins 2 games with them.

Enter Jerry Kill. He wins 2 BIG games with Brewsters players too. Then the next year, with some of his guys now, he wins only 2 games in the BIG again. We are in year three now of Kill's tenure. He MUST win 3 games in the BIG to be on par with what Brewster did. Kill can't hide behind this subjective "program was in shambles" argument after this year. If a program was in such shambles and Brewster was such a moron (he was, clearly) how on earth where they able to win 3, 3 and 2 BIG games, whereas Kill has gone 2, 2?

Players, coaching , schedule and luck all have their place in factoring a team's record. The players appear better, but that's just a subjective appearance right now. The schedule IS softer, that's objective. Luck, well so far we've been unlucky I think but the coaching, well its been good and its been bad. I don't want to re-hash some of the really bone-headed in-game decisions Kill made in 2.5 years. He's made more than his fair share I think.


Finally, I saw some postings on Kill never having to change his assistants. While some call that a good thing, I am more suspicious of it. Why wouldn't we want ambitious positional coaches? If they are getting offers for promotions and are turning them down for less money, why? Will there ever be a new or creative thought brought into the fold if its the same guys all the time? I am not so sure its a negative, but its not a lock positive either. We had excessive turnover before. We now over-correct with a coaching squad with no turnover. Somewhere in the middle feels like a better place to be.
Click to expand...

Certainly you are entitled to your opinions, but...

funny-pictures-elephant-bigger-than-moon.jpg
 

This is an interesting thread, and I appreciate the optimism of certain fans, but I've got to agree with the first part of edma0012's post, basically: How in Hades do we "know" that Kill is doing everything the right way, and building the foundations?

I would certainly like to believe that, but the only real data points I know that we have are: #1 wins, and much, much less #2 APR. The APR last year was impressive (995, IIRC, and a record score for us). The wins on the field have been roughly equivalent to Brewster so far.

Can anyone point to any other REAL data points and/or numbers and/or observations that actually SHOW that Kill is "building on concrete" as I believe he likes to say - or to use the analogy of the earlier poster, that he's repairing the foundation and getting rid of asbestos? I do think it's a positive that he has O & D schemes, that it seems like he recruits players to fit those schemes, and that his coaches stick around. But some programs have coaches shuffle in & out and do OK and others have little turnover and slide downhill.

Finally, why must everyone rip on Brewster and proclaim that he was the worst coach ever and a snake-oil salesman? I, too, was ultimately disappointed by him, but he did the best he could and his 2nd & 3rd seasons were competitive. Enough already!
 

Golden Elephant said:
This is an interesting thread, and I appreciate the optimism of certain fans, but I've got to agree with the first part of edma0012's post, basically: How in Hades do we "know" that Kill is doing everything the right way, and building the foundations?

I would certainly like to believe that, but the only real data points I know that we have are: #1 wins, and much, much less #2 APR. The APR last year was impressive (995, IIRC, and a record score for us). The wins on the field have been roughly equivalent to Brewster so far.

Can anyone point to any other REAL data points and/or numbers and/or observations that actually SHOW that Kill is "building on concrete" as I believe he likes to say - or to use the analogy of the earlier poster, that he's repairing the foundation and getting rid of asbestos? I do think it's a positive that he has O & D schemes, that it seems like he recruits players to fit those schemes, and that his coaches stick around. But some programs have coaches shuffle in & out and do OK and others have little turnover and slide downhill.

Finally, why must everyone rip on Brewster and proclaim that he was the worst coach ever and a snake-oil salesman? I, too, was ultimately disappointed by him, but he did the best he could and his 2nd & 3rd seasons were competitive. Enough already!
Click to expand...

I've got nothing factual, but how about the eye test? How about not losing to NMSU like to years ago? Beating soundly the teams we should have beat thus far? I'm hoping you've watched most of the games, but if you haven't witnessed the improvement since year one, I wonder why it isn't apparent to you the team has improved. I'm still in the wait and see mode. Enjoy the season, make note of product on the field, evaluate at the end of the season. This program can't replace coaches every three years, if we do, no decent coach will take this job.
 

Coolew01 said:
I've got nothing factual, but how about the eye test? How about not losing to NMSU like to years ago? Beating soundly the teams we should have beat thus far? I'm hoping you've watched most of the games, but if you haven't witnessed the improvement since year one, I wonder why it isn't apparent to you the team has improved. I'm still in the wait and see mode. Enjoy the season, make note of product on the field, evaluate at the end of the season. This program can't replace coaches every three years, if we do, no decent coach will take this job.
Click to expand...

