Brewster's Coaching

[Gold Rush]

I have been doing this game by game this season mainly because I feel the jury is
still out on Tim Brewster so far as a head coach. While I have been doing this, I can tell
there is a definite improvement as he matures and gains some experience. Of course,
a coach always looks better if the players are better, but Tim Brewster is becoming a
quality Big Ten coach.

The first year, I graded him out as a C- and I thought that was being generous. The
Gophers took a step backward as they learned new schemes and had to rebuild most of the
offense as well as defense. They completely scrapped a very good offense in favor of a spread which got scrapped again a couple years later which I thought was a mistake. I would have preferred that they stuck with what worked and incorporated some new ideas and made it into a bit of a hybrid system where they could still utilize their blocking schemes and highly potent running attack.

In year two, the defense made great strides forward, while the offense still struggled, but the
team did show some signs of improvement as a whole. I gave Tim Brewster a C+, which I
believe put him 8th amongst Big Ten coaches. Perhaps the most distressing item in his brief tenure here has been the carousel of coaches coming and going, particularly with the coordinators. We need these guys to stick around and grow with the program, if possible and changing philosophies and schemes every year or two does not bode well for us. We need some consistency as it takes a while for the team to get comfortable with them.

This year, so far in a game by game analysis, he has averaged out to a B over the first three games, but I thought overall he and his staff did an excellent job vs. Northwestern. There were a lot of positives that I saw. Last year, I thought Brewster got outcoached by Pat Fitgerald pretty bad and that was a big reason why they lost that game. This year, Brewster really held his own.

The game prep, adjustments and motivation were all up in the A range, but I really liked how the team only committed one penalty the entire game. It is obvious the staff has been working on this and to be honest, it was becoming embarrassing watching this team kill drive after drive with stupid penalties. I also thought the clock management was very good and another positive was third down conversions. One of the gopherholers constant complaints (myself included) was the inability to pick up third downs, especially third and short and adding a fullback has really helped this offense, which many of us implored two years ago. Yeah -- we were right!!!!

I did take issue with an extremely horrible call he made in declining a penalty and gave Northwestern a 4th and 2 which they easily converted and scored what could have been the game winning touchdown. Good coaches simply do not make that call and you see what the end result was. Brewster is still learning, although I wish he would have learned some of this at a smaller school before he came here.

Still, I think he is progressing and growing with the team and his dedication and hard work, particularly in recruiting, is making this a better team. I am not positive he will be able to get us
to the next level just yet, but I am at least getting a little more comfortable with him. For this week, he gets a solid A- from me and if he can keep that up, he will nudge his way near the top of the Big Ten coaches.

 

[Bayfieldgopher]

Forget the all his talk about Gopher Nation, Rose Bowl, etc. Coach Brewster has said from the get-go that he wants his players to play hard nosed, agressive football, work hard and get bigger and stronger. He has done well spreading his positive attitude down to his players and coaches. He has often said that this team believes in itself and each other and I feel that attitude has been instrumental thus far.

Absent the 5 game skid the end of last season, the Gophers have posted a 10-2 start the past two seasons and 10-7 overall. Things are getting better.

I am on that jury but I like the direction this team is heading. Now we need to keep pointed in that direction.

 

[wait!what?]

I felt the Badger talent and MSU talent were pretty similar in skills, but it appeared the badger coaches were calling plays that got their players wide open. Tolzien was on the money on his tosses, no zip on them but because the play action was executed well, the receiver was painfully wide open.
Position by Position the badgers slightly edge the gophs, so this weekend will be a good display of coaching acumen.

 

[station19]

One of the biggest positives of the current team is the overall speed of the defense. In recent years past the defense has been horribly slow. The current defense seem quicker, faster and more athletic.

 

[josh087]

I did take issue with an extremely horrible call he made in declining a penalty and gave Northwestern a 4th and 2 which they easily converted and scored what could have been the game winning touchdown. Good coaches simply do not make that call and you see what the end result was.

Easily converted???? Really? The pass was nearly broken up, barely caught, and you could have made the case to overturn the call on the field and rule the pass incomplete.

In my mind I cannot seriously consider any of your points above or believe you know what you are talking about based on this statement.

There were positives and negatives in declining the penalty. It was not an easy decision, and far from a cut-and-dry move. I happened to agree with him at the time before the 4th down play was run - I can definitely see where some didn't agree. But to call it a flat out horrible decision is just plain wrong.

 

[Bayfieldgopher]

One of the biggest positives of the current team is the overall speed of the defense. In recent years past the defense has been horribly slow. The current defense seem quicker, faster and more athletic.

I often wonder what our D would look like with Brock and Curtis Thomas at the S/SS spots.

Back to reality. I can only wish for more speed at those spots but.......

 

[Schnauzer]

I think Brewster is improving in every, or nearly every way. The one big bug-a-boo is the yearly change over with the coordinators. Other than that, I feel like Brewster has grown as a coach.

