Coulda, shoulda & woulda

[Jackedforlife]

We have lost 3 games this season…all 3 winnable. The concern I carry is no matter the talent we can’t seem outplay the coaching at times.

When we lose sure there are times when players “coulda” changed it…drops, penalties etc.

I find myself though as somewhat knowledgeable fan of football questioning coaching decisions. The “shoulda” and “woulda”.

It seems like the last 5(spring/fall) losses are far more on the coaches, shoulda/woulda. Anyone out there think I’m off base on this?

[jakejc795]

We have lost 3 games this season…all 3 winnable. The concern I carry is no matter the talent we can’t seem outplay the coaching at times.

When we lose sure there are times when players “coulda” changed it…drops, penalties etc.

I find myself though as somewhat knowledgeable fan of football questioning coaching decisions. The “shoulda” and “woulda”.

It seems like the last 5(spring/fall) losses are far more on the coaches, shoulda/woulda. Anyone out there think I’m off base on this?

The issue I have with the overarching foci being on "outplaying the coaching" is that it serves to constrain the evaluation of contributing factors in the losses.

The criticism of Stig has evolved from him "lacking killer instinct," to his "inability to win 'big games," to "being outcoached" after losses. What's baffling is that the very circumstances that contributed to the SIU loss in particular seem to negate the first criticism (he went for the win, thereby illustrating what many would say is a killer instinct), and as I mentioned in another thread, Hill made his own poor decisions during that game.

The inability to win big games narrative is flawed because it ignores the Jacks advancing in the playoffs (and winning earlier games to obtain seeds). Lastly, would you say he outcoached the Bison in multiple Marker games, or is that an example of the Jacks winning in spite of Stig (or because of the Bison's own coaching woes)?

All coaches make questionable decisions, and I suspect Stig will likely stick around to try to attain 200 wins, so we might want to focus on bolstering the secondary.

In your ideal world, who would the Jacks hire to replace Stig?

[jakejc795]

We have lost 3 games this season…all 3 winnable. The concern I carry is no matter the talent we can’t seem outplay the coaching at times.

I find myself though as somewhat knowledgeable fan of football questioning coaching decisions. The “shoulda” and “woulda”.

One area where I'll concede a desire for coaching changes would be nixing Eck serving as both OC and OL coach.

JMU, SHSU, NDSU, UNI, USD, etc. don't have such an arrangement, and I think the Jacks having it contributes to questionable playcalling on offense and delayed OL adjustments at times.

I also would like to see Bergstrom focus solely on DBs rather than be co-DC because the DB play/lack of adjustments suggests they could benefit from added attention

[Jackedforlife]

It’s not that I don’t think mistakes are allowable…it just seems to be the same ones. Also to compare Stig to Hill is interesting…Stig has decades of experience. Are we better with him? Of course, he handled this transition better than any of us imagined. I’m just tired of similar situations where coaching has us in these predicaments.

30 years ago we’d have gone crazy to to only have 3 losses and and consistently going to the playoffs.

Ultimately this thread wasn’t started with “replace Stig” in mind. It was to have dialogue about decisions that are made that continue to plague the Jacks. Moreso dialogue to see if other fans see what I’m seeing, feel what I’m feeling. Players get corrected or instruction on how to be better…I do t want to blow up the ship but patching a hole isn’t bad either.

Stig is a fantastic leader of young men just tired of similar situations resulting in the same results.

[jakejc795]

It’s not that I don’t think mistakes are allowable…it just seems to be the same ones. Also to compare Stig to Hill is interesting…Stig has decades of experience. Are we better with him? Of course, he handled this transition better than any of us imagined. I’m just tired of similar situations where coaching has us in these predicaments.

30 years ago we’d have gone crazy to to only have 3 losses and and consistently going to the playoffs.

Ultimately this thread wasn’t started with “replace Stig” in mind. It was to have dialogue about decisions that are made that continue to plague the Jacks. Moreso dialogue to see if other fans see what I’m seeing, feel what I’m feeling. Players get corrected or instruction on how to be better…I do t want to blow up the ship but patching a hole isn’t bad either.

Stig is a fantastic leader of young men just tired of similar situations resulting in the same results.

I mentioned Hill because there were multiple posters enamored with him when the Redbirds "quit" during the spring season and he and the SIU AD "fought for their team" by essentially throwing the rest of the conference under the bus.

Are there instances where Stig's clock management has me scratching my head? Yes, but he's hardly the only coach that's an issue with (including FBS coaches who'd generally be considered "top tier").

I could be mistaken, but I remember turnovers being a prime contributor in the 2019 loss vs USD, and I'm not sure how you blame Stig or assistants for those.

What specific repeat "situations" are you referring to?

[LetsGoRabbits]

I have not even read the GDT thread yet. not sure i will. really still in NO MOOD to talk about this game and have no expectation that i EVER will be

that said, doesnt it seem completely true that EVERY coaching staff makes several decisions during almost EVERY game that can at the VERY least be questioned???

i mean if you think there is a coaching staff out there that does not make some questionable decisions in almost every game. please list them

SO...... YES i can think of a few things i would have done differently, if i was the person making the decisions

but i have NO IDEA what type of thought process we have to have to think that ANY OTHER coaches are going to make us happy with 100% of the decisions they make

BOTH the best and the worst decisions have the chance to EITHER succeed or fail. every successful decision is not the BEST decision and every failing decision is not the WORST!!!!

at the end of the day players have to execute. at the very least do fundamental basic things correctly and i really thought after the UNI game this team would find another gear, as we have in the second half of the season so many times in the last decade full of playoff appearances and significant playoff success. maybe the injuries are still having an impact????? IDK and i will definitely not say it is over until it is over. they have definitely made their path to ultimate glory harder, but this team can still beat ANY team in the country and maybe they will find that additional gear come playoff time. but, again, they have DEFINITELY made things harder for themselves

i am not going to give some extensive list of failed execution but speaking of disagreeing with decisions.....

i can definitely think of reasons to go for the win against SIU. that would not have been the decision i would have made with a team i was coaching but that is the decision they made and the players have the tools and skills to make that a successful decision

maybe if the players had executed perfectly SIU would have stopped them anyway but that is NOT what happened. the main receiving target absolutely did not run the route correctly and the QB never looked at any other target and as i recall did not have a lot of time to look at others because pressure came pretty much straight at him. failed execution by the line, by the QB, and by the TE

so maybe if what you are looking for is a HC or staff that make such perfect decisions that the players can execute simple tasks poorly and still succeed then perhaps you are on to something??? but even the best coaches at the highest level seem to be failing if that is the standard

saturday i totally disagreed with the decision to try to kill the clock on 4th down in the manner it was done. IN MY OPINION which is as horribly flawed as anyones!!! when you weigh the risk and reward of all the choices on the table, i thought punting was the best decision. but if you are scared of the risk and willing to take the risk of trying to run the clock out and NOT quite getting it done, hence giving them the ball about 55 yards from winning TD then i also think just running the ball and try to get first down was a better choice. a running play takes at least 3 seconds off clock. still leaving them time for ONLY ONE play but also gives us at least a chance of keeping the ball

all that said i still think the decision that was made is a defensible decision. again i dont like it and it feels awfully cute to me. but we have had success with very similar strategy few years ago with TC running out the clock

but if that is the decision, again the players have to execute better. O line cannot let a rusher force QB to hurry the throw and execute the throw poorly. i cannot watch replays but i am pretty sure it was a ONE WR route. leaving NINE to block. you just can NOT have someone in chris face that fast. this is supposed to be the BEST O line in the country. they are not consistently executing

all that said chris is an experienced player. and that throw has to be better

but beyond all that. no matter what choice was made, unless we took EVERY second off the clock there was a chance we would be required to defend a hail mary!! while the offense is still on the field players and coaches definitely begain talking about what to do. ZERO doubt it was said over and over there is NO benefit to catching the ball. spike it into the ground. we have NO NEED for possession all we need is the ball to be ON THE GROUND

and still EXPERIENCED players attempted to catch the ball

SOOOO, best coaches decisions or worst, it makes NO difference if the plays are not going to be executed.

[FrontRowObserver]

The coaching calls on the last 2 plays are the least of my concerns. We ran a ply that should’ve ran out of clock, it almost worked. We played prevent defense where that is the only call you should make. The parts that I hate are when we don’t try to find Pierre space and have him run straight behind the center. This would’ve been the easy advice when running out the clock because outside runs take longer. 1:39 against a timeout is 3 plays ending inbounds and a 4th down to average each down to less than 5 seconds. Even if we had Chris stand like a statue in the pocket, he could’ve wasted 5 seconds so why do we run up the middle?