forums

Jacory Harris

SFbayCane said:
An offense does not turn the ball over. lol

Nix was most certainly over his head as an offensive coordinator. Mark Whipple was an accomplished OC and head coach. He was head coach and offensive play caller for a team that won an FCS National Championship. His resume is solid. That's why I think its misguided to lump both of these guys together simply because they both came to the same conclusion about the ability of Jacory Harris and the squad at that time.
Click to expand...
Plus, Mark Whipple coached Kenny Pickett, so...
 
Advertisement
Mklein13 said:
Jacory only played 1 year under Jedd. 2 were under Whipple and 1 under Nix.
Click to expand...

One of the reasons why the INTs went down under Fisch , is because the offensive philosophy overall was much more conservative compared to when Whipple was the OC. Ultimately it didn't matter who the OC was, Jacory was always going to be Japicky.
 
Jacory and that 08 class should have stacked some 10 win seasons at MINIMUM during their time here

maybe he wasn’t top flight to put the team on his back and win a natty but miss me if you think he shouldn’t have won more than he did. Terrible coaching
 
Advertisement
dwreck27 said:
Jacory and that 08 class should have stacked some 10 win seasons at MINIMUM during their time here

maybe he wasn’t top flight to put the team on his back and win a natty but miss me if you think he shouldn’t have won more than he did. Terrible coaching
Click to expand...
This x1000

We've recruited spread QBs to play in pro style systems for almost a decade. Randy would ignore entire counties of players because of some nonsense sfla bs. Al Golden and D'Onofrio were the smartest guys in any room they walked into. Richt, for as much as he did for the program, hurt us just as much by hiring unqualified staff members and making his son the QB coach when there was nothing to suggest he was even qualified to be a GA. Diaz's first staff was a joke as well. UM has always been cheap when it came to coaches and the results show.
 
Cookie917 said:
I mean, isn't it then a double standard to throw hate at a former coach that didn't meet expectations? Not saying Jac did that, I liked him as a Cane, still do, thought it was a good interview. Dude had obvious limitations and hindsight is always 20/20. There are things he did in HS and got away with due to the superior athletic ability around him that he could not do successfully in college.

And not saying this interview specifically, but I rarely like the revisionist history interviews years later. They add little probative value and tend to only illicit negative responses. Like could you imagine a coach giving an interview about former players? It would not go over well.
Click to expand...
Coaches are paid professionals. They are paid to take criticism. It comes with the job. Without any long tenure, coaches are paid mercenaries with no affiliation or investiture with a school beyond the short few years they worked there.

I don't get this equivalence you're trying to make. The only thing close would be a coach like Mark Richt who is an alum and has a vested interest in the school.

Players are family. They gave all they had to the program and deserve the same respect as the super stars everyone remembers. Those guys less talented or underachievers were the teammates and brothers of the players everyone loves. They formed bonds and relationships beyond the football field.

You can criticize a athlete's performance, not he or she as a person. These people in this thread giving personal hate simply because a young man didn't meet their expectations on the football field. Doesn't get much worse than that.

Just ridiculous that people said they wouldn't watch the video because he wasn't a good QB (paraphrasing). If a player who never played a down of football soes an interview tell you what went on during a good or bad season, you don't say I won't watch because this guy never played or didn't play well. Just a messed up way of thinking.
 
Number1CanesFan said:
Coaches are paid professionals. They are paid to take criticism. It comes with the job. Without any long tenure, coaches are paid mercenaries with no affiliation or investiture with a school beyond the short few years they worked there.

I don't get this equivalence you're trying to make. The only thing close would be a coach like Mark Richt who is an alum and has a vested interest in the school.

Players are family. They gave all they had to the program and deserve the same respect as the super stars everyone remembers. Those guys less talented or underachievers were the teammates and brothers of the players everyone loves. They formed bonds and relationships beyond the football field.

You can criticize a athlete's performance, not he or she as a person. These people in this thread giving personal hate simply because a young man didn't meet their expectations on the football field. Doesn't get much worse than that.

Just ridiculous that people said they wouldn't watch the video because he wasn't a good QB (paraphrasing). If a player who never played a down of football soes an interview tell you what went on during a good or bad season, you don't say I won't watch because this guy never played or didn't play well. Just a messed up way of thinking.
Click to expand...

Plus Whipple threw dirt on His name to NFL people, so it's only right Jacory returns the favor.
 
Number1CanesFan said:
Coaches are paid professionals. They are paid to take criticism. It comes with the job. Without any long tenure, coaches are paid mercenaries with no affiliation or investiture with a school beyond the short few years they worked there.

I don't get this equivalence you're trying to make. The only thing close would be a coach like Mark Richt who is an alum and has a vested interest in the school.

Players are family. They gave all they had to the program and deserve the same respect as the super stars everyone remembers. Those guys less talented or underachievers were the teammates and brothers of the players everyone loves. They formed bonds and relationships beyond the football field.

You can criticize a athlete's performance, not he or she as a person. These people in this thread giving personal hate simply because a young man didn't meet their expectations on the football field. Doesn't get much worse than that.

Just ridiculous that people said they wouldn't watch the video because he wasn't a good QB (paraphrasing). If a player who never played a down of football soes an interview tell you what went on during a good or bad season, you don't say I won't watch because this guy never played or didn't play well. Just a messed up way of thinking.
Click to expand...

This cleared it up. Could not agree more UNLESS that person is like Winslow Jr. or something like that then I feel you can criticize the person.

I get that coach's are paid and leave etc. and yes there are exceptions like mark richt and randy shannon who are also alums, but I think coaches likewise give all they have to a university, most of them move their families and wives and children to be a part of it. No coach takes a job trying to fail but I do recognize the difference between a grown *** man making millions over kids playing a game.

But I actually fall on the other side of the coin when it comes to criticism. Both players and coaches are there to do a job, if they do not do that job, they are open for criticism (as you mentioned on their performance, not personal feelings). There are of course exceptions to any rule and one that comes to mind is Zion Nelson his TF year, he had no business being out there but the coaches kept putting him out there and in positions to fail (7 step play action slow developing plays). What is the kid going to say? No coach, I am not going in? I think most of his criticism should have been directed towards coaches. But overall agree with the premise of your post now that you cleared it up.
 
Advertisement
Cookie917 said:
This cleared it up. Could not agree more UNLESS that person is like Winslow Jr. or something like that then I feel you can criticize the person.

I get that coach's are paid and leave etc. and yes there are exceptions like mark richt and randy shannon who are also alums, but I think coaches likewise give all they have to a university, most of them move their families and wives and children to be a part of it. No coach takes a job trying to fail but I do recognize the difference between a grown *** man making millions over kids playing a game.

But I actually fall on the other side of the coin when it comes to criticism. Both players and coaches are there to do a job, if they do not do that job, they are open for criticism (as you mentioned on their performance, not personal feelings). There are of course exceptions to any rule and one that comes to mind is Zion Nelson his TF year, he had no business being out there but the coaches kept putting him out there and in positions to fail (7 step play action slow developing plays). What is the kid going to say? No coach, I am not going in? I think most of his criticism should have been directed towards coaches. But overall agree with the premise of your post now that you cleared it up.
Click to expand...


I would also add the following.

If a coach doesn't like his situation (i.e., administrative support, co-workers, power dynamics, etc.), he can take any one of a number of other jobs in a heartbeat (and often for more money).

If a player does not like his situation, until recently he faced numerous barriers to leaving for another school. Even now, you may still have issues with academics and transfer credits, as well as IC limitations.

I don't think it's entirely fair to criticize a player for many things that are beyond his control. Not working out and smoking or playing video games instead? Sure. Drop a dozen passes during big games? Sure. But to rip a kid for not turning into a first round draft choice, or for running bad plays sent in by an overpaid assistant coach? I have a bigger problem with that.
 
Advertisement
The problem with Wiffle’s offense wasn’t necessarily the predisposition for deep passes. Like I’ve said earlier, Miami was scoring more than the turnovers were hurting them. It was that he was a one trick pony. The more tape of his offense, the easier it got to defend. That first week game against FSU in 09 was explosive and awesome. By the end of 2010, USF could easily shut his offense down. There’s a reason he’s bounced around since then, including a huge failed return to UMass. At this point he’s just another guy getting recycled in the college football recycling bin. His current offense at Pitt resembles a majority of his FBS career. Decent passing game that’s not nearly good enough to make up for a terrible ground game.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top