Heels vs Horned Frogs

CFordUNC said:
I think those are totally fair and valid questions. I think the answer to most of them, and probably all of them, is a lot simpler than that wacky theory being floated by fans on IC. I think the answer is that this coaching staff, despite being led by the most accomplished NFL coach of all time, has some major flaws in terms of relevant experience in coaching, scheming, playcalling, and game planning at the collegiate level. Freddie Kitchens had one of the most disastrous head coaching stint anyone has ever had in the NFL, and has never been known to be a prolific OC or playcaller, yet he is our OC and playcaller. This staff has virtually zero collective collegiate coaching experience, so they were probably entirely reliant upon what they know, which is coaching, scheming, game planning, and playcalling for the NFL, which is decidedly different from doing it in college. A lot of NFL people seemingly have an arrogance about them that leads them to believe that "football is football" and that just because they were successful at the professional level, then they will automatically be successful doing the same things at the collegiate level, because the collegiate level must just be the "JV league" of the NFL.
Click to expand...
Nice post.

I’d add - was the bulk of this staff successful at the NFL level? This staff is not the group of coaches who helped lead the Patriots to such prolonged success from 2001-2019.
 
superrific said:
First, Freddie Kitchens most certainly did not have such a disastrous head coaching stint. This was a team that went 1-15 and 0-16 in previous seasons. In the next one, they recovered a bit to 7-8-1, but the team was 2-5-1 until Kitchens was promoted to OC. Then when he became head coach, they were a disappointing 6-10 but come on. That's what the 49ers were last year and nobody thinks Shanahan is a disaster.

Second, the problem with these "coaches are incompentent" accusations is that they are completely wild and don't make sense. OK, let's suppose Kitchens is a bad OC. Is he so bad that he doesn't understand the benefit of moving the pocket? Of designing some short, quick-hit passing plays? That is not plausible. He was a HC and OC in the NFL. He's coached in the NFL for two decades. It is impossible that he doesn't understand basics like this.

Just like it's impossible that HD doesn't understand "how to run an offense." Whatever the virtues or vices of HD's coaching, it is impossible that he doesn't understand how offense works. Impossible. He played under Dean. He played at a high level in the NBA, as an offensive minded player. He coached with Roy.

Fans need to chill the fuck out sometimes. Maybe BB won't be a good coach, but the idea that he doesn't understand basics is ridiculous and more worthy of scorn than the preseason game theory.
Click to expand...
Please. I lived through those years in Cleveland. Believe me, Freddie Kitchens was a disaster and you’ll find no one in Cleveland as charitable as you toward him. He is pretty much regarded as a complete clown.
 
I know it must seem like I have Belichick Derangement Syndrome. I don’t. I just think that if UNC is going to go all in on football, we need to go all in on our expectations, too. And what we saw Monday night is so far below expectations as to be alarming. That said, it’s true that it’s only one data point. There’s tons of football to play yet and tons of room and opportunity for growth and improvement. I trust we’ll see it.

For the record, anyone who is on the IC boards from around 2013 through 2018 would have seen me be every bit as critical of Larry Fedora. And I was every bit as critical of mack Brown in game one of 2.0 when we TOOK A KNEE ON FOURTH DOWN AT MIDFIELD and gave South Carolina a solid chance at beating us. So I’m an equal opportunity complainer!
 
It took the hiring of Belichick for UNC to go “all in” on football. No other hire outside of Saban could have convinced UNC, and its big donors, to make this kind of financial commitment it is making to the sport. He may or may not work out but UNC football has already benefitted.
 
Ramrouser said:
It took the hiring of Belichick for UNC to go “all in” on football. No other hire outside of Saban could have convinced UNC, and its big donors, to make this kind of financial commitment it is making to the sport. He may or may not work out but UNC football has already benefitted.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure we are “all in” on football. I suspect Ohio State spends 3x what we spend on football. They are all in. We are still playing in the kiddie pool.

Unless by “all in” you mean like the poker player with just a few chips.
 
Calheel said:
I’m not sure we are “all in” on football. I suspect Ohio State spends 3x what we spend on football. They are all in. We are still playing in the kiddie pool.

Unless by “all in” you mean like the poker player with just a few chips.
Click to expand...
The latter and we are more than all-in. It is no overstatement to say that if this experiment doesn't work, we buried the entire rest of the athletic department. We robbed Peter to pay Paul in MAJOR ways to make this thing happen.
 
wmheel1287 said:
The latter and we are more than all-in. It is no overstatement to say that if this experiment doesn't work, we buried the entire rest of the athletic department. We robbed Peter to pay Paul in MAJOR ways to make this thing happen.
Click to expand...
It’s not going to work.
 
wmheel1287 said:
The latter and we are more than all-in. It is no overstatement to say that if this experiment doesn't work, we buried the entire rest of the athletic department. We robbed Peter to pay Paul in MAJOR ways to make this thing happen.
Click to expand...
Can you describe what Peters we robbed to pay Paul and what we're out if this doesn't work?
 
Calheel said:
I’m not sure we are “all in” on football. I suspect Ohio State spends 3x what we spend on football. They are all in. We are still playing in the kiddie pool.

Unless by “all in” you mean like the poker player with just a few chips.
Click to expand...
“All in” as in we’re now spending enough money to have a seat at the big boy table a show some leg to the SEC/BIG for future membership. Didn’t mean to suggest that we’ll ever spend Oho State/Texas/ Ga money.
 
wmheel1287 said:
The latter and we are more than all-in. It is no overstatement to say that if this experiment doesn't work, we buried the entire rest of the athletic department. We robbed Peter to pay Paul in MAJOR ways to make this thing happen.
Click to expand...
This move will save the non revenue sports and keep them at a high level of excellence. We simply have to participate in big league football in order to generate the revenue to fuel our 26 other sports. It’s only a matter of time before the P2 conferences start stealing our soccer/lacrosse etc players and coaches if we don’t gain membership in one of those two conferences as the $$ disparity grows larger every year.
 
Ramrouser said:
This move will save the non revenue sports and keep them at a high level of excellence. We simply have to participate in big league football in order to generate the revenue to fuel our 26 other sports. It’s only a matter of time before the P2 conferences start stealing our soccer/lacrosse etc players and coaches if we don’t gain membership in one of those two conferences as the $$ disparity grows larger every year.
Click to expand...
This move could do that (i don’t know the financials completely), but the football has to be successful. Would have been easier to be a little more forward thinking when the writing was on the wall about the acc, but alas. I think the amount of investment required to do this and you get a shit product with a 73 year old asshole, well good luck getting the money together in 2-4 years for a new coach and an exit fee and good luck hiring someone worth his salt considering how much of a power play shit show this was
 
You’re not wrong, of course. This investment must show a roi and get us in the SEC for it to be deemed a success

Plus, you can only be an asshole coach if you’re an unqualified success.

I still predict BB sticks the landing and makes this thing work.
 
mpaer said:
We spent 14 mill of Institutional funds on Athetics last year
Click to expand...
That's last year and I'm not sure how that carries over to this year, either if it would be necessary this year if nothing had changed, much less all the changes that occurred.

I'm open to the idea that this is a grand risk with the entire AD riding on the outcome, but I'm not seeing it without some additional details. I think even if this fails that we are still very likely the lead choice for both the SEC & B1G within the next 5 years and that is the key thing that has to happen for our future.
 
SnoopRob said:
That's last year and I'm not sure how that carries over to this year, either if it would be necessary this year if nothing had changed, much less all the changes that occurred.

I'm open to the idea that this is a grand risk with the entire AD riding on the outcome, but I'm not seeing it without some additional details. I think even if this fails that we are still very likely the lead choice for both the SEC & B1G within the next 5 years and that is the key thing that has to happen for our future.
Click to expand...
Oh Yea
I think we are attractive to the Big 2
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top