Crowe: Winning culture "not sustainable" with JUCO players

[homersapien 11,367]

The argument could be made that Dameyune Craig is a legitimate QB coach. At least two QB's he coached went in the first round. I'm really not sure why Lashlee is the QB coach instead of Craig, as that seems like an obvious choice to me. My only guess has been that Lashlee is the QB coach for the same reason that he's the OC, because his long experience with Gus gives him a better idea of what Gus wants.

I'm not sure how much credit Craig deserves for the QBs at FSU considering that that is Jimbo Fisher's offense and Fisher has been "QB Coach" at every single one of his stops since 1988. Craig had virtually no significant QB coaching experience prior to coming to FSU (just 2 seasons at Tuskegee); he was mainly at FSU to recruit just like he's mainly here to recruit.

I'm not sure how much credit he deserves either.

Was he their position coach or not?

If so, and Fisher was working over his shoulder then all the better for the experience.

[Quietmaninthecorner 1,945]

We have only used juco's to plug players as well. Nose tackle is one of the most important positions on their D, and everyone knows how important left tackle is as well and they used juco's at those positions before. I'm just saying even the best teams use juco's

No, we've used JUCO's to try and fill entire units (DL) as well as pivotal positions like QB...all because we either haven't been able to recruit well enough, or we haven't developed the HS players that we have signed. We are relying on JUCO's and other team's castoffs (Matthews, Countess) to fill nearly half our defense; that isn't "plugging one or two holes".

To me the issue is team chemistry. The Guy who has done everything the right way. Who worked hard on the field and in the class room...stayed away from trouble...gets a scholarship, Works his butt off for 3 years at a big time high pressure SEC school, and is then bumped down the depth chart. Replaced by a guy that did not study as hard in high school, or got in trouble, or a number of other issues. then, spent a couple years in JUCO where the work load is not has hard or heavy. This will cause resentment.

This is not an issue if it is just 1 or 2 players. BUT, if it is a widespread stratagey used throughout the team, there will be widespread resentment to the point it overtakes a team. Preferential treatment of players (JUCO or not) just compounds the situation. The result is what I beleive we are seeing. I think the coaches are seeing that now.

[icanthearyou 4,462]

When I grow up, I want to live in a world in which almost no one understands the difference between an indicator and, an absolute.

I want to believe that the ounce of truth found in any narrative is an all encompassing explanation of the totality of reality and, apply that narrative as a complete explanation to any specific issue.

Generally speaking, the problem with generalizations is not that they aren't true, they just aren't specific enough to cover all of the aspects of specific situations. When used as a complete explanation, the truth of the generalization becomes a lie.

[keesler 5,924]

We have only used juco's to plug players as well. Nose tackle is one of the most important positions on their D, and everyone knows how important left tackle is as well and they used juco's at those positions before. I'm just saying even the best teams use juco's

No, we've used JUCO's to try and fill entire units (DL) as well as pivotal positions like QB...all because we either haven't been able to recruit well enough, or we haven't developed the HS players that we have signed. We are relying on JUCO's and other team's castoffs (Matthews, Countess) to fill nearly half our defense; that isn't "plugging one or two holes".

To me the issue is team chemistry. The Guy who has done everything the right way. Who worked hard on the field and in the class room...stayed away from trouble...gets a scholarship, Works his butt off for 3 years at a big time high pressure SEC school, and is then bumped down the depth chart. Replaced by a guy that did not study as hard in high school, or got in trouble, or a number of other issues. then, spent a couple years in JUCO where the work load is not has hard or heavy. This will cause resentment.

This is not an issue if it is just 1 or 2 players. BUT, if it is a widespread stratagey used throughout the team, there will be widespread resentment to the point it overtakes a team. Preferential treatment of players (JUCO or not) just compounds the situation. The result is what I beleive we are seeing. I think the coaches are seeing that now.

Good post. I've never looked at from this perspective. I can easily see how player discord and bad attitudes could seep into the system when these plug 'n play athletes are brought into the program.

