Wyche said coach No D is a mastermind lmao i heard it all

[sebastian91]

Potato?

 

[CaneAlmighty]

So his STRATEGY was to run system that didn't play to his players' strengths?

And we can't use the THREE ****ING SEASONS of abysmal play as judgment against this 'strategy' and those implementing it, because it was intentional? Somehow, none of this track record is relevant? Getting tuned up, routinely, by bad offenses is not something to be concerned about?

And I shouldn't be cd, because these coarches needed four years to get their players in and ready?

OK.

Like I said, I don't agree with the strategy. But that is NOT the same as the validity of the scheme itself, or whether or not D'Onofrio is a "mastermind" at defense. They seemed to have just written off the three years while trying to look to the future with the total revamp. Now they have players, we'll see if it pays off long term. The idiots pretending anyone is giving them a free pass are making up motives for those who simply understand that we haven't seen a D'Onofrio defense with actual D'Onofrio players yet. Should he have just written off the past few years and force-fit the players at the time into his system? I don't think so, but that's of trying to win now vs. win later. Does it mean they system is worthless and he can't coach defense? That remains to be seen no matter how much you whine.

What a ****ing myopic view point. You get the first point yet can't connect the dots to save your ****ing life. Of course the D or anyone d would play better with handpicked players for their style of D. That is not the definition of a successful coach. Taking what you have and making it work is. Waiting 4 years to field a decent D is the most moronic thinking I've seen on this board. And you are the point man. Kudo's.

Apparently some (you) are too stupid to understand the distinction. I'm not defending D'Onofrio's decision to play it that way. I'm pointing out that those claiming the verdict is out on whether this type of defense works and whether D'Onofrio knows how to coach a defense are wrong, period. Two different things. Feel free to criticize his decision to only look to the future vs. using the players he had in the best fit for them at the time. That is a completely different topic than whether the defensive scheme will work when his players are in it. Your post leaves out the part where you and your fellow mopes continually state that the defensive scheme is "bad" and "can't work" and now you are backpedaling and saying "Of course the D or anyone d would play better with handpicked players for their style of D."

Where did I say anything about the scheme outside of your absurd context that the staff needs four years to implement it?

The idea that it should take four years to get your players in place is dubious, at best.

Finally, even if that were the case, it marks them as failures anyway. They may turn it around, perhaps, but this isn't the kind of business that gives you long life cycles. Especially at a place like Miami. Burning even one season without doing whatever is necessary to win is a serious problem. Their jobs are to win and win now. Not build some obscure ****heap like VT or KSU up to relevance. Failing to note or believe that makes them either too arrogant or simple. Failing to carry through makes them incompetent.

They've already failed as coaches. Whether or not you believe that doesn't affect the reality of it. They may succeed, moving for. ward, but anyone has the right to doubt that. Certainly anyone with eyes and a memory.

It took the the great Narduzzi 5 years to Get the players he needed to turn it around.

 

[DHucks]

Potato?

Cheese grits?

 

[TedHendricksOffspring]

Cant judge his defense when playing with a full deck ... This is the first year i judge him and the whole staff...

Then that's your foolish mistake. His deck was more than full enough where the defense should not have been ranked in the 110's.

When was this?

http://espn.go.com/college-football...al/position/defense/sort/totalYards/year/2012

So you think think the deck was full enough to not suck?
There has been ONE player drafted from that defense. A 6th rounder at that. For comparison purposes UCLA who was ranked a couple of spots ahead had 2 first round LBs on that defense.
Georgia, which had an average defense that year (60th) had a bunch of players drafted from their defense including some first rounders

Just goes to show how out of wack this fan base is.

The deck was full enough to beat out elite powerhouses like Texas State, UNLV, and Kansas. Also, let me dispel the myth that you need a defense stacked with future Pro-Bowlers to win. Michigan State had one defensive player drafted last year, granted a 1st-rounder, and they finished as the #2 defense.

UCLA had just had a coaching change and had finished as the #115 defense the year before that. Couple that with playing in the PAC-12 and there would be poor performances. Golden on the other hand was a 2nd year coach who had fielded the #28 defense with Shannon's players only to plummet 88 spots. The situations are hardly identical.

