-
Hi Guest,
We've updated the site to combine all the forums that were part of the Big Sky Fans Network into one location. This will make it easier to navigate and participate in all the discussions for each school without having to have multiple accounts, etc. We are still working out some tweaks but please let us know if you notice anything.
With the migration, in some circumstances, your username could have been merged with one of your other usernames from the other forums. If this is the case, you can request to change your username in your account details page of your profile. -
Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!
-
Guest, do want an ad free experience on BigSkyFans.com among other benefits? Upgrade your account today!
Simply click your profile name > account upgrades > BigSky Club > choose between the year long subscription (two free months) or month to month
Thanks for the continued support. Cheers!
Changes in offseason...
- Thread starter 916bengal
- Start date
Utah Bengal
Member
1. A new D.C.
2. D-Line needs to be introduced to the weight-room
3. Defense needs to learn how to tackle
3. Russel Hill needs to learn how to look-off the safety
4. Training staff needs find some way to avoid the 3,000 injuries that have occured this year
2. D-Line needs to be introduced to the weight-room
3. Defense needs to learn how to tackle
3. Russel Hill needs to learn how to look-off the safety
4. Training staff needs find some way to avoid the 3,000 injuries that have occured this year
bengalcub
Active member
First and foremost for me...
I would like to see this team get a minimum of six home games. Five is unbearable and four would be unacceptable. I'd say the early line is five for next season with a fair chance of four and almost no chance of six.
Second, this team will need to go JC heavy as much as we all don't want to see it. If that is the case, they need to get solid early contributors. Plus, they need to be able to keep what they recruit. What I mean by that is they cannot lose the vast majority of these kids to attrition before next season. The track record for JC recruits under Zamberlin has been painful, with at least five players no longer with the team.
Find a FG kicker. Ramos and Huk may be the answer, but I am not sure. Not having an all BSC-level kicker and punter is unforgivable when you play your home games in a dome.
Speed. Find it, ISU lacks it.
Don't be "Larry Lewis loyal"--if changes need to be made, make them.
D-line--if they don't get it fixed, the defense will continue to leak yards like an old lady/man with irritable bowel syndrome.
I would like to see this team get a minimum of six home games. Five is unbearable and four would be unacceptable. I'd say the early line is five for next season with a fair chance of four and almost no chance of six.
Second, this team will need to go JC heavy as much as we all don't want to see it. If that is the case, they need to get solid early contributors. Plus, they need to be able to keep what they recruit. What I mean by that is they cannot lose the vast majority of these kids to attrition before next season. The track record for JC recruits under Zamberlin has been painful, with at least five players no longer with the team.
Find a FG kicker. Ramos and Huk may be the answer, but I am not sure. Not having an all BSC-level kicker and punter is unforgivable when you play your home games in a dome.
Speed. Find it, ISU lacks it.
Don't be "Larry Lewis loyal"--if changes need to be made, make them.
D-line--if they don't get it fixed, the defense will continue to leak yards like an old lady/man with irritable bowel syndrome.
john_clayton
Active member
Here's my $0.02 on this topic. A couple of items are already addressed by Utah Bengal et al., but I figured, what the heck...
1. scheduling...I'd like to see 6H games. I realize the economics of scheduling guarantee (to be paid and to be paid out) games. ISU might as well get paid handsomely compared to what they received v. BSU/UI this year. I think there was a previous post/link showing what BSC teams received for playing FCS schools this year (and previous years). No reason why ISU can't get a $400K + payday for one game, right?
2. it is about the Willies and the Joes...talent wise, ISU needs help at several positions...especially on the DEF and ST, and the coaches must be able to bring in JC-transfers and/or drop downs who can a) stick around and b) make immediate impact.
The next recruiting class is a very important one for Z and his crew. They have got to bring in legit D-I guys and/or recruit more (and improve the player development) of borderline D-I/D-II with speed. It seems as if UM (linebackers) and EWU (O-line), for example, brings in guys who were passed over by many, yet when they get to UM/EWU, they develop into all-BSC caliber talent. I see a lot of borderline guys on ISU's roster so their development in the next year or two is essential.
