I can't believe I'm hearing this

[PlayerRep]

2. Feel free to tell us who can or has won at UNLV. John Robinson, former USC and NFL coach, couldn't and didn't. Do you really not think that Hauck's years at UNLV are more relevant than 7 years at Montana? If you do, then you should just stop posting, and you are a football idiot.

t.

Most just assume that you can't win at UNLV, but while they were an independent (1968-81), 3 different coaches won, there and quite often as a collective (100-51-3).

Bill Ireland 1968–1972 26–23–1 .530
Ron Meyer 1973–1975 27–8–0 .771
Tony Knap 1976–1981 47–20–2 .695

Once the new Raiders facility is built, and they get to start using it - I can only suspect things will go back to their glory days.

Thanks. Good to see that they were able to win 4 decades ago. Not much as changed in college football since then. I should have said no one has been able to win there since FBS and FCS were created. Ha.

 

[Eriul]

I will say posters are very hypocritical when it comes to players actions. Everyone here will blame the coaches when the players don’t execute and say that it’s the coaches responsibility to get players ready but then say the coaches are not responsible for the players off the field

What?

Having control over players' on-field actions is based on something called "coaching," which is done by a team of coaches called a "staff." This staff, then, oversees these players' actions, physically, and critiques them while the players perform. In this scenario, holding coaches accountable for what is usually repeat actions is sensible, and most coaches take that on willfully.

Having control over players' actions off of and often very far away from the field of play/practice is another matter entirely. What the coach(es) can be held to account for on that front, however, is the response to those bad actions. To say that that is hypocritical is poorly reasoned.

I disagree. I do not believe a college coaches job begins and ends on the field.

My point is simply this. If the coaches are responsible for everything the players do on the field then that needs to hold true for off the field too. I don't believe they are...but many people on this forum think coaches control every single player on every play

how exactly does he control what they do off the field. Should he build a army style barracks and have them all sleep there year round? Make a rule you can only leave to go to class and practice? Tuck them in every night at 10pm sharp? plant tracking devices in them? At some point the players need to be held accountable for their actions and no one else. If i get a DUI tonight should my boss lose his job because he recruited me and I misbehaved? no.

All he can do is do his best to encourage good behavior, and warn them of the consequences of their actions. The only thing the coach can be held responsible for are his actions dealing with the bad behavior. In 7 out of 8 cases the players in question were removed from the team. What else do you want from this guy? Jeaze

I guess I wasn't clear when I said...I don't believe they are.

I think most people would agree that coaches are not just leaders for these young men just on the field but off the field too. They are held responsible if the students do not hold good grades, participate in team events, etc.

The coaches role does not end once the game ends for these young men. My argument is saying...IF you are going to say that the coach is directly responsible for everything the player does on the field(which I don't say at all but MANY on this board do), then you have to make that same assessment off the field. Which is obviously absurd.

My overall point was trying to say that we blame the coach for every mistake that happens on the field. "HE SHOULD HAVE PREPARED THEM MORE!!!!!!" This happens every fucking week. We credit the players when they do well and blame the coaches when they do poorly. Then when the player makes a mistake off the field it's the players fault and not the coaches fault at all. This is extremely hypocritical and like almost anything in life the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

Both the players and the coaches are responsible in their own ways for what happens on and off the field.

 

[MTGRZ]

Bobby Hauck is turning into a demagogue.

To many, he can do no wrong. When someone points out a valid criticism, his supporters here will not listen. They become labeled, not as fellow Griz fans, who simply disagree, but as Bobcat trolls, sent from Bozeman to kick the university while its down.

Bring up his record at UNLV, and its dismissed as "Oh that's just UNLV. No one can win there."

Bring up that the offense he ran here might be outdated and that the Big Sky isn't the same anymore. "Oh, I'm sure he's learned and changed his schemes."

Bring up his relationship with the media. "Oh that's just a pushy reporter who needed to be shut down."

Bring up the fact that his teams fielded players who were frequently on the wrong side of the law, and not just for small charges, but manslaughter and breaking & entering. "Oh that's wrong. Hauck isn't responsible for that. Is he supposed to be responsible for what college kids do? What about the other guys on his team?"

