In regards to Kalen DeBoer, I don't think he's qualified to be an OC in FCS. It's just my opinion, but I don't give much credit to dominating the GPAC. I think he needs to get some more experience at another school to "prove" what he's doing now in 11AA...oops I meant the GPAC.
Playing time is simple" if u don't like it, then just get better"!
I don't know if it is as simple as that.... I think the reason some players would be upset is when the guy running the offense leaves right before fall camp and things are changed.... I'm not saying it has anything to do with Coach Meadows as a person, but for example if you are a player and you are told you are this # on the depth chart, and you are told you are going to run this type of an offense and you are told to work on this, and you get to camp and you are now lower on the depth chart, the type of offense you are running doesn't benefit your style and what you worked on over the summer has nothing to do with what is going on now you are going to get some upset people.... I thought Coach Meadows ran a so-so offense, it seemed very timid at times and very run predictable, I don't know if that was just his style being a line guy or if it had to do with no true #1 reciever and a QB with no previous starting experience....
As far as Deboer, he'd be a good FCS OC.... I just don't see him leaving....
In regards to Kalen DeBoer, I don't think he's qualified to be an OC in FCS. It's just my opinion, but I don't give much credit to dominating the GPAC. I think he needs to get some more experience at another school to "prove" what he's doing now in 11AA...oops I meant the GPAC.
I believe "church league" is the more correct term.
You know that you're over the hill when your mind makes a promise that your body can't fill. - L. George
I agree with all of you. I'm just saying what I've been hearing from friends I have on the team. My experience with Meadows has been positive, but there are a pretty good group of players that wouldn't be sad to see him leave. Yes, a lot of it does have to do with playing time imo. But they are saying it has more to do with how he managed the offensive playcalling this year.
All this would be moot had the defense made one stop and the offense gotten three first downs out of the plays that WERE called in the fourth quarter in Montana... I assume there wasn't quibbling over the play calling when it was 48-20 with 15 to go.
NoVa, that is too naive an answer. Adjustments are made throughout the game - usually by both teams. So no, often times what may have been working early doesn't work later. The argument (overly simplistic IMO) is that it shouldn't matter what play is called as long as you execute. Hmmmm, what to do when they walk both safeties up into the box or line up in the perfect coverage to defend the play called? And how does the defense end up in the right alignment most of the time - when your offense is predictable. Run when you are supposed to, pass when you are supposed to. That is exactly what we did in crunch time. Were blocks missed, checks not made etc. - sure, happens all game. But it sure is easier to play defense when you can almost always have an extra tackler/coverer at the point of attack and/or rush with abandon because you know the QB is dropping back. We learned; I expect that we will do better next time (next year!)
To the point of the thread, I think Luke would make a good head coach. Especially if Northern is concerned with building a program the right way. I think our staff does a remarkable job with finding young men of character and mentoring them into exceptional student athletes at the college level. Developing strong leaders is something that is crucial to success as well, and not easy to do. Luke takes 8 years of experience doing that to NSU if selected. I think his track record as an Offensive coach is solid, and as a line coach is exceptional. I would expect his managerial skills to be good as well since he was named an Associate Head Coach. Good luck Luke.
I agree with all of you. I'm just saying what I've been hearing from friends I have on the team. My experience with Meadows has been positive, but there are a pretty good group of players that wouldn't be sad to see him leave. Yes, a lot of it does have to do with playing time imo. But they are saying it has more to do with how he managed the offensive playcalling this year.
Playing time and what players think of the Coach is in a lot of situations based on playing time. Players that get the playing time love the Coach. Players not playing generally don't care if he leaves. Coach Meadows leaving would be a lose for the Jacks and a gain for the Wolves.
I did hear that Mike Whittier (sp'g) will not be returning to the Jacks after the semester break. Don't believe it has anything to do with Coach Meadows. But, simply a matter of his depth on the depth chart. I have not heard were he is going but I did hear Mike is gone. Good luck to him and the the best of luck to Coach Meadows if he gets the head job at Northern. It would be a nice pay raise for him as well.
NoVa, that is too naive an answer. Adjustments are made throughout the game - usually by both teams. So no, often times what may have been working early doesn't work later. The argument (overly simplistic IMO) is that it shouldn't matter what play is called as long as you execute. .
Well, I've been called worse than naiive, but I stand by my point.
Check it out. The Jacks ran eight times and passed or attempted to pass five times when still ahead or tied in the 4th quarter. (And no, this doesn't count when they were trying to come back; they passed constantly the last two possessions, obviously). Now maybe they weren't running the routes you'd run or through the holes you'd run or mixed 'em up like you expected, but it wasn't run three over tackle and punt, either. Two of the passes were on second and short or medium.
The key drive was when the Jacks were still ahead by 14 after Montana, unfortunately, scored on a pass on the first play of the quarter. (Play calling?) Jacks got two quick first downs, and took 5 minutes off the clock. The first first down came on a pass on second and six from the Jacks' 19. Minnett then ran for 10 for another first down. Good calls?
Then three penalties for 20 yards in six plays killed the drive and took away decent field position. Is it naiive to say those penalties were just as important as, say, the play-calling at that point of the game?
Had the Jacks only doubled up those two first downs on that drive they could have taken the clock down to around five minutes, give or take a minute depending on Montana's use of timeouts. Even if forced to punt would have been able to pin Montana deep in its own territory with a 14-point lead with five or under left to play. But the penalties killed that drive and they gave it up at the Montana 34 with almost 10 minutes to go.
Well, I've been called worse than naiive, but I stand by my point.
Check it out. The Jacks ran eight times and passed or attempted to pass five times when still ahead or tied in the 4th quarter. (And no, this doesn't count when they were trying to come back; they passed constantly the last two possessions, obviously). Now maybe they weren't running the routes you'd run or through the holes you'd run or mixed 'em up like you expected, but it wasn't run three over tackle and punt, either. Two of the passes were on second and short or medium.
The key drive was when the Jacks were still ahead by 14 after Montana, unfortunately, scored on a pass on the first play of the quarter. (Play calling?) Jacks got two quick first downs, and took 5 minutes off the clock. The first first down came on a pass on second and six from the Jacks' 19. Minnett then ran for 10 for another first down. Good calls?
Then three penalties for 20 yards in six plays killed the drive and took away decent field position. Is it naiive to say those penalties were just as important as, say, the play-calling at that point of the game?
Had the Jacks only doubled up those two first downs on that drive they could have taken the clock down to around five minutes, give or take a minute depending on Montana's use of timeouts. Even if forced to punt would have been able to pin Montana deep in its own territory with a 14-point lead with five or under left to play. But the penalties killed that drive and they gave it up at the Montana 34 with almost 10 minutes to go.
I can't say I am close to Coach Meadow other than meeting him once and having a very nice conversation. That said I think NoVa has a very valid point here. If General Parnell had been available, he possibly could have snagged a Montana pass and the momentum of Montana would have halted. A pick by all the others would have had the same affect, its just that the General's pick in the Missouri State game was very big. A change of momentum and we stop complaining about play calling. I am about 100 percent certain that this would have been the case.
I getting tired of hearing who likes and dislikes Coach Meadows. I sure wish we could have a decision out of Aberdeen that would shut this thread down once and for all. I finding so many redundant posts that surely its time move on to other topics. Am I the only one tired of this thread?
If Meadows didn't have the offense rolling early in the year the Jacks would have missed the playoffs and then we wouldn't be having this discussion. I didn't agree with all of the calls but hindsight is always good that way. Time to move on.
If General Parnell had been available, he possibly could have snagged a Montana pass and the momentum of Montana would have halted. A pick by all the others would have had the same affect, its just that the General's pick in the Missouri State game was very big.
One of my favorite players, Kjerstad, dropped a pick and I pointed to that play as the change of mo from the Jacks to the Gizz.
As far as Meadows goes, I could go either way. He has his good points, but like everyone he has areas he can work on.
No matter who the OC is next fall needs to figure out a Flash play that has Duffy as the first read with Minnett and TKool running an option type play. Gotta get our playmakers on the field.
I can't say I am close to Coach Meadow other than meeting him once and having a very nice conversation. That said I think NoVa has a very valid point here. If General Parnell had been available, he possibly could have snagged a Montana pass and the momentum of Montana would have halted. A pick by all the others would have had the same affect, its just that the General's pick in the Missouri State game was very big. A change of momentum and we stop complaining about play calling. I am about 100 percent certain that this would have been the case.
I getting tired of hearing who likes and dislikes Coach Meadows. I sure wish we could have a decision out of Aberdeen that would shut this thread down once and for all. I finding so many redundant posts that surely its time move on to other topics. Am I the only one tired of this thread?
Yes- I am tired of the thread- "if the players execute the play called then its a great call" If the players don't execute the play called then the 2nd guessers will say" what is he thinking".. I wouldn't tell a businessman how to run his business, I wouldn't tell a farmer how to farm etc etc .. For all the people out there that think they know anything about coaching, trust me, they probably don't.. Let the coaches coach!
Coming from NAIA and moving up to the Div.1 AA level is a major step up-not a step down.. I would rather be a coordinator in the Missouri Valley Conference then be coaching in the GPAC Conference where there are basically 2 good teams- Morningside and SFalls.. Who's on our schedule this week? How bout Dordt- a team we can beat 80-0 with no preparation or how bout Concordia and the list goes on in the GPAC.. O Coordinator @ SDSU have to prepare against UNI's defense this week-against SIU the folllowing week and then NDSU the next.. Talk about challenging- the quality of football in the Missouri Valley Conference is top notch and I can't imagine anyone not wanting to be at that level of football compared to NAIA or the Northern Sun Conference.
You are also talking about USF , who is the Best Program in the country at that level. I am suprised Northern St did not throw the house at him, that would be a step up right now! DeBoer knows division you coach and win in does not matter, he is known nationwide!
We would be lucky to have him as a coordinator! IMO
I don't know if it is as simple as that.... I think the reason some players would be upset is when the guy running the offense leaves right before fall camp and things are changed.... I'm not saying it has anything to do with Coach Meadows as a person, but for example if you are a player and you are told you are this # on the depth chart, and you are told you are going to run this type of an offense and you are told to work on this, and you get to camp and you are now lower on the depth chart, the type of offense you are running doesn't benefit your style and what you worked on over the summer has nothing to do with what is going on now you are going to get some upset people.... I thought Coach Meadows ran a so-so offense, it seemed very timid at times and very run predictable, I don't know if that was just his style being a line guy or if it had to do with no true #1 reciever and a QB with no previous starting experience....
As far as Deboer, he'd be a good FCS OC.... I just don't see him leaving....
I wish people would understand the it was meadows that was running the offense last year also. So all the talk about don bailey running and leaving late only mattered to who coached QB and nothing with the offense. In my observation this is the same offense we ran in 2006 with karodes at QB or at least very similar so nothing new was brought here with bailey.
Originally posted by from the cheap seatsView Post
I wish people would understand the it was meadows that was running the offense last year also. So all the talk about don bailey running and leaving late only mattered to who coached QB and nothing with the offense. In my observation this is the same offense we ran in 2006 with karodes at QB or at least very similar so nothing new was brought here with bailey.
A very good point! Thank you for pointing that out.
Comment