Love me some Stitt

[reinell30]

How come the QB that is in the pipeline is always better then the one we have? I think Phillips will do just fine. If not, Jensen will take over the show. We have very gifted QB's on this team already!

It is a mandatory claim to go along with team is "young", "wait until he gets his recruits" and need "4 - 5 years"

If this team doesn't perform "excellent" at least this year, It will be a long time before we see that "Outstanding" team again. I like what I see with this team, and I think Stitt will take us deep into the playoff's. I believe the QB that takes the reins this year and shows leadership will be Jensen.

 

[garizzalies]

In the typical offense, a pass with a mediocre QB is hard enough to complete when all 11 players know exactly where the ball is going. 3 things can happen and only 1 is good.
In this offense, only 1 really knows where the ball is going and he usually will not know for sure until after the snap. That puts a tremendous amount of pressure on him and I believe it requires a special talent. We might have such a QB in the pipeline but I would be surprised if he steps up this year. That's the whole point: stitt may not have time to develop him.
Also, when our run game is really just a series of short passes, a drop is worse than a run for no gain, because the risk is much higher, and will eventually catch-up. So w/o a serious run game, we need an elite QB. I don't think we have either of these things yet (I actually think we have the back, just not the oline)

 

[BadlandsGrizFan]

The problem with "believing in the system" or "trusting the process" is that it is so highly dependent upon a truly gifted QB which we have not seen yet, and I'm skeptical there will be one this year.

This is accurate...if Stitts team has Carson Wentz that first year we are probably at the very least in the semi finals.

I like Gus as a guy..but he was not the QB we were going to ride to the deep playoff runs....he just wasnt.

Did you know Gus as a guy? No way you knew him as well as PR probably did.

I mean he frequently comes to my cabin up on Flathead..along with Dave D and Jesus Christ....I'm best friends with most every person thats ever played football in Montana....

I often let them come around and I'll serve them brunch followed afterwards by a nice romp with the wife...but I mean come on..I got all the inside info so its totally worth it.

 

[poorgriz]

The problem with "believing in the system" or "trusting the process" is that it is so highly dependent upon a truly gifted QB which we have not seen yet, and I'm skeptical there will be one this year.

So, what we need is a "system" where you win with mediocre players? I think changing players is a much quicker route to success than changing systems. Get enough of the right players and you probably win with any system. And they may already be in the recruiting pipeline, even if this year may not produce a big breakout.

We've already seen what a mediocre QB looks like in this offense. In 25 years, we've had a small handful of elite qbs. Anyone of them would have likely thrived in stitts offense. The problem is, the typical qbs we get, aren't enough to get it done. Take berquist for example. Decent QB who got us to a chipper with his intangibles. Not going to be enough in this offense unless our oline and rbs pick up some serious slack. We don't necessarily need a DD/JJ, but a berquist/Brady ain't gonna cut it w/o lots of help. There's too many third-and-longs in this offense to survive with a QB who has a mediocre completion %. You guys keep talking about intangibles like toughness but what we need is accuracy as this is a pass 1st offense

Yet EWU seems to stamp them out of a mold. Repeatedly. Ad nauseam. As in, over and over and over again.

Apples to oranges because EWU isn't running Stitt's system. I don't think some of you are grasping just how much Stitt's system relies on superb QB play... possibly more so than any other system in the country. He has stated how important the QB is in his system many many times.

 

[RayWill]

Apples to oranges because EWU isn't running Stitt's system. I don't think some of you are grasping just how much Stitt's system relies on superb QB play... possibly more so than any other system in the country. He has stated how important the QB is in his system many many times.

This is what gets me. He also said that when the Griz get to winning again under his system it will be sustainable. How is it sustainable if you need an uber once on a blue moon QB? How is that sustainable?

 

[brewskis]

Apples to oranges because EWU isn't running Stitt's system. I don't think some of you are grasping just how much Stitt's system relies on superb QB play... possibly more so than any other system in the country. He has stated how important the QB is in his system many many times.

