How long will we give the next coach?

Donate To GopherHole
M

maroon and gold

Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2008
Messages
198
Reaction score
21
Points
18
Is everybody in agreement that we're in the strongest (top to bottom) B10 division? Do you see a crack in the armor of the other 5 teams over the next 3 years? These are all solid teams/programs with solid coaching staffs. (We were all hoping that RichRod was finished, but then Denard R. came along.) So nobody's going to roll over and play dead .... is the cupboard full enough to get us where we need to be in three years?
 

3 years to show something in terms of development, 4-5 if signs are good initially.
 

I say if our new coach does not win a National Championship his first year we should fire his ass immediately. :confused:
 

If he doesn't say all the things I want to hear at the first press conference, I'm through with him.
 

No question the new guy has a huge challenge ahead. One of the keys will be the new HC bringing in a solid 2011 class. And then getting the type of players he needs to fit his schemes. The 2007 class was a disaster with Mason leaving and Brewster such a late hire. And very little is left of the 2006 class which lacked talent in the first place.

Is the cupboard full enough? Too early to call. Coach Brewster chose to RS a good number of frosh this Fall which could be a good thing. And Beal should be an upgrade at LB. Who knows how many RS will be ready to help get us on track but we will need immediate OL help. Keeping the team together will be vital as our numbers are down and we need bodies. We could see an effort to attract a large walk-on group in 2011.
 


Hopefully, he will win out of the gate and this question will be moot. How long will we give the next coach to do what? Finish .500 in the conference? Go to a Jan.1 bowl? Win our division? Win the conference title?

Depending on the landmark, the timeframe would be different. I feel like it's definitely time to evaluate things if a coach can't finish .500 in his own conference within 3 years.
 

Honestly, it could be all over the second he comments on our uniforms.
 

How long?

If a train leaves Minneapolis at 3:00 PM how long will it take to arrive at it's destination? With only one stop how many people will still be on board at the destination?

Can't we at least wait to see who we hire? We all might want him gone at the press conference.
 

EG#9 said:
Hopefully, he will win out of the gate and this question will be moot. How long will we give the next coach to do what? Finish .500 in the conference? Go to a Jan.1 bowl? Win our division? Win the conference title?

Depending on the landmark, the timeframe would be different. I feel like it's definitely time to evaluate things if a coach can't finish .500 in his own conference within 3 years.
Click to expand...

With the strength of our division is it possible to get to .500 in three years? The days of anyone in the B10 being satisfied with being the patsy are gone. Everyone wants to be a winner .... NOW!
 



As long as he doesn't start in with "Gopher Nation" crapola

First thing the coach needs to do is Keep Joel Maturi at bay and do not let him anywhere near needing to hire another coach. No "Gopher Nation" blathering, no gimmicks "growing Rose Bowl" turf, and actually sounding like an intelligent coach by not repeating consistent tired cliches like get your damn chilli hot and saying "tremendous" a lot.
Call a spade a spade, no talking up losses as more than they are. New coach better not be making claims like we are light years ahead of where we were at when we came in as a coaching staff after a few day's on the job. In other words cut the BS and no "Brewsterisms" even if your positive don't sound like a frickin carney or a Circus big top promoter.

Have a plan and stick to it first and foremost, do not be firing coaches left and right and changing coordinators, not sticking to your vision are part of why we are in this mess right now. Get some JUCO defensive backs and WR's that can actually contribute and play(one's you have actually watched) and are not just highlights on youtube, big time stats guy's. Far to many wasted scholarships on this already with the last head coach. Don't trip over your own feet to find guy's in Texas and Florida and if you have that type of equal talent in your own backyard. We need Texas and Florida guy's everyone does but don't overlook the talent in your own backyard like the last head coach.
 

Don't agree with your conclusion

"We need Texas and Florida guy's everyone does but don't overlook the talent in your own backyard like the last head coach."

Point one: We don't have a huge pool of division one football players to recruit in Minnesota.

Point two: The new coach is not going to work harder to recruit Minnesota talent than Brewster did! Won't happen. You can criticize Brewster for not being able to land the top rated Minnesota
kids. But, absolutely it was not because he didn't work hard enough at it or he ignored them. That is factually wrong.

The new guy may sell at a higher closing percentage but he is not going to outwork Brewster recruiting Minnesota kids. Most division one MN football players live in the Twin Cities. If you want to go away to school you are not choosing Minnesota.
 

maroon and gold said:
With the strength of our division is it possible to get to .500 in three years? The days of anyone in the B10 being satisfied with being the patsy are gone. Everyone wants to be a winner .... NOW!
Click to expand...

