the jug

[Mtneer]

If we play Whee and we're both 1-10, which is more of a likelihood than a mere possibility, it could be one of the best SoCon games of the year! We may get to see some exciting football after all. And no, Satterfield needs one more year before we talk new HC, no matter what happens these next 6 weeks.

[MtnDevil95]

Fire Satterfield now or at the end of this season, and you'll condemn the program. No coach with half a brain would step into an athletic department that cans a rookie head coach after 1 transitional season following a botched transition.

Be mad at Coach, call for improvement, be frustrated, but temper that with patience and do not ignore the larger picture.

[Deano]

Fire Satterfield now or at the end of this season, and you'll condemn the program. No coach with half a brain would step into an athletic department that cans a rookie head coach after 1 transitional season following a botched transition.

Be mad at Coach, call for improvement, be frustrated, but temper that with patience and do not ignore the larger picture.

I completely agree with you. I think you really have to give a new coach or a new offensive or defensive scheme at least three years before you can evaluate effectiveness. Even the best teams out there have down years. Its very rare to have immediate success with new coaches or schemes. I think we are spoiled and we need to go through this to understand that winning, no matter at what level whether FCS or FBS is not easy and only comes through hard work. This will make whatever success we enjoy for the years to come much sweeter. For now, enjoy the tailgating, enjoy the fellowship with your freinds and support the team on the field, eventually it will improve.

[Yosef84]

Serious question. If we are 1-10 when we play WCU and we lose to them, should Scott be fired immediately following that game?

I'm still waiting for the "serious question" you were going to pose.

I think that is a serious question. I am not calling for anyone to be fired at this point and I usually feel coaches should get some time to build a program. Problem here is that there was already an existing dominant FCS program that SS inherited. Yes, there were some problems but to go from 8-4 and conference champs to 1-11 and a loss to Western, that would be unimaginable. If the unimaginable were to become a reality, it would be a clear indication that SS is just not ready to be a head coach yet. So if the unimaginable happens, do you keep with a guy that is clearly over his head or find a proven commodity and right the ship? I think that is a serious question and one that CC should give serious consideration. I keep hearing all this "rebuilding" talk and hearing that "it will take years" and I just don't buy it. We are a football school with good football players, if we get a good head football coach who hires good football assistant coaches, all will be fine. The real question that remains for the rest of the season is whether or not SS is a good head football coach, right now the answer is no.

The problem with this logic you propose is that Satterfield did NOT inherit a dominant football program. We haven't been dominant for a while. He inherited a collection of excellent athletes and a group of coaches hired by someone else. Satterfield was brought in under the "don't rock the boat" philosophy. Yes, he made some switches in the DC position but most new head coaches are given the opportunity to hire their staff and anyone retained from the previous staff is by their choice. I don't think Satterfield had that option. Maybe it would have made no difference. Maybe it would! Before folks take this statement and spin it against Cobb, let me just say that I hear precious few complaining about the plan and just about everyone thought the continuity would be a positive.

Bottom line is that there is nothing "clear" about the conclusion you draw and I don't think many on this board (including myself) have a grasp of all the variable at play. Most people are just drawing a conclusion and then picking the facts that support what they believe.

Somebody else pointed out how many of those wins last year were by the skin of our teeth. Remember the Samford game last year? The difference between that 8-4 season last year and a 4-7 (no playoff) is not very large. Add to that the fact that two of our losses this year have been because of errors (penalties...blown plays). Injuries (JLJ, Blair, etc.), loss of 6 all conference players, off season issues, and the general impact of a DOUBLE transition and this year is a tough hill to climb.

Personally, I do not think it will take years to rebuild. I will take a spark.

[WataugaMan]

Hopefully we will see that spark this weekend.

[JTApps1]

Why are we even talking about WCU? We have 5 games between now and then, and we have a ton of issues to talk about. The Jug will be nothing more than an artifact after this game anyways. Well Firemoose may feel differently but that is a an entirely different story.

[WataugaMan]

Agreed, Furple is next on the schedule. It's an opportunity to get a win and get things moving in the right direction. Need to focus on the Vermins first.

[PBR1893-BEER-HAT-GUY]

the jug...an artifact??? i guess the bible is an artifact...i guess pbr will one day be an artifact...i guess boobs will one day be an artifact...blasphemy! and it does matter and yes im looking ahead but it's a hopeful silver lining to an incredibly bad storm brewing.

[t4pizza]

Serious question. If we are 1-10 when we play WCU and we lose to them, should Scott be fired immediately following that game?

I'm still waiting for the "serious question" you were going to pose.

I think that is a serious question. I am not calling for anyone to be fired at this point and I usually feel coaches should get some time to build a program. Problem here is that there was already an existing dominant FCS program that SS inherited. Yes, there were some problems but to go from 8-4 and conference champs to 1-11 and a loss to Western, that would be unimaginable. If the unimaginable were to become a reality, it would be a clear indication that SS is just not ready to be a head coach yet. So if the unimaginable happens, do you keep with a guy that is clearly over his head or find a proven commodity and right the ship? I think that is a serious question and one that CC should give serious consideration. I keep hearing all this "rebuilding" talk and hearing that "it will take years" and I just don't buy it. We are a football school with good football players, if we get a good head football coach who hires good football assistant coaches, all will be fine. The real question that remains for the rest of the season is whether or not SS is a good head football coach, right now the answer is no.

The problem with this logic you propose is that Satterfield did NOT inherit a dominant football program. We haven't been dominant for a while. He inherited a collection of excellent athletes and a group of coaches hired by someone else. Satterfield was brought in under the "don't rock the boat" philosophy. Yes, he made some switches in the DC position but most new head coaches are given the opportunity to hire their staff and anyone retained from the previous staff is by their choice. I don't think Satterfield had that option. Maybe it would have made no difference. Maybe it would! Before folks take this statement and spin it against Cobb, let me just say that I hear precious few complaining about the plan and just about everyone thought the continuity would be a positive.

Bottom line is that there is nothing "clear" about the conclusion you draw and I don't think many on this board (including myself) have a grasp of all the variable at play. Most people are just drawing a conclusion and then picking the facts that support what they believe.

Somebody else pointed out how many of those wins last year were by the skin of our teeth. Remember the Samford game last year? The difference between that 8-4 season last year and a 4-7 (no playoff) is not very large. Add to that the fact that two of our losses this year have been because of errors (penalties...blown plays). Injuries (JLJ, Blair, etc.), loss of 6 all conference players, off season issues, and the general impact of a DOUBLE transition and this year is a tough hill to climb.

Personally, I do not think it will take years to rebuild. I will take a spark.

Maybe you misunderstood my position so let me clarify, I am not calling for him to be fired. I was just simply saying (and responding to a post that implied it was not a serious question) that I do think it would be a serious question that should be considered by those in charge. Executives make bad hires all the time, the question then becomes is it worse to give the bad hire time to fix it or to fire the bad hire after a small sample size. I generally think it is worse to fire after a small sample size but I do understand that the individual situations need to be examined closely.

I stand by my statement that he inherited a dominant program, because we are a dominant program. Notice I did not say a dominant team because clearly the team was/is flawed but the program is and has historically been dominant. It's not like he took over at Western. A new coach going 1-11 at Western would barely raise an eyebrow. At App the same record will cause widespread hysteria.

I'm not sure what "clear conclusions" that you think I drew/posted because I don't see any in my post. I did state that IF he went 1-11 and lost to Western that he would be clearly over his head, and I stand by that perception. However, I don't think he will go 1-11 and lose to Western. This was a hypothetical question but if it turned to be true, I think even the most ardent ASU and SS supporters would have to concede that he was in over his head this year.

I do agree with you that it shouldn't take much to turn us around, a spark would work.

[MtnDevil95]

I disagree that a 1-11 season in his first as a head coach would be an indication that Satterfield is in over his head. Especially given the extenuating circumstances of transition to a higher division and a bungled coaching transition, neither of which Satt had any control over. In fact those 2 circumstances trump the "inherited a dominant program, strong team" argument, in my opinion.

There are plenty of examples of coaches who are now, nearly universally, thought of as highly successful who struggled through 1, 2 or more seasons in a new position. Mack Brown (granted he inherited a bad team) managed 2 wins in 22 games in his first 2 seasons at Chapel Hill. It wasn't until his 4th that he coached them to a share of the ACC title. Nick Saban was 25-22-1 in his first 4 seasons at Michigan St. In his 5th season, he coached the Spartans to 9-2 and finished ranked the 9th in the nation.

1 season, no matter how bad, is not enough to judge a new head coach's ability, or serve as a barometer for future sucess.

[JCline0429]

Fire Satterfield now or at the end of this season, and you'll condemn the program. No coach with half a brain would step into an athletic department that cans a rookie head coach after 1 transitional season following a botched transition.

Be mad at Coach, call for improvement, be frustrated, but temper that with patience and do not ignore the larger picture.

I completely agree with you. I think you really have to give a new coach or a new offensive or defensive scheme at least three years before you can evaluate effectiveness. Even the best teams out there have down years. Its very rare to have immediate success with new coaches or schemes. I think we are spoiled and we need to go through this to understand that winning, no matter at what level whether FCS or FBS is not easy and only comes through hard work. This will make whatever success we enjoy for the years to come much sweeter. For now, enjoy the tailgating, enjoy the fellowship with your freinds and support the team on the field, eventually it will improve.

Spot on, Deano. Rep point.

[Yosef84]

t4pizza,
OK...I think we got into a semantics clash there. I understand where you are coming from with the "dominant program" reference and I agree. About the "over his head" reference, that is the point where I differ. Again, this might be semantics. I do agree that Scott's learning curve is steeper than expected, but I think it's compounded by factors beyond his control. We keep going back to the 1993 season, but it definitely deserves to be compared:
1) Scott is the common denominator in both seasons. In both cases, he was new to his role.
2) The 93 season followed a successful season where App when 7-5 (two losses to ACC schools) and lost in the first round of the playoffs.
3) App entered 93 with a promising new QB. DJ Campbell had graduated, but Andy Arnold had been groomed to assume the reigns. The week before the first game against NCA&T, Andy broke his collar bone and App had to go with an inexperienced (but talented) QB. Note: We didn't give that game away by a blown special teams play or a pick6...they dominated us in a pretty nasty game.
4) Late in the season App hit its stride and finally won the last three (although against the bottom of the conference).
5) 1994 saw App back in form and went 9-4 with a win in the first round of the playoffs.

That's an example of a pretty good and pretty experience HC who almost let a season get away from him. I don't think JM was over his head. I think stuff just happened and the foundation for that year's team collapsed. I am not trying to put this all on JLJ. I admire the young man for everything he has done and tried to do, but he simply wasn't up to the task and the foundation of this team was gone. There is another quality young man trying to fill the gap and I hope that between the two of them, they can get it done.

Regarding Western, I agree it is too early to be talking about that game. I can't believe there has been as little talk about Furman as there has been. I do think it's funny that suddenly Western is apparently a rival again. The advantage of NOT being a smack talker is that I don't really feel the need to eat any crow, regardless of the outcome (this last part isn't directed at you t4pizza).

[JCline0429]

the jug...an artifact??? i guess the bible is an artifact...i guess pbr will one day be an artifact...i guess boobs will one day be an artifact...blasphemy! and it does matter and yes im looking ahead but it's a hopeful silver lining to an incredibly bad storm brewing.

boobs will never just be an artifact.

[T-Dog]

I had the TV on in the background as I was writing earlier and The U came on. In Jimmy Johnson's first season at Miami after Schnellenberger won the National Title, Miami went 6-5. In the next three years, Miami lost only four games.

In 2009 after going 26-7 in the previous three years, NDSU went 3-8 in a year that had much turnover due to disciplinary issues. Then in 2010 they went 7-5, made the playoffs and won two games before losing at eventual champion EWU and the rest is history.

Now is not the time to panic. Yes there are certain aspects that could be improved, but to make wholesale changes would be short-sighted.

[JCline0429]

If we play Whee and we're both 1-10, which is more of a likelihood than a mere possibility, it could be one of the best SoCon games of the year! We may get to see some exciting football after all. And no, Satterfield needs one more year before we talk new HC, no matter what happens these next 6 weeks.

I always wanted to see a 11-0 App vs WCU at 11-0. Now I may get to see two 1-11 teams play each other. Uggggh.