HookedonGriz said:
MTGRZ said:
HookedonGriz said:
So there have been many vocal non-supporters of Stitt, and understandably so. We all want what is best and we want the Griz to win.
With that being said, I have a question for you. How long does Hauck (or the next guy get). I don't think the Griz will be magically better with Hauck or a new coach (although im hopeful) in year 1 and maybe not Year 2. Are you guys going to be this vocal and crying for more change if Griz continue to struggle. Does new coach get same leash as Stitt or is it even shorter?
I think that all hinges on how he (Hauck or someone else) gets the team to play-especially in big games and against rivals. Also, does he recruit well in MT? Griz were obviously out coached and outplayed in '16. That level of coaching and play against the cats is what many feel was unacceptable. I felt the guys played much harder this year against the cats, but the feeling was still that the team was not pushed emotionally by Stitt. The idea that, "if you can't get up for a game like this yourself...." isn't good coaching. Especially in college. These are 18-22 year-old guys, they need the head coach to lead by example. If you looked at the energy level on the sidelines, it was clear to see msu had the excitement, the drive, and the emotion. We need our mojo back. If it is a "Montana guy" who understands the tradition and expectations, I would guess the leash is longer.
Thanks for the feedback, and I'd say that is fair. Kem, Spanky, TCC I'd love to hear your thoughts on this as you've been some of the most vocal on this.
I'm not such a believer in the importance of emotion as above. I'm more a believer in sound schemes and execution. As I posted in another thread, Stitt's offense is not built to sustain drives or control the ball. It is not dependable on the ground. It is not ideal in the RZ. It is focused on the big play, which Bob has found out are more difficult to achieve against good D1 defenses. His program is not built around excellence in defense or special teams. The result is clobbering weak teams but difficulty in winning big games against more worthy opponents. About 60% is all we were ever going to get.
If the choice is Hauck, he is about as opposite as can be. He lives for long drives that get into the end zone. He likes to keep the ball out of the hands of the opponent and his defense fresh. His offense is balanced; you cannot overload. He will go over the top more to keep the defense loose than to live off the results. His defense is sound, conservative, not taking risks like blitzes on 3rd and long. He will run the ball down your throat until you stop it and he will wear you down. He will win the special teams game every time. He has a lot of exposure to the MWC play and I believe he would bring that type of power spread offense. His teams will be prepared and keep mistakes to a minimum. A stronger disciplinarian. His teams always get better as the season progresses. He can attract very solid assistants, recruit well and put players into the NFL. He wins conf. championships and is competitive in the playoffs. Times are different than his first run, but so will he be. We would be lucky to get him back. If not, I hope we get a HC with a similar philosophy.