3. evaluate the match between talent and scheme...are they congruent? Maybe some of the schemes, personnel decisions, and play calling need changes. Does that mean a change to the OC/DC and other position coaches? I don't know.
I'm curious to see how ISU will come out and play the last three games. These are ISU's playoff games. What better opportunity is there than to play spoiler to WSU's quest for an unbeaten BSC season and to hand UM a 2nd loss in BSC, and go into the off-season on a winning note against an overlooked Sac St team. It'll take a Herculean effort to accomplish, but ISU has shown it can play good football in quarters. They just got to play four quarters of good football in one game. One play at time, one series at time.
From the Reed Gym parking lot taken over by the Reed Gym expansion project, this is John Clayton, BengalDen.com
1. scheduling...I'd like to see 6H games. I realize the economics of scheduling guarantee (to be paid and to be paid out) games. ISU might as well get paid handsomely compared to what they received v. BSU/UI this year. I think there was a previous post/link showing what BSC teams received for playing FCS schools this year (and previous years). No reason why ISU can't get a $400K + payday for one game, right?
2. it is about the Willies and the Joes...talent wise, ISU needs help at several positions...especially on the DEF and ST, and the coaches must be able to bring in JC-transfers and/or drop downs who can a) stick around and b) make immediate impact.
The next recruiting class is a very important one for Z and his crew. They have got to bring in legit D-I guys and/or recruit more (and improve the player development) of borderline D-I/D-II with speed. It seems as if UM (linebackers) and EWU (O-line), for example, brings in guys who were passed over by many, yet when they get to UM/EWU, they develop into all-BSC caliber talent. I see a lot of borderline guys on ISU's roster so their development in the next year or two is essential.
3. evaluate the match between talent and scheme...are they congruent? Maybe some of the schemes, personnel decisions, and play calling need changes. Does that mean a change to the OC/DC and other position coaches? I don't know.
I'm curious to see how ISU will come out and play the last three games. These are ISU's playoff games. What better opportunity is there than to play spoiler to WSU's quest for an unbeaten BSC season and to hand UM a 2nd loss in BSC, and go into the off-season on a winning note against an overlooked Sac St team. It'll take a Herculean effort to accomplish, but ISU has shown it can play good football in quarters. They just got to play four quarters of good football in one game. One play at time, one series at time.
From the Reed Gym parking lot taken over by the Reed Gym expansion project, this is John Clayton, BengalDen.com
spudbowl
Active member
Personally, I like it when we don't play a Montana Tech type of team. I would rather go 0-12 then go 1-11 and have the one win against a Montana Tech. I liked seeing North Dakota, a quality football team in Poky. I liked seeing Cal Poly last year. Let's get better and compete, not make the schedule easier --though I agree that more home games would be nice and hopefully we play only 11 games next year, not sure what 12 games gives you that eleven does not.
The Bengal men's bb team is playing a real DI schedule, I applaud that. Play teams at your level or drop down a division.
The Bengal men's bb team is playing a real DI schedule, I applaud that. Play teams at your level or drop down a division.
Scheduling....
The BSU game brought some real revenue to ISU. What was it, a 3 1/2 hour bus ride and a sizeable pay check. That was the only advantage to playing them. Face it. The athletic budget needed the pay check. The Idaho game... I imagine that the cost to ISU was substantially more than cost to go to the BSU game and the pay check was sizeably less. I saw little advantage of going to Idaho to play other than ISU had a chance to win that game. If ISU plays a D1A game, make it worth its while financially. Then use the windfall to bring other non-conference teams into Pocatello.
If ISU plays a D1A game, why not USU? ISU could compete with them. They are close and it could actually bring some ISU exposure to not only southern Idaho but also northern Utah. The travel costs would be minimal and there should be a pay check.
