I did, we are right on his heels. 67 years old is the new 47 years old. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Tech77
Printable View
I did, we are right on his heels. 67 years old is the new 47 years old. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Tech77
Quote:
Originally Posted by olddog75
No, it isn't. I don't know who the desperate 60 yr-old was who started all this 60 is the new 40 crap. He must have been trying to pick up a younger woman or something. I did 40, and I did 60. They are not remotely related even on my very best day. Dave, you shouldn't give this false hope to these younger people. :icon_wink:
Well this news could just be from this board, but here is "SOMETHING"...
From coachingsearch.com
LA Tech: Don't be surprised if Central Arkansas wide receivers coach Matt Kubik ends up on Skip Holtz' staff at LA Tech.
Might need to try more fiber in your diet.Quote:
Originally Posted by rockdog
http://www.coachingsearch.com/coachi...ch-ticker.html
Quote:
Originally Posted by coachingsearch.com
Makes me very happy. The man can recruit.Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnylightnin
That, he can...hope this is true and we keep Eggan.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigdog13
Everything "defense" this year was horrible, including the DL. Is Eggan responsible for that? Maybe this year was merely an anomaly and Eggan can really recruit and coach DL. Maybe....
If it were me, I'd have cleaned house, if I were Holtz. I would have power-washed and disinfected the defensive coaches' offices, just to remove any lingering crappiness.
But, for whatever reason, Holtz thinks Eggan is worth keeping. So, unlike DONW, I will get behind this move and support Holtz's decision and support Eggan.
Build us a real defense......please.
Oh! that reminds me.....Spangler?????
Retaining Eggen is a major component in helping this team to "regroup" instead of rebuilding it. Another guy I think should be retained is Koonz. He is an excellent recruiter and did a good job of coordinating the recruiting board.
The DL was probably the brightest spot on the defense, and would have been a lot more present if the secondary actually provided coverage. Just saying.Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
DL was a bright spot? Do you not remember the lack of a pass rush from the front four? I recall opposing qb's having all day to throw and when they did tuck it to run we had no speed any where to catch them.
That said, I do favor keeping Coach Eggen
Like everyone else I want Rattay on staff.Quote:
Originally Posted by maddawg
I guess one could coach WR and the other QBs. Kubic has the better resume (as a coach).
Glad to keep Eggan. He recruits very well and provides continuity.
I believe Rattay's salary would be covered by increased LTAC donations because of his hiring.Quote:
Originally Posted by inudesu
Yessir. This.Quote:
Originally Posted by maddawg
I don't know if his name has been mentioned before, but Matt Middleton (OC at UAM) coach was a GA here in early 00's. Young, high energy guy with ties across Louisiana and Ark. Could be a possibility for WR coach.
Yes, many of us would love to see Matt at Tech. He would love to be here too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellis88
I would too. Great coach and person.Quote:
Originally Posted by maddawg
Respectfully, have a differrent opinion. do not claim to be right but somehow we were ranked #40 defense in nation in 2011. gave up 23 pts per game. Personally think Coach D did nd fantastic job of recruiting offensive players but not enough D guys. Dooley did get some solid D players ( no I am NOT a Dooley hack) Think with 25 scholarships we can recruit based on we need you now and CUSA, Know both Eggan and Koonz are know -liked and trusted by players and both have strong relationships in recruiting base. Are they the 2011 guys or the 2012 guys. also remember , we got a lot of guys injured with cheap ankle turns at Illinois. maybe the old adage "dont throw the baby out with the bathwater" is appropriate here.Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
and watching the CBS special it was obvious the players liked him-- believe Patton and Dixon both called him their favorite coach. Correct me if I am wrong -- my memory is going of a TV show and news articleQuote:
Originally Posted by FishingBack
Dude.......we had NO PASS RUSH WHATSOEVER!!! Go back and watch the San Jose St game. It's pretty difficult for a any DB to cover a receiver if the QB has 10 seconds to throw. Geez........Quote:
Originally Posted by BoutThemDawgs
Agreed. Personnel issue rather than coaching issue for this. You don't have a drop in DL production this dramatically with the same coach and it is not personnel. We have to recruit this year towards D period. That aspect of recruiting has been overlooked the last couple of years.Quote:
Originally Posted by HogDawg
It wasn't lack of number of defensive signees. Go back and look and SD's comments on this class and you will see that they stressed defense. Problem was perhaps scouting and evaluation (coaches). They just got the wrong guys, maybe.
......I've seen better pass rushes by the women's garden club heading into Neiman Marcus. :laugh:
Yep. Players and injuries. Lot of guys playing with bad wheels.
We sucked in week 1 and it continued through week 12. The injury excuse might hold some water if we'd been decent in the first few games, but we weren't. The level of talent is another argument altogether.
......riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. We'll go with "injuries" to save a little face. :icon_wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by DoubleDDawg
May have sucked in Week 1, but improved in Weeks 2 and 3. Then we faced the cheap shot artists at Virginia, and that set us back big time....the D never really recovered as it stayed banged up the rest of the year.Quote:
Originally Posted by mildawg
We're easily in the Orange Bowl if this D could have allowed just 14 points less per game against the WAC schedule.
No argument about the Orange Bowl, and no argument that we were banged up after UVA. But 600+ yards and 49 points in week 1 to what ultimately was a 5-7 team is the only argument needed. We were a bad defense starting out. Trying to say that we "improved" is just spin -- we still gave up almost 500 yards and 37 points to a very average Rice team at home in week 2. I'll grant that the Illinois game was a good defensive effort and I have made that distinction a number of times... but let's not kid ourselves, Illinois was a 2-win team that only averaged 16 points per game, yet we gave up 24.Quote:
Originally Posted by RealityCheck
Now, if the argument centers around whether we would have made the Orange Bowl without the injuries, then that is a viable--although useless--discussion. We probably wouldn't have been the worst defense in FBS without the injuries and possibly could have been good enough to win those last 2 WAC contests. Unfortunately, we'll never know.
Game 1 .Houston gets the ball out quickly . I was there saw it. Game 2, good pass rush. I was there saw it. Game 3 cheap shot artists. being in Va.,and an ex player I'm sure you saw it milddawg. Randle and Ellis our two best up the middle weren't the same the rest of the year. Porter , our best D player was gone the rest of the year. Combine that with the loss of talent and speed(Broha,Cole Dudley), TE on IK's side or chip by RB, and granted a vanilla blitz package which coincides with the "just execute" mentality and lack of speed at safety, made for a disastrous defense. Our style of offense and the number of plays in our game didn't help. Bend but don't break without turnovers is a killer. It was what Dykes and the high octane offensive package requires out of their defensive schemes . (See Arizona,OK St.,W. Virginia,etc.) I'm not saying Spangler was error proof, just that you can't put this performance totally on coaching.
Hey, I'm not arguing that the injuries didn't hurt us. I just don't think they had quite the same impact. All of the guys injured early in the year (except Porter) were back for USU and SJSU, but the defense didn't improve one iota. There simply no evidence to show that we were better with those injured players than we were without them.
Now, the losses of last year's seniors definitely hurt. I knew Broha, Lacey, Dudley, Cole, Rust, Carter, and Evans were good players, but to think that those guys made the difference between a top 50 defense and a defense that finished dead last is hard to fathom. Every team has to replace departing seniors each year. We still had some pretty good talent at LB, DE, and C this season, albeit not quite to the level of the departing seniors. However, was the drop-off in talent great enough to justify our fall from a top-50 or so defense to dead last in FBS? Regardless, what's done is done and it looks like we'll be getting a new DC. I think we'll all be on the same page when it comes to the new coordinator and his staff -- all of last year's issues aside, we all hope they can coach our guys to a much better performance in 2013.
these is getting spooky-- we are agreeing way too much lately--have not seen you post lately but that is what I posted few days agoQuote:
Originally Posted by RealityCheck
hate to get back to original Thread -- but has either Slaughter have any coaching experience ( or inclination?) How about Larry Anderson? know he was coaching high school in shreveport -- last I checked he has at least 1 superbowl ring, maybe 2.
and back to the topic at hand....
from coachingsearch.com
LA Tech: Skip Holtz reached out to John Simon about joining the LA Tech staff, but Simon will remain with Southern Miss and new head coach Todd Monken.
Could Greg Hudson head to Louisiana Tech and work for Skip Holtz?
http://www.tomahawknation.com/2012/1...holtz#comments
http://floridastate.247sports.com/Bo...ech-15086069/1
He's dead to me...Quote:
Originally Posted by rockdog
:icon_roll:Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Brasky
Yeah, I want to believe the rumors on the internet. And if it were true, I want to bash on a former Tech player that actually honored his word when he said he would go work somewhere.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Brasky
Come on...you're better than this
Forget something??Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Brasky
:sarc: