Bob Stitt new OC at UNC?

[PlayerRep]

But I don't think they took a step back as they did about what I thought they would. I was never sold that this was a 9 win playoff team. You can nitpick all you want about some spots in sagarin, but in the end, the last two seasons were pretty much the same. This coaching change wasn't really about what Hauck would do this season, it was about what Stitt did in 3 and what they hope Hauck can do by year 3.

Stopped reading after your first sentence. You’re absolutely biased if you think this team is better than last years. Every analytic is going to argue against you. And at the end of the day the worse record against a worse schedule is an easy proof of concept.

Last year UM played UW, but only 2 playoff teams NAU, and Weber. This year UM played 3 playoff teams, N. Iowa, UC Davis and MSU, two of which have already advanced in the playoffs.

I think this years team had a huge flaw, in the worst O-line I’ve seen in all the years I’ve watched Montana football, but despite that, they were very competitive in every game, except UND. I think with a little better o-line, this team could have been pretty good. And as hard as it is to believe this year’s team was better in turnovers, giving up 20 compared to 26 for last year’s team.

This year for actual statistics as far as SoS... we had a bottom 20 fcs schedule. Last year we were 15th. Just fwiw.

Turnovers are a problem yes. But, .5 turnovers a game extra is minimal given SoS, plays/game, ppg contributing

If you want to convince everyone how knowledgeable you are because you rely on Jeff Sagarin, go for it. Most posters who have commented seem to think he's not much better than a joke.

 

[Eriul]

Stopped reading after your first sentence. You’re absolutely biased if you think this team is better than last years. Every analytic is going to argue against you. And at the end of the day the worse record against a worse schedule is an easy proof of concept.

Last year UM played UW, but only 2 playoff teams NAU, and Weber. This year UM played 3 playoff teams, N. Iowa, UC Davis and MSU, two of which have already advanced in the playoffs.

I think this years team had a huge flaw, in the worst O-line I’ve seen in all the years I’ve watched Montana football, but despite that, they were very competitive in every game, except UND. I think with a little better o-line, this team could have been pretty good. And as hard as it is to believe this year’s team was better in turnovers, giving up 20 compared to 26 for last year’s team.

This year for actual statistics as far as SoS... we had a bottom 20 fcs schedule. Last year we were 15th. Just fwiw.

Turnovers are a problem yes. But, .5 turnovers a game extra is minimal given SoS, plays/game, ppg contributing

If you want to convince everyone how knowledgeable you are because you rely on Jeff Sagarin, go for it. Most posters who have commented seem to think he's not much better than a joke.

I don’t rely on Jeff sagarin. I rely on my algorithms. They’re very much like his though. Just using him as a basic reference. You claim the team analytically was better but Jeff Sagarin is literally entirely analytical and public and his analytics disagree. So do mine, but I’m not going to go into how mine work. I don’t think it’ll stick given the parameters aren’t things like, “played harder.”

 

[Eriul]

This is actually super funny. You really aren’t as close to the team as you claim you are or you might not claim That I don’t understand the game... yikes

If you don't understand the interceptions and turnovers are very important in football, then I'm sorry but none of us can help you. That in and of itself shows that you don't know much about football. See how much support you can get for your view that interceptions and turnovers are't important.

I can tell by how you post and what you say that you are not very knowledgeable about the game of football.

I have never said I am close to the team.

Every post you make is how close you are to “people on the team.” Maybe one day you should ask some coaches you’re so close to if they know a “lesbian computer lady.” I think you might be surprised

I know most of the coaches and have met all of them, and know lots of current and former people associated with the program, but I have never said I am "close to the team". Do you think people on egriz don't know or suspect who you are?

If you knew or suspected who I was you wouldn’t Say I don’t know the game while also promoting Hauck.

Btw I’ve met probably 10+ posters from this board in person and not one of them has said anything to me about egriz. I’m going to assume they don’t know who I am. I’ve never met you though

 

[PlayerRep]

But I don't think they took a step back as they did about what I thought they would. I was never sold that this was a 9 win playoff team. You can nitpick all you want about some spots in sagarin, but in the end, the last two seasons were pretty much the same. This coaching change wasn't really about what Hauck would do this season, it was about what Stitt did in 3 and what they hope Hauck can do by year 3.

Stopped reading after your first sentence. You’re absolutely biased if you think this team is better than last years. Every analytic is going to argue against you. And at the end of the day the worse record against a worse schedule is an easy proof of concept.

Last year UM played UW, but only 2 playoff teams NAU, and Weber. This year UM played 3 playoff teams, N. Iowa, UC Davis and MSU, two of which have already advanced in the playoffs.

I think this years team had a huge flaw, in the worst O-line I’ve seen in all the years I’ve watched Montana football, but despite that, they were very competitive in every game, except UND. I think with a little better o-line, this team could have been pretty good. And as hard as it is to believe this year’s team was better in turnovers, giving up 20 compared to 26 for last year’s team.

This year for actual statistics as far as SoS... we had a bottom 20 fcs schedule. Last year we were 15th. Just fwiw.

Turnovers are a problem yes. But, .5 turnovers a game extra is minimal given SoS, plays/game, ppg contributing

According to Sagarin, UM didn't have a strong schedule last year and it was no where close to top 15. In fact, I thought it was the weakest in the conference, according to Sagarin. Also, take out UW and then see how the SOS drops.

As for turnovers, UM still had too many fumbles this year, and the fumbles absolutely killed us in the games we lost.

And, if you don't think playing harder, hitting harder, and tackling better, all of which can be measured, is important data for football, then we can't help you.

 

[Eriul]

Stopped reading after your first sentence. You’re absolutely biased if you think this team is better than last years. Every analytic is going to argue against you. And at the end of the day the worse record against a worse schedule is an easy proof of concept.

Last year UM played UW, but only 2 playoff teams NAU, and Weber. This year UM played 3 playoff teams, N. Iowa, UC Davis and MSU, two of which have already advanced in the playoffs.

I think this years team had a huge flaw, in the worst O-line I’ve seen in all the years I’ve watched Montana football, but despite that, they were very competitive in every game, except UND. I think with a little better o-line, this team could have been pretty good. And as hard as it is to believe this year’s team was better in turnovers, giving up 20 compared to 26 for last year’s team.

This year for actual statistics as far as SoS... we had a bottom 20 fcs schedule. Last year we were 15th. Just fwiw.

Turnovers are a problem yes. But, .5 turnovers a game extra is minimal given SoS, plays/game, ppg contributing

According to Sagarin, UM didn't have a strong schedule last year and it was no where close to top 15. In fact, I thought it was the weakest in the conference, according to Sagarin. Also, take out UW and then see how the SOS drops.

As for turnovers, UM still had too many fumbles this year, and the fumbles absolutely killed us in the games we lost.

If you take out UW then your stats are all gone as well. I’m not sure what you’re looking at but I’m going to assume it’s not SoS as is interpreted by everyone.

 

[Eriul]

Stopped reading after your first sentence. You’re absolutely biased if you think this team is better than last years. Every analytic is going to argue against you. And at the end of the day the worse record against a worse schedule is an easy proof of concept.

Last year UM played UW, but only 2 playoff teams NAU, and Weber. This year UM played 3 playoff teams, N. Iowa, UC Davis and MSU, two of which have already advanced in the playoffs.

I think this years team had a huge flaw, in the worst O-line I’ve seen in all the years I’ve watched Montana football, but despite that, they were very competitive in every game, except UND. I think with a little better o-line, this team could have been pretty good. And as hard as it is to believe this year’s team was better in turnovers, giving up 20 compared to 26 for last year’s team.

This year for actual statistics as far as SoS... we had a bottom 20 fcs schedule. Last year we were 15th. Just fwiw.

Turnovers are a problem yes. But, .5 turnovers a game extra is minimal given SoS, plays/game, ppg contributing

According to Sagarin, UM didn't have a strong schedule last year and it was no where close to top 15. In fact, I thought it was the weakest in the conference, according to Sagarin. Also, take out UW and then see how the SOS drops.

As for turnovers, UM still had too many fumbles this year, and the fumbles absolutely killed us in the games we lost.

And, if you don't think playing harder, hitting harder, and tackling better, all of which can be measured, is important data for football, then we can't help you.

Legitimately NONE of those things can be measured... what the fuck. Are you actually trolling? Find me one stat anywhere on a players “tackling better.” There are grades that humans give based off of perception. That is not how things are measured. I know you’re a law guy but you’re actually just out of your realm. I wouldn’t argue law with you so don’t argue science with me. You’re just embarassing yourself

 

[PlayerRep]

Last year UM played UW, but only 2 playoff teams NAU, and Weber. This year UM played 3 playoff teams, N. Iowa, UC Davis and MSU, two of which have already advanced in the playoffs.

I think this years team had a huge flaw, in the worst O-line I’ve seen in all the years I’ve watched Montana football, but despite that, they were very competitive in every game, except UND. I think with a little better o-line, this team could have been pretty good. And as hard as it is to believe this year’s team was better in turnovers, giving up 20 compared to 26 for last year’s team.

This year for actual statistics as far as SoS... we had a bottom 20 fcs schedule. Last year we were 15th. Just fwiw.

Turnovers are a problem yes. But, .5 turnovers a game extra is minimal given SoS, plays/game, ppg contributing

According to Sagarin, UM didn't have a strong schedule last year and it was no where close to top 15. In fact, I thought it was the weakest in the conference, according to Sagarin. Also, take out UW and then see how the SOS drops.

As for turnovers, UM still had too many fumbles this year, and the fumbles absolutely killed us in the games we lost.

And, if you don't think playing harder, hitting harder, and tackling better, all of which can be measured, is important data for football, then we can't help you.

Legitimately NONE of those things can be measured... what the f***. Are you actually trolling? Find me one stat anywhere on a players “tackling better.” There are grades that humans give based off of perception. That is not how things are measured. I know you’re a law guy but you’re actually just out of your realm. I wouldn’t argue law with you so don’t argue science with me. You’re just embarassing yourself

I know the game. I know that turnovers, tackles, toughness, playing physical, etc. are very important to the game. You obviously don't know the game. I am talking football. Science isn't football. You are the one embarrassing yourself.

Why don't you provide us the Sagarin SOS for FCS teams and the conference last year.

 

[Eriul]

This year for actual statistics as far as SoS... we had a bottom 20 fcs schedule. Last year we were 15th. Just fwiw.

Turnovers are a problem yes. But, .5 turnovers a game extra is minimal given SoS, plays/game, ppg contributing

According to Sagarin, UM didn't have a strong schedule last year and it was no where close to top 15. In fact, I thought it was the weakest in the conference, according to Sagarin. Also, take out UW and then see how the SOS drops.

As for turnovers, UM still had too many fumbles this year, and the fumbles absolutely killed us in the games we lost.

And, if you don't think playing harder, hitting harder, and tackling better, all of which can be measured, is important data for football, then we can't help you.

Legitimately NONE of those things can be measured... what the f***. Are you actually trolling? Find me one stat anywhere on a players “tackling better.” There are grades that humans give based off of perception. That is not how things are measured. I know you’re a law guy but you’re actually just out of your realm. I wouldn’t argue law with you so don’t argue science with me. You’re just embarassing yourself

I know the game. I know that turnovers, tackles, toughness, playing physical, etc. are very important to the game. You obviously don't know the game. I am talking football. Science isn't football. You are the one embarrassing yourself.

Why don't you provide us the Sagarin SOS for FCS teams and the conference last year.