This is what gets me. He also said that when the Griz get to winning again under his system it will be sustainable. How is it sustainable if you need an uber once on a blue moon QB? How is that sustainable?

Relax. It's not as profound as poorgriz wishes it was.

Sure, if we get a Tom Brady back there then maybe we will be putting up 50 points a game and nobody will stay with us. But if we have a stingy defense and a strong offensive line then it won't take Tom Brady.

We won't need the best QB in the nation every year if the defense does its job, and we have a stellar running back & offensive line.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[RayWill]

Apples to oranges because EWU isn't running Stitt's system. I don't think some of you are grasping just how much Stitt's system relies on superb QB play... possibly more so than any other system in the country. He has stated how important the QB is in his system many many times.

This is what gets me. He also said that when the Griz get to winning again under his system it will be sustainable. How is it sustainable if you need an uber once on a blue moon QB? How is that sustainable?

Relax. It's not as profound as poorgriz wishes it was.

Sure, if we get a Tom Brady back there then maybe we will be putting up 50 points a game and nobody will stay with us. But if we have a stingy defense and a strong offensive line then it won't take Tom Brady.

We won't need the best QB in the nation every year if the defense does its job, and we have a stellar running back & offensive line.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree with you. I was being slightly sarcastic. Not just poorkitty believes that. Have heard it a hundred times. I think people are putting too much stock in the complexity of the scheme and that it needs this mythical QB to run it.

 

[bgbigdog]

Apples to oranges because EWU isn't running Stitt's system. I don't think some of you are grasping just how much Stitt's system relies on superb QB play... possibly more so than any other system in the country. He has stated how important the QB is in his system many many times.

This is what gets me. He also said that when the Griz get to winning again under his system it will be sustainable. How is it sustainable if you need an uber once on a blue moon QB? How is that sustainable?

Sustainably "efficient" QB play. Superb play gets you into the tournament. One or more of these guys is capable of efficient, sustainable will depend upon Stitt's game planning and adjustments.

IF... the offensive line is the most improved group, a running game is possible. If they can run, the pass will be all that more effective.

 

[AZGrizFan]

Apples to oranges because EWU isn't running Stitt's system. I don't think some of you are grasping just how much Stitt's system relies on superb QB play... possibly more so than any other system in the country. He has stated how important the QB is in his system many many times.

This is what gets me. He also said that when the Griz get to winning again under his system it will be sustainable. How is it sustainable if you need an uber once on a blue moon QB? How is that sustainable?

Relax. It's not as profound as poorgriz wishes it was.

Sure, if we get a Tom Brady back there then maybe we will be putting up 50 points a game and nobody will stay with us. But if we have a stingy defense and a strong offensive line then it won't take Tom Brady.

We won't need the best QB in the nation every year if the defense does its job, and we have a stellar running back & offensive line.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thank you for bringing them back to reality. Christ on a crutch, you'd think we need Joe Fucking Montana to run this offense if you believe some of the naysayers. Here's a hint Scat fans: just because you SAY it doesn't make it so...we will be just fine and beat your sorry asses 5 of every 6 just like normal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[krammer]

How come the QB that is in the pipeline is always better then the one we have? I think Phillips will do just fine. If not, Jensen will take over the show. We have very gifted QB's on this team already!

Just speaking to the future and stability. I'm really high on Caleb Hill. I think he could take us on a deep playoff run next season or possssssibly this year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

i really think that brewslis is right,,,,hill can throw, bigger, faster, can extend plays, looks like a running back when he breaks the pocket, i believe a gamer too.... he will be the man by end of the regular season. he is very good imo....

 

[Ursus1]

So, what we need is a "system" where you win with mediocre players? I think changing players is a much quicker route to success than changing systems. Get enough of the right players and you probably win with any system. And they may already be in the recruiting pipeline, even if this year may not produce a big breakout.

