Hauck back to Montana?

[griz5700]

Plus 1 E.G.!!! Great post!!!

Ahhh, the good old days. When the press was filled with Griz players in trouble with the law. When the program was a running joke for its third grade tantrum with teenagers from the college newspaper. Can't wait to recreate an egotistical self-centered culture where student athletes feel they are better than anyone else, deserve special treatment and are above the law.

As E.G. pointed out, he consistently makes immature, ill-advised and SELFISH decisions and doesn't have the capacity to be a good leader or someone that you want shaping young people. f*** Bobby and his ridiculous cult of personality.

Enrollment was at all time highs during those horrible Hauck years. Of course that is not the sole reason, but winning helps everything.

 

[ORGUNGRIZ]

So has anyone given this a thought. Stirs contract is up at the end of this season correct? Is there a chance maybe dehind closed doors he has told UM he does not want or plan to renew his contract with UM? Maybe he has his feelers out as well and has a line on other options. Or maybe he realizes he might be in over his head at the FCS level!

I think Bobby is wise to make it be know he has interest in being a head coach again.

Look UM has a 14 million dollar project wrapping up for this season and the last thing UM needs wants and can afford is a coach that is only able of producing 6-5, 7-4 teams. Many might not like it but they need a Bobby to run a dominant winning program. I for one am all for it!

Engstrom and Kent knew exactly what they fired in Stitt. Look at his record at Mines. Not great in all reality. He probably did as well as he did because he could recruit super smart kids to go to engineering school that had some talent and played against schools with lessor athletes.

At the FCS level Stitt has not really been able to get his "magic" offense going. Granted he had to recruit to fills spots for his offense. However I think the talent level at other FCS schools is to equal to have his offense work.

Brady did what he could in Stitta offense but he was clearly a better pocket passer. Stitt had Willy Flug (sp) but somehow he was not talented or smart enough to run the offense? Look what the kid did in high school in Oregon in an spread offense. Yet Brady could run the offense better?

It will be very interesting to see how this season plays out..

 

[gotgame75]

...maybe the Hauck/Washington's are putting pressure on Haslem to let him know Stitt is out if he can't produce...they have a lot of money invested in the university..yes money talks!

I can guarantee you that the Washingtons are not currently putting pressure on Haslem on behalf of Hauck.

 

[gotgame75]

Engstrom and Kent knew exactly what they fired in Stitt. Look at his record at Mines. Not great in all reality. He probably did as well as he did because he could recruit super smart kids to go to engineering school that had some talent and played against schools with lessor athletes.

At the FCS level Stitt has not really been able to get his "magic" offense going. Granted he had to recruit to fills spots for his offense. However I think the talent level at other FCS schools is to equal to have his offense work.

:lol: Interesting logic here. So much wrong with this I don't know where to begin.

 

[signedbewildered]

So has anyone given this a thought. Stirs contract is up at the end of this season correct? Is there a chance maybe dehind closed doors he has told UM he does not want or plan to renew his contract with UM? Maybe he has his feelers out as well and has a line on other options. Or maybe he realizes he might be in over his head at the FCS level!

I think Bobby is wise to make it be know he has interest in being a head coach again.

Look UM has a 14 million dollar project wrapping up for this season and the last thing UM needs wants and can afford is a coach that is only able of producing 6-5, 7-4 teams. Many might not like it but they need a Bobby to run a dominant winning program. I for one am all for it!

Engstrom and Kent knew exactly what they fired in Stitt. Look at his record at Mines. Not great in all reality. He probably did as well as he did because he could recruit super smart kids to go to engineering school that had some talent and played against schools with lessor athletes.

At the FCS level Stitt has not really been able to get his "magic" offense going. Granted he had to recruit to fills spots for his offense. However I think the talent level at other FCS schools is to equal to have his offense work.

Brady did what he could in Stitta offense but he was clearly a better pocket passer. Stitt had Willy Flug (sp) but somehow he was not talented or smart enough to run the offense? Look what the kid did in high school in Oregon in an spread offense. Yet Brady could run the offense better?

It will be very interesting to see how this season plays out..

No

 

[gotgame75]

Got game....Are you referring to the same BOR that allowed Engstrom to destroy UM before firing him, then hired him back as a professor? I wouldn't bet the farm on them taking a position against Bobby.

I would. The BoR and UM admin (for all of their "wisdom") are acutely aware of the reality of the Hauck tenure - lots of wins, but rampant off-the-field issues that were the foundation of the Johnson/Pfulgrad scandal that came later. That is why, despite actively campaigning for the job when we hired Stitt, he was never seriously considered by Haslam.

 

[grizfan406]

3 years ago when the Hauck returns rumors started to swirl I was like, "Meh." If we had re-hired Hauck I would have been ok with it but we knew exactly what that would have been all about. We had seen it all before. There would have been no mystery whatsoever. When they hired stitt I was super excited because it's a wild card. I would rather take the chance on a D2 coach who has a proven winning record, an exciting offensive strategy, and an ability to recruit at a top tier academic college and still win. Then I started to watch and listen to the interviews and I was sold. Stitt said in one of his first interviews that he wants the best O-line in the country. He has his priorities straight.

 

[Stop_HammerTime69]

It's only been 2 years. 2 seasons. At every level, the good coaches take a few years to get things together. You cannot fix the problems that Pflugrad and Delaney had in 2 years. I mean seriously, look at a team like Colorado. Mac took 6 seasons and Colorado was bad, and they won 10 games. Tom Osbourne took almost a decade before he could win the big game in the 90s, and he had one of the most impressive dynasties in football history. Things don't just instantly change. It takes time. Sometimes you can work with the talent the previous guy left for a year, and then you need a rebuilding year or two just to get things the way you want.

There's no way Hauck could just come back and replicate what he did, which was phenomenal. He had so many talent advantages that simply are not there at the moment.

In all honesty, Don Read was the guy who did the hard work and got the program to where it was in the late 90s and early-mid 2000s. After he left, the grounwork was there and it became a nice car where you pass the keys to the next guy and tell him don't crash it. The program could be passé from one guy to the next and we got really lucky with a string of good hires. The scandal and sanctions put on the Griz were the car crash. So you have to rebuild. That takes patience. This isn't where the talents in place and the next guy can just instantly win the Big Sky every year. I'm sorry, but UM's just not at that elite level. YET.

 

[signedbewildered]

".....He had so many talent advantages that simply are not there at the moment."

Define "so many." He had some dudes at some positions, we have some dudes at others.

O-line and QB are the biggest question marks IMO this season.

 

[Stop_HammerTime69]

".....He had so many talent advantages that simply are not there at the moment."

Define "so many." He had some dudes at some positions, we have some dudes at others.

O-line and QB are the biggest question marks IMO this season.

Hauck had the talent in place to simply walk in and win the conference. He didn't have a scandal that still loomed over the program. Hauck was following a series of successful coaches who had already brought in the talent and made recruiting much easier.

Let me ask you this: Which would you rather follow and which would be easier to take to the big stage and experience massive success with?

Two coaches who went a combined 78-18 and won the last 5 consecutive conference titles, with a national title in there

OR

two coaches who went a combined 37-21, one conference title, and a scandal-ridden tenure resulting in sanctions

The school itself put in a scholarship reduction for football. Stitt wasn't even competing with a full scholarship roster (the scholarship reduction ended this past season). It's not a fair comparison. The situation Stitt got into was very, very different from Hauck.

 

[signedbewildered]

I agree (almost) 100% with everything you are saying. I was questioning the "....so many talent advantages that simply are not there at the moment." part solely.

Apples to oranges, I know but this years and especially next years team isn't exactly chopped liver. Unless a disaster this year, I'm all for giving Stitt 18. You can only use the talent excuse for so many years.

 

[Stop_HammerTime69]

I agree (almost) 100% with everything you are saying. I was questioning the "....so many talent advantages that simply are not there at the moment." part solely.

Apples to oranges, I know but this years and especially next years team isn't exactly chopped liver. Unless a disaster this year, I'm all for giving Stitt 18. You can only use the talent excuse for so many years.

Oh yeah, definitely. I just think it's worth pointing out that everything Stitt has done has been without a full roster and more difficult recruiting. Hauck didn't have to deal with that.

While I definitely think we'll do better this year, our best this season will probably be 8-3, with losses to Washington, Eastern Washington, and a crazy random one. Stitt just brought in his first full class, and I'm guessing some will probably redshirt. It will probably take until 18 or 19 till we see any results, and it would take just about any decent coach that long at best, given the circumstances.

And yeah, the talent excuse gets old, but right now it's still relevant. We really just have to be patient, which sucks, but if we want to where we were, we gotta wait for a bit.

 

[griz5700]

I agree (almost) 100% with everything you are saying. I was questioning the "....so many talent advantages that simply are not there at the moment." part solely.

Apples to oranges, I know but this years and especially next years team isn't exactly chopped liver. Unless a disaster this year, I'm all for giving Stitt 18. You can only use the talent excuse for so many years.

Oh yeah, definitely. I just think it's worth pointing out that everything Stitt has done has been without a full roster and more difficult recruiting. Hauck didn't have to deal with that.

While I definitely think we'll do better this year, our best this season will probably be 8-3, with losses to Washington, Eastern Washington, and a crazy random one. Stitt just brought in his first full class, and I'm guessing some will probably redshirt. It will probably take until 18 or 19 till we see any results, and it would take just about any decent coach that long at best, given the circumstances.

And yeah, the talent excuse gets old, but right now it's still relevant. We really just have to be patient, which sucks, but if we want to where we were, we gotta wait for a bit.

"More difficult recruiting"? Please elaborate.

Difficult recruiting is associated with any team in the same conference as Montana and Wa-Griz.

It's not as much recruiting as it is coaching. Although unlike most, I haven't been impressed with Stitt's recruits. The best players he has coached were recruited by a previous staff.

 

[Fat Bruno]

The idea of Hauck coming back has the same appeal as a second Trump term. Punks creating punkery all around them and sewing the seeds for the disasters to come ... both embarrassments to the institutions they represent. You couldn’t watch a Hauck half-time interview without cringing at his churlish, childish performance.

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

Difficult recruiting is associated with any team in the same conference as Montana and Wa-Griz.

Bullshit. You are living in the past.

 

[Stop_HammerTime69]

I agree (almost) 100% with everything you are saying. I was questioning the "....so many talent advantages that simply are not there at the moment." part solely.

Apples to oranges, I know but this years and especially next years team isn't exactly chopped liver. Unless a disaster this year, I'm all for giving Stitt 18. You can only use the talent excuse for so many years.

Oh yeah, definitely. I just think it's worth pointing out that everything Stitt has done has been without a full roster and more difficult recruiting. Hauck didn't have to deal with that.

While I definitely think we'll do better this year, our best this season will probably be 8-3, with losses to Washington, Eastern Washington, and a crazy random one. Stitt just brought in his first full class, and I'm guessing some will probably redshirt. It will probably take until 18 or 19 till we see any results, and it would take just about any decent coach that long at best, given the circumstances.

And yeah, the talent excuse gets old, but right now it's still relevant. We really just have to be patient, which sucks, but if we want to where we were, we gotta wait for a bit.

"More difficult recruiting"? Please elaborate.

Difficult recruiting is associated with any team in the same conference as Montana and Wa-Griz.

It's not as much recruiting as it is coaching. Although unlike most, I haven't been impressed with Stitt's recruits. The best players he has coached were recruited by a previous staff.

I mean, recruiting to an FCS school isn't the easiest thing in the world, especially in a place as remote as Montana. Yes, there is absolutely name appeal when you're good, and bringing a kid to WaGriz is a huge advantage, but Montana had a self-imposed scholarship reduction, with a nasty book and media coverage about them over something as serious as rape. It doesn't help that we often compete with Mountain West teams for kids. Frankly, I think it's a testament to Stitt's skill he got a 3* QB here immediately following the removal of a scholarship reduction.

 

[Ursus1]

Difficult recruiting is associated with any team in the same conference as Montana and Wa-Griz.

Bullshit. You are living in the past.

I agree...even the Scats are beating out Griz on many. Until the Griz can start winning the conference and making deep runs the recruiting will be tough. Kids would love to play at Wa-Griz IF they are winning to boot. Kids don't want a great stadium and be on a mediocre team. EWU has shitty facility but wins....we need to get the wins and recruiting will follow

 

[zengriz]

...with the talent on last years team...
...hauck doesn't lose to the catz any way shape...
...beat the catz and the griz move onto the playoffs...
...then who knows..but we don't have this taste in our mouth...

... :twocents: ...

 

[griz5700]

Difficult recruiting is associated with any team in the same conference as Montana and Wa-Griz.

Bullshit. You are living in the past.

You're exaggerating the present.

You make excuses for mediocrity. UM has vast recruiting advantages over its conference peers.

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

Difficult recruiting is associated with any team in the same conference as Montana and Wa-Griz.

Bullshit. You are living in the past.

You're exaggerating the present.

You make excuses for mediocrity. UM has vast recruiting advantages over its conference peers.

Actually, mediocrity is one of the big issues. But keep your head in the clouds.