You were talking analytics. From point one. Some people would argue from their bias', like you, that the team is better. Fine, analytics disagree. My whole point. Analytics don't give a damn about your Bobby bias. Analytics also don't take in parameters like, "Tackling harder." :lol: Which, believe it or not old man, is not measurable.

Sagarin doesn't have a SoS as we know it. But he has a "schedule" rank. This is supplied by much more complicated parameters than I'm sure you will grasp. His "schedule" rank and traditional SoS are VERY different. You can easily see this by comparing schedules such as Weber State and Montana last year. Notice the skew on things because of playoffs?

 

[ordigger]

If that’s the case, then I’d suggest he was saying coaching was the issue.

Two players mentioned to me even before this season that Dante Olson not playing as a RS soph was just an example of deeper coaching issues.

Weird, that his own teammates didn’t see him play every game last year.

Special teams, but count the starts and minutes he played at LB in 2017. Then tell me wasn't good enough.

He had the misfortune of playing behind our deepest group. The three ahead of him were studs themselves.

 

[ordigger]

This is actually super funny. You really aren’t as close to the team as you claim you are or you might not claim That I don’t understand the game... yikes

If you don't understand the interceptions and turnovers are very important in football, then I'm sorry but none of us can help you. That in and of itself shows that you don't know much about football. See how much support you can get for your view that interceptions and turnovers are't important.

I can tell by how you post and what you say that you are not very knowledgeable about the game of football.

I have never said I am close to the team.

Every post you make is how close you are to “people on the team.” Maybe one day you should ask some coaches you’re so close to if they know a “lesbian computer lady.” I think you might be surprised

I know most of the coaches and have met all of them, and know lots of current and former people associated with the program, but I have never said I am "close to the team". Do you think people on egriz don't know or suspect who you are?

At one point I thought she was your daughter or niece. . Lol

 

[kemajic]

Two players mentioned to me even before this season that Dante Olson not playing as a RS soph was just an example of deeper coaching issues.

Weird, that his own teammates didn’t see him play every game last year.

Special teams, but count the starts and minutes he played at LB in 2017. Then tell me wasn't good enough.

He had the misfortune of playing behind our deepest group. The three ahead of him were studs themselves.

Vika was a stud LB? Where did he play this year? Only Buss of that group is even in the same league as Olson.

 

[kemajic]

Every analytic doesn't argue against his argument. Played harder. Played more physical. Tackled better. Way fewer picks. Fewer turnovers. More yards per play. Fewer yards given up per play. More leads going into 4th quarter. Ha.

None of those things are analytical ways to analyze a teams success.

Yes, they are if you know anything about football. They create confidence for the future since we started but 3 seniors. I do not remember a commitment in 2017 like the one we saw trailing with two minutes to go last Saturday. I feel very good about where this program is now. I did not after 2017. We were 7-4 and never beat a decent team, so I say BS to your claim that 2018 was a worse schedule than 2017. One of the teams we beat is in the second round of the playoffs.

Interesting to hear from you again after you disappeared. How about that bet? Everything you listed is emotion and bias... not analytics...

Also your argument about the 2nd round playoff team. Cool, that’s 1 round farther than NAU got last year who we also beat. Legitimately, this actually argues in your favor of team success. Surprised someone found a metric that is used

A yes, quarterbackless NAU game in which they flamed out. Did your analytics recall NAU losing at home to scholarshipless San Diego 41-10 in the play-in game?

I never disappeared; what bet?

 

[bgbigdog]

Banks started off last season like he was an all conference player, but seemed to disappear @ times. He and Buss were both second team all-BSC. Vika clearly struggled in relief of Strahm, who somehow managed a third team nod with a suspension. People forget that Olson was Buss’s backup. Buss, the guy who was noted this season as being a candidate for an FBS award because of his performance last season.

It’s not that they didn’t know about his athleticism. Olson was second team all-BSC special teams & no doubt should have been first option @ just about any position as backup. But I’d also suggest they didn’t pay much attention to the lb’s as a group of players given their coach was also the special teams coach. Had his hands full & that got so bad that guys like Akem, JLM & Curran wound up in coverage teams.

 

[kemajic]

Banks started off last season like he was an all conference player, but seemed to disappear @ times. He and Buss were both second team all-BSC. Vika clearly struggled in relief of Strahm, who somehow managed a third team nod with a suspension. People forget that Olson was Buss’s backup. Buss, the guy who was noted this season as being a candidate for an FBS award because of his performance last season.

It’s not that they didn’t know about his athleticism. Olson was second team all-BSC special teams & no doubt should have been first option @ just about any position as backup. But I’d also suggest they didn’t pay much attention to the lb’s as a group of players given their coach was also the special teams coach. Had his hands full & that got so bad that guys like Akem, JLM & Curran wound up in coverage teams.

Good points. Olson should have been ahead of Vika; anyone could see that. Except our DC....

 

[ordigger]

Weird, that his own teammates didn’t see him play every game last year.

Special teams, but count the starts and minutes he played at LB in 2017. Then tell me wasn't good enough.

He had the misfortune of playing behind our deepest group. The three ahead of him were studs themselves.

Vika was a stud LB? Where did he play this year? Only Buss of that group is even in the same league as Olson.

He backed up Buss, who was favorite for DPOY. Olsons numbers would not have been as good this year if Buss was not hurt. Banks was leading tackler last year, and Strahm was the motivational leader. All good players. Btw I was posting last year about how good Olson looked long before anyone on this board was saying much.

Perhaps you should now focus on why your man crush also didn’t play his best players this year. All coaches do it, so whining about Stitt doing it is a bit hypocritical

 

[PlayerRep]

If you don't understand the interceptions and turnovers are very important in football, then I'm sorry but none of us can help you. That in and of itself shows that you don't know much about football. See how much support you can get for your view that interceptions and turnovers are't important.

I can tell by how you post and what you say that you are not very knowledgeable about the game of football.

I have never said I am close to the team.

Every post you make is how close you are to “people on the team.” Maybe one day you should ask some coaches you’re so close to if they know a “lesbian computer lady.” I think you might be surprised

I know most of the coaches and have met all of them, and know lots of current and former people associated with the program, but I have never said I am "close to the team". Do you think people on egriz don't know or suspect who you are?

At one point I thought she was your daughter or niece. . Lol

I have always like Eriul, and usually tried to give her support, or even extra support. Thought I'd test her a bit yesterday, and she what she had in the tank. She did fine. My daughter, the NYC lawyer and rugby player, would have blasted me out of the ballpark. She's smart and tough, and a very good tackler. Ha.

 

[AZGrizFan]

Weird, that his own teammates didn’t see him play every game last year.

Special teams, but count the starts and minutes he played at LB in 2017. Then tell me wasn't good enough.

He had the misfortune of playing behind our deepest group. The three ahead of him were studs themselves.

Vika was a stud LB? Where did he play this year? Only Buss of that group is even in the same league as Olson.

You're right. But it wasn't Buss who led the conference in tackles last year.

 

[AZGrizFan]

I do love how, 13 months after his dismissal, Stitt is still so much in people's heads here that we can have a 9 page thread dedicated to him. :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[PlayerRep]

Where was Olson last year when Vika was substituting for Strahm?

Hope Vika is going back to linebacker. Seemed odd to have a bunch of fullbacks this year, and then use only TE's in the backfield. I saw Vika make a few nice plays in some pre-season practices this year. I asked then if he was going back to LB, and he said probably not.

 

[PlayerRep]

I do love how, 13 months after his dismissal, Stitt is still so much in people's heads here that we can have a 9 page thread dedicated to him. :lol: :lol: :lol:

It's mainly because people like you and CDA keep bringing him up, if only indirectly, in so many of your posts. Only 12 months, not 13 months, by the way. Also, do you think Stitt's 3 years at UM and recruits left on the team this year, had no influence on the team and results this year?