We've already seen what a mediocre QB looks like in this offense. In 25 years, we've had a small handful of elite qbs. Anyone of them would have likely thrived in stitts offense. The problem is, the typical qbs we get, aren't enough to get it done. Take berquist for example. Decent QB who got us to a chipper with his intangibles. Not going to be enough in this offense unless our oline and rbs pick up some serious slack. We don't necessarily need a DD/JJ, but a berquist/Brady ain't gonna cut it w/o lots of help. There's too many third-and-longs in this offense to survive with a QB who has a mediocre completion %. You guys keep talking about intangibles like toughness but what we need is accuracy as this is a pass 1st offense

Yet EWU seems to stamp them out of a mold. Repeatedly. Ad nauseam. As in, over and over and over again.

Apples to oranges because EWU isn't running Stitt's system. I don't think some of you are grasping just how much Stitt's system relies on superb QB play... possibly more so than any other system in the country. He has stated how important the QB is in his system many many times.

If takes that good of QB to work .....it is the stupidest offense to run in college. You change QB'S through graduation and RARELY can get a stud, let alone reload. In the Missoulian article about Marty M. helping local QB'S he mentioned how you can't put too much on a QB. Pretty sure he knows a hell of a lot more about that position than Stitt. But if average QB play gets you average results.....no wonder his career record is mediocre.

 

[garizzalies]

We won't need the [1] best QB in the nation every year if the [2] defense does its job, and we have a [3] stellar running back & [4] offensive line.

Exactly. What you said is pretty much true for all college football offenses. But we don't have a normal offense. I think it's sustainable with a berquist-level QB and the three other things you described but I'm not sure we have 2 of the 4 this year. I know we got one. And if they had fed him the god damn ball ALL game long no doubt in my mind Griz win.

I'm not as extreme as poorcats, nor will I ever be as dumb as any cat person, but I've got concerns like the rest of Griz nation for Stitt THIS YEAR. I see the potential and if he had the time he'd blow David2's dome off WAGriz.

Last time we were picked 6th, I was knee high to a grasshopper and I'm pretty sure there was an eclipse just like this summer. I remember being more afraid for the Grizzly Bears; same now. The only saving grace is (again) we're better than cat people

 

[Topey711]

Unless there is a repeat of last year's meltdown, I think you have to give Stitt time. Everyone just glosses over the lost scholarships now that the sanctions are over. The reality is, the Griz are just now in the heart of the effects of it. First year has almost no effect. Almost all freshman would redshirted anyways. Second year, probably not a whole lot either. But now you have holes in your upper classes that are filled with walkons. Yes sometimes they turn into stars but that's not the norm. 4 scholarships lost per year might mean 6 or more players lost in FCS where splitting is allowed. The Griz will feel these effects until that last reduced class is graduated. Depth is probably the thing effected most. You're seeing it now with so many young players listed on the two deep. Any coach is going to struggle under this. If Stitt can keep at least a winning record then you gotta give him a little time.

 

[Stop_HammerTime69]

Unless there is a repeat of last year's meltdown, I think you have to give Stitt time. Everyone just glosses over the lost scholarships now that the sanctions are over. The reality is, the Griz are just now in the heart of the effects of it. First year has almost no effect. Almost all freshman would redshirted anyways. Second year, probably not a whole lot either. But now you have holes in your upper classes that are filled with walkons. Yes sometimes they turn into stars but that's not the norm. 4 scholarships lost per year might mean 6 or more players lost in FCS where splitting is allowed. The Griz will feel these effects until that last reduced class is graduated. Depth is probably the thing effected most. You're seeing it now with so many young players listed on the two deep. Any coach is going to struggle under this. If Stitt can keep at least a winning record then you gotta give him a little time.

This. So much this. +1

A lot of people on this board are expecting Stitt to replicate Joe Glenn or Bobby Hauck's tenure, but Stitt has so many extra problems to deal with here. It's not like he inherited a championship caliber team without scholarship reductions and willingly made the change in system for no reason. No, Montana was hurting, but because the program got to a point where it can take hits, our worst season is still above .500. So, obviously, the sky is falling when starters get injured and we simply don't have the depth to back them up.

 

[sdk.catfish]

by Ursus1 » Thu Jul 20, 2017 6:12 pm

If takes that good of QB to work .....it is the stupidest offense to run in college. You change QB'S through graduation and RARELY can get a stud, let alone reload. In the Missoulian article about Marty M. helping local QB'S he mentioned how you can't put too much on a QB. Pretty sure he knows a hell of a lot more about that position than Stitt. But if average QB play gets you average results.....no wonder his career record is mediocre.

The evolution of this thread has brought me to somewhat of an epiphany. Many of you will not like it. Many of you won't be able to follow the logic to the end. That's ok but here it is.
1. First of all you need to look at Stitt's record at CSM https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Stitt#Colorado_School_of_Mines ; notice how very good playoff years are followed by poor, average, or slightly above average years.
2. Many of you have noted how long it takes (2 to 3 years) for players to learn Stitt's system and seem to accept that is a good or acceptable thing
3. So we get to the epiphany thing. Why recruit transfer QB's that only have 2 years if it takes 3 to learn the system. Should we expect great things from Phillips and Hill?
4. From a QB recruiting perspective if we have a red-shirt freshman like Jensen, who might be very good in a couple of years if he plays, where is the playing time for the backup. In other words this would substantiate Stitt's record at CSM. A QB learns and plays and eventually has a good season. But the kid recruited behind him has little experience and the following season or seasons are not that good. How do your recruit top of the mill QB's who may only play one year if the recruit ahead of him is one year ahead.

I don't know if this is the stupidest offense run in college (as per the tweak by Ursus1), but it may show that we are going to have the same arguments year after year if Stitt is retained.

 

[grizindabox]

Coach Quotes @CoachMotto

Bad teams, no one leads. Average teams, coaches lead. But elite teams, players lead. – P.J. Fleck

 

[Sam A. Blitz]

by Ursus1 » Thu Jul 20, 2017 6:12 pm

If takes that good of QB to work .....it is the stupidest offense to run in college. You change QB'S through graduation and RARELY can get a stud, let alone reload. In the Missoulian article about Marty M. helping local QB'S he mentioned how you can't put too much on a QB. Pretty sure he knows a hell of a lot more about that position than Stitt. But if average QB play gets you average results.....no wonder his career record is mediocre.

The evolution of this thread has brought me to somewhat of an epiphany. Many of you will not like it. Many of you won't be able to follow the logic to the end. That's ok but here it is.
1. First of all you need to look at Stitt's record at CSM https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Stitt#Colorado_School_of_Mines ; notice how very good playoff years are followed by poor, average, or slightly above average years.
2. Many of you have noted how long it takes (2 to 3 years) for players to learn Stitt's system and seem to accept that is a good or acceptable thing
3. So we get to the epiphany thing. Why recruit transfer QB's that only have 2 years if it takes 3 to learn the system. Should we expect great things from Phillips and Hill?
4. From a QB recruiting perspective if we have a red-shirt freshman like Jensen, who might be very good in a couple of years if he plays, where is the playing time for the backup. In other words this would substantiate Stitt's record at CSM. A QB learns and plays and eventually has a good season. But the kid recruited behind him has little experience and the following season or seasons are not that good. How do your recruit top of the mill QB's who may only play one year if the recruit ahead of him is one year ahead.

I don't know if this is the stupidest offense run in college (as per the tweak by Ursus1), but it may show that we are going to have the same arguments year after year if Stitt is retained.

1. I'm impressed with he did at Mines. When it comes to NCAA football programs in the Western U.S. Mines is among the very most difficult to recruit to. You have a very limited pool of athletes you can recruit, so it is difficult to maintain strong depth of talent. You can't ignore that when analyzing his record at Mines.