At this point, I would kill for a top 60 defense. And the funny thing about that Georgia team is that they finished #4 in the country. We were a long way from that.

Just goes to show how wack some members of this fanbase are.

 

[dk72]

Like I said, I don't agree with the strategy. But that is NOT the same as the validity of the scheme itself, or whether or not D'Onofrio is a "mastermind" at defense. They seemed to have just written off the three years while trying to look to the future with the total revamp. Now they have players, we'll see if it pays off long term. The idiots pretending anyone is giving them a free pass are making up motives for those who simply understand that we haven't seen a D'Onofrio defense with actual D'Onofrio players yet. Should he have just written off the past few years and force-fit the players at the time into his system? I don't think so, but that's of trying to win now vs. win later. Does it mean they system is worthless and he can't coach defense? That remains to be seen no matter how much you whine.

What a ****ing myopic view point. You get the first point yet can't connect the dots to save your ****ing life. Of course the D or anyone d would play better with handpicked players for their style of D. That is not the definition of a successful coach. Taking what you have and making it work is. Waiting 4 years to field a decent D is the most moronic thinking I've seen on this board. And you are the point man. Kudo's.

Apparently some (you) are too stupid to understand the distinction. I'm not defending D'Onofrio's decision to play it that way. I'm pointing out that those claiming the verdict is out on whether this type of defense works and whether D'Onofrio knows how to coach a defense are wrong, period. Two different things. Feel free to criticize his decision to only look to the future vs. using the players he had in the best fit for them at the time. That is a completely different topic than whether the defensive scheme will work when his players are in it. Your post leaves out the part where you and your fellow mopes continually state that the defensive scheme is "bad" and "can't work" and now you are backpedaling and saying "Of course the D or anyone d would play better with handpicked players for their style of D."

Where did I say anything about the scheme outside of your absurd context that the staff needs four years to implement it?

The idea that it should take four years to get your players in place is dubious, at best.

Finally, even if that were the case, it marks them as failures anyway. They may turn it around, perhaps, but this isn't the kind of business that gives you long life cycles. Especially at a place like Miami. Burning even one season without doing whatever is necessary to win is a serious problem. Their jobs are to win and win now. Not build some obscure ****heap like VT or KSU up to relevance. Failing to note or believe that makes them either too arrogant or simple. Failing to carry through makes them incompetent.

They've already failed as coaches. Whether or not you believe that doesn't affect the reality of it. They may succeed, moving for. ward, but anyone has the right to doubt that. Certainly anyone with eyes and a memory.

It took the the great Narduzzi 5 years to Get the players he needed to turn it around.

Exactly. Narduzzi wouldn't have lasted here, Butch wouldn't have made it through his first few seasons, many good coaches would have been shuffled in and out in a constant rotating door of coaches if it were up to some of the posters on here and their need for immediate gratification.

 

[Miami82]

Like I said, I don't agree with the strategy. But that is NOT the same as the validity of the scheme itself, or whether or not D'Onofrio is a "mastermind" at defense. They seemed to have just written off the three years while trying to look to the future with the total revamp. Now they have players, we'll see if it pays off long term. The idiots pretending anyone is giving them a free pass are making up motives for those who simply understand that we haven't seen a D'Onofrio defense with actual D'Onofrio players yet. Should he have just written off the past few years and force-fit the players at the time into his system? I don't think so, but that's of trying to win now vs. win later. Does it mean they system is worthless and he can't coach defense? That remains to be seen no matter how much you whine.

What a ****ing myopic view point. You get the first point yet can't connect the dots to save your ****ing life. Of course the D or anyone d would play better with handpicked players for their style of D. That is not the definition of a successful coach. Taking what you have and making it work is. Waiting 4 years to field a decent D is the most moronic thinking I've seen on this board. And you are the point man. Kudo's.