I like the idea of more home games. It gives the community additional opportunities to come out and watch the team. That brings up a completely different can of worms... getting the community to embrace the Bengals. Somehow ISU needs to connect with Pocatello, Idaho Falls, Blackfoot, and American Falls. There are well over 150,000 potential fans within 50 miles and ISU doesn't take advantage of it. ISU needs to get make game day and community event. I'm an outsider, I admit. But it seems that there are folks in the department that carry on today as they did yesterday and the day before that, and the day before that... Everyone, I mean everyone in the athletic department needs to climb out of the rut, wear their orange and black and hit the street with a new vigor promoting ISU and its athletic program. Idaho Falls, Malad and Soda Springs watch out. The Bengals are coming to town to reintroduce themselves. The status quo is not acceptable if you don't make it that way. Talk is cheap. Action from the university will pay dividends.
Although the budget crisis may not be over, the focus can now shift from survival to exposure. JMO.
The BSU game brought some real revenue to ISU. What was it, a 3 1/2 hour bus ride and a sizeable pay check. That was the only advantage to playing them. Face it. The athletic budget needed the pay check. The Idaho game... I imagine that the cost to ISU was substantially more than cost to go to the BSU game and the pay check was sizeably less. I saw little advantage of going to Idaho to play other than ISU had a chance to win that game. If ISU plays a D1A game, make it worth its while financially. Then use the windfall to bring other non-conference teams into Pocatello.
If ISU plays a D1A game, why not USU? ISU could compete with them. They are close and it could actually bring some ISU exposure to not only southern Idaho but also northern Utah. The travel costs would be minimal and there should be a pay check.
I like the idea of more home games. It gives the community additional opportunities to come out and watch the team. That brings up a completely different can of worms... getting the community to embrace the Bengals. Somehow ISU needs to connect with Pocatello, Idaho Falls, Blackfoot, and American Falls. There are well over 150,000 potential fans within 50 miles and ISU doesn't take advantage of it. ISU needs to get make game day and community event. I'm an outsider, I admit. But it seems that there are folks in the department that carry on today as they did yesterday and the day before that, and the day before that... Everyone, I mean everyone in the athletic department needs to climb out of the rut, wear their orange and black and hit the street with a new vigor promoting ISU and its athletic program. Idaho Falls, Malad and Soda Springs watch out. The Bengals are coming to town to reintroduce themselves. The status quo is not acceptable if you don't make it that way. Talk is cheap. Action from the university will pay dividends.
Although the budget crisis may not be over, the focus can now shift from survival to exposure. JMO.
john_clayton
Active member
One more tidbit about possible scheduling changes...
I spoke with a colleague of mine and we discussed the idea of starting the season with a home game to at least generate some kind of buzz about the team for the new season. In 2007, new coach, new beginnings, new school year, and a win v. SOU to kick off the season. Decent way to start the Zamberlin era.
In 08, with the excitement of returning players, Zamberlin and staff in program for at least one full year, etc. Community has to wait until game #3 for ISU's first home game after two FBS losses. The anticipation was still there for the North Dakota game, but for it to come on a Thursday after two FBS teams three weeks after the start of the fall semester, the "buzz" intensity had ISU waned off. Granted, had ISU pulled off an upset at Idaho, then the anticipation for the UND game would have been greater.
Fast forward to 09, coming off a possible 0- or 1-win season, new recruits and returning players who RS and the host of FR/RS-FR/SO who played in 08, and any other changes a new year brings, there's gonna be some excitement/anticipation to see how this team will respond after a dismal 2008 season. If Z-man continues to preach the team is improving/getting better with the youthful experience, then I think fans, the community, the university will be interested to see how 2009 starts. Scheduling a home game to start the season against a D-II (i.e. WWU or CWU) or an FCS school could possibly generate more interest. Obviously the team would have to win the opener to continue to build momentum into week two.
Go Bengals...busy weekend...Thu - VB, Fri - VB, WBB, MBB, Sat - FB v. Weber. Hang in there Frank and Katie.
Enjoying my tall, skinny, pumpkin spice mocha from Starbucks, this is John Clayton, BengalDen.com
I spoke with a colleague of mine and we discussed the idea of starting the season with a home game to at least generate some kind of buzz about the team for the new season. In 2007, new coach, new beginnings, new school year, and a win v. SOU to kick off the season. Decent way to start the Zamberlin era.
In 08, with the excitement of returning players, Zamberlin and staff in program for at least one full year, etc. Community has to wait until game #3 for ISU's first home game after two FBS losses. The anticipation was still there for the North Dakota game, but for it to come on a Thursday after two FBS teams three weeks after the start of the fall semester, the "buzz" intensity had ISU waned off. Granted, had ISU pulled off an upset at Idaho, then the anticipation for the UND game would have been greater.
Fast forward to 09, coming off a possible 0- or 1-win season, new recruits and returning players who RS and the host of FR/RS-FR/SO who played in 08, and any other changes a new year brings, there's gonna be some excitement/anticipation to see how this team will respond after a dismal 2008 season. If Z-man continues to preach the team is improving/getting better with the youthful experience, then I think fans, the community, the university will be interested to see how 2009 starts. Scheduling a home game to start the season against a D-II (i.e. WWU or CWU) or an FCS school could possibly generate more interest. Obviously the team would have to win the opener to continue to build momentum into week two.
Go Bengals...busy weekend...Thu - VB, Fri - VB, WBB, MBB, Sat - FB v. Weber. Hang in there Frank and Katie.
Enjoying my tall, skinny, pumpkin spice mocha from Starbucks, this is John Clayton, BengalDen.com
isusuperfan
Active member
And I will try to keep my sanity as well, hahahahaha
blackfootbengal
Active member
Clayton is correct; having us, play to upper Div. teams prior to playing our first home game was a big mistake. Every year we have posts about promoting the team, loses never help promotions. You would be surprised at how many people do not know the difference between a NAIA team and a Div I team. They do not understand the advantage having 22 more scholarships gives a team over another. They only understand win/loss records. Most don't care that you lost to an upper division team or beat a lower division team. They just want to see wins on the board. Even Montana balances out its schedule by scheduling a win when they play potential losses. Everyone does it and every year some purist complains about the practice. Look at Weber's win/loss record as posted in the paper, does it mention whom two of those wins came against, no the only thing that matters is you won or you lost. Hell, the teams we recruit against cannot use the practice against you because they did the same thing. If we want the people from Idaho Falls, Rexburg, or Rigby to come to the games we have to put wins on the board, they don't care whom the win was against for the most part, they just know if you won or lost. As for playing Boise and Idaho, Boise paid decent and hurt us recruiting in Boise. Not a good trade off, we could have gotten more from Utah or someone else with less effect on recruiting. Idaho was just a bad game all around. No money made, hurt recruiting in Idaho, and gave a bad team a win.
As to changes next year:
You cannot change both D-Coordinator and O-Coordinator in the same year without disrupting the whole team. Make a choice; we score 20 points a game, ranked nationally in the top twenty in many categories or choose giving up 40 points a game and are the worst defense in college football. Easy choice in my mind. The fact that I question what Orthman calls sometimes do not make me right, I am paid to run a manufacturing plant not a football team. In the rankings, our offense is not that bad, our defense is that bad. Granted, Barnum left the offense in much better shape than Lorig left the defense. Nevertheless, we have had two JC recruiting classes on Defense and the only starters from the two classes are Amos, Rife, and Wright. We have a former walk-on starting at OLB (one I personally like); we had a former walk-on starting ahead of the last two recruiting classes at MLB when Rife was hurt. Additionally, our D-line started with a former walk-on starting at D-tackle ahead of all of the recruits from the last two years, both JC and HS. Josh Crittenden was our most effective lineman prior to his injury and could not get on the field last year on D-line only marginally better than this year. Recruiting is very important at the college level, if you are not a good recruiter you need to get out of the game. Any bad recruiting decisions fall to the D-Coordinator or O-Coordinator, they make the final approval of any player we bring in on their side of the ball. Frankly, as far as the D-line goes we have made more bad decisions than good decisions. I always cut freshman slack and never blame a freshman for mistakes made on the field, it's our fault if a freshman has to play, not theirs. Amos and Vaiamonga are the only JC scholarship players from the first class that are still playing on D-line, remember we pulled Vaiamounga's scholarship in the spring and he walked-on this fall. He is playing ahead of two scholarship players right now. Rutton played ahead of two scholarship players at D-Tackle until injuries pushed him back out to end where he belongs. He leads the D-line in tackles and has played as a backup most the time. Jablonsky is starting now, but was a backup until injuries pushed him to the forefront, he is second on the D-line in tackles and was also a backup for the most part. Simply stated, the recruits from the last two years on D-line are not getting it done. We were not counting on the freshmen to come in and be game breakers, we were counting on the JC kids to come in and produce. It has not happened on the D-Line. It is bad when the one position that is not improving is the position the D-coordinator coaches.
We need to bring in a very good Defensive End, ready to play when he comes in. We cannot have kids who were walk-ons playing ahead of kids we scholarship. Either we missed badly on the walk-on or we missed badly on the scholarship kid. Both bad things, if that is what happened.
As to changes next year:
You cannot change both D-Coordinator and O-Coordinator in the same year without disrupting the whole team. Make a choice; we score 20 points a game, ranked nationally in the top twenty in many categories or choose giving up 40 points a game and are the worst defense in college football. Easy choice in my mind. The fact that I question what Orthman calls sometimes do not make me right, I am paid to run a manufacturing plant not a football team. In the rankings, our offense is not that bad, our defense is that bad. Granted, Barnum left the offense in much better shape than Lorig left the defense. Nevertheless, we have had two JC recruiting classes on Defense and the only starters from the two classes are Amos, Rife, and Wright. We have a former walk-on starting at OLB (one I personally like); we had a former walk-on starting ahead of the last two recruiting classes at MLB when Rife was hurt. Additionally, our D-line started with a former walk-on starting at D-tackle ahead of all of the recruits from the last two years, both JC and HS. Josh Crittenden was our most effective lineman prior to his injury and could not get on the field last year on D-line only marginally better than this year. Recruiting is very important at the college level, if you are not a good recruiter you need to get out of the game. Any bad recruiting decisions fall to the D-Coordinator or O-Coordinator, they make the final approval of any player we bring in on their side of the ball. Frankly, as far as the D-line goes we have made more bad decisions than good decisions. I always cut freshman slack and never blame a freshman for mistakes made on the field, it's our fault if a freshman has to play, not theirs. Amos and Vaiamonga are the only JC scholarship players from the first class that are still playing on D-line, remember we pulled Vaiamounga's scholarship in the spring and he walked-on this fall. He is playing ahead of two scholarship players right now. Rutton played ahead of two scholarship players at D-Tackle until injuries pushed him back out to end where he belongs. He leads the D-line in tackles and has played as a backup most the time. Jablonsky is starting now, but was a backup until injuries pushed him to the forefront, he is second on the D-line in tackles and was also a backup for the most part. Simply stated, the recruits from the last two years on D-line are not getting it done. We were not counting on the freshmen to come in and be game breakers, we were counting on the JC kids to come in and produce. It has not happened on the D-Line. It is bad when the one position that is not improving is the position the D-coordinator coaches.
We need to bring in a very good Defensive End, ready to play when he comes in. We cannot have kids who were walk-ons playing ahead of kids we scholarship. Either we missed badly on the walk-on or we missed badly on the scholarship kid. Both bad things, if that is what happened.
blackfootbengal
Active member
Something I would like to point out is, my posts tend to be long winded because I don't post very often and usually I have allot of frustration stored up by the time I do post. Anything I say is an observation that I try to support by presenting what I see as supportable fact. None of it is meant as a personal attack on any coach or individual. I try to separate the person from the position and make my observations without looking at my likes or dislikes of any person. I support my observations of the defense by presenting facts as I see them about the defense. I do the same with the offense, my like or dislike of a coach has nothing to do with my observation of how he does his job. I understand I have already upset the coaching staff and feel bad about that because I have never hid behind my posting name, the coaching staff knows who I am, but that does not change my opinion of what is going on with the team. I call it as I see it; my likes or dislikes have nothing to do with my opinion of our defense or offense. What I have said is my opinion and if you cannot accept that then tough. I made the mistake of attacking a player personally once and apologized for it, I don't apologize twice for the same thing. When I state something it is my opinion, if you choose to debate my opinion then you open yourself up to me defending my position. You may not like what is say from that point on; I'm not here to make everyone happy and contented. I come here to talk about sports, read some good debates, and even participate in some, if you cannot handle that then tough.
bhumble2
Active member
This is not a bash blackfoot just a disagreement;
We have the worst scoring offense and defense in the conference. 20 points per game will not get it done. So if we change both coordinators what is the worst that could happen go 0-11, we can do that now.
SCORING OFFENSE G TD XP 2XP DXP FG Saf Pts Avg
--------------------------------------------------------------
1. Montana............. 9 42 37 0 0 8 3 319 35.4
2. Weber State......... 10 47 41 1 0 7 0 346 34.6
3. Northern Arizona.... 9 34 31 0 1 13 2 280 31.1
4. Eastern Washington.. 8 31 28 1 0 5 0 231 28.9
5. Portland State...... 8 26 24 0 0 12 0 216 27.0
6. Montana State....... 9 30 29 0 1 9 2 242 26.9
7. Sacramento State.... 9 27 23 0 0 9 0 212 23.6
8. Northern Colorado... 8 19 15 3 0 8 2 163 20.4
9. Idaho State......... 9 24 22 0 0 5 1 183 20.3
SCORING DEFENSE G TD XP 2XP DXP FG Saf Pts Avg
--------------------------------------------------------------
1. Weber State......... 10 25 23 1 0 7 1 198 19.8
2. Montana............. 9 22 21 1 0 9 0 182 20.2
3. Northern Arizona.... 9 28 24 2 0 8 0 220 24.4
4. Montana State....... 9 34 27 1 0 3 0 242 26.9
5. Sacramento State.... 9 31 24 0 0 10 2 244 27.1
6. Northern Colorado... 8 29 27 0 1 7 1 226 28.2
7. Eastern Washington.. 8 30 26 1 0 10 1 240 30.0
8. Portland State...... 8 33 31 1 0 9 0 258 32.2
9. Idaho State......... 9 49 47 1 0 8 3 373 41.4
blackfootbengal
Active member
I don't disagree with you as to the stats. I just don't think you can change both coordinators without a major disruption in what is going on. It would be no different than firing the whole staff. The Big Sky as a whole is scoring more points this year, last year 20 points a game placed you third from the bottom with the next two only scoring 24 pts. a game. Last year we gave up 35 points a game this year 40, adjusting for improved offense in the league we are still a bad defense. With better defense we could at least have a chance to win. As to our stats; the last two road games were played in terrible conditions after spending hours in airports and on buses getting to the games. Nether side of the ball could be expected to be at the top of thier games after that. In fact allot of our problems stem from our travel schedule and the way we are getting to these games. While the coach does not dare use this as an excuse, I can because it is true.
The type of conditions are certainly not a valid excuse. Did our opponents on that given day have to play in the same conditions? Yes...The only bad weather games we've played in were @ Northern Colorado and @ Cal Poly. The game in Portland a couple weeks ago was gorgeous weather. And travleing should not affect a good team's performance. These are things championship teams overcome!
blackfootbengal
Active member
Tell me that after you spend 10 hrs on buses and sitting in airports so you can play a 3 hour football game. Travel is tiring, coupled with poor playing conditions it leads to problems. None of the home teams had to travel or sleep in a bus seat. Ask any those traveling with the team how much fun it has been, and they did not have to play a game as well. The travel coupled with the fact that we are not that good has lead to losses.