Well .500 is not a winner. Obviously it is "possible" to be .500 in the conference or better in one of the next 3 years, it should be probable. Brewster was one game under that mark the 2 years previous to this one. If we don't feel confident about the new guy being able to be one game better than Brewster...we hired the wrong guy.
 

Exactly

EG#9 said:
Well .500 is not a winner. Obviously it is "possible" to be .500 in the conference or better in one of the next 3 years, it should be probable. Brewster was one game under that mark the 2 years previous to this one. If we don't feel confident about the new guy being able to be one game better than Brewster...we hired the wrong guy.
Click to expand...


Total agreement. So, we can't hire a coach who isn't winning every year in his present conference, whether it is similar or lower caliber...i.e.

Hoke, Edsall etc
 



Fire the dude after the spring game.
 


60's Guy said:
"We need Texas and Florida guy's everyone does but don't overlook the talent in your own backyard like the last head coach."

Point one: We don't have a huge pool of division one football players to recruit in Minnesota.

Point two: The new coach is not going to work harder to recruit Minnesota talent than Brewster did! Won't happen. You can criticize Brewster for not being able to land the top rated Minnesota
kids. But, absolutely it was not because he didn't work hard enough at it or he ignored them. That is factually wrong.

The new guy may sell at a higher closing percentage but he is not going to outwork Brewster recruiting Minnesota kids. Most division one MN football players live in the Twin Cities. If you want to go away to school you are not choosing Minnesota.
Click to expand...

What are we? A bunch of genetic mutants? The idea you can not develop talent is impossibly naive. Some of the most impressive talents in football came out of Minnesota. So, much talent is developed by other teams that we tend to forget how many players ultimately play and play well in D1. What is not so apparent in the world of football statistics is why so many high school athletes give up sports to only concentrate on academics. My guess is that because this state values academic achievement, our high potential athletes are interested in giving up sport for straight academic pursuit. Otherwise, I think more athletes would pursue athletic scholarships and receive them. I don't believe our kids are less healthy or less athletic compared to their southern rivals. In fact, just the opposite, our kids are healthier than theirs because of the intelligent lifestyles of thier parents. I think people who look at the statistics of per capita scholarships have confounded statistics that need to be seriously examined. Confounded in the same manner that one study found smokers in England living longer than non-smokers. When they narrowed the group ranges for age related comparisson, the non-smokers kicked ass over the smokers in longevity. I think you will find the same thing here. The face of it looks like the south does better with D1 athletes. But, compare what is happening with scholars want to play football and you may find a higher percentage of Minnesota kids competing for actual playing time. The whole idea that Minnesotan's can't compete is way overstated and more myth than reality.
 

gopherdudepart2 said:
First thing the coach needs to do is Keep Joel Maturi at bay and do not let him anywhere near needing to hire another coach. No "Gopher Nation" blathering, no gimmicks "growing Rose Bowl" turf, and actually sounding like an intelligent coach by not repeating consistent tired cliches like get your damn chilli hot and saying "tremendous" a lot.
Call a spade a spade, no talking up losses as more than they are. New coach better not be making claims like we are light years ahead of where we were at when we came in as a coaching staff after a few day's on the job. In other words cut the BS and no "Brewsterisms" even if your positive don't sound like a frickin carney or a Circus big top promoter.
Click to expand...

You make it seem as if Maturi adopted these things. In any case, I don't have the slightest problem with any of these things you list here. <X> Nation is perhaps overused, but there is nothing wrong with it. I also have not the slightest problem with setting the Rose Bowl as a goal, and not the slightest problem with Rose Bowl turf.

"Get your dad gum chili hot" is in no way, shape or form a cliche, let alone a tired one. It caught people's interest because it WASN'T a cliche. And get over the word "tremendous". Yes, he engages in coachspeak, but he didn't invent it, it's called coachspeak for a reason. I like that he promoted the program and was optimistic.

Brewster needed to be fired, but that doesn't mean that everything he did was bad. He's not the devil.
 

Is the implication going to be that we aren't going to give the coach enough time? How about if we hire the coach first before we worry about firing him? Maybe we will keep him on until he loses to 2 I-AA teams.
 

Ski U Master said:
3 years to show something in terms of development, 4-5 if signs are good initially.
Click to expand...

5 years. You need to give a coach at least the ability to coach players he recruited through their senior year.
 