One reason some are skeptical is that while we are beating the teams we should be, why does it take 1-1.5 quarters to warm up? Why can't we come out of the tunnel fired up and start stomping right away? When you start off games on negative vibes (to fans) it's hard to shake it. The last three weeks we should have marched down on our opening drives and gotten points. That sets a positive tone, instead we haven't gotten anything. We've scored six points in the first quarter this far, and that won't cut it in Big Ten play. I'm hoping, like others, that the playbook opens up soon. I'm probably being selfish and unreasonable though :)
 


Coolew01 said:
I've got nothing factual, but how about the eye test? How about not losing to NMSU like to years ago? Beating soundly the teams we should have beat thus far? I'm hoping you've watched most of the games, but if you haven't witnessed the improvement since year one, I wonder why it isn't apparent to you the team has improved. I'm still in the wait and see mode. Enjoy the season, make note of product on the field, evaluate at the end of the season. This program can't replace coaches every three years, if we do, no decent coach will take this job.
Click to expand...

I hate the eye test. My concern has never been margin of victory, ease of win (and that cuts both ways, I don't get too excited about blowing out a weak opponent and I also don't get too concerned about struggling in the first quarter against a weak opponent), or how pretty the game looks. It is fine to say that we should not expect the moon right away. Kill's progress has been good so far. He struggled in his first year with some growing pains trying to instill a new system. His second year, he took us to a bowl game. But it has to show on the field this year. 2 conference wins is not going to cut it. An interim coach won 2 conference games in only 5 chances with a team that was 1-6 (one of which came against an opponent that was ranked top 25 pretty late in the season). It is time for us to nab a win in one of those games against the big boys where nobody gives us a chance. No one on our schedule is invincible.

As to the second bolded, I am not (and I think most gopher holers are not) advocating for considering a coaching change or anything along those lines. Nor am I saying that Kill has not done a good job so far. We are just saying that it is premature to declare him a success here. He has taken us far and done it (I think) well, he just has a lot farther to go.
 

Nate said:
One reason some are skeptical is that while we are beating the teams we should be, why does it take 1-1.5 quarters to warm up? Why can't we come out of the tunnel fired up and start stomping right away? When you start off games on negative vibes (to fans) it's hard to shake it. The last three weeks we should have marched down on our opening drives and gotten points. That sets a positive tone, instead we haven't gotten anything. We've scored six points in the first quarter this far, and that won't cut it in Big Ten play. I'm hoping, like others, that the playbook opens up soon. I'm probably being selfish and unreasonable though :)
Click to expand...

I see your concern over the starts and I was a little concerned myself. Earlier this week I heard this discussed wednesday on KFAN (argh I know) and heard some reasonable conclusions about this. First, the style of play ran by the opposing team has been different than what the gophers game planned for and lead to a tight game in the first half. This does sound reasonable but I would expect a quicker adjustment by the gophers than waiting until half time. Either way adjustments were made at the halfs and we beat the teams handily. We have also had some injuries at both runningback and in the defensive backfield and while we have good depth at both positions I'm sure there is some dropoff in talent there. I'm doing my best to remember this after a couple of days so I'm sure there were a couple of other points made I can't recall. In the case of Western I their game plan was to grind it out with us and try to keep it close. Kill has said they didn't expect that so adjustments were made and the gophers went on the win easily. The quick passes have also been killing us and the gophers have yet to show a solution that I have seen.
 

Nate said:
One reason some are skeptical is that while we are beating the teams we should be, why does it take 1-1.5 quarters to warm up? Why can't we come out of the tunnel fired up and start stomping right away? When you start off games on negative vibes (to fans) it's hard to shake it. The last three weeks we should have marched down on our opening drives and gotten points. That sets a positive tone, instead we haven't gotten anything. We've scored six points in the first quarter this far, and that won't cut it in Big Ten play. I'm hoping, like others, that the playbook opens up soon. I'm probably being selfish and unreasonable though :)
Click to expand...

We all wish that we had a good enough team to be up 14-0 after the 1st quarter and smash teams like those we've just played. The reality is, we aren't good enough to do that yet. Keep in mind, a mere 2 years ago we couldn't even beat teams like the ones we've just played. Not because we couldn't get up for the games, but because they were just as good as we were. This team is improving. Not as fast as we would like, but it is getting better.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom