• 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!

Statement from Jeremy Calhoun

AZGrizFan said:
PlayerRep said:
Well, then we agree. It wasn't a Ferrari. It actually wasn't even close, but it was a good and strong program and there was good talent. But all holes were not filled.

What does this statement mean? Is the expectation that a coach should come into a situation and have NO holes to fill? Isn't it obvious that all holes were not filled? Hell, there are new holes created every single off-season. Some created by graduation, some by attrition, some by injury, some by coaching changes, scheme changes, coach running off starters and All Americans, etc., etc.

It means that Hauck, then, did not inherit a cadillac or a ferrari. Why is that hard for some of you to understand.
 
kemajic said:
Merkleman said:
kemajic said:
Merkleman said:
This team is likely to take another step backwards next year.
I don't think so; we started 3 seniors of the 22 vs. MSU and BH has another recruiting year to fill the holes. Other teams on the schedule have far more turnover. And lose the "another"; we did not take a step back in 2018; the 2018 team was far better at the end of the year than the 2017 team.

Really? They were better? 3 losses in a row. 3 losses at home including one to Portland state. A worse win loss record and this team did better than last years?

In 2017 they lost one game at home. Never lost consecutive games, had a better win loss record and the teams they lost to last year were better than the teams the lost to this year.
You missed the "at the end of the year" part in your selective reading. Two blowout road wins and playing MSU far tougher; doing everything but winning. Started but 3 seniors at the end. But for a home blowout of UND, the 2017 team did not finish strong and was embarrassed by MSU. Enough to miss the playoffs at 7-4 (thanks to Valpo and Savannah St.) and get the HC fired. The 2017 team ran up its stats on the weak teams; folded to the tougher ones. Never beat a playoff team.

at the end of the season, meaning the second half of the last game, the griz were total crap. the year before the team played a better half at the end of the season.

just playing your 'take the ball and go home, game, mickey.
 
argh! said:
kemajic said:
Merkleman said:
kemajic said:
I don't think so; we started 3 seniors of the 22 vs. MSU and BH has another recruiting year to fill the holes. Other teams on the schedule have far more turnover. And lose the "another"; we did not take a step back in 2018; the 2018 team was far better at the end of the year than the 2017 team.

Really? They were better? 3 losses in a row. 3 losses at home including one to Portland state. A worse win loss record and this team did better than last years?

In 2017 they lost one game at home. Never lost consecutive games, had a better win loss record and the teams they lost to last year were better than the teams the lost to this year.
You missed the "at the end of the year" part in your selective reading. Two blowout road wins and playing MSU far tougher; doing everything but winning. Started but 3 seniors at the end. But for a home blowout of UND, the 2017 team did not finish strong and was embarrassed by MSU. Enough to miss the playoffs at 7-4 (thanks to Valpo and Savannah St.) and get the HC fired. The 2017 team ran up its stats on the weak teams; folded to the tougher ones. Never beat a playoff team.

at the end of the season, meaning the second half of the last game, the griz were total crap. the year before the team played a better half at the end of the season.

just playing your 'take the ball and go home, game, mickey.

Nope, don't agree on your statements about playoffs. Wrong.
 
kemajic said:
Merkleman said:
kemajic said:
Merkleman said:
This team is likely to take another step backwards next year.
I don't think so; we started 3 seniors of the 22 vs. MSU and BH has another recruiting year to fill the holes. Other teams on the schedule have far more turnover. And lose the "another"; we did not take a step back in 2018; the 2018 team was far better at the end of the year than the 2017 team.

Really? They were better? 3 losses in a row. 3 losses at home including one to Portland state. A worse win loss record and this team did better than last years?

In 2017 they lost one game at home. Never lost consecutive games, had a better win loss record and the teams they lost to last year were better than the teams the lost to this year.
You missed the "at the end of the year" part in your selective reading. Two blowout road wins and playing MSU far tougher; doing everything but winning. Started but 3 seniors at the end. But for a home blowout of UND, the 2017 team did not finish strong and was embarrassed by MSU. Enough to miss the playoffs at 7-4 (thanks to Valpo and Savannah St.) and get the HC fired. The 2017 team ran up its stats on the weak teams; folded to the tougher ones. Never beat a playoff team.

but for a blowout win in a (practically) home game against the very weak spuds, the 2018 finished badly and was embarrassed by msu, who played a linebacker at qb.
 
kemajic said:
Merkleman said:
kemajic said:
Merkleman said:
This team is likely to take another step backwards next year.
I don't think so; we started 3 seniors of the 22 vs. MSU and BH has another recruiting year to fill the holes. Other teams on the schedule have far more turnover. And lose the "another"; we did not take a step back in 2018; the 2018 team was far better at the end of the year than the 2017 team.

Really? They were better? 3 losses in a row. 3 losses at home including one to Portland state. A worse win loss record and this team did better than last years?

In 2017 they lost one game at home. Never lost consecutive games, had a better win loss record and the teams they lost to last year were better than the teams the lost to this year.
You missed the "at the end of the year" part in your selective reading. Two blowout road wins and playing MSU far tougher; doing everything but winning. Started but 3 seniors at the end. But for a home blowout of UND, the 2017 team did not finish strong and was embarrassed by MSU. Enough to miss the playoffs at 7-4 (thanks to Valpo and Savannah St.) and get the HC fired. The 2017 team ran up its stats on the weak teams; folded to the tougher ones. Never beat a playoff team.

Again, 3 losses in a row compared to not losing consecutive games last year. 3 home losses at home compared to 1 last year.

As far as finishing this season stronger.... really?
This year the finished the last 6 games at 2-4 last year they finished 4-2

2018
Loss at home to PSU
Loss- blow out to a bad North Dakota team
Loss- blowout at home to UC Davis
Win- blowout out of 2 win souther Utah
Win- Idaho state
Loss- at home against Montana state who’s best player was suspended all year. And we’re dominated in the 2nd half

2017
Win- Idaho state
Win- Blow out of North Dakota
Loss- at Weber who made a good playoff run
Win- Against PLAYOFF NAU with our 4th QB
Win- blowout of Northern Idaho
Loss -away against State who had there best player and although the margin was bigger, nothing in the game last year compared to the 2nd half this year.

I know, facts sometimes elude people on here but there really is no other way to look at it. And yes as you can see above they did beat a playoff team last year with there 4th string QB.

And lastly nothing an any alternate universe did last years team fold up the way this years did. There are literally 100’s of comments this year on how this team folded in the 2nd half this year in probably 5 or 6 games including Montana state.
 
argh! said:
kemajic said:
Merkleman said:
kemajic said:
I don't think so; we started 3 seniors of the 22 vs. MSU and BH has another recruiting year to fill the holes. Other teams on the schedule have far more turnover. And lose the "another"; we did not take a step back in 2018; the 2018 team was far better at the end of the year than the 2017 team.

Really? They were better? 3 losses in a row. 3 losses at home including one to Portland state. A worse win loss record and this team did better than last years?

In 2017 they lost one game at home. Never lost consecutive games, had a better win loss record and the teams they lost to last year were better than the teams the lost to this year.
You missed the "at the end of the year" part in your selective reading. Two blowout road wins and playing MSU far tougher; doing everything but winning. Started but 3 seniors at the end. But for a home blowout of UND, the 2017 team did not finish strong and was embarrassed by MSU. Enough to miss the playoffs at 7-4 (thanks to Valpo and Savannah St.) and get the HC fired. The 2017 team ran up its stats on the weak teams; folded to the tougher ones. Never beat a playoff team.

but for a blowout win in a (practically) home game against the very weak spuds, the 2018 finished badly and was embarrassed by msu, who played a linebacker at qb.

The MSU linebacker at qb was first team all conference. A former starting UM defensive player told me that Anderson is one of the 3 best players he ever played against/saw, along with Wentz and Kupp. Anderson is a terrific player and a winner. The Griz would love to have Anderson.
 
Merkleman said:
kemajic said:
Merkleman said:
kemajic said:
I don't think so; we started 3 seniors of the 22 vs. MSU and BH has another recruiting year to fill the holes. Other teams on the schedule have far more turnover. And lose the "another"; we did not take a step back in 2018; the 2018 team was far better at the end of the year than the 2017 team.

Really? They were better? 3 losses in a row. 3 losses at home including one to Portland state. A worse win loss record and this team did better than last years?

In 2017 they lost one game at home. Never lost consecutive games, had a better win loss record and the teams they lost to last year were better than the teams the lost to this year.
You missed the "at the end of the year" part in your selective reading. Two blowout road wins and playing MSU far tougher; doing everything but winning. Started but 3 seniors at the end. But for a home blowout of UND, the 2017 team did not finish strong and was embarrassed by MSU. Enough to miss the playoffs at 7-4 (thanks to Valpo and Savannah St.) and get the HC fired. The 2017 team ran up its stats on the weak teams; folded to the tougher ones. Never beat a playoff team.

Again, 3 losses in a row compared to not losing consecutive games last year. 3 home losses at home compared to 1 last year.