Year 1 - The Struggle continues (new systems + new QB = tough times)
Year 2 - The false positive (M Gray shines as a senior, nobody developed behind him)
Year 3 - Coach is put on notice (new QB struggles bring us back to 5 wins)
Year 4 - Coach is fired after another mediocre season because we're shelling out the big bucks

Lather. Rinse. Repeat.
 

Swagger Wagon said:
Year 1 - The Struggle continues (new systems + new QB = tough times)
Year 2 - The false positive (M Gray shines as a senior, nobody developed behind him)
Year 3 - Coach is put on notice (new QB struggles bring us back to 5 wins)
Year 4 - Coach is fired after another mediocre season because we're shelling out the big bucks

Lather. Rinse. Repeat.
Click to expand...

Let us look at how much time coaches have been given:

Stoll: 7 years.
Salem: 5 years.
Gutekunst: 6 years.
Wacker: 5 years.
Mason: 10 years.
Brewster: 4 years.

So we can dispense with the idea that there is a pattern of giving coaches only 4 years. And Brewster wasn't fired after a mediocre 4th year, he was fired during a disastrous 4th year.
 

I dont have a time frame.

I am throwing out a time frame on this hire. I have in the past believed that every coach should get 5 years no matter what but Brewster changed that for me. I dont think it was only his problem but who he hired as assistant coaches. How long will I give the new coach? I will give him as long as he deserves. I want to see the proof on the field that the program is improving and getting better and this has nothing to do with wins and losses.

Improve the blocking on this team not just hope it happens because your experienced bad lineman are now older.

Make sure the defensive players can tackle. Broken tackles happen especially against bad teams but 11 football players should be able to tackle most of the time. I shouldnt be shocked when a defender makes a one on one tackle.

I want to see the new coach be able to improve the Gophers football team on both sides of the ball. We can't be an all offensive team like we were under Mason. We cant be an all defensive team like we were last season when we made it to a bowl with no offense at all. We need to see a coach who can balance both sides of the ball.

Most of all at some point you have to win games. I will settle for winning games against teams we should beat the low level Non Conference teams and a couple of the bottom feeders in the Big Ten. I am not going to worry about wins and losses until the guy has been hear for a season or two. That being said the team next year will have some talented players the new coach should be able to use them.
 

5-6 years. No firing mention until 5-6 years have passed and everyone of their first recruiting class has gone through the program. Evaluate then and see if the program is moving in the right direction. I can't envision a disaster like we had this year happening in the next 5-6 years.
 

Silvio said:
5 years. You need to give a coach at least the ability to coach players he recruited through their senior year.
Click to expand...

That's what all the "experts" were saying about Brewster. Well, he managed to drive our program into the ground in 3.5 years.

I agree that in a perfect world, you give the coach 5 years. But that assumes that there are some minimum levels of performance. As others pointed out, the BT is only going to get tougher, so it's ludicrous to pick a set # of wins out of the air as some line the new coach has to cross.

Instead, I think there has to be some set expectations of what sorts of progress need to be made. Areas include recruiting (esp. in state), graduation rates and off-field behavior, and just seeing improvement year over year. We could bring in Urban Meyer and there's no way Minnesota wins more than 5 or 6 games next year. And that's rounding up.

But S-canning Brewster was the right thing to do, regardless of the "5 year rule". If we see the same pattern again of regression, lack of player development, etc, we should hesitate to hit the EJECT button. After Brewster, our administration should be able to recognize the pattern.
 

Swagger Wagon said:
Year 1 - The Struggle continues (new systems + new QB = tough times)
Year 2 - The false positive (M Gray shines as a senior, nobody developed behind him)
Year 3 - Coach is put on notice (new QB struggles bring us back to 5 wins)
Year 4 - Coach is fired after another mediocre season because we're shelling out the big bucks

Lather. Rinse. Repeat.
Click to expand...

If they hire the wrong guy again, yes, this scenario will play out. If they hire the right guy, a coach who can build a winning defense, the odds are he will be around for a long while and will be in a major bowl game or two.
 

Too Long in the Wasteland said:
That's what all the "experts" were saying about Brewster. Well, he managed to drive our program into the ground in 3.5 years.

I agree that in a perfect world, you give the coach 5 years. But that assumes that there are some minimum levels of performance. As others pointed out, the BT is only going to get tougher, so it's ludicrous to pick a set # of wins out of the air as some line the new coach has to cross.

Instead, I think there has to be some set expectations of what sorts of progress need to be made. Areas include recruiting (esp. in state), graduation rates and off-field behavior, and just seeing improvement year over year. We could bring in Urban Meyer and there's no way Minnesota wins more than 5 or 6 games next year. And that's rounding up.

