|
|
Post by coachp83 on Dec 14, 2020 12:00:21 GMT -6
I think as a coach, and I assume I'm not alone, we often look at the 'best' programs to see what they run schematically and see if there is anything we can steal from what they do. The problem with doing that, particularly in college, is that these top teams often have the most talent year in and year out. As the old saying goes, it's not the x's and o's it's the Jimmy's and Joe's. So out of curiosity, what college coach or program out there have you noticed recently doing to the most with the least? Is there a perhaps unrecognized or underappreciated coach or staff that would be worthwhile looking into rather than the Bama's and Clemson's of the world? This doesn't have to be limited to scheme, it could also apply to player development as well. Curious to hear some thoughts on this.
|
|
|
|
Post by Wingtman on Dec 14, 2020 12:52:08 GMT -6
Army, really any of the service academies.
And I don't mean "least" as an insult. Not getting a bunch of 3,4,5 stars. Size restrictions. Grade requirements. The list goes on. Those kids are special, and the fact they are successful is a huge compliment to the coaches and kids.
|
|
|
|
Post by bigmoot2 on Dec 14, 2020 12:54:01 GMT -6
Ive always thought Wofford does a heck of job
|
|
|
|
Post by jgordon1 on Dec 14, 2020 12:56:15 GMT -6
University of Maine...by far
|
|
|
|
Post by Down 'n Out on Dec 14, 2020 13:02:20 GMT -6
In terms of player development and making the most out of what theyve got id say Wisconsin. They put a ton of OLs and TEs in the NFL along with some DLs and LBs. Theyre never in the top 10 recruiting classes but almost always in the top 25 at the end of the season and often in the top 10.
Their recruiting classes average a ranking of 40 for the past decade, imo they do a lot with those ballplayers
|
|
|
|
Post by spos21ram on Dec 14, 2020 13:06:40 GMT -6
Out of the Power 5's its hard not to mention Iowa St. Can add Indiana to the list. Always have to take a backseat to their Basketball team.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachp83 on Dec 14, 2020 13:13:53 GMT -6
Army, really any of the service academies. And I don't mean "least" as an insult. Not getting a bunch of 3,4,5 stars. Size restrictions. Grade requirements. The list goes on. Those kids are special, and the fact they are successful is a huge compliment to the coaches and kids. I'd have to agree... Their success I think is in large part due to the types of kids they get. I don't know the answer to this but what are some examples of their coaches going on to coach at other places? |
|
|
|
Post by coachp83 on Dec 14, 2020 13:14:39 GMT -6
Out of the Power 5's its hard not to mention Iowa St. Can add Indiana to the list. Always have to take a backseat to their Basketball team. I think Allen has done a tremendous job at Indiana. The kids there seem to love playing for that guy. |
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Dec 14, 2020 14:45:32 GMT -6
Army, really any of the service academies. And I don't mean "least" as an insult. Not getting a bunch of 3,4,5 stars. Size restrictions. Grade requirements. The list goes on. Those kids are special, and the fact they are successful is a huge compliment to the coaches and kids.
I agree... Just the fact that the three academies are competitive at the FBS/D1 level is a testament to how well the programs are run.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Dec 14, 2020 18:10:08 GMT -6
Louisiana Tech under Skip Holtz. In the last seasons (including this one) They have gone 61-39 overall, 41-21 in conference, won 6 consecutive bowl games and is playing in a 7th in a few weeks. This as one of 5 FBS schools in the state.
|
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Dec 14, 2020 22:34:15 GMT -6
Dave Clawson at Wake Forest. They compete with the big dogs in-conference-not beating them necessarily but not getting blown out either- despite the fact that they can't recruit the same kind of player.
|
|
|
|
Post by olliebaba14 on Dec 15, 2020 4:31:22 GMT -6
Kent State under Sean Lewis
- Coastal
- Northwestern
- Iowa State
-LA tech
|
|
|
|
Post by CS on Dec 15, 2020 5:15:09 GMT -6
Army, really any of the service academies. And I don't mean "least" as an insult. Not getting a bunch of 3,4,5 stars. Size restrictions. Grade requirements. The list goes on. Those kids are special, and the fact they are successful is a huge compliment to the coaches and kids. I'd have to agree... Their success I think is in large part due to the types of kids they get. I don't know the answer to this but what are some examples of their coaches going on to coach at other places? Paul Johnson is the only one I know of that has. Brian Bohannon at Kennesaw State worked for Paul Johnson and has tremendous success there |
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Dec 15, 2020 7:03:37 GMT -6
Out of the Power 5's its hard not to mention Iowa St. Can add Indiana to the list. Always have to take a backseat to their Basketball team. I think Allen has done a tremendous job at Indiana. The kids there seem to love playing for that guy. Allen has done a tremendous job. I think it is fair to note that the climb started with Kevin Wilson. Kevin Wilson is a tremendous football mind and I think Allen added to that as well as brought in an energy that infused the program with more than what Wilson had to offer. I was a little bitter when they cut ties with Wilson, but Allen is clearly a great fit for the position. |
|
|
|
Post by Footballguy on Dec 16, 2020 17:02:08 GMT -6
Northwestern, the academies.
|
|
CoachF
Junior Member
Enter your message here...
Posts: 416
|
Post by CoachF on Dec 17, 2020 7:49:04 GMT -6
Iowa & the Academies.
I think just life life and all people have problems but they are different, same thing goes for college programs.
For example: Academies have a ton of potential drawbacks to success with time commitment and what those guys have to go through. I would argue there are a lot of benefits to those jobs too though. Who wouldn't want to be coaching those guys? I would imagine they have few issues with guys getting in trouble off of the field.
I say Iowa because under Kirk Ferentz they have done it for over 20 years. They are never getting five stars. Doyle is gone now, but they were developing players, I would argue, better than anyone in BCS. Guys coming in there with potential and they were tapping that potential. Offensively they are "pro-style" but are so simple upfront they allow guys to play aggressively.
Pretty much the same goes defensively. Super simple-gives them a chance. Urban Meyer commented on it last week, they are simple but it allows them to be so tuned into what you do offensively, and those guys are rarely if ever thinking about their own assignment.
They might get pegged as being too conservative, but they are in every game. They rarely if ever get "blown out" they have pulled a lot of "upsets". They have 3 losing seasons the past 21 years. That is incredible.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2020 8:03:05 GMT -6
I would suggest that allof the schools named have self imposed limitations.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2020 8:25:48 GMT -6
Iowa & the Academies. I think just life life and all people have problems but they are different, same thing goes for college programs. For example: Academies have a ton of potential drawbacks to success with time commitment and what those guys have to go through. I would argue there are a lot of benefits to those jobs too though. Who wouldn't want to be coaching those guys? I would imagine they have few issues with guys getting in trouble off of the field. I say Iowa because under Kirk Ferentz they have done it for over 20 years. They are never getting five stars. Doyle is gone now, but they were developing players, I would argue, better than anyone in BCS. Guys coming in there with potential and they were tapping that potential. Offensively they are "pro-style" but are so simple upfront they allow guys to play aggressively. Pretty much the same goes defensively. Super simple-gives them a chance. Urban Meyer commented on it last week, they are simple but it allows them to be so tuned into what you do offensively, and those guys are rarely if ever thinking about their own assignment. They might get pegged as being too conservative, but they are in every game. They rarely if ever get "blown out" they have pulled a lot of "upsets". They have 3 losing seasons the past 21 years. That is incredible. Iowa is always one I think of, adding Wisconsin, Kansas State and Northwestern. I would add Iowa State but they are more recent. I understand they may not have the prestige of the top schools football wise, but I am always surprised some of the prized recruits don't consider some of those schools more. They will develop anyone they get it seems. |
|
|
|
Post by 21bucksweep on Dec 17, 2020 18:25:49 GMT -6
I think App State has done a really nice job the past 4-5 years, especially considering that they have had 3 HC in the last 3 years. Anytime I've watched them play a P5 school they are always in the game. I think their current HC Shawn Clark has been there 4 or 5 years as an assistant before being promoted this season.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Dec 17, 2020 20:39:35 GMT -6
Iowa & the Academies. I think just life life and all people have problems but they are different, same thing goes for college programs. For example: Academies have a ton of potential drawbacks to success with time commitment and what those guys have to go through. I would argue there are a lot of benefits to those jobs too though. Who wouldn't want to be coaching those guys? I would imagine they have few issues with guys getting in trouble off of the field. I say Iowa because under Kirk Ferentz they have done it for over 20 years. They are never getting five stars. Doyle is gone now, but they were developing players, I would argue, better than anyone in BCS. Guys coming in there with potential and they were tapping that potential. Offensively they are "pro-style" but are so simple upfront they allow guys to play aggressively. Pretty much the same goes defensively. Super simple-gives them a chance. Urban Meyer commented on it last week, they are simple but it allows them to be so tuned into what you do offensively, and those guys are rarely if ever thinking about their own assignment. They might get pegged as being too conservative, but they are in every game. They rarely if ever get "blown out" they have pulled a lot of "upsets". They have 3 losing seasons the past 21 years. That is incredible. Iowa is always one I think of, adding Wisconsin, Kansas State and Northwestern. I would add Iowa State but they are more recent. I understand they may not have the prestige of the top schools football wise, but I am always surprised some of the prized recruits don't consider some of those schools more. They will develop anyone they get it seems. Wisconsin spent over $154 million on athletics in the 2018-2019 year. Iowa spent over $146 million. The median FBS expenditure was about $62 million. Iowa and Wisconsin are hardly working with "the least". La Tech spent $23 million. |
|
|
|
Post by coachsmith79 on Dec 18, 2020 0:25:42 GMT -6
Boise State. 20-30 years of competitive and successful football at both the FBS & FCS level under multiple head coaches. Whether in the now defunct WAC, old Big West conference and currently the Mountain West, they've owned those conferences when the were member over them.
|
|
|
|
Post by bulldogsdc on Dec 18, 2020 14:15:22 GMT -6
I don't think the OP was asking who plays the most white guys.
|
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Dec 18, 2020 23:10:21 GMT -6
Iowa is always one I think of, adding Wisconsin, Kansas State and Northwestern. I would add Iowa State but they are more recent. I understand they may not have the prestige of the top schools football wise, but I am always surprised some of the prized recruits don't consider some of those schools more. They will develop anyone they get it seems. Wisconsin spent over $154 million on athletics in the 2018-2019 year. Iowa spent over $146 million. The median FBS expenditure was about $62 million. Iowa and Wisconsin are hardly working with "the least". La Tech spent $23 million. What did Michigan State, Michigan, Penn State, Ohio State spend? |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Dec 19, 2020 1:57:01 GMT -6
Wisconsin spent over $154 million on athletics in the 2018-2019 year. Iowa spent over $146 million. The median FBS expenditure was about $62 million. Iowa and Wisconsin are hardly working with "the least". La Tech spent $23 million. What did Michigan State, Michigan, Penn State, Ohio State spend? Spartans-$137million Nittan Lions- $155 million Wolverines- $192 million Buckeyes- $206 million. Ferentz's Big ten winning percentage is .572 Hayden Fry's was .592 Mark Dantonio's was .639 John L Smith and Bobby williams were below .500 Nick Saban was .585 George Perels was just above .500 Joe Pa was .638 Bill O'Brien was .625 James Franklin's is .654 Bo's was .855 at Michigan Gary Moeller's was .775 Lloyd Carr's was .779 Rich Rod was .250 Hoke's was .563 and Harbaugh sits at .694 Paul Chrysts is .734 Alvarez was .507 Brett Bielma's was .660 Gary Anderson's was .812 |
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Dec 19, 2020 7:45:07 GMT -6
Wow,
I would’ve guessed the relative expenditures for those programs would’ve been higher. Your point makes perfect sense with these numbers. Had the elite programs spent significantly more I would’ve thought the stance of Wisconsin and Iowa would’ve have still held quite strong when considering financial factors.
My favorite part of your post is that Coach Schembechler’s full name isn’t even needed.
Also crazy fo think that in today’s climate Coach Saban probably would’ve never gotten a fifth year at Michigan State.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2020 8:09:31 GMT -6
I wouldn’t put any power 5 school in any category doing
most with least. It’s embarrassing what some programs considering what resources are available. What the hell is the big 10 doing losing, pretty routinely, losing to Mac schools?
|
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Dec 19, 2020 10:10:34 GMT -6
I wouldn’t put any power 5 school in any category doing most with least. It’s embarrassing what some programs considering what resources are available. What the hell is the big 10 doing losing, pretty routinely, losing to Mac schools? I don't know. Probably the same thing that Ole Miss is doing losing to Memphis. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2020 10:31:41 GMT -6
I wouldn’t put any power 5 school in any category doing most with least. It’s embarrassing what some programs considering what resources are available. What the hell is the big 10 doing losing, pretty routinely, losing to Mac schools? I don't know. Probably the same thing that Ole Miss is doing losing to Memphis. When I said power 5, it meant just that. Big 10 is just easy. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Dec 19, 2020 10:37:19 GMT -6
Wow, I would’ve guessed the relative expenditures for those programs would’ve been higher. Your point makes perfect sense with these numbers. Had the elite programs spent significantly more I would’ve thought the stance of Wisconsin and Iowa would’ve have still held quite strong when considering financial factors. My favorite part of your post is that Coach Schembechler’s full name isn’t even needed. Also crazy fo think that in today’s climate Coach Saban probably would’ve never gotten a fifth year at Michigan State. A few things: 1) The figures given were for entire athletic programs, not just football programs. They information came from the Knight commission website. Of interest to me was that OSU and Michigan reported figures representing an athletic program of 35 teams and over 1000 and 29 teams, 910 athletes respectively. Wisconsin's expenses represented a program of 24 teams and 788 athletes. Iowa 24 teams and 669 athletes. LSU's athletic expenditures of $145 million in 2019 represented expenses for an athletic program consisting of 21 teams and 462 athletes. A&M's expenses of $165 million represented a program of 20 teams and 580 athletes. Bama spent $166 million to fund a program of 21 teams and 652 athletes. 2) I didn't want to risk misspelling the name  3) I disagree with the Saban comment, based on MSU's history. Going above .500 in the Big Ten seems acceptable to MSU with regards to retaining employment as a HFC. 4) I guess my point in posting the figures, and including that the Median FBS athletic expenses being about 40% (or less) than Wisconsin and Iowa and those schools spending roughly 70%-75% of what OSU and Michigan and more or the same as their league members are spending yet loosing just a little less as they are winning in the Big Ten might not be considered doing "most with the least". It is basically just as expected, wouldn't you say? |
|
|
|
Post by coachgreen05 on Dec 19, 2020 10:57:02 GMT -6
For this category, we looked at the past four years of NFL draft picks from the first five rounds. Programs that had a non-ESPN 300 player drafted were rewarded.
This includes some four-star players who weren't in the top 300, but for the most part, the list is made up of former three-star and unranked prospects.
Here are the numbers first:
Iowa: 13
Utah: 12
Wisconsin: 11
Washington: 11
Ohio State: 10
Michigan: 10
North Carolina: 9
NC State: 9
Boston College: 8
Clemson: 7
Notre Dame: 7
Penn State: 7
Oklahoma: 7
|
|
