|
Post by aggiejazz on Sept 5, 2006 13:40:55 GMT -5
With both schools acquiring new football coaches, both having identical win-loss records from last year and both having about the same number of players in each class year will it be fair to start comparing the programs' effectiveness starting this year?
I think that Elon and A&T were in below average shape at the end of last season. A&T lost a close game to Elon on Elon's home field.
I think I have noticed two different philosphies during this past spring. Elon's coach told the players that slate is wiped clean and may the best player win the position in the spring and fall training camp. Elon started an older QB because he felt the player would catch on quicker to his system. In Elon's first game this season they have beaten a promising playoff team.
I was told that Fobbs dropped the upper classmen down in the depth charts for new comings who had not had a chance to play during the spring session. I heard that Fobbs was so disappointed in the performance of the upper classman during the spring training camp that the newcomings started the fall training camp high on the depth chart ahead of the upper classman before there was a snap of the ball. I am not sure if this is totally true concerning the depth positioning.
Was Fobbs too harsh in his critique of the upper classmen because he did not realize this is close to the level of talent that plays 1AA HBCU football? Let me explain, Fobbs has spent a lot of years looking at and evaluating Big XII talent so when he came to A&T, he saw players that were not that talented but he may not have fully realized this is the talent he must start with and work with until he can get the younger players' fundamentals to where he wants it later in the year or next year. That also this is the talent that he will likely end up having to accept to some degree in his recruiting of high school players.
It can be easier to make stressful game changes with an upper classman although less talented than with an in-experienced young player.
There are two theories: one is play your more talented but inexperienced players and take your hard lumps now hoping things will get better a year or so from now; or two is bring the young players along at moderate speed and thus keeping the team from getting totally embarrassed with lopesided losses and preventing young talented players from losing their confidence and enthusiam.
|
|
|
Post by DOOMS on Sept 5, 2006 13:55:44 GMT -5
Elon went and hired a guy experienced in what they want to do (which is the same thing we supposedly want to do), a guy that's been to the playoffs and already been a head coach.
Fobbs is learning on the job.
Elon will be that much further ahead of us as a result. And that's a shame because we had an opportunity to be far ahead of them. Right now we have the worst d-I program in the state and it will probably be that way the full term of Fobbs' contract. He has nothing to work with and has to learn how to work with it with limited resources. That's just going to take a while, any way you slice it.
Fobbs decided rather than do like Small and have people say he couldn't win with his own boys he will live or die with his players. I ain't gonna judge it one way or the other. He's with us until he quits, dies, or his contract is up.
Is it fair to compare the effectiveness of our programs? Yes and no. I won't because I knew when we made our hire that we were behind the eight ball, so to me there's no comparison. Just wave goodbye to 'em as they fly past us.
|
|
Aggie77
Official BDF member
Member Since: September 2004
Posts: 5,571
|
Post by Aggie77 on Sept 5, 2006 18:53:44 GMT -5
I posed this question earlier as how do measure Coach Fobbs' success. I don't think ELON is a fair comparison, we are financially inferior to their program. They have already passed us, we don't have to wait til they fly past. All they needed was a coach.
A better comparison would JSU. Though not financially superior (I don’t think), but implementing a different philosophy; a seasoned winner. He apparently had a pipeline already full and needed a place to unload. It will be interesting to see how they fair this season.
As far as the players, you should always, always and always play your best players. I don’t care what classification they are. That may not be your most talented players, but the players that make plays, that get the job done day in and day out.
|
|
|
Post by aggiejazz on Sept 6, 2006 7:58:02 GMT -5
Doomsday and Aggie77, if you feel Elon put more money into the football program does that money get negated somewhat since they are in a much tougher football conference and that allow us to compare the schools if not straight up then on a small curve scale?
The only builtin advantage I think Elon has is the money used for a conditioning program. Other than that we are on equal footing because we have some advantages over them like our stadium and larger fan base. Plus, on the field both programs have been fairly equal so I you can compare the programs.
After this year you can start comparing us to Norfolk State and if they have surpassed us three years from now then we might as well fold our program.
|
|
|
Post by DOOMS on Sept 6, 2006 8:12:22 GMT -5
jazz, I didn't say Elon spent more than we did, even though they do. Elon actually has many built in advantages over us:
They have a big money donor (Dusty Rhodes, not the wrestler but the Purdue engineer they named the stadium after).
They have as good a chance at most black players as we do and a muuuuch better shot at white ones.
They have a better retention rate.
They have a better graduation rate.
They have a more experienced head coach.
They have a more experienced a.d.
The list goes on and on.
Now, we have advantages too, but none of them that happen to touch the football field.
A larger stadium and larger fan base doesn't put a better product on the field. Don't forget that. We (hbcu folks) always fall back on this we have more fans more alums in the nfl classic games bigger stadium etc, but guess what, the game is played on the field. Elon was 2-0 against us when they played in a high school stadium. Remember that.
On the field the programs were equal purely because of Bill Hayes. Hayes hated to lose and he made sure anybody that hit the field to play for him hated it too. Small was more of a "that's ok, we'll just keep working at it" guy. Phuck that. We're gonna kick their a$$ today and we're gonna kick their a$$ next year too. That's what I want in a coach. Now that Bill's residue is clearly gone from the program the programs are no longer equal. No point in comparing the two.
I'd say Norfolk's ahead of us right now, but if homegirl that just took over is anything like her former boss Jim C. Renick, that program will not be given money to sustain success. Why is Norfolk ahead? Because they beat their d-2 rival's a$$ and our d-2 rival kicked our a$$.
Actually, I ain't comparing us to anybody anymore. My insistence on comparing us to App State, Youngstown, and Furman is what led to me calling for Hayes' head many years ago in the first place. We don't have the infrastructure or leadership in place to be compared to any successful program.
|
|
Aggie77
Official BDF member
Member Since: September 2004
Posts: 5,571
|
Post by Aggie77 on Sept 6, 2006 10:59:44 GMT -5
I’ll bet ELON has more sponsorship dollars, more alumni giving dollars, more season ticket holders and probably a significant athletic endowment. All this equates to a better funded program. Do you think for an instant that ELON is not funding the full 63? Do we have an athletic endowment.
Speaking of Dusty Rhodes I met him couple years ago, dude was one on the founders of Cisco Systems, his son went to ELON was/is the grounds keeper for all athletic facilities. A graduate of the landscape/horticulture program. This was the year they first open the stadium. I drove by to the check the school out since I had never been there. He was out there reviewing installation of the bell in the bell tower. He's very personable (that day anyway) dude gave me a mini tour, like a proud father. He gives to Purdue also, but his affections are with ELON. I didn't get the impression that power or control were attached to his giving.
Based on some of the decisions we have made over the past five years, I not sure that capital would solve our competitive disadvantage.
|
|
|
Post by DOOMS on Sept 6, 2006 11:03:43 GMT -5
If we had the right people making the right decisions it would. We wouldn't win a national championship but we could at least be on Hampton's level.
I think Elon just started funding a full 63. They were broke for a loooong time. I'm betting Elon the school itself funds the program better than we do. In most cases the school is going to be the biggest funder of the program on this level. When we're talking about Villanova or Furman or Wofford the school may or may not be the main contributor to the athletic coffers, but Elon?
|
|
|
Post by aggiejazz on Sept 6, 2006 14:29:20 GMT -5
We have stressed money and I know A&T needs more money but strongly feel that A&T's administration is a badly run organization. Let me stress, Dee Todd is not the cause of the problem. It was a mess when she arrived and it is too big of mess for her to correct.
I am not a football expert but I know my basketball, yet I feel A&T has made two straight bad hires in a row for football head coaches due to having two straight bad hires for athletic directors. Chancelor Fort had no clue about intercollegiate sports and Renick loved it but he could not hire the right person to run the department and tell the alumni the honest truth that if you want champions you have to support it financially like you are wealthy champions.
We need a chancelor and AD who can make the right hires and be strong enough to resist the calls to fire a coach because he or she has a .500 winning percentage due to A&T providing minimal funding that is near the bottom of the conference.
I agree, you need a lot of money to hire top people but good money should get you proficient people. We had a chance to hire a good head coach from a group of winning head coaches from lower levels who are used to performing outstanding work that is far and beyond the call of duty, with average financial support.
I wonder next year if A&T would be able to beat Div III Mount Union or Bridgewater.
|
|
|
Post by DOOMS on Sept 6, 2006 14:52:29 GMT -5
There are simply no more nails to be hit on the head after that statement. Correct on every last point.
|
|
|
Post by Bornthrilla on Sept 6, 2006 15:11:54 GMT -5
I think it would help if we hired a corporate development director for our athletic department. Someone who's sole job would be to forge new corporate partnerships and service those clients throughout the year. I think we are literally leaving hundreds of thousands of dollars on the table by not allocating the resources to tap into the local business community.
Hayes was the best at doing this but he also had to recruit, coach, coordinate, administrate and, according to him, landscape.
Coming from the Houston Rockets, I noticed that we had an entire department consisting of nine people who focused only on corporate development. We had a director, three managers, three people who were just in charge of making sales and two people who were just in charge of client services. Plus they had an intern. At A&T, I think we just have Dee Todd and Keith McCluney.
|
|
|
Post by DOOMS on Sept 6, 2006 15:15:56 GMT -5
...and, according to him, landscape. As far as your suggestions, it's a good one and I would think it would be a no-brainer for where Todd came from. I would also suspect that Renick figured that's what she would do when she got aboard. Well, she hasn't, and despite the fact I think she's inept, I don't think she hasn't because she didn't think of it.
|
|
|
Post by captaggie on Sept 6, 2006 16:58:15 GMT -5
I would like to see the Victory Club focus only on corporate sponsorships. That would end (hopefully) the conflict between them and the Aggie Club.
|
|
|
Post by Bornthrilla on Sept 6, 2006 17:27:53 GMT -5
I would like to move this thread to the general A&T football board. Does anyone have a problem with that?
|
|
|
Post by Aggie One on Sept 6, 2006 18:44:59 GMT -5
No problem.
|
|
Aggie77
Official BDF member
Member Since: September 2004
Posts: 5,571
|
Post by Aggie77 on Sept 6, 2006 18:46:19 GMT -5
As far as your suggestions, it's a good one and I would think it would be a no-brainer for where Todd came from. I would also suspect that Renick figured that's what she would do when she got aboard. Well, she hasn't, and despite the fact I think she's inept, I don't think she hasn't because she didn't think of it. I willing to bet she thought of it and other things too, she been in a lot of bigtime programs, she has to know that's how it's done. But a department that ends mens tennis can't add staff, unless it's on a percentage basis. Maybe we should go the professional fundraiser route until we learn to do it our shelves. Move it at your pleasure.
|
|