[aucanucktiger 1,791]

Chemistry is truly a factor too but not the closing argument on incorporating transfers like JUCOs. This board with few exceptions vehemently opposed the concept of AU staff even flirting with Russell Wilson when he was transferring from NC State because "it might mess up the good chemistry" between Kiehl Frazier, Barrett Trotter and Clint Moseley. The likelihood of us getting Wilson isn't the point, anybody want to guess in hindsight whether that chemistry disruption would have been worth it? Not Wilson would have been our savior in that era but he certainly would not have hurt...

[Tiger 8,821]

Chemistry disruption is equally based on the attitude of the player coming in along with how it disrupts the depth chart already in place IMO. A good guy who is better than those who are already there -- no problem. Nick Marshall got in trouble, and perhaps he was treated as a favorite by Gus, but he was far and away the best option we had at QB so it had a minimal bearing on chemistry IMO from the outside looking in...or maybe because we don't hear about bad chemistry until the product on the field is so crappy that stuff just starts to come out.

[McLoofus 35,182]

Chemistry is truly a factor too but not the closing argument on incorporating transfers like JUCOs. This board with few exceptions vehemently opposed the concept of AU staff even flirting with Russell Wilson when he was transferring from NC State because "it might mess up the good chemistry" between Kiehl Frazier, Barrett Trotter and Clint Moseley. The likelihood of us getting Wilson isn't the point, anybody want to guess in hindsight whether that chemistry disruption would have been worth it? Not Wilson would have been our savior in that era but he certainly would not have hurt...

Yup. And folks still think we should back off recruiting juco QBs because of Sean White, Tyler Queen and Woody Barrett (who hasn't even signed). It's amazing.

And Tiger, you're right, but I'll take it a step further. What Nick Marshall contributed to the team in terms of chemistry not only didn't hinder us, but every player on the 2013 and 2014 teams will tell you that his leadership is one of the primary reasons why our offense clicked. 2010 guys would say the same about Cam.

If a guy puts the work in and delivers results, then I don't think the team cares how long he's been there.

[WarEagle1983 2,185]

I don't mind JUCOs...except when you continually have to rely on it to find a QB b/c it seems like we can't develop them. That's a HUGE problem for me.

[Quietmaninthecorner 1,945]

Chemistry is truly a factor too but not the closing argument on incorporating transfers like JUCOs. This board with few exceptions vehemently opposed the concept of AU staff even flirting with Russell Wilson when he was transferring from NC State because "it might mess up the good chemistry" between Kiehl Frazier, Barrett Trotter and Clint Moseley. The likelihood of us getting Wilson isn't the point, anybody want to guess in hindsight whether that chemistry disruption would have been worth it? Not Wilson would have been our savior in that era but he certainly would not have hurt...

Oh, I agree. I am all for bringing in JUCO players if they are better than what we have, but only If it is one or two players. I figure there are always a couple players really unhappy on every team. You bring in a couple jucos you have another couple unhappy players. Still no big deal. 4-5 unhappy players gets lost in the shuffle. The happy 95% of the team overrides the few unhappy players.

But when you add 6-8 JUCO's the number one guys get bumped to #2 and lossed most of hisplaying time. The number two guys are now 3rd team, and will most likely not get any playing time. We now have 12-16 resentful players undermining the whole "team work " concept. Some of them more than others. But being human there will be some resentment from the bumped players.

Yes, you must weigh and consider how much better a juco is, how much better he can make the team, and how much chemistry is disrupted. May be we got lucky and found a bunch of JUCOs that were talented, and caused little disruption in chemistry, but for each juco there is a little disruption, those little disruptions add up. Lots of them add up to major disruptions in chemistry.

[IronMan70 3,277]

I don't mind JUCOs...except when you continually have to rely on it to find a QB b/c it seems like we can't develop them. That's a HUGE problem for me.

That's true and we are on the same wave length but the problem isn't the JUCO of course. It's the fact you can't get a HS kid to take over when his time comes. At best, it's hit or miss on HS kids at QB, probably more than any other position.

I would use the yahoos on the other side of the state as an example, which I hate to do by the way. Look at all the 4* and 5* HS QBs they have then look who is starting. A Sr.that was a Jr. transfer from another program who took a year himself. He couldn't beat out a Sr. last year that use to be a RB. Not a single HS QB over the last 2 years, developed from within, has been able to crack the starting position.

LSU is having the same problem with their HS phenom QB who is now a Soph. They have LF to be the centerpiece which covers up the problem. The QB is certainly not the centerpiece of the offense but he has shown he is good at handoffs. Just let LF get injured and/or crank up the passing and see what LSU has then. Georgia has a graduate transfer starting from Virginia no less. Yet both of those schools have recruited 4* and 5* high school QBs over the last 2 years.

The bottom line is, you HAVE to have good play at the position of QB to have a chance. Without it, the entire team is effected, on both sides of the ball. If you can develop a HS QB and he is already on the roster, great. But as I said in an earlier post, if you don't have one, you better be going out and get one.

[WarEagle1983 2,185]

I don't mind JUCOs...except when you continually have to rely on it to find a QB b/c it seems like we can't develop them. That's a HUGE problem for me.

That's true and we are on the same wave length but the problem isn't the JUCO of course. It's the fact you can't get a HS kid to take over when his time comes. At best, it's hit or miss on HS kids at QB, probably more than any other position.

I would use the yahoos on the other side of the state as an example, which I hate to do by the way. Look at all the 4* and 5* HS QBs they have then look who is starting. A Sr.that was a Jr. transfer from another program who took a year himself. He couldn't beat out a Sr. last year that use to be a RB. Not a single HS QB over the last 2 years, developed from within, has been able to crack the starting position.

LSU is having the same problem with their HS phenom QB who is now a Soph. They have LF to be the centerpiece which covers up the problem. The QB is certainly not the centerpiece of the offense but he has shown he is good at handoffs. Just let LF get injured and/or crank up the passing and see what LSU has then. Georgia has a graduate transfer starting from Virginia no less. Yet both of those schools have recruited 4* and 5* high school QBs over the last 2 years.

The bottom line is, you HAVE to have good play at the position of QB to have a chance. Without it, the entire team is effected, on both sides of the ball. If you can develop a HS QB and he is already on the roster, great. But as I said in an earlier post, if you don't have one, you better be going out and get one.

Agree. Good points b/c the turds have certainly have a number of 4 and 5* QBs. Several have transferred as well. Probably why there is a lot of subpar play going on this season too. The QB position in CFB is extremely weak this year and it's showing across the board. There are some decent QBs but very inconsistent.

[metafour 4,969]

I would use the yahoos on the other side of the state as an example, which I hate to do by the way. Look at all the 4* and 5* HS QBs they have then look who is starting. A Sr.that was a Jr. transfer from another program who took a year himself. He couldn't beat out a Sr. last year that use to be a RB. Not a single HS QB over the last 2 years, developed from within, has been able to crack the starting position.

LSU is having the same problem with their HS phenom QB who is now a Soph. They have LF to be the centerpiece which covers up the problem. The QB is certainly not the centerpiece of the offense but he has shown he is good at handoffs. Just let LF get injured and/or crank up the passing and see what LSU has then. Georgia has a graduate transfer starting from Virginia no less. Yet both of those schools have recruited 4* and 5* high school QBs over the last 2 years.

These are three teams that run Pro oriented offenses which ask infinitely more from their quarterbacks - that is why they struggle so often to find a stable quarterback. The entire draw of spread-oriented offenses is that it minimizes the talent required for you to produce: you don't need Peyton Manning to make your offense work because the scheme simplifies things dramatically. That is why Nick Marshall can look pretty good for us despite the fact that he really possessed numerous glaring flaws as a quarterback which ensured that he'd have no chance in hell of playing the position at a school like Georgia...hence why he was a DB prior to being expelled, and hence why he's now playing DB in the NFL.

It should be easier for us to find a passable quarterback just because of the scheme we run. Flaws can be hidden in this offense, the same cant be said for Pro oriented offenses. This is also why NFL personnel dreaded the rise of spread-oriented offenses around the country: you've got a ton of guys who put up flashy numbers, but you are tasked with trying to project how they will translate over to much more complicated offenses at the next level.

[WarTim 3,456]

How many recruits from past three years are no longer at AU??

[metafour 4,969]

If you can develop a HS QB and he is already on the roster, great. But as I said in an earlier post, if you don't have one, you better be going out and get one.

You are taking just as big a risk, if not a bigger one by trying to go the JUCO route. Why? Ask yourself why this so-called proposed "JUCO hotshot" is in JUCO in the first place. The reality is that most of those kids were either deemed not good enough out of HS and they went to JUCO to try and get another shot at being evaluated, or they were good enough to be recruited by top D1 teams but they possessed piss-poor grades or serious problems which prevented them from actually making it there (in this case you're taking a huge risk in assuming that they've alleviated those problems, which most times isn't the case) . The third possibility is that the candidate was actually signed by a top team (ie: he was already deemed good enough), but certain circumstances led them to JUCO...usually off the field problems. Examples of this are obvious: Cam Newton, Zach Mettenberger, Chad Kelly, Nick Marshall, etc. Even Chris Todd was good enough to make it to Texas Tech. This third type of prospect is the one that you really want...but the problem is that they are a rare case; its not like every year there is one or more of these types of prospects kicking around in JUCO. I don't see one of them this year. The hyped guy dual-threat guy we're looking at right now went to Air Force out of HS I believe...is it possible that he slipped through the cracks and is actually a top SEC caliber player? Sure, but it is just as likely if not more likely that the guys we currently have on roster are better than him. If that is the case, then why not do everything in your power to coach them up instead of trying to take the longshot that this guy is any better?

The great majority of our JUCO successes have been guys that were already obviously known SEC talents before they ever wound up in JUCO. The majority of our JUCO flops have been guys who were marginal prospects out of HS but all of a sudden look great in JUCO. Don't forget that while JUCO is above HS ball, it is still way below SEC caliber play.

[Tiger 8,821]

If you can develop a HS QB and he is already on the roster, great. But as I said in an earlier post, if you don't have one, you better be going out and get one.

You are taking just as big a risk, if not a bigger one by trying to go the JUCO route. Why? Ask yourself why this so-called proposed "JUCO hotshot" is in JUCO in the first place. The reality is that most of those kids were either deemed not good enough out of HS and they went to JUCO to try and get another shot at being evaluated, or they were good enough to be recruited by top D1 teams but they possessed piss-poor grades or serious problems which prevented them from actually making it there (in this case you're taking a huge risk in assuming that they've alleviated those problems, which most times isn't the case) . The third possibility is that the candidate was actually signed by a top team (ie: he was already deemed good enough), but certain circumstances led them to JUCO...usually off the field problems. Examples of this are obvious: Cam Newton, Zach Mettenberger, Chad Kelly, Nick Marshall, etc. Even Chris Todd was good enough to make it to Texas Tech. This third type of prospect is the one that you really want...but the problem is that they are a rare case; its not like every year there is one or more of these types of prospects kicking around in JUCO. I don't see one of them this year. The hyped guy dual-threat guy we're looking at right now went to Air Force out of HS I believe...is it possible that he slipped through the cracks and is actually a top SEC caliber player? Sure, but it is just as likely if not more likely that the guys we currently have on roster are better than him. If that is the case, then why not do everything in your power to coach them up instead of trying to take the longshot that this guy is any better?

The great majority of our JUCO successes have been guys that were already obviously known SEC talents before they ever wound up in JUCO. The majority of our JUCO flops have been guys who were marginal prospects out of HS but all of a sudden look great in JUCO. Don't forget that while JUCO is above HS ball, it is still way below SEC caliber play.

This is especially true. good point.

[McLoofus 35,182]

If you can develop a HS QB and he is already on the roster, great. But as I said in an earlier post, if you don't have one, you better be going out and get one.

You are taking just as big a risk, if not a bigger one by trying to go the JUCO route. Why? Ask yourself why this so-called proposed "JUCO hotshot" is in JUCO in the first place. The reality is that most of those kids were either deemed not good enough out of HS and they went to JUCO to try and get another shot at being evaluated, or they were good enough to be recruited by top D1 teams but they possessed piss-poor grades or serious problems which prevented them from actually making it there (in this case you're taking a huge risk in assuming that they've alleviated those problems, which most times isn't the case) . The third possibility is that the candidate was actually signed by a top team (ie: he was already deemed good enough), but certain circumstances led them to JUCO...usually off the field problems. Examples of this are obvious: Cam Newton, Zach Mettenberger, Chad Kelly, Nick Marshall, etc. Even Chris Todd was good enough to make it to Texas Tech. This third type of prospect is the one that you really want...but the problem is that they are a rare case; its not like every year there is one or more of these types of prospects kicking around in JUCO. I don't see one of them this year. The hyped guy dual-threat guy we're looking at right now went to Air Force out of HS I believe...is it possible that he slipped through the cracks and is actually a top SEC caliber player? Sure, but it is just as likely if not more likely that the guys we currently have on roster are better than him. If that is the case, then why not do everything in your power to coach them up instead of trying to take the longshot that this guy is any better?

The great majority of our JUCO successes have been guys that were already obviously known SEC talents before they ever wound up in JUCO. The majority of our JUCO flops have been guys who were marginal prospects out of HS but all of a sudden look great in JUCO. Don't forget that while JUCO is above HS ball, it is still way below SEC caliber play.

This is especially true. good point.

Agreed, good post. I had argued against avoiding juco guys based on previous reasons, but that's pretty compelling.

[IronMan70 3,277]

I would use the yahoos on the other side of the state as an example, which I hate to do by the way. Look at all the 4* and 5* HS QBs they have then look who is starting. A Sr.that was a Jr. transfer from another program who took a year himself. He couldn't beat out a Sr. last year that use to be a RB. Not a single HS QB over the last 2 years, developed from within, has been able to crack the starting position.

LSU is having the same problem with their HS phenom QB who is now a Soph. They have LF to be the centerpiece which covers up the problem. The QB is certainly not the centerpiece of the offense but he has shown he is good at handoffs. Just let LF get injured and/or crank up the passing and see what LSU has then. Georgia has a graduate transfer starting from Virginia no less. Yet both of those schools have recruited 4* and 5* high school QBs over the last 2 years.

These are three teams that run Pro oriented offenses which ask infinitely more from their quarterbacks - that is why they struggle so often to find a stable quarterback. The entire draw of spread-oriented offenses is that it minimizes the talent required for you to produce: you don't need Peyton Manning to make your offense work because the scheme simplifies things dramatically. That is why Nick Marshall can look pretty good for us despite the fact that he really possessed numerous glaring flaws as a quarterback which ensured that he'd have no chance in hell of playing the position at a school like Georgia...hence why he was a DB prior to being expelled, and hence why he's now playing DB in the NFL.

It should be easier for us to find a passable quarterback just because of the scheme we run. Flaws can be hidden in this offense, the same cant be said for Pro oriented offenses. This is also why NFL personnel dreaded the rise of spread-oriented offenses around the country: you've got a ton of guys who put up flashy numbers, but you are tasked with trying to project how they will translate over to much more complicated offenses at the next level.

All very true. All 3 are pro style offenses and one was even able to get a former RB to play well. Your point on spread offenses and DT QBs is on point too. That it should be easier to find one since a spread offense can hide flaws in a DT QB. Good post.

[IronMan70 3,277]

If you can develop a HS QB and he is already on the roster, great. But as I said in an earlier post, if you don't have one, you better be going out and get one.

You are taking just as big a risk, if not a bigger one by trying to go the JUCO route. Why? Ask yourself why this so-called proposed "JUCO hotshot" is in JUCO in the first place. The reality is that most of those kids were either deemed not good enough out of HS and they went to JUCO to try and get another shot at being evaluated, or they were good enough to be recruited by top D1 teams but they possessed piss-poor grades or serious problems which prevented them from actually making it there (in this case you're taking a huge risk in assuming that they've alleviated those problems, which most times isn't the case) . The third possibility is that the candidate was actually signed by a top team (ie: he was already deemed good enough), but certain circumstances led them to JUCO...usually off the field problems. Examples of this are obvious: Cam Newton, Zach Mettenberger, Chad Kelly, Nick Marshall, etc. Even Chris Todd was good enough to make it to Texas Tech. This third type of prospect is the one that you really want...but the problem is that they are a rare case; its not like every year there is one or more of these types of prospects kicking around in JUCO. I don't see one of them this year. The hyped guy dual-threat guy we're looking at right now went to Air Force out of HS I believe...is it possible that he slipped through the cracks and is actually a top SEC caliber player? Sure, but it is just as likely if not more likely that the guys we currently have on roster are better than him. If that is the case, then why not do everything in your power to coach them up instead of trying to take the longshot that this guy is any better?

The great majority of our JUCO successes have been guys that were already obviously known SEC talents before they ever wound up in JUCO. The majority of our JUCO flops have been guys who were marginal prospects out of HS but all of a sudden look great in JUCO. Don't forget that while JUCO is above HS ball, it is still way below SEC caliber play.

Yes, a JUCO is a risk just like any recruit is a risk since nothing is guaranteed. I agree that we should do everything in our power to coach them up first. That would be my preference. I mean, I would like to have 5 HS QBs, all groomed from within, ready to take over, that actually can take over when it's show time. But what we want and what is (as of today) is 2 different things.

That brings us back to the same thing. After you do all that, all the developing and all the coaching, if it still doesn't work you better try to go get one (a good starting QB) somewhere else. Because no matter the method used, what is more important than how we get one, is IF we get one.

A JUCO just gave us 2 years to groom a star HS QB and unfortunately the developing thing hasn't worked out so far. You can't just sit there and do nothing if the ones on the roster don't work out.

[aujeff11 6,243]

If you can develop a HS QB and he is already on the roster, great. But as I said in an earlier post, if you don't have one, you better be going out and get one.

You are taking just as big a risk, if not a bigger one by trying to go the JUCO route. Why? Ask yourself why this so-called proposed "JUCO hotshot" is in JUCO in the first place. The reality is that most of those kids were either deemed not good enough out of HS and they went to JUCO to try and get another shot at being evaluated, or they were good enough to be recruited by top D1 teams but they possessed piss-poor grades or serious problems which prevented them from actually making it there (in this case you're taking a huge risk in assuming that they've alleviated those problems, which most times isn't the case) . The third possibility is that the candidate was actually signed by a top team (ie: he was already deemed good enough), but certain circumstances led them to JUCO...usually off the field problems. Examples of this are obvious: Cam Newton, Zach Mettenberger, Chad Kelly, Nick Marshall, etc. Even Chris Todd was good enough to make it to Texas Tech. This third type of prospect is the one that you really want...but the problem is that they are a rare case; its not like every year there is one or more of these types of prospects kicking around in JUCO. I don't see one of them this year. The hyped guy dual-threat guy we're looking at right now went to Air Force out of HS I believe...is it possible that he slipped through the cracks and is actually a top SEC caliber player? Sure, but it is just as likely if not more likely that the guys we currently have on roster are better than him. If that is the case, then why not do everything in your power to coach them up instead of trying to take the longshot that this guy is any better?

The great majority of our JUCO successes have been guys that were already obviously known SEC talents before they ever wound up in JUCO. The majority of our JUCO flops have been guys who were marginal prospects out of HS but all of a sudden look great in JUCO. Don't forget that while JUCO is above HS ball, it is still way below SEC caliber play.

Thank you.

[keesler 5,924]

If you can develop a HS QB and he is already on the roster, great. But as I said in an earlier post, if you don't have one, you better be going out and get one.

You are taking just as big a risk, if not a bigger one by trying to go the JUCO route. Why? Ask yourself why this so-called proposed "JUCO hotshot" is in JUCO in the first place. The reality is that most of those kids were either deemed not good enough out of HS and they went to JUCO to try and get another shot at being evaluated, or they were good enough to be recruited by top D1 teams but they possessed piss-poor grades or serious problems which prevented them from actually making it there (in this case you're taking a huge risk in assuming that they've alleviated those problems, which most times isn't the case) . The third possibility is that the candidate was actually signed by a top team (ie: he was already deemed good enough), but certain circumstances led them to JUCO...usually off the field problems. Examples of this are obvious: Cam Newton, Zach Mettenberger, Chad Kelly, Nick Marshall, etc. Even Chris Todd was good enough to make it to Texas Tech. This third type of prospect is the one that you really want...but the problem is that they are a rare case; its not like every year there is one or more of these types of prospects kicking around in JUCO. I don't see one of them this year. The hyped guy dual-threat guy we're looking at right now went to Air Force out of HS I believe...is it possible that he slipped through the cracks and is actually a top SEC caliber player? Sure, but it is just as likely if not more likely that the guys we currently have on roster are better than him. If that is the case, then why not do everything in your power to coach them up instead of trying to take the longshot that this guy is any better?

The great majority of our JUCO successes have been guys that were already obviously known SEC talents before they ever wound up in JUCO. The majority of our JUCO flops have been guys who were marginal prospects out of HS but all of a sudden look great in JUCO. Don't forget that while JUCO is above HS ball, it is still way below SEC caliber play.

Thanks!

[AURealist 2,185]

...

...

Yep. Great post.

[Mikey 16,578]

The decision on when to get a JUCO pretty much takes care of itself. In your 2 deep, if you don't already have a player that is capable of handling a key position, you better get one. The reason as to why you don't already have a player on the roster is another issue.

Just an observation but, a more direct cause of why programs aren't able to sustain a winning culture, is whether or not they keep changing head coaches.

Shhhhh! You're pissing off the instant gratification crowd. You know, the guys that would have fired Pat Dye after the '84 & '85 seasons, or Shug Jordan after '52.

[Tiger 8,821]

But are teams changing coaches because they aren't winning or are they not winning because they keep changing coaches?

[homersapien 11,367]

The decision on when to get a JUCO pretty much takes care of itself. In your 2 deep, if you don't already have a player that is capable of handling a key position, you better get one. The reason as to why you don't already have a player on the roster is another issue.

Just an observation but, a more direct cause of why programs aren't able to sustain a winning culture, is whether or not they keep changing head coaches.

Shhhhh! You're pissing off the instant gratification crowd. You know, the guys that would have fired Pat Dye after the '84 & '85 seasons, or Shug Jordan after '52.

Lord, please give me patience and I want it right NOW!

Best case, Gus has a brilliant football mind but he doesn't yet know how to be a top level head coach. Unfortunately - or fortunately depending on how you look at it - he is accumulating that experience at Auburn's expense. Hopefully, he is a fast learner and Auburn will keep him long enough for the investment to pay off.

[IronMan70 3,277]

The decision on when to get a JUCO pretty much takes care of itself. In your 2 deep, if you don't already have a player that is capable of handling a key position, you better get one. The reason as to why you don't already have a player on the roster is another issue.

Just an observation but, a more direct cause of why programs aren't able to sustain a winning culture, is whether or not they keep changing head coaches.

Shhhhh! You're pissing off the instant gratification crowd. You know, the guys that would have fired Pat Dye after the '84 & '85 seasons, or Shug Jordan after '52.

Uh huh, those 2 would have never made it. We could add in Woody Hayes (16 wins total, 1st 3 years) at Ohio State, Vince Dooley (13 wins total, 1st 2 years) at Georgia, Frank Beamer (11 wins total, 1st 3 years) at Va. Tech, Johnny Vaught (9 wins total, in years 3 & 4) and a slew of others. All ended up as very successful coaches that stayed in one place a very long time.