But S-canning Brewster was the right thing to do, regardless of the "5 year rule". If we see the same pattern again of regression, lack of player development, etc, we should hesitate to hit the EJECT button. After Brewster, our administration should be able to recognize the pattern.
Click to expand...

I think Brewster was brought in at a bad time. He came into a program that's best QB was a Freshman. They didn't have any success early and did not improve at all. The new coach will have similar issues at the QB possition and I think will need a longer leash of 5-6 years to turn things around.
 

Too Long in the Wasteland said:
That's what all the "experts" were saying about Brewster. Well, he managed to drive our program into the ground in 3.5 years.

I agree that in a perfect world, you give the coach 5 years. But that assumes that there are some minimum levels of performance. As others pointed out, the BT is only going to get tougher, so it's ludicrous to pick a set # of wins out of the air as some line the new coach has to cross.

Instead, I think there has to be some set expectations of what sorts of progress need to be made. Areas include recruiting (esp. in state), graduation rates and off-field behavior, and just seeing improvement year over year. We could bring in Urban Meyer and there's no way Minnesota wins more than 5 or 6 games next year. And that's rounding up.

But S-canning Brewster was the right thing to do, regardless of the "5 year rule". If we see the same pattern again of regression, lack of player development, etc, we should hesitate to hit the EJECT button. After Brewster, our administration should be able to recognize the pattern.
Click to expand...

Brewster was canned for lack of wins and nothing else. You should note that Brewster saw marked improvement in recruiting (esp. in state) and academic rates. His players had some off field issues, but those were alcohol related (serious, but not as compared to what happened before his first season). I would say players also improved under Brewster, he took players and improved them to get a shot in the NFL (many players on last years defense).

Brewster's problem wasn't he couldn't make up his mind on offense (coordinators & Scheme) and got his defense into a position where all the players with heavy game day experience (starters & others behind front 4) graduated at one time. Part of this was his reliance on JUCO players on the defensive side of the ball.

Also the defense took a terrible loss when K. Royston went down in the spring, that was probably the straw that broke the camels back. He would have been able to provide leadership in the secondary and was a great complimentary player to someone like Therat (sp.) in their skill set. Brewster got this defense into a position were they could not overcome the loss of one player.

Brewster did good things as the head coach. He also had many weaknesses that got him justifiably fired. This year is terrible from a win loss standpoint, but the PROGRAM has not been run into the ground. Based on the recruiting rankings the next coach will find this program to be in much better shape than when Brewster took over, depending on who decides to stay in the program.
 

If after 3 years we haven't seen favorable progress, then the hot seat is on. I can deal with a couple bad years but adding a conference win or two each year is the goal. Also staying competitive in the games...55-0 is not. Brew took a .500 team to 1-11, then essentially did it again this year.

Though, As fans we have to do a better job about attending bowl games. Under Mason we got bypassed for higher prestige bowl a couple times because Gopher nation doesn't fill up hotel rooms, and outside of the BCS thats what bowls want.
 

wdgold said:
If they hire the wrong guy again, yes, this scenario will play out. If they hire the right guy, a coach who can build a winning defense, the odds are he will be around for a long while and will be in a major bowl game or two.
Click to expand...

You can put me in "the right guy won't be hired this time" group as we'll have the same guys making the selection as 4 years ago. And you can't just look at the coaching history at Minnesota to see how long the new coach has to "succeed". You have to look at the college football landscape. 3-4 years is what many coaches get at middling programs nowadays.

Coaches fired already in 2010 are Brew (3.5), Todd Dodge (3.5) and Dan Hawkins (4.5). Other coaches on the 2010 hot seat are Dennis Erickson (4th year), Rich Rodriguez (3rd year), Paul Wulff (3rd year), Bill Lynch (4th year), Mike Locksley (2nd year), Houston Nutt (3rd year), etc. Other recent short term coaches are Kragthorpe, Ron Prince, Greg Robinson, Ty Willingham, Ted Roof and Bill Callahan.

As coaches salaries escalate, so do expectations. Deliver or get fired is the new way of business.
 

Coaches with losing records at Minnesota, and how many years they got:

Thomas Peeples, 1 year, 0.333
Jack Minds, 1 year, 0.444
Wes Fessler, 3 years, 0.435
Joe Salem, 5 years, 0.352
Gutekunst, 6 years, 0.441
Wacker, 5 years, 0.291
Brewster, 3.5 years, 0.333
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom