Thinking about it, this is a big year for Nate, when he was at Wofford he was considered one of the best, if not the best defensive coordinator in the SC, but there was always that nagging question, was he really that good, or was his teams stats better than they actually were becouse Woffords offense was on the field for so long. Then last year we were willing to give him a pass, becouse of the translation period of a new coaching staff. This year he really doesn't have any excuses, I expect the defense to be much better, ya, I know, some are going to say becouse of the step up in competition the defense is going to struggle, but to me that's an excuse, he is being paid very good money to find a way to improve the defense, no matter what the roadblocks thrown at him. If he really is the defensive guru he was protraied at Wofford, it would be disappointing not to see big improvement on the defensive side of the ball.

All I have to say is this: We have 100% of our staff from last year, except S&C. When's the last time we could say that?

I hope that our staff on both sides of the ball prove successful for years to come. Longevity is key to success. If any of our coaches (HC /OC/ DC) arent cutting it 4 years from now, let's re-evaluate then.

We will be young still this year. There were 7 freshmen on the field at times on defense last year. So it stands to reason that there will be times that we have 7 sophomores on the field at one time. Experianced but still young.

Woody is fine. I'm more worried about being able to keep him, rather than will he make it. Stepping up with a young team- we've got to be patient. We could be much improved with the same record. I'm looking for improvement throughout the season, on both sides of the ball

Good point about 100% of the staff coming back.

That staff took the team we saw play vs. Montana and A&T and had them playing fairly well by seasons end. With a complete offseason I think they'll continue to develop players it may just be harder to realize given the schedule.

sixtoes9134 wrote:All I have to say is this: We have 100% of our staff from last year, except S&C. When's the last time we could say that?

I hope that our staff on both sides of the ball prove successful for years to come. Longevity is key to success. If any of our coaches (HC /OC/ DC) arent cutting it 4 years from now, let's re-evaluate then.

Retaining staff isn't necessarily a good thing. Its rare that bigger school will poach coaches with a 4-8 record. We were losing coaches cause we were winning consistently. Going forward I hope we lose a bunch of assistants cause it means we are winning a bunch of games.

ASUPATCH wrote:

sixtoes9134 wrote:All I have to say is this: We have 100% of our staff from last year, except S&C. When's the last time we could say that?

I hope that our staff on both sides of the ball prove successful for years to come. Longevity is key to success. If any of our coaches (HC /OC/ DC) arent cutting it 4 years from now, let's re-evaluate then.

Retaining staff isn't necessarily a good thing. Its rare that bigger school will poach coaches with a 4-8 record. We were losing coaches cause we were winning consistently. Going forward I hope we lose a bunch of assistants cause it means we are winning a bunch of games.

As I recall from an earlier discussion, we had some coaches that had other opportunities but chose to stay. I believe Coach Satterfield himself brought this up.

ASUPATCH wrote:

sixtoes9134 wrote:All I have to say is this: We have 100% of our staff from last year, except S&C. When's the last time we could say that?

I hope that our staff on both sides of the ball prove successful for years to come. Longevity is key to success. If any of our coaches (HC /OC/ DC) arent cutting it 4 years from now, let's re-evaluate then.

Retaining staff isn't necessarily a good thing. Its rare that bigger school will poach coaches with a 4-8 record. We were losing coaches cause we were winning consistently. Going forward I hope we lose a bunch of assistants cause it means we are winning a bunch of games.

I hope we win games and keep coaches like we did in the 2000s - the grass isn't always greener or bluer (Boise) or redder (EWU)

I'd have the same thought about losing assistants as I do HCs - if we're successful, I hope we will pay them well enough that they won't look to jump at the first chance to go elsewhere (e.g., a CUSA program). But if a big school comes looking and opens up the checkbook, we'd be naive to think most wouldn't jump on the opportunity.

WVAPPeer wrote:

ASUPATCH wrote:

sixtoes9134 wrote:All I have to say is this: We have 100% of our staff from last year, except S&C. When's the last time we could say that?

I hope that our staff on both sides of the ball prove successful for years to come. Longevity is key to success. If any of our coaches (HC /OC/ DC) arent cutting it 4 years from now, let's re-evaluate then.

Retaining staff isn't necessarily a good thing. Its rare that bigger school will poach coaches with a 4-8 record. We were losing coaches cause we were winning consistently. Going forward I hope we lose a bunch of assistants cause it means we are winning a bunch of games.

I hope we win games and keep coaches like we did in the 2000s - the grass isn't always greener or bluer (Boise) or redder (EWU)

Satterfield, Elliot Galloway all left for bigger school in said time period. Cause we were winning. Beauty of winning is you get to pick better assistant to replace them when they get plucked from us. I would far prefer to be losing coaches and winning than firing coaches and losing.

yes they did but all but except Galloway had been at APP for 10+ years ---

WVAPPeer wrote:yes they did but all but except Galloway had been at APP for 10+ years ---

I agree with you that best case scenario is that we are winning and retain our staff. That however is not realistic. Luckily for us Satt and Elliot were alumnus and that kept them here longer than most would have.

The team (including defense) improved dramatically from the beginning of the year to the end. That is the single most encouraging sign for me. It indicates that the players were buying into the program and were not giving up. We're still extremely young, so I am not expecting miracles in 2014, but I think we will be solid. I think Nate Woody was a very good hire, and nothing has happened to change that opinion.