Bring up that his offensive coordinator messed up a massive rape scandal. "Oh that wasn't Hauck's doing. You aren't the reason something happened once you leave somewhere. It's not like your actions and the precedents that you set can have consequences once you leave. And Pflu got screwed."

And after any of those responses, comes the deflection. "What about Stitt?" Well, guess what? I'm not talking about Stitt. As of November 20, 2017, Bob Stitt became irrelevant to Montana football. I'm talking about Hauck and his flaws.

When a crime reporter publishes about the trends and incidents that happened during and immediately after Hauck's tenure involving players he brought to Missoula, he is publicly crucifed for doing his job.

The only comments on Hauck anyone on here listens to are the ones where it seems to be endless praise. Only old players' accounts and the odd reporter who published a puff piece seems to be taken seriously.

This is very troubling, not because some of those responses aren't valid, but the dismissive tone, anger, and defensiveness that comes with it, as if Hauck coming here is a part of some peoples' identity, as if it is a personal attack on them. Those first two responses are absolutely valid. UNLV is tough to win at. He could have learned over the years and his offense isn't the same. But those last ones, that don't even acknowledge that there was ever a problem, that's the part that worries me.

Now, before I wrap up, I want to make one thing very clear. I'm an avid college football fan and I love the Montana Grizzlies. I want nothing more than to see the team succeed and show how small and pathetic the rest of the conference is. I want nothing more than to see a packed Washington-Grizzly Stadium in the middle of December in a raging blizzard. I want nothing more than to see the Bobcats get quieter and quieter with each passing loss to us. And I'll certainly admit that his 80-17 record speaks for itself.

But I do not want a figure who is held high on a pedestal, as if he is above any criticism. If he comes here, and fails to produce better than Stitt, or his players consistently end up in the news for criminal activity, both of which are very real possibilities, then we do not want a figure with supporters who support him more than the program itself.

:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :thumb:

See my recent point by point post. You really don't have a clue, do you.

I'm sorry your ego doesn't let other opinions enter into your head. Your dismissal of other's views makes you sound like a conceited old has-been. The world moves fast, try to keep up.

 

[CFallsGriz]

What?

Having control over players' on-field actions is based on something called "coaching," which is done by a team of coaches called a "staff." This staff, then, oversees these players' actions, physically, and critiques them while the players perform. In this scenario, holding coaches accountable for what is usually repeat actions is sensible, and most coaches take that on willfully.

Having control over players' actions off of and often very far away from the field of play/practice is another matter entirely. What the coach(es) can be held to account for on that front, however, is the response to those bad actions. To say that that is hypocritical is poorly reasoned.

I disagree. I do not believe a college coaches job begins and ends on the field.

My point is simply this. If the coaches are responsible for everything the players do on the field then that needs to hold true for off the field too. I don't believe they are...but many people on this forum think coaches control every single player on every play

how exactly does he control what they do off the field. Should he build a army style barracks and have them all sleep there year round? Make a rule you can only leave to go to class and practice? Tuck them in every night at 10pm sharp? plant tracking devices in them? At some point the players need to be held accountable for their actions and no one else. If i get a DUI tonight should my boss lose his job because he recruited me and I misbehaved? no.

All he can do is do his best to encourage good behavior, and warn them of the consequences of their actions. The only thing the coach can be held responsible for are his actions dealing with the bad behavior. In 7 out of 8 cases the players in question were removed from the team. What else do you want from this guy? Jeaze

I guess I wasn't clear when I said...I don't believe they are.

I think most people would agree that coaches are not just leaders for these young men just on the field but off the field too. They are held responsible if the students do not hold good grades, participate in team events, etc.

The coaches role does not end once the game ends for these young men. My argument is saying...IF you are going to say that the coach is directly responsible for everything the player does on the field(which I don't say at all but MANY on this board do), then you have to make that same assessment off the field. Which is obviously absurd.

My overall point was trying to say that we blame the coach for every mistake that happens on the field. "HE SHOULD HAVE PREPARED THEM MORE!!!!!!" This happens every f***[*] week. We credit the players when they do well and blame the coaches when they do poorly. Then when the player makes a mistake off the field it's the players fault and not the coaches fault at all. This is extremely hypocritical and like almost anything in life the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

Both the players and the coaches are responsible in their own ways for what happens on and off the field.

This is a bullsh*t blanket statement. Speaking for myself, I don't say that. I see people putting it on the individuals all the time. It seems like you're just being critical of people on here because that's primarily what you do when you log on.

Also, you used the word "we," so... Just sayin

 

[PlayerRep]

Bobby Hauck is turning into a demagogue.

To many, he can do no wrong. When someone points out a valid criticism, his supporters here will not listen. They become labeled, not as fellow Griz fans, who simply disagree, but as Bobcat trolls, sent from Bozeman to kick the university while its down.

Bring up his record at UNLV, and its dismissed as "Oh that's just UNLV. No one can win there."

Bring up that the offense he ran here might be outdated and that the Big Sky isn't the same anymore. "Oh, I'm sure he's learned and changed his schemes."

Bring up his relationship with the media. "Oh that's just a pushy reporter who needed to be shut down."

Bring up the fact that his teams fielded players who were frequently on the wrong side of the law, and not just for small charges, but manslaughter and breaking & entering. "Oh that's wrong. Hauck isn't responsible for that. Is he supposed to be responsible for what college kids do? What about the other guys on his team?"

Bring up that his offensive coordinator messed up a massive rape scandal. "Oh that wasn't Hauck's doing. You aren't the reason something happened once you leave somewhere. It's not like your actions and the precedents that you set can have consequences once you leave. And Pflu got screwed."

And after any of those responses, comes the deflection. "What about Stitt?" Well, guess what? I'm not talking about Stitt. As of November 20, 2017, Bob Stitt became irrelevant to Montana football. I'm talking about Hauck and his flaws.

When a crime reporter publishes about the trends and incidents that happened during and immediately after Hauck's tenure involving players he brought to Missoula, he is publicly crucifed for doing his job.

The only comments on Hauck anyone on here listens to are the ones where it seems to be endless praise. Only old players' accounts and the odd reporter who published a puff piece seems to be taken seriously.

This is very troubling, not because some of those responses aren't valid, but the dismissive tone, anger, and defensiveness that comes with it, as if Hauck coming here is a part of some peoples' identity, as if it is a personal attack on them. Those first two responses are absolutely valid. UNLV is tough to win at. He could have learned over the years and his offense isn't the same. But those last ones, that don't even acknowledge that there was ever a problem, that's the part that worries me.

Now, before I wrap up, I want to make one thing very clear. I'm an avid college football fan and I love the Montana Grizzlies. I want nothing more than to see the team succeed and show how small and pathetic the rest of the conference is. I want nothing more than to see a packed Washington-Grizzly Stadium in the middle of December in a raging blizzard. I want nothing more than to see the Bobcats get quieter and quieter with each passing loss to us. And I'll certainly admit that his 80-17 record speaks for itself.

But I do not want a figure who is held high on a pedestal, as if he is above any criticism. If he comes here, and fails to produce better than Stitt, or his players consistently end up in the news for criminal activity, both of which are very real possibilities, then we do not want a figure with supporters who support him more than the program itself.

:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :thumb:

See my recent point by point post. You really don't have a clue, do you.

I'm sorry your ego doesn't let other opinions enter into your head. Your dismissal of other's views makes you sound like a conceited old has-been. The world moves fast, try to keep up.

First, your "facts" are wrong, not just your opinions.

Second, I'm sorry but I don't give particiaption ribbons for opinions. If I believe opinions are incorrect, or know they are incorrect, I often say so. Sorry, that your ego/pyche is so fragile than you can't take someone disagreeing with you.

 

[MTGRZ]

:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :thumb:

See my recent point by point post. You really don't have a clue, do you.

I'm sorry your ego doesn't let other opinions enter into your head. Your dismissal of other's views makes you sound like a conceited old has-been. The world moves fast, try to keep up.

First, your "facts" are wrong, not just your opinions.

Second, I'm sorry but I don't give particiaption ribbons for opinions. If I believe opinions are incorrect, or know they are incorrect, I often say so. Sorry, that your ego/pyche is so fragile than you can't take someone disagreeing with you.

What are you talking about? I didn't post anything but :clap: and :thumb: You assume I can't take it when someone disagrees with me- that is far from true. In fact, if you think about my statement (that we should entertain others opinions to form a well rounded point of view) I am all for disagreements. Disagreements help us see all sides of an issue and form well supported conclusions. You are the one who jumped at someone supporting a view other than yours.

By the way, it's, "psyche".

 

[Eriul]

I disagree. I do not believe a college coaches job begins and ends on the field.

My point is simply this. If the coaches are responsible for everything the players do on the field then that needs to hold true for off the field too. I don't believe they are...but many people on this forum think coaches control every single player on every play

how exactly does he control what they do off the field. Should he build a army style barracks and have them all sleep there year round? Make a rule you can only leave to go to class and practice? Tuck them in every night at 10pm sharp? plant tracking devices in them? At some point the players need to be held accountable for their actions and no one else. If i get a DUI tonight should my boss lose his job because he recruited me and I misbehaved? no.

All he can do is do his best to encourage good behavior, and warn them of the consequences of their actions. The only thing the coach can be held responsible for are his actions dealing with the bad behavior. In 7 out of 8 cases the players in question were removed from the team. What else do you want from this guy? Jeaze

I guess I wasn't clear when I said...I don't believe they are.

I think most people would agree that coaches are not just leaders for these young men just on the field but off the field too. They are held responsible if the students do not hold good grades, participate in team events, etc.

The coaches role does not end once the game ends for these young men. My argument is saying...IF you are going to say that the coach is directly responsible for everything the player does on the field(which I don't say at all but MANY on this board do), then you have to make that same assessment off the field. Which is obviously absurd.

My overall point was trying to say that we blame the coach for every mistake that happens on the field. "HE SHOULD HAVE PREPARED THEM MORE!!!!!!" This happens every f***[*] week. We credit the players when they do well and blame the coaches when they do poorly. Then when the player makes a mistake off the field it's the players fault and not the coaches fault at all. This is extremely hypocritical and like almost anything in life the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

Both the players and the coaches are responsible in their own ways for what happens on and off the field.

This is a bullsh*t blanket statement. Speaking for myself, I don't say that. I see people putting it on the individuals all the time. It seems like you're just being critical of people on here because that's primarily what you do when you log on.

Also, you used the word "we," so... Just sayin

Hahaha wow. I haven’t laughed that hard reading on egriz in a while

 

[CFallsGriz]

how exactly does he control what they do off the field. Should he build a army style barracks and have them all sleep there year round? Make a rule you can only leave to go to class and practice? Tuck them in every night at 10pm sharp? plant tracking devices in them? At some point the players need to be held accountable for their actions and no one else. If i get a DUI tonight should my boss lose his job because he recruited me and I misbehaved? no.

All he can do is do his best to encourage good behavior, and warn them of the consequences of their actions. The only thing the coach can be held responsible for are his actions dealing with the bad behavior. In 7 out of 8 cases the players in question were removed from the team. What else do you want from this guy? Jeaze

I guess I wasn't clear when I said...I don't believe they are.

I think most people would agree that coaches are not just leaders for these young men just on the field but off the field too. They are held responsible if the students do not hold good grades, participate in team events, etc.

The coaches role does not end once the game ends for these young men. My argument is saying...IF you are going to say that the coach is directly responsible for everything the player does on the field(which I don't say at all but MANY on this board do), then you have to make that same assessment off the field. Which is obviously absurd.

My overall point was trying to say that we blame the coach for every mistake that happens on the field. "HE SHOULD HAVE PREPARED THEM MORE!!!!!!" This happens every f***[*] week. We credit the players when they do well and blame the coaches when they do poorly. Then when the player makes a mistake off the field it's the players fault and not the coaches fault at all. This is extremely hypocritical and like almost anything in life the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

Both the players and the coaches are responsible in their own ways for what happens on and off the field.

This is a bullsh*t blanket statement. Speaking for myself, I don't say that. I see people putting it on the individuals all the time. It seems like you're just being critical of people on here because that's primarily what you do when you log on.

Also, you used the word "we," so... Just sayin

Hahaha wow. I haven’t laughed that hard reading on egriz in a while

Your rebuttal sucks, if you can call it that.

Your credibility is waning.

Hahaha wow.

 

[grizrgood]

What?

Having control over players' on-field actions is based on something called "coaching," which is done by a team of coaches called a "staff." This staff, then, oversees these players' actions, physically, and critiques them while the players perform. In this scenario, holding coaches accountable for what is usually repeat actions is sensible, and most coaches take that on willfully.

Having control over players' actions off of and often very far away from the field of play/practice is another matter entirely. What the coach(es) can be held to account for on that front, however, is the response to those bad actions. To say that that is hypocritical is poorly reasoned.

I disagree. I do not believe a college coaches job begins and ends on the field.

My point is simply this. If the coaches are responsible for everything the players do on the field then that needs to hold true for off the field too. I don't believe they are...but many people on this forum think coaches control every single player on every play

how exactly does he control what they do off the field. Should he build a army style barracks and have them all sleep there year round? Make a rule you can only leave to go to class and practice? Tuck them in every night at 10pm sharp? plant tracking devices in them? At some point the players need to be held accountable for their actions and no one else. If i get a DUI tonight should my boss lose his job because he recruited me and I misbehaved? no.

All he can do is do his best to encourage good behavior, and warn them of the consequences of their actions. The only thing the coach can be held responsible for are his actions dealing with the bad behavior. In 7 out of 8 cases the players in question were removed from the team. What else do you want from this guy? Jeaze

I guess I wasn't clear when I said...I don't believe they are.

I think most people would agree that coaches are not just leaders for these young men just on the field but off the field too. They are held responsible if the students do not hold good grades, participate in team events, etc.

The coaches role does not end once the game ends for these young men. My argument is saying...IF you are going to say that the coach is directly responsible for everything the player does on the field(which I don't say at all but MANY on this board do), then you have to make that same assessment off the field. Which is obviously absurd.

My overall point was trying to say that we blame the coach for every mistake that happens on the field. "HE SHOULD HAVE PREPARED THEM MORE!!!!!!" This happens every f***[*] week. We credit the players when they do well and blame the coaches when they do poorly. Then when the player makes a mistake off the field it's the players fault and not the coaches fault at all. This is extremely hypocritical and like almost anything in life the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

Both the players and the coaches are responsible in their own ways for what happens on and off the field.

:roll:

 

[PlayerRep]

I didn't read any of these last posts, but I support Eriul and like her posting.

 

[CFallsGriz]

I didn't read any of these last posts, but I support Eriul and like her posting.

But you didn't read any counter-arguments...

Huh...

This is where I check out.

 

[Eriul]

I didn't read any of these last posts, but I support Eriul and like her posting.

But you didn't read any counter-arguments...

Huh...

This is where I check out.

Yah I’m done arguing with you when you claim what I said was a blanket statement and then immediately say I come on here just to be critical of people.

You say I lost my credibility but maybe assess your arguments a bit more. As for me, I’m done arguing with you. I’ll just agree to disagree with you

 

[Eriul]

I didn't read any of these last posts, but I support Eriul and like her posting.

Thanks PR. It’s funny because I’ve actually met quite a few posters here. Many of which did not know that I was me and you’d be shocked at how different they are when they’re face to face, not slamming hate behind a keyboard

 

[CFallsGriz]

I didn't read any of these last posts, but I support Eriul and like her posting.

But you didn't read any counter-arguments...

Huh...

This is where I check out.

Yah I’m done arguing with you when you claim what I said was a blanket statement and then immediately say I come on here just to be critical of people.

You say I lost my credibility but maybe assess your arguments a bit more. As for me, I’m done arguing with you. I’ll just agree to disagree with you

I didn't say you "lost your credibility," and I didn't quote you here. You quoted me. I said it was waning because you didn't address the subject at hand, and it absolutely was a blanket statement. You obviously know the other guy. I agreed to disagree awhile ago.

You be you tho...

 

[Eriul]

K

 

[Stop_HammerTime69]

So, I think I’m at a point where I can respond now. Yes, I know that I painted myself into a corner and became a bit of a minority, but frankly, I don’t care. I want you to know that Griz fans are not some monolithic block that supports your ideas whole-heartedly. Some of us recognize that fans have crossed a line when we sexually harass and threaten death against a member of the Missoula community. Some of us recognize that maybe isn’t the best answer, no matter how awesome it might be to rehire our winningest coach for our 37th (lucky number) head coach.