2. It doesn't take players much longer to learn this system than other systems. I don't care what system or program a player plays in, there is going to be a learning curve. Stitt has chosen to recruit more HS and young players and "stay the course" of developing young talent that will be here. He recruited Phillips, because there was a large gap in talent at a crucial position. Other than that, he has mostly chosen to develop players for long term stability rather than get aggressive on picking up transfers on positions, such as the OL.

3. See #2. He had to pick up a transfer because of the gap. Our depth would have been extremely young and inexperienced this year had he not picked up Phillips last year.

4. He isn't doing anything different than most programs in the country when it comes to recruiting, developing, and playing QB's. You recruit as good as QB you can find and make them compete every year. It is very rare for a QB to get PT before his Sophomore year. Phillips will have a very good chance to start as a Sophomore next year, with another year of physical and mental development under his belt. Carson Wentz didn't start until he was a Jr. Gubrud didn't start till he was a Sophomore.

 

[sdk.catfish]

by Sam A. Blitz » Thu Jul 20, 2017 7:51 pm

1. I'm impressed with he did at Mines. When it comes to NCAA football programs in the Western U.S. Mines is among the very most difficult to recruit to. You have a very limited pool of athletes you can recruit, so it is difficult to maintain strong depth of talent. You can't ignore that when analyzing his record at Mines.

2. It doesn't take players much longer to learn this system than other systems.

3. See #2. He had to pick up a transfer because of the gap. Our depth would have been extremely young and inexperienced this year had he not picked up Phillips last year.

Sorry, I simply disagree with most of your post. History is history. Stitt has a record of a good season followed by several poor to average seasons. I guess many Griz fans on this board are willing to settle for that but I am not. There is no record of a Stitt dynasty. Secondly many Stitt supporters on this board have belabored how long it takes to learn the system as an excuse for more time for Stitt. You apparently disagree with that but at some point we can't have it both ways. I am not naive enough to think there didn't need to be a back-up plan at quarterback but I'm not sure that even last year, if Jensen had started and letting the redshirt go, the record would have been much worse than 5-6. I mean what is the difference in mediocre if it means a year of QB experience. What if Hill starts for 2 years and Jensen is a Jr? What if Jensen says the hell with recruiting transfers and leaves? Difference of opinion and no ill will meant. This season might tell the tale but history shows us good Stitt seasons are followed by poor or average Stitt seasons.

 

[cmtgrizzly]

I hope Jensen turns out to be a great qb. Stitt felt he was going to be great and a player that can excel in his offense. If not, then I do worry about Stitt's judgement regarding his own offense. Given the increased experience at quarterback that Phillips and Hill have they should be burying Jensen in all ways except knowledge of this specific offense, though Phillips should have a good handle on it by now. If they are not, and it seems that they aren't significantly ahead of Jensen, I would prefer Jensen start as he should get significantly better with experience and he will be here long after the other two are gone. Does anyone feel Phillips and Hill are head shoulders ahead of Jensen right now?

 

[daGrizJ]

First, I don't think there are many coaches that could have taken the crap the Griz have been through in the last few years and turned us onto a contender in 1 or 2 years. That's just beyond expectations, IMO. Am I sure Stitt is the answer? No, after last year, not yet. But...considering the high quality of players that have committed to this program, coaches, and "system" since the change I feel the corner has been turned.

Second, I think the idea that this O needs a superior QB to be successful is incorrect. What it needs is a balanced offense, with a smart athletic QB, and a solid D. Three things that have been lacking, but I feel are being built upon. There were several years at CSM where they had a 1000, or close, yrd RB to support the QB. Yes, a running game. Imagine that. The QB does needs to be able to read defenses and adjust at the line. That's what separates this spread O from most of the others. The QB has to think. Stitt's O gives the QB a good deal of power in that respect. Brady, when he wasn't scared, beat the 4 time FCS champions with this scheme. When he was scared, he checked down to 50 bubble screens. With the quality of WRs on this team, a QB who can move, even just a little, to allow them time, will be a nice asset. All of this needs a strong OL, which isn't unusual in elite teams.

Third, we still have a ways to go to achieve this,folks. I support giving it some time.