- Recruiting. Has been good and the more athletic players have arrived on campus. Needs to maintain.
- Game prep. Has been better this year than either of the previous two years. The whole game day schedule seems to be very organized and weekly themes seem to be worked into the actual game plan. There is a general good process for getting that many kids on the same page and pulling on the same rope each week.
- motivation. Seems to be a top strength and it is not a cooincidence Brewster leads the Big 10 in pregame/postgame cameras in the locker room (also see "recruiting")
- In game adjustments. This appears to be Brewster's biggest area of improvement this year. Much of this may be due to the other coaches but in general, the Gophers have looked better in the second half of their games this year than in the first. That just wasn't the case in his first two years.
- Game long learning into practice. This has also been very good. Look at all the stupid mistakes that ended drives (especially against Syracuse and Air Force). This has literally improved each week. One week isn't a trend but the running game may be turning around as well.
- In-game decisions. During Brewster's first two seasons, there were games that most could agree he got "out coached". Has it happened this year? This also appears to be much improved. Not much controversy on punt vs go-for-it, timeouts, etc. either.
- player improvement. This one is the hardest for me to put my finger on. There are some players that perhaps haven't improved or improved greatly but others are now making greater impacts under Brewster's coaching team.

All in all he wasn't horrible his first two seasons but I am liking the trend. He appears to me to be getting better at the job he has only held at the college level for 2.33 seasons.

In the end he will be defined by his W/L record and a good one will get him the big extension. That will have to play out.

 

[GophersInIowa]

Easily converted???? Really? The pass was nearly broken up, barely caught, and you could have made the case to overturn the call on the field and rule the pass incomplete.

In my mind I cannot seriously consider any of your points above or believe you know what you are talking about based on this statement.

There were positives and negatives in declining the penalty. It was not an easy decision, and far from a cut-and-dry move. I happened to agree with him at the time before the 4th down play was run - I can definitely see where some didn't agree. But to call it a flat out horrible decision is just plain wrong.

The OP made a lot of good points except for this one. I agree with you josh. The guy made a very good catch with a lot of traffic around him. As for the decision to decline it, I think it was the correct call. Some have agreed and some disagree with the call. The wide variety of comments made about it goes to show that it was not an easy decision. You ask 100 coaches what they would do in that situation and you're probably close to 50-50.

 

[Ole]

The prep and in game adjustments have gotten much better this year, I really think this reflects well on the one negative that could be had about Brew's tenor, coaching turnover.
From what I remember, Fisch was thought very well of in his gameplanning, Shanahan said as much when Fisch was hired, the scripting of plays for Decker, mixing in wildcat/playaction, these have succeeded so far, execution has been the biggest problem, which is getting better and will improve as Weber and the O get comfortable with the new offense. Remember, they haven't even ran all the plays in the playbook yet, Fisch has been mixing some in little by little showing plays from Denver in gameplanning meeting(see rittenberg's Cal gameprep article) Fisch has been a good hire thus far and Brew is looking better as a coach for it.

As for the D, Cosgrove and Lee have done a good job of getting the D to execute, platooning in alot of front 7 players has also been really good thus far, mixing in some 3-4 schemes that Roof started last year has led to some good pressure. The biggest knock on the D thus far has been giving up alot of yards, short of the Cal game, we've been a bend don't break D, with success. I think this also improves as the Big Ten schedule unfolds, teams like Wisky, MSU, Iowa run a more classic Big ten poundem O, OSU, Purdue, PSU, and Illinois run spread/prostyle hybrid type attacks, but none pose the game prep problems that a unidentified Syracuse O or a disciplined AF triple option did. Cosgrove has brought in stability and solid fundementals, when we match up well athletically we will do fine on D, when we don't we will struggle. Keep recruiting speed, and we'll be good on D for years.

 

[highwayman]

Easily converted???? Really? The pass was nearly broken up, barely caught, and you could have made the case to overturn the call on the field and rule the pass incomplete.

In my mind I cannot seriously consider any of your points above or believe you know what you are talking about based on this statement.

There were positives and negatives in declining the penalty. It was not an easy decision, and far from a cut-and-dry move. I happened to agree with him at the time before the 4th down play was run - I can definitely see where some didn't agree. But to call it a flat out horrible decision is just plain wrong.

You are right Josh--it was only a "horrible call" in the end because the Cats were awarded a touchdown. You also left out that Kafka was sacked on the play a fraction of a second after he let it go.

Trailing by four, would the Cats would have gone for it again on 4th down if we had taken the penalty?

Historical NCAA 4th down conversion rate is actually around 50%. Historical NCAA 3rd down conversion rate is around 40%. However, if you fail on 4th down, you don't get another shot. On a 3rd down failure, you get another play if you wish. You get a shot to convert on 3rd or 4th down. Statistically, that means that if you are in "4-down territory" you have a 90% chance (in statistics you add "or" situations=40%+50%) to get a 1st down on 3rd or 4th down.

Of course those overall odds seem skewed to the offenses favor because yardage and game situation is not taken in account. However, a team with no running attack has just as much trouble (or success) with 4th and 2 as they do with 4th and 10. Also, I think that the 4th down figures are likely a lot of short 4ths or teams going for it in junk time when they are way behind. I can't back that up.

I think it is better to only give your opponent only one shot at keeping the ball instead of two. It was almost a miracle play. Kafka throws the ball 2" farther and we are talking about "Brewster's gutsy call".

 

[FreakyDeke]

Your stats are off there highwayman. Assuming your 40% and 50% numbers are correct, the odds would be 70% that you get a 1st down. You either get it on 3rd down (40%) or given that you fail 3rd down and get it on 4th down (60% times 50% = 30%). 40 + 30 = 70.