A Sea Of Red

We have played better vs FBS schools over the years than we have vs many FCS schools. I can't recall us getting embarrassed by a FBS school, but there has been some embarrassing loses to FBS schools.

ballcoach15 wrote:We have played better vs FBS schools over the years than we have vs many FCS schools. I can't recall us getting embarrassed by a FBS school, but there has been some embarrassing loses to FBS schools.

True, but a couple of things to consider. First, when a FBS team plays a FCS team, there is a natural tendency to take the opponent for granted. Finally, most of our FBS games have been the first game of the year. Gill won't have 8 months to put together a game plan between games, when we are playing a FBS schedule.

I think Gill could do at LU what he did at Buffalo, which amounts to seasons around 5/7, with an occasional 7/5 every 3-4 years.

BigRed1 wrote:

R i wrote:We will win more than 2-3 per year with Gill.

I really hope you’re right, but I don’t see it happening. With the lack of success Gill has had with an FCS schedule, I doubt he will have very much success against stronger opponents. I would sincerely like to know why you think he is going to be able to do what he’s failed to do so far. I would love to hear your take on this.

He has always won more than 2-3 games, so he has not failed to do that so far.

As far as transitioning, he will be able to get better recruiting classes. This years class is disappointing so far, but better than years past when we were recruiting to FCS BigSouth competition.

I am not a Gill apologist, but to say he would not win more than 2 games a year is kind of RiDiculous.

Saying that because he is winning 6 or 7 a year in FCS means he will win substantially less in FBS is assuming there will be no upgrade in talent. While the jury is still out on this first FBS recruiting class, there is movement in the right direction. More importantly, the big picture track record of all schools in all sports shows that when you move up, you will be able to recruit better players, although it is not a!ways an instantaneous transformation.

Our talent level hasn’t been our problem. We’ve had more talent than every Big South team not named Coastal and even then we were likely even with Coastal.

Can we pump the brakes on the recruiting evaluation?

Lets project that we get two more 3* recruits this class and compare it to the 2017 classes in the lower G5 conferences.

Five 3* recruits puts us at
-8/14 in the CUSA
-7/12 in the SBC
-9/12 in the MAC
-Over Army's three 3* recruits last season.

If we push that number to eight 3* for the 2019 class
-Still 8/14 in the CUSA
-3/12 in the SBC
-6/12 in the MAC
-Tied with UMass at eight.

We will only garner more attention with more FBS opponents.

Jonathan Carone wrote:Our talent level hasn’t been our problem. We’ve had more talent than every Big South team not named Coastal and even then we were likely even with Coastal.

The primary challenge to playing an FBS schedule will not be the calibre of the coaching we face; it will be the talent of the players. If we can upgrade that, I see no reason why our W/L record should take a big dive. I am not saying we cannot or should not upgrade the coaching as well. Hopefully IM will be given the authority to make that call.

And speaking of Ian McCaw, isn't it amazing the how quickly the controversy over his hire has faded. JLFJR has his flaws, like all of us, but he is a smart cookie, and it's looking more and more like he pulled off a major coup in landing Ian.

Hiring a football coach could be difficult for Ian. He will likely have to hire someone that knows him personally. The cloud of TitleIX at Baylor, could shrink the candidate pool pretty significantly.

I agree, Ian has been worth it so far, and I have no doubts he can hire a great coach if need be.

olldflame wrote:The primary challenge to playing an FBS schedule will not be the calibre of the coaching we face; it will be the talent of the players.

We have been getting beat while having superior talent for three years. Why would that change at a higher level? The disappointment would just be greater.

R i wrote:Hiring a football coach could be difficult for Ian. He will likely have to hire someone that knows him personally. The cloud of TitleIX at Baylor, could shrink the candidate pool pretty significantly.

I agree, Ian has been worth it so far, and I have no doubts he can hire a great coach if need be.

I don't see what happened at Baylor having any significant impact on Ian's ability to hire a football coach, whether he knows the man personally or not. Unlike Ken Starr and his cohorts, our leadership has a robust Title IX compliance system in place, something he did in spite of the fact he doesn't like the way the law is being enforced, but he realized the pragmatic need for it. Add to that the fact that, while they are certainly not all "angels", we do screen the character of our recruits more carefully than most schools, and I think a lot of possible coaches would be excited about the idea of working at a place where they could focus more on football and less on outside drama.

Jonathan Carone wrote:

olldflame wrote:The primary challenge to playing an FBS schedule will not be the calibre of the coaching we face; it will be the talent of the players.

We have been getting beat while having superior talent for three years. Why would that change at a higher level? The disappointment would just be greater.

Pay attention Jon. No one is saying we won't lose football games; just that there is no real reason to believe we would only win 2 or 3 a year as has been suggested. I have mixed feelings about making a coaching change, but I have a lot of confidence in IM to make the right call on that. I also can understand if they hold off a year or so because of the cost of the buyout.

I see 3-4 wins next year best case without significant changes and not much more than that the year after.

R i wrote:

BigRed1 wrote:

R i wrote:We will win more than 2-3 per year with Gill.

I really hope you’re right, but I don’t see it happening. With the lack of success Gill has had with an FCS schedule, I doubt he will have very much success against stronger opponents. I would sincerely like to know why you think he is going to be able to do what he’s failed to do so far. I would love to hear your take on this.

He has always won more than 2-3 games, so he has not failed to do that so far.

As far as transitioning, he will be able to get better recruiting classes. This years class is disappointing so far, but better than years past when we were recruiting to FCS BigSouth competition.

I am not a Gill apologist, but to say he would not win more than 2 games a year is kind of RiDiculous.

Gill coached 6 years in the FBS. Out of those six years he’s had 1 winning season. Three of those seasons were 3 or less wins. Granted he may get higher caliber players, but the teams he faces will also have higher caliber players as well. The competition is going to be much better than what he’s faced in the past six years. If we compare his FBS record against his FCS record, it’s a drastic difference.

Anyone coaching at Kansas gets a mulligan on their record

Purple Haize wrote:Anyone coaching at Kansas gets a mulligan on their record

If they don't, they should. I remember the Kansas yahoos coming on here bad mouthing TG and proclaiming Charlie Weiss a genius. He proved to be not so ingenious and a jerk as well. Waiting for them to go begging to the only coach who has won there, Mark Mangino, who "resigned" due to allegations of player abuse in 2009.

I think it should also be added that the other FBS HC job Gill had was at Buffalo. Not exactly your historic football powerhouse either, which is why he got so much credit (possibly more than he deserved) for taking them to a conference championship and a bowl.

Let me state again for the record, I am NOT saying we do not need a new coach. I trust McCaw to make that call.

In Ian We Trust

Kansas is historically bad, but we can’t simply overlook his results there completely. They have to be taken in context.

Mangino was 7-5, 6-6, 12-1, 8-5, 5-7 with 3 bowl wins in his last five years. He’s the outlier.

Gill came in and immediately went 3-9, losing his first game to an FCS. He lost 17 of his last 20. Of those 17 losses only three were single digits. Three of his five wins were by less than a touchdown.

If you look at how his teams performed at Kansas and how they’ve performed at Liberty, there’s not much hope for success. I hate that because he’s represents us so well but at some point you are who you are.

Turner Gill had some terrible jobs: Buffalo and Kansas.

I know he went 5-7 his last year at Buffalo, but after that first year he went 18-20 with a conference championship and bowl appearance. If you look at Buffalo from 1999 to 2017 this is what you see. . .
6 times they won 5 or more games, 3 of those 6 seasons belong to Turner Gill. He is the only one to win a conference title there and the other 3 seasons of 5 or more wins were shared by 3 different head coaches.

He left Buffalo in a MUCH better position when he left. Record doesn't speak for the success he had at Buffalo.

And for the record next season, I think we can win 6 games for sure. I will be disappointed with anything less than 4. For the 2019 season I think we can win 7 of those games and again anything less than 4 would be a disappointment.

I don’t really understand why so many people keep excusing Gill’s lack of success at Kansas. In the previous 8 years before Gill went there, Kansas went to 4 bowl games and won three of those. It’s when Gill came to Kansas and there after that they became a dumpster fire.

Mangini created the dumpster fire and even the great Charlie Weis couldn't fix it.

BigRed1 wrote:I don’t really understand why so many people keep excusing Gill’s lack of success at Kansas. In the previous 8 years before Gill went there, Kansas went to 4 bowl games and won three of those. It’s when Gill came to Kansas and there after that they became a dumpster fire.

Finally someone with some sense.

Ewglenn wrote:

BigRed1 wrote:I don’t really understand why so many people keep excusing Gill’s lack of success at Kansas. In the previous 8 years before Gill went there, Kansas went to 4 bowl games and won three of those. It’s when Gill came to Kansas and there after that they became a dumpster fire.

Finally someone with some sense.

As has been stated by myself and others, Gill's predicesor at Kansas, Mark Mangino, is the only coach to have success there in a LONG time. They were bad before him and have been bad since he left. He was the Kansas equivalent of Bill Snyder at K State, but without the longevity or the class. Trying to make it sound like Turner Gill is responsible for the dumpster fire that is Kansas football is agenda driven revisionist history.

FlamesHighontheTide wrote:I know he went 5-7 his last year at Buffalo, but after that first year he went 18-20 with a conference championship and bowl appearance. If you look at Buffalo from 1999 to 2017 this is what you see. . .
6 times they won 5 or more games, 3 of those 6 seasons belong to Turner Gill. He is the only one to win a conference title there and the other 3 seasons of 5 or more wins were shared by 3 different head coaches.

He left Buffalo in a MUCH better position when he left. Record doesn't speak for the success he had at Buffalo.

And for the record next season, I think we can win 6 games for sure. I will be disappointed with anything less than 4. For the 2019 season I think we can win 7 of those games and again anything less than 4 would be a disappointment.

But Look what happened the year after he left, when Buffalo was stacked with his system and recruits from the previous 4 years. The new coach went 2/10 I think, but was was able to get to 8/4 within a few years.

No matter how you slice it, he peaked at 7/4, and the team went backwards. Same story at LU.