Apparently some (you) are too stupid to understand the distinction. I'm not defending D'Onofrio's decision to play it that way. I'm pointing out that those claiming the verdict is out on whether this type of defense works and whether D'Onofrio knows how to coach a defense are wrong, period. Two different things. Feel free to criticize his decision to only look to the future vs. using the players he had in the best fit for them at the time. That is a completely different topic than whether the defensive scheme will work when his players are in it. Your post leaves out the part where you and your fellow mopes continually state that the defensive scheme is "bad" and "can't work" and now you are backpedaling and saying "Of course the D or anyone d would play better with handpicked players for their style of D."

Where did I say anything about the scheme outside of your absurd context that the staff needs four years to implement it?

The idea that it should take four years to get your players in place is dubious, at best.

Finally, even if that were the case, it marks them as failures anyway. They may turn it around, perhaps, but this isn't the kind of business that gives you long life cycles. Especially at a place like Miami. Burning even one season without doing whatever is necessary to win is a serious problem. Their jobs are to win and win now. Not build some obscure ****heap like VT or KSU up to relevance. Failing to note or believe that makes them either too arrogant or simple. Failing to carry through makes them incompetent.

They've already failed as coaches. Whether or not you believe that doesn't affect the reality of it. They may succeed, moving for. ward, but anyone has the right to doubt that. Certainly anyone with eyes and a memory.

It took the the great Narduzzi 5 years to Get the players he needed to turn it around.

LMAO, no it didn't. He was hired in late 07 and this is his track record by total defense. His lowest ranked was 73, and single digit the last 3.

year Rank Name Games Plays Yds Avg TDs Ydspgm Wins Losses Ties
2008 58 Michigan St. 13 872 4626 5.31 37 355.85 9 4 0
2009 73 Michigan St. 13 914 4951 5.42 42 380.85 6 7 0
2010 43 Michigan St. 13 873 4599 5.27 37 353.77 11 2 0
2011 6 Michigan St. 14 903 3884 4.3 33 277.43 11 3 0
2012 4 Michigan St. 13 816 3567 4.37 20 274.38 7 6 0
2013 2 Michigan St. 14 873 3,531 4.04 21 252.2 13 1 0

 

[DaU83]

What a ****ing myopic view point. You get the first point yet can't connect the dots to save your ****ing life. Of course the D or anyone d would play better with handpicked players for their style of D. That is not the definition of a successful coach. Taking what you have and making it work is. Waiting 4 years to field a decent D is the most moronic thinking I've seen on this board. And you are the point man. Kudo's.

Apparently some (you) are too stupid to understand the distinction. I'm not defending D'Onofrio's decision to play it that way. I'm pointing out that those claiming the verdict is out on whether this type of defense works and whether D'Onofrio knows how to coach a defense are wrong, period. Two different things. Feel free to criticize his decision to only look to the future vs. using the players he had in the best fit for them at the time. That is a completely different topic than whether the defensive scheme will work when his players are in it. Your post leaves out the part where you and your fellow mopes continually state that the defensive scheme is "bad" and "can't work" and now you are backpedaling and saying "Of course the D or anyone d would play better with handpicked players for their style of D."

Where did I say anything about the scheme outside of your absurd context that the staff needs four years to implement it?

The idea that it should take four years to get your players in place is dubious, at best.

Finally, even if that were the case, it marks them as failures anyway. They may turn it around, perhaps, but this isn't the kind of business that gives you long life cycles. Especially at a place like Miami. Burning even one season without doing whatever is necessary to win is a serious problem. Their jobs are to win and win now. Not build some obscure ****heap like VT or KSU up to relevance. Failing to note or believe that makes them either too arrogant or simple. Failing to carry through makes them incompetent.

They've already failed as coaches. Whether or not you believe that doesn't affect the reality of it. They may succeed, moving for. ward, but anyone has the right to doubt that. Certainly anyone with eyes and a memory.

It took the the great Narduzzi 5 years to Get the players he needed to turn it around.

LMAO, no it didn't. He was hired in late 07 and this is his track record by total defense. His lowest ranked was 73, and single digit the last 3.

year Rank Name Games Plays Yds Avg TDs Ydspgm Wins Losses Ties
2008 58 Michigan St. 13 872 4626 5.31 37 355.85 9 4 0
2009 73 Michigan St. 13 914 4951 5.42 42 380.85 6 7 0
2010 43 Michigan St. 13 873 4599 5.27 37 353.77 11 2 0
2011 6 Michigan St. 14 903 3884 4.3 33 277.43 11 3 0
2012 4 Michigan St. 13 816 3567 4.37 20 274.38 7 6 0
2013 2 Michigan St. 14 873 3,531 4.04 21 252.2 13 1 0

so it took him 4 years?

 

[Miami82]

Apparently some (you) are too stupid to understand the distinction. I'm not defending D'Onofrio's decision to play it that way. I'm pointing out that those claiming the verdict is out on whether this type of defense works and whether D'Onofrio knows how to coach a defense are wrong, period. Two different things. Feel free to criticize his decision to only look to the future vs. using the players he had in the best fit for them at the time. That is a completely different topic than whether the defensive scheme will work when his players are in it. Your post leaves out the part where you and your fellow mopes continually state that the defensive scheme is "bad" and "can't work" and now you are backpedaling and saying "Of course the D or anyone d would play better with handpicked players for their style of D."

Where did I say anything about the scheme outside of your absurd context that the staff needs four years to implement it?

The idea that it should take four years to get your players in place is dubious, at best.

Finally, even if that were the case, it marks them as failures anyway. They may turn it around, perhaps, but this isn't the kind of business that gives you long life cycles. Especially at a place like Miami. Burning even one season without doing whatever is necessary to win is a serious problem. Their jobs are to win and win now. Not build some obscure ****heap like VT or KSU up to relevance. Failing to note or believe that makes them either too arrogant or simple. Failing to carry through makes them incompetent.

They've already failed as coaches. Whether or not you believe that doesn't affect the reality of it. They may succeed, moving for. ward, but anyone has the right to doubt that. Certainly anyone with eyes and a memory.

It took the the great Narduzzi 5 years to Get the players he needed to turn it around.

LMAO, no it didn't. He was hired in late 07 and this is his track record by total defense. His lowest ranked was 73, and single digit the last 3.

year Rank Name Games Plays Yds Avg TDs Ydspgm Wins Losses Ties
2008 58 Michigan St. 13 872 4626 5.31 37 355.85 9 4 0
2009 73 Michigan St. 13 914 4951 5.42 42 380.85 6 7 0
2010 43 Michigan St. 13 873 4599 5.27 37 353.77 11 2 0
2011 6 Michigan St. 14 903 3884 4.3 33 277.43 11 3 0
2012 4 Michigan St. 13 816 3567 4.37 20 274.38 7 6 0
2013 2 Michigan St. 14 873 3,531 4.04 21 252.2 13 1 0

so it took him 4 years?

4 years for top 10, 3 years to get under 50 which we will be lucky to do this year from 89 last year. His worst was 73, vs 116 for Dorito.

 

[canedoit]

What a ****ing myopic view point. You get the first point yet can't connect the dots to save your ****ing life. Of course the D or anyone d would play better with handpicked players for their style of D. That is not the definition of a successful coach. Taking what you have and making it work is. Waiting 4 years to field a decent D is the most moronic thinking I've seen on this board. And you are the point man. Kudo's.

Apparently some (you) are too stupid to understand the distinction. I'm not defending D'Onofrio's decision to play it that way. I'm pointing out that those claiming the verdict is out on whether this type of defense works and whether D'Onofrio knows how to coach a defense are wrong, period. Two different things. Feel free to criticize his decision to only look to the future vs. using the players he had in the best fit for them at the time. That is a completely different topic than whether the defensive scheme will work when his players are in it. Your post leaves out the part where you and your fellow mopes continually state that the defensive scheme is "bad" and "can't work" and now you are backpedaling and saying "Of course the D or anyone d would play better with handpicked players for their style of D."

Where did I say anything about the scheme outside of your absurd context that the staff needs four years to implement it?

The idea that it should take four years to get your players in place is dubious, at best.

Finally, even if that were the case, it marks them as failures anyway. They may turn it around, perhaps, but this isn't the kind of business that gives you long life cycles. Especially at a place like Miami. Burning even one season without doing whatever is necessary to win is a serious problem. Their jobs are to win and win now. Not build some obscure ****heap like VT or KSU up to relevance. Failing to note or believe that makes them either too arrogant or simple. Failing to carry through makes them incompetent.

They've already failed as coaches. Whether or not you believe that doesn't affect the reality of it. They may succeed, moving for. ward, but anyone has the right to doubt that. Certainly anyone with eyes and a memory.

It took the the great Narduzzi 5 years to Get the players he needed to turn it around.

LMAO, no it didn't. He was hired in late 07 and this is his track record by total defense. His lowest ranked was 73, and single digit the last 3.

year Rank Name Games Plays Yds Avg TDs Ydspgm Wins Losses Ties
2008 58 Michigan St. 13 872 4626 5.31 37 355.85 9 4 0
2009 73 Michigan St. 13 914 4951 5.42 42 380.85 6 7 0
2010 43 Michigan St. 13 873 4599 5.27 37 353.77 11 2 0
2011 6 Michigan St. 14 903 3884 4.3 33 277.43 11 3 0
2012 4 Michigan St. 13 816 3567 4.37 20 274.38 7 6 0
2013 2 Michigan St. 14 873 3,531 4.04 21 252.2 13 1 0

Year 3 to 4, that's a significant leap...but 3 yrs of consistent high quality D. Thanks for bringing those stats up, but...his worst years are **** near twice as good as Coach D. I'm praying to the football gods we'll get to see sound defence this yr.

 

[canesthing3]

I started reading this thread, then I briefly contemplated banging my head off the wall so I stopped. Jesus help us

 

[Miami82]

What a ****ing myopic view point. You get the first point yet can't connect the dots to save your ****ing life. Of course the D or anyone d would play better with handpicked players for their style of D. That is not the definition of a successful coach. Taking what you have and making it work is. Waiting 4 years to field a decent D is the most moronic thinking I've seen on this board. And you are the point man. Kudo's.

Apparently some (you) are too stupid to understand the distinction. I'm not defending D'Onofrio's decision to play it that way. I'm pointing out that those claiming the verdict is out on whether this type of defense works and whether D'Onofrio knows how to coach a defense are wrong, period. Two different things. Feel free to criticize his decision to only look to the future vs. using the players he had in the best fit for them at the time. That is a completely different topic than whether the defensive scheme will work when his players are in it. Your post leaves out the part where you and your fellow mopes continually state that the defensive scheme is "bad" and "can't work" and now you are backpedaling and saying "Of course the D or anyone d would play better with handpicked players for their style of D."

Where did I say anything about the scheme outside of your absurd context that the staff needs four years to implement it?

The idea that it should take four years to get your players in place is dubious, at best.

Finally, even if that were the case, it marks them as failures anyway. They may turn it around, perhaps, but this isn't the kind of business that gives you long life cycles. Especially at a place like Miami. Burning even one season without doing whatever is necessary to win is a serious problem. Their jobs are to win and win now. Not build some obscure ****heap like VT or KSU up to relevance. Failing to note or believe that makes them either too arrogant or simple. Failing to carry through makes them incompetent.

They've already failed as coaches. Whether or not you believe that doesn't affect the reality of it. They may succeed, moving for. ward, but anyone has the right to doubt that. Certainly anyone with eyes and a memory.

It took the the great Narduzzi 5 years to Get the players he needed to turn it around.

Exactly. Narduzzi wouldn't have lasted here, Butch wouldn't have made it through his first few seasons, many good coaches would have been shuffled in and out in a constant rotating door of coaches if it were up to some of the posters on here and their need for immediate gratification.

You lying through your teeth again. At no stage was Narduzzi ever as bad as Dorito. I love how you and klanalmighty make **** up then when given facts walk away from a thread. Just like the soft shouldered ******* you are.

 

[dk72]

Apparently some (you) are too stupid to understand the distinction. I'm not defending D'Onofrio's decision to play it that way. I'm pointing out that those claiming the verdict is out on whether this type of defense works and whether D'Onofrio knows how to coach a defense are wrong, period. Two different things. Feel free to criticize his decision to only look to the future vs. using the players he had in the best fit for them at the time. That is a completely different topic than whether the defensive scheme will work when his players are in it. Your post leaves out the part where you and your fellow mopes continually state that the defensive scheme is "bad" and "can't work" and now you are backpedaling and saying "Of course the D or anyone d would play better with handpicked players for their style of D."

Where did I say anything about the scheme outside of your absurd context that the staff needs four years to implement it?

The idea that it should take four years to get your players in place is dubious, at best.

Finally, even if that were the case, it marks them as failures anyway. They may turn it around, perhaps, but this isn't the kind of business that gives you long life cycles. Especially at a place like Miami. Burning even one season without doing whatever is necessary to win is a serious problem. Their jobs are to win and win now. Not build some obscure ****heap like VT or KSU up to relevance. Failing to note or believe that makes them either too arrogant or simple. Failing to carry through makes them incompetent.

They've already failed as coaches. Whether or not you believe that doesn't affect the reality of it. They may succeed, moving for. ward, but anyone has the right to doubt that. Certainly anyone with eyes and a memory.

It took the the great Narduzzi 5 years to Get the players he needed to turn it around.

Exactly. Narduzzi wouldn't have lasted here, Butch wouldn't have made it through his first few seasons, many good coaches would have been shuffled in and out in a constant rotating door of coaches if it were up to some of the posters on here and their need for immediate gratification.

You lying through your teeth again. At no stage was Narduzzi ever as bad as Dorito. I love how you and klanalmighty make **** up then when given facts walk away from a thread. Just like the soft shouldered ******* you are.

I've yet to see you provide a fact. Just lots of whining, *****ing, pathetic attempts at debate, and at least 50% of the time, some comment about **** sucking. You really are utterly irrelevant.

 

[Biscuits]

Then you're ******* blind. He posted MSU's defensive results under Narduzzi. Only facts.

And some of you sunshine pumpers had the gall to twist that into a tortured reasoning for equating a proven defensive coach for a failed one.

Even if it -had- taken Narduzzi four years to field a decent defense (it didn't), Sparty is a slightly different program than Miami. There are -slightly- different levels of expectation and access to talent at each.

 

[CaneAlmighty]

Then you're ****ing blind. He posted MSU's defensive results under Narduzzi. Only facts.

And some of you sunshine pumpers had the gall to twist that into a tortured reasoning for equating a proven defensive coach for a failed one.

Even if it -had- taken Narduzzi four years to field a decent defense (it didn't), Sparty is a slightly different program than Miami. There are -slightly- different levels of expectation and access to talent at each.

They have the same access to talent as Michigan and OSU.

 

[INCaneFan]

Then you're ****ing blind. He posted MSU's defensive results under Narduzzi. Only facts.

And some of you sunshine pumpers had the gall to twist that into a tortured reasoning for equating a proven defensive coach for a failed one.

Even if it -had- taken Narduzzi four years to field a decent defense (it didn't), Sparty is a slightly different program than Miami. There are -slightly- different levels of expectation and access to talent at each.

They have the same access to talent as Michigan and OSU.

Yet they'd be behind both and then add in PSU, Nebraska, and Wisconsin in their conference for the most desirable schools to go to in conference alone. You're working too hard here and looking pretty silly in doing so.

Riddle me this, how has MSU recruited during Al's time here? How about MSU against their peers in conference? Once you have those answers, you'll really be befuddled with those defensive rankings.

 

[niner]

Then you're ****ing blind. He posted MSU's defensive results under Narduzzi. Only facts.

And some of you sunshine pumpers had the gall to twist that into a tortured reasoning for equating a proven defensive coach for a failed one.

Even if it -had- taken Narduzzi four years to field a decent defense (it didn't), Sparty is a slightly different program than Miami. There are -slightly- different levels of expectation and access to talent at each.

They have the same access to talent as Michigan and OSU.

Yet they'd be behind both and then add in PSU, Nebraska, and Wisconsin in their conference for the most desirable schools to go to in conference alone. You're working too hard here and looking pretty silly in doing so.

Riddle me this, how has MSU recruited during Al's time here? How about MSU against their peers in conference? Once you have those answers, you'll really be befuddled with those defensive rankings.

MSU also had a 3 year NCAA investigation with media calling for the death penalty and other coaches negatively recruiting based on media reports? or nah?

 

[CaneAlmighty]

Then you're ****ing blind. He posted MSU's defensive results under Narduzzi. Only facts.

And some of you sunshine pumpers had the gall to twist that into a tortured reasoning for equating a proven defensive coach for a failed one.

Even if it -had- taken Narduzzi four years to field a decent defense (it didn't), Sparty is a slightly different program than Miami. There are -slightly- different levels of expectation and access to talent at each.

They have the same access to talent as Michigan and OSU.

Yet they'd be behind both and then add in PSU, Nebraska, and Wisconsin in their conference for the most desirable schools to go to in conference alone. You're working too hard here and looking pretty silly in doing so.

Riddle me this, how has MSU recruited during Al's time here? How about MSU against their peers in conference? Once you have those answers, you'll really be befuddled with those defensive rankings.

The point that is THAT IT TAKES TIME to implement a defensive system and develop and acquire the right personnel to run was the case @ Michigan State under the leadership of Narduzzi the great which took him 5 YEARS. Got it chump?

 

[DaU83]

Then you're ****ing blind. He posted MSU's defensive results under Narduzzi. Only facts.

And some of you sunshine pumpers had the gall to twist that into a tortured reasoning for equating a proven defensive coach for a failed one.

Even if it -had- taken Narduzzi four years to field a decent defense (it didn't), Sparty is a slightly different program than Miami. There are -slightly- different levels of expectation and access to talent at each.

They have the same access to talent as Michigan and OSU.

Yet they'd be behind both and then add in PSU, Nebraska, and Wisconsin in their conference for the most desirable schools to go to in conference alone. You're working too hard here and looking pretty silly in doing so.

Riddle me this, how has MSU recruited during Al's time here? How about MSU against their peers in conference? Once you have those answers, you'll really be befuddled with those defensive rankings.

This is exactly the reason you implement your system and recruit to it for the long haul.. instead of the "band aid" fixes everyone would have liked. Let's be honest though, buddy ryan wasn't going to much more out of the players we've been trotting out there for the last couple of years.

 

[Miami82]

Then you're ****ing blind. He posted MSU's defensive results under Narduzzi. Only facts.

And some of you sunshine pumpers had the gall to twist that into a tortured reasoning for equating a proven defensive coach for a failed one.

Even if it -had- taken Narduzzi four years to field a decent defense (it didn't), Sparty is a slightly different program than Miami. There are -slightly- different levels of expectation and access to talent at each.

They have the same access to talent as Michigan and OSU.

Yet they'd be behind both and then add in PSU, Nebraska, and Wisconsin in their conference for the most desirable schools to go to in conference alone. You're working too hard here and looking pretty silly in doing so.

Riddle me this, how has MSU recruited during Al's time here? How about MSU against their peers in conference? Once you have those answers, you'll really be befuddled with those defensive rankings.

The point that is THAT IT TAKES TIME to implement a defensive system and develop and acquire the right personnel to run was the case @ Michigan State under the leadership of Narduzzi the great which took him 5 YEARS. Got it chump?

LMAO, you live in a world of denial don't you... It was 3 years. Keep trying to fight facts.

 

[sstcane]

I have info from 3 players that have played under the last two coaching regimes. They all actually have DNO's back. Watching film
guys were trying top make plays and not doing their assignments. Guys that are now in the NFL that really were trying to get stats rather
than playing the assignments from the defense.

I also have worked with Max Bullough from MSU and he said that the D worked when they got the right players in and they all worked together.
The MSU D last year had several 4th and 5th year players on it and their DE will be a 1st round pick this year.

This is the year that they have to prove themselves. If it's the same **** as last year then he has to go. I'm on the fence with this D because
in certain cases last year we had guys in position to stop a drive and they would miss a tackle (Tyriq vs Virginia in the flat) (5 guys vs VT). But
at the same time when Duke ran for 300 yds and we stayed in a 2 high look instead of bringing a safety into the box.

I think the problem in the past is that the better athletes didn't know the D, or were free lancing so the coaches went with guys like Kacy, AJ and
Cornelieus because they knew the plays. But unfortunately they were physically inferior.

We'll know the answer on labour day.