As far as finishing this season stronger.... really?
This year the finished the last 6 games at 2-4 last year they finished 4-2

2018
Loss at home to PSU
Loss- blow out to a bad North Dakota team
Loss- blowout at home to UC Davis
Win- blowout out of 2 win souther Utah
Win- Idaho state
Loss- at home against Montana state who’s best player was suspended all year. And we’re dominated in the 2nd half

2017
Win- Idaho state
Win- Blow out of North Dakota
Loss- at Weber who made a good playoff run
Win- Against PLAYOFF NAU with our 4th QB
Win- blowout of Northern Idaho
Loss -away against State who had there best player and although the margin was bigger, nothing in the game last year compared to the 2nd half this year.

I know, facts sometimes elude people on here but there really is no other way to look at it. And yes as you can see above they did beat a playoff team last year with there 4th string QB.

And lastly nothing an any alternate universe did last years team fold up the way this years did. There are literally 100’s of comments this year on how this team folded in the 2nd half this year in probably 5 or 6 games including Montana state.

I assume you didn't attend a single game. You didn't see the improvements in the team this year. Even if you had, I suppose you might not admit the improvements. I thin uou are biased. Under Stitt, this last season would have had worse results. To be clear, obviously everyone knows the record this year was one game worse than last year. However, the team player better and harder in several important ways, in my view.
 
I appreciate everyone's opinions on whether 2017 or 2018 was better. Here is my opinion: both years sucked because we didn't make the playoffs and lost to the Bobcats. Does it matter which year sucked less?
 
CDAGRIZ said:
I appreciate everyone's opinions on whether 2017 or 2018 was better. Here is my opinion: both years sucked because we didn't make the playoffs and lost to the Bobcats. Does it matter which year sucked less?

Truth. They were both stinky and improvement is needed to make these a distant memory.
 
CDAGRIZ said:
I appreciate everyone's opinions on whether 2017 or 2018 was better. Here is my opinion: both years sucked because we didn't make the playoffs and lost to the Bobcats. Does it matter which year sucked less?

I see your point. It does seem to matter to Stitt lovers and Hauck haters/skeptics. Perhaps some in the reverse direction too. Only objective posters like Kem and me, and a few others, get it right.
 
PlayerRep said:
CDAGRIZ said:
I appreciate everyone's opinions on whether 2017 or 2018 was better. Here is my opinion: both years sucked because we didn't make the playoffs and lost to the Bobcats. Does it matter which year sucked less?

I see your point. It does seem to matter to Stitt lovers and Hauck haters/skeptics. Perhaps some in the reverse direction too. Only objective posters like Kem and me, and a few others, get it right.

:lol: Given that Kem basically started/poured fuel on the fire that this year was measurable better tha last year, that kind of deflates your argument that he’s an “objective poster”.
 
PlayerRep said:
AZGrizFan said:
PlayerRep said:
Well, then we agree. It wasn't a Ferrari. It actually wasn't even close, but it was a good and strong program and there was good talent. But all holes were not filled.

What does this statement mean? Is the expectation that a coach should come into a situation and have NO holes to fill? Isn't it obvious that all holes were not filled? Hell, there are new holes created every single off-season. Some created by graduation, some by attrition, some by injury, some by coaching changes, scheme changes, coach running off starters and All Americans, etc., etc.

It means that Hauck, then, did not inherit a cadillac or a ferrari. Why is that hard for some of you to understand.

Please show me a coach who has, when taking over for a fired coach.
 
AZGrizFan said:
PlayerRep said:
AZGrizFan said:
PlayerRep said:
Well, then we agree. It wasn't a Ferrari. It actually wasn't even close, but it was a good and strong program and there was good talent. But all holes were not filled.

What does this statement mean? Is the expectation that a coach should come into a situation and have NO holes to fill? Isn't it obvious that all holes were not filled? Hell, there are new holes created every single off-season. Some created by graduation, some by attrition, some by injury, some by coaching changes, scheme changes, coach running off starters and All Americans, etc., etc.

It means that Hauck, then, did not inherit a cadillac or a ferrari. Why is that hard for some of you to understand.

Please show me a coach who has, when taking over for a fired coach.

Why don't you direct your question to the posters who said that Hauck inherited a ferrari/cadillac? Hauck took over from Glenn, who was not a fired coach.
 
AZGrizFan said:
PlayerRep said:
CDAGRIZ said:
I appreciate everyone's opinions on whether 2017 or 2018 was better. Here is my opinion: both years sucked because we didn't make the playoffs and lost to the Bobcats. Does it matter which year sucked less?

I see your point. It does seem to matter to Stitt lovers and Hauck haters/skeptics. Perhaps some in the reverse direction too. Only objective posters like Kem and me, and a few others, get it right.

:lol: Given that Kem basically started/poured fuel on the fire that this year was measurable better tha last year, that kind of deflates your argument that he’s an “objective poster”.

Work on your ability to recognize humor.
 
PlayerRep said:
AZGrizFan said:
PlayerRep said:
AZGrizFan said:
What does this statement mean? Is the expectation that a coach should come into a situation and have NO holes to fill? Isn't it obvious that all holes were not filled? Hell, there are new holes created every single off-season. Some created by graduation, some by attrition, some by injury, some by coaching changes, scheme changes, coach running off starters and All Americans, etc., etc.

It means that Hauck, then, did not inherit a cadillac or a ferrari. Why is that hard for some of you to understand.

Please show me a coach who has, when taking over for a fired coach.

Why don't you direct your question to the posters who said that Hauck inherited a ferrari/cadillac? Hauck took over from Glenn, who was not a fired coach.

I know. It was a Ferrari.
 
PlayerRep said:
AZGrizFan said:
PlayerRep said:
Well, then we agree. It wasn't a Ferrari. It actually wasn't even close, but it was a good and strong program and there was good talent. But all holes were not filled.

What does this statement mean? Is the expectation that a coach should come into a situation and have NO holes to fill? Isn't it obvious that all holes were not filled? Hell, there are new holes created every single off-season. Some created by graduation, some by attrition, some by injury, some by coaching changes, scheme changes, coach running off starters and All Americans, etc., etc.

It means that Hauck, then, did not inherit a cadillac or a ferrari. Why is that hard for some of you to understand.

Hauck inherited a team that had just set an FCS record for consecutive wins before it lost 3 of its last 4, primarily due to injuries, and who had been to the national championship the two prior years. That team had holes it needed need to fill, but all teams do when they enter a new year, and I think you're minimizing what Hauck did inherit.
 
br fan said:
PlayerRep said:
AZGrizFan said:
PlayerRep said:
Well, then we agree. It wasn't a Ferrari. It actually wasn't even close, but it was a good and strong program and there was good talent. But all holes were not filled.

What does this statement mean? Is the expectation that a coach should come into a situation and have NO holes to fill? Isn't it obvious that all holes were not filled? Hell, there are new holes created every single off-season. Some created by graduation, some by attrition, some by injury, some by coaching changes, scheme changes, coach running off starters and All Americans, etc., etc.

It means that Hauck, then, did not inherit a cadillac or a ferrari. Why is that hard for some of you to understand.

Hauck inherited a team that had just set an FCS record for consecutive wins before it lost 3 of its last 4, primarily due to injuries, and who had been to the national championship the two prior years. That team had holes it needed need to fill, but all teams do when they enter a new year, and I think you're minimizing what Hauck did inherit.

What were the injuries?
 
PlayerRep said:
br fan said:
PlayerRep said:
AZGrizFan said:
What does this statement mean? Is the expectation that a coach should come into a situation and have NO holes to fill? Isn't it obvious that all holes were not filled? Hell, there are new holes created every single off-season. Some created by graduation, some by attrition, some by injury, some by coaching changes, scheme changes, coach running off starters and All Americans, etc., etc.

It means that Hauck, then, did not inherit a cadillac or a ferrari. Why is that hard for some of you to understand.

Hauck inherited a team that had just set an FCS record for consecutive wins before it lost 3 of its last 4, primarily due to injuries, and who had been to the national championship the two prior years. That team had holes it needed need to fill, but all teams do when they enter a new year, and I think you're minimizing what Hauck did inherit.

What were the injuries?

The major one was probably John Edwards. He played through it, but there was a reason for his performance at the end of that year including the 1-10 showing against the Cats. If you're interested, here's a link to the 2002 roster that lists who Hauck inherited from that team, and there's a lot of Grizzly greats on it.

https://gogriz.com/roster.aspx?roster=117&path=
 
br fan said:
PlayerRep said:
br fan said:
PlayerRep said:
It means that Hauck, then, did not inherit a cadillac or a ferrari. Why is that hard for some of you to understand.

Hauck inherited a team that had just set an FCS record for consecutive wins before it lost 3 of its last 4, primarily due to injuries, and who had been to the national championship the two prior years. That team had holes it needed need to fill, but all teams do when they enter a new year, and I think you're minimizing what Hauck did inherit.

What were the injuries?

The major one was probably John Edwards. He played through it, but there was a reason for his performance at the end of that year including the 1-10 showing against the Cats. If you're interested, here's a link to the 2002 roster that lists who Hauck inherited from that team, and there's a lot of Grizzly greats on it.

https://gogriz.com/roster.aspx?roster=117&path=

Thanks. I have looked at the roster recently. I know many of the guys on that team. Went to the weddings of at least 3 of them. Just had not recalled injuries playing a part in the 3 losses at end of season.
 
Back
Top