• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

FCS to FBS coaching challenges

RayWill

Well-known member
SI has an interesting article. It explores how most successful FCS coaches who move up struggle at the next level and the challenges that they face.

https://www.si.com/college-football/2018/12/12/chris-klieman-mike-houston-fcs-fbs-head-coaches

From part of the article:

Everything is bigger in the FBS, but that doesn’t always mean everything is better for first-time head coaches. Recruiting is more competitive, changes more rapidly and is stretched into a year-round event. Staffs are so much larger at the FBS level that some FCS-turned-FBS coaches admit they failed to delegate and manage well enough. Budgets are so much greater that organizational structure and prudent spending are imperative. Coaches coming from Division II and Division III must learn a new rulebook in Division I, one that puts more stringent qualifying restrictions on recruits. There is also the scholarship increase to 85–22 more than FCS and 49 more than Division II—that can make things even more complex.

For all the success stories of lower-level coaches, there are failures. After being hired from Elon, Pete Lembo won 25 games in his first three seasons at Ball State before the Cardinals regressed and Lembo resigned to join the staff at Maryland, then left after two years to take the same assistant roles at Rice. Everett Withers, who led James Madison to consecutive FCS playoff appearances, won just seven games in three seasons at Texas State, and Mike London, winner of 24 games in two years at FCS Richmond, led Virginia to one bowl game in six years.

Coaches say recruiting is the biggest change that Klieman and Houston will experience. Each cycle is, of course, more intense and competitive—“You’re going after bigger fish,” Hopson says—but it also runs on a different timeline. While FBS signing classes are nearly full by the time a prospect’s high school football season ends in November or December, lower divisions are just getting started. “It’s a little bit of let the chips fall where they may,” says Fritz, who has spent time as a head coach at junior college, Division II and FCS schools. “A lot of the kids are waiting to see what they are going to get.” Offering scholarships to eighth graders and getting commitments from high school sophomores are routine procedures on the FBS level that are nearly non-existent at the lower reaches of the college game. It’s more of a “patient” recruitment, says the 60-year-old Bailiff, now coach at Division II Texas A&M-Commerce. “Everybody thinks they’re going to FBS,” he says. “Whole world does, doesn’t matter how big you are or fast you are. They all have that dream. In FCS, you usually get commitments later.”

While recruiting can be a tricky adjustment, the management of a larger staff and budget are the most difficult obstacles, FCS-turned-FBS coaches agree. The budgets of FBS programs are big enough to quadruple an FCS coach’s staff. At $48 million, James Madison has the largest athletic budget of any FCS program. It would rank No. 62 among FBS schools, according to data from USA Today. With the ability to hire analysts, equipment managers and so on, staffs can swell to more than 50 people, well surpassing those in FCS, especially those in the SWAC.
 
RayWill said:
SI has an interesting article. It explores how most successful FCS coaches who move up struggle at the next level and the challenges that they face.

https://www.si.com/college-football/2018/12/12/chris-klieman-mike-houston-fcs-fbs-head-coaches

From part of the article:

Everything is bigger in the FBS, but that doesn’t always mean everything is better for first-time head coaches. Recruiting is more competitive, changes more rapidly and is stretched into a year-round event. Staffs are so much larger at the FBS level that some FCS-turned-FBS coaches admit they failed to delegate and manage well enough. Budgets are so much greater that organizational structure and prudent spending are imperative. Coaches coming from Division II and Division III must learn a new rulebook in Division I, one that puts more stringent qualifying restrictions on recruits. There is also the scholarship increase to 85–22 more than FCS and 49 more than Division II—that can make things even more complex.

For all the success stories of lower-level coaches, there are failures. After being hired from Elon, Pete Lembo won 25 games in his first three seasons at Ball State before the Cardinals regressed and Lembo resigned to join the staff at Maryland, then left after two years to take the same assistant roles at Rice. Everett Withers, who led James Madison to consecutive FCS playoff appearances, won just seven games in three seasons at Texas State, and Mike London, winner of 24 games in two years at FCS Richmond, led Virginia to one bowl game in six years.

Coaches say recruiting is the biggest change that Klieman and Houston will experience. Each cycle is, of course, more intense and competitive—“You’re going after bigger fish,” Hopson says—but it also runs on a different timeline. While FBS signing classes are nearly full by the time a prospect’s high school football season ends in November or December, lower divisions are just getting started. “It’s a little bit of let the chips fall where they may,” says Fritz, who has spent time as a head coach at junior college, Division II and FCS schools. “A lot of the kids are waiting to see what they are going to get.” Offering scholarships to eighth graders and getting commitments from high school sophomores are routine procedures on the FBS level that are nearly non-existent at the lower reaches of the college game. It’s more of a “patient” recruitment, says the 60-year-old Bailiff, now coach at Division II Texas A&M-Commerce. “Everybody thinks they’re going to FBS,” he says. “Whole world does, doesn’t matter how big you are or fast you are. They all have that dream. In FCS, you usually get commitments later.”

While recruiting can be a tricky adjustment, the management of a larger staff and budget are the most difficult obstacles, FCS-turned-FBS coaches agree. The budgets of FBS programs are big enough to quadruple an FCS coach’s staff. At $48 million, James Madison has the largest athletic budget of any FCS program. It would rank No. 62 among FBS schools, according to data from USA Today. With the ability to hire analysts, equipment managers and so on, staffs can swell to more than 50 people, well surpassing those in FCS, especially those in the SWAC.

Good article and thanks for posting it. I wonder if the struggles can also be tied to taking jobs at historically low performing programs. They are tough to recruit to, regardless of a coaches organizational skills, staff preparation and sound budgeting. Some places like Vegas are not very appealing if you are a player. (I really did not use Vegas because of Hauck. It is such a glaring example of complete awfulness.)
 
Copper Griz said:
RayWill said:
SI has an interesting article. It explores how most successful FCS coaches who move up struggle at the next level and the challenges that they face.

https://www.si.com/college-football/2018/12/12/chris-klieman-mike-houston-fcs-fbs-head-coaches



Good article and thanks for posting it. I wonder if the struggles can also be tied to taking jobs at historically low performing programs. They are tough to recruit to, regardless of a coaches organizational skills, staff preparation and sound budgeting. Some places like Vegas are not very appealing if you are a player. (I really did not use Vegas because of Hauck. It is such a glaring example of complete awfulness.)

Wyoming too. Look how many coaches Wyoming has been a graveyard for.
 
RayWill said:
Copper Griz said:
RayWill said:
SI has an interesting article. It explores how most successful FCS coaches who move up struggle at the next level and the challenges that they face.

https://www.si.com/college-football/2018/12/12/chris-klieman-mike-houston-fcs-fbs-head-coaches



Good article and thanks for posting it. I wonder if the struggles can also be tied to taking jobs at historically low performing programs. They are tough to recruit to, regardless of a coaches organizational skills, staff preparation and sound budgeting. Some places like Vegas are not very appealing if you are a player. (I really did not use Vegas because of Hauck. It is such a glaring example of complete awfulness.)

Wyoming too. Look how many coaches Wyoming has been a graveyard for.

Yes, it would be a tough place to win at. Bohl has done better than I expected. I read the headlines of an article that mentioned five players had already announced they were transferring from the Wyoming program. That may be the norm for FBS programs, but it seemed like a lot right after the season. 6-6 and playing in that conference - uuggghhhh. The money is good so I can't blame him for taking the job. His predecessor may fair better, but Kansas is no picnic either.
 
It rarely gets talked about anymore, but Paul Wulff moving up from EWU to a P5 Washington State was a pretty big deal at the time. Granted it was an absolute unmitigated disaster for WSU and ultimately derailed Wulff's career trajectory, but that was a helluva jump for an FCS coach. Similiar to what Klieman is doing.
 
RayWill said:
SI has an interesting article. It explores how most successful FCS coaches who move up struggle at the next level and the challenges that they face.

https://www.si.com/college-football/2018/12/12/chris-klieman-mike-houston-fcs-fbs-head-coaches

From part of the article:

Everything is bigger in the FBS, but that doesn’t always mean everything is better for first-time head coaches. Recruiting is more competitive, changes more rapidly and is stretched into a year-round event. Staffs are so much larger at the FBS level that some FCS-turned-FBS coaches admit they failed to delegate and manage well enough. Budgets are so much greater that organizational structure and prudent spending are imperative. Coaches coming from Division II and Division III must learn a new rulebook in Division I, one that puts more stringent qualifying restrictions on recruits. There is also the scholarship increase to 85–22 more than FCS and 49 more than Division II—that can make things even more complex.

For all the success stories of lower-level coaches, there are failures. After being hired from Elon, Pete Lembo won 25 games in his first three seasons at Ball State before the Cardinals regressed and Lembo resigned to join the staff at Maryland, then left after two years to take the same assistant roles at Rice. Everett Withers, who led James Madison to consecutive FCS playoff appearances, won just seven games in three seasons at Texas State, and Mike London, winner of 24 games in two years at FCS Richmond, led Virginia to one bowl game in six years.

Coaches say recruiting is the biggest change that Klieman and Houston will experience. Each cycle is, of course, more intense and competitive—“You’re going after bigger fish,” Hopson says—but it also runs on a different timeline. While FBS signing classes are nearly full by the time a prospect’s high school football season ends in November or December, lower divisions are just getting started. “It’s a little bit of let the chips fall where they may,” says Fritz, who has spent time as a head coach at junior college, Division II and FCS schools. “A lot of the kids are waiting to see what they are going to get.” Offering scholarships to eighth graders and getting commitments from high school sophomores are routine procedures on the FBS level that are nearly non-existent at the lower reaches of the college game. It’s more of a “patient” recruitment, says the 60-year-old Bailiff, now coach at Division II Texas A&M-Commerce. “Everybody thinks they’re going to FBS,” he says. “Whole world does, doesn’t matter how big you are or fast you are. They all have that dream. In FCS, you usually get commitments later.”

While recruiting can be a tricky adjustment, the management of a larger staff and budget are the most difficult obstacles, FCS-turned-FBS coaches agree. The budgets of FBS programs are big enough to quadruple an FCS coach’s staff. At $48 million, James Madison has the largest athletic budget of any FCS program. It would rank No. 62 among FBS schools, according to data from USA Today. With the ability to hire analysts, equipment managers and so on, staffs can swell to more than 50 people, well surpassing those in FCS, especially those in the SWAC.

Great read. Thanks for posting :thumb:
 
Back
Top