VideoEagle

The Boise State coach isn't just giving up because his starting quarterback entered the portal. He's scheduling a meeting with the player and his folks to discuss what Boise can offer to get him to stay.

That was what the story was. Of course, he never directly commented and KState claimed they were never interested in him as a coach.

Thanks, Paul Blake. We'll let you know.

Seth was the first (non-interim) coach to leave with a .500 or better record since 1980. He was only the second coach in at least 40 years to have back-to-back nine-win seasons. When he arrived, NT had been to one bowl game in 11 years, and during his tenure, we went to five bowls in six years. He changed the standard from "Can you get to any bowl game?" to "How many bowl games can you win?" I don't have the exact numbers handy, but roughly 60% of D1 football coaches have less than a .500 record after 5 years putting Seth in the (roughly) Top 40% of D1 football head coaches. Unquestionably, he raised the program to a much higher level than it was when he arrived.

I think program sales are going increase as no one will know who the players are!

While I'm happy for the success of those walk-ons, I think this shows we've had a problem evaluating talent. Don't get me wrong - NO ONE always gets talent evaluation right. And almost every team has a walk-on that was misevaluated and later earned a scholarship. But NT has been having too many walk-ons outperforming scholarship guys.

Can you name three examples in the last five years of a team firing a coordinator mid-season and that unit improving its performance? Can it happen? Yes, but very rarely. The majority of the time the unit remains mostly the same.

Every month, someone wins the Lotto. Every day, people draw to inside straights. Occasionally, you get lucky. Usually, you don't.

Thanks for doing this! I notice the pattern reported in a formal study from 2012 still holds. Teams with 6-6 or better records have about a 1 in 3 chance of improving their record with a new coach. This year, of the nine 6-6 or better teams that got new coaches, three improved their records from the year before. It doesn't seem to matter if you are a P5 or G5, bringing in a new coach only has a 33% chance of improving the first year IF you are .500 or better! The study from 2012 looked back over eight years and found the same pattern.

I find it a bit ironic SMU is saying being passed over by Liberty shows they need to get into the ACC to "get the respect they deserve." But the ACC is the first P5 Conference to have its undefeated Champion passed over! Are they going to the P5 that gets no respect?

Not even in New York. It’s a second rate bowl in a baseball stadium in Boston.

This isn't true, it can get MUCH worse! We can't drop lower than last place, but we have a lot of room to give up more points and yardage.

IN the age of the portal and NIL, EVERY YEAR has the potential to be a rebuilding year.

Nailed it!

First, I used to hear about coaches being reassigned rather than being fired a lot more. UT did it with someone, but could not cut the coaches salary. Baylor kept Ken Starr’s salary then same. I’m not sure about the lacrosse coach. I suspect, but do not know, football head coaching contracts might contain a no reassignment clause.

If you don't feed the trolls they will move on.

The NCAA started allowing, but not requiring, multiyear scholarships in 2012. A few years later, the autonomous conferences - Pac 12, Big 10, SEC, ACC, Big XII, plus Notre Dame - agreed to have multiyear scholarships for football. One website, Informedathlete.com, started calling this a rule and this has been widely quoted by other websites. But there wasn't an enforcement mechanism ever implemented - if a school chose to ignore the agreement, there was never any penalty. It was never an NCAA rule. And it appears there were always multiple exceptions to it that individual conferences and even schools had. Generally, if there was a change in head coach players that didn't fit the new scheme were encouraged (and usually helped) to move on and free up the scholarships for players that fit the new scheme.

So the fuss is over 6 1/2 points and five yards a game between the guy people want back and the guy we got?

I can't remember where I saw the articles, but more than one talked about how Sharp and the regents are keeping a very low profile on this because Sharp was the one leading the charge to sign Fisher to the $95 million guaranteed contract. Bjork wanted to extend Fisher, but not as long and with more performance bonuses than guarantees. Apparently Sharp told Bjork if he wouldn't go along with the deal, the regents would find someone who would.

No, he argued against it but was overruled by Chancellor John Sharp and a majority of the A&M regents. Bjork wanted Fisher, but not with the crazy contract. Bjork isn’t getting fired now because he’s helping deflect the heat from Sharp and the Regents.

No, they wouldn't. The people making NIL decisions don't do things to spite schools that aren't in their new conference.

There are a lot of reasons to be optimistic about next year. Many have been listed above. The professionals that analyze teams for a living like the writers at DCTF think we should be optimistic as well. I put more trust in those folks that can spend lots of time, resources, and money doing their research. Looking back, there were many here last year convinced we’d only win 3 games with a tougher conference and what was thought to be a couple of tough OCC games. We did better in a conference of our peers than they thought.

There’s a great article by Tim Cowlishaw in today’s DMN on A&Ms hire. A few things he points out: * In the 40 years of the SWC before WWIi, Aggie only won two SWC titles. * In the 80 years after WWII, they had one decade of success with 7 titles between 85 and 94, but never came close to a National Championship. * During their time in the BigXII they had one conference championship. * In 16 years in the SEC, they have never been very close to a conference championship. * Coaches cannot automatically bring success from previous schools as they will no longer have the assistants, staff, and institutional structure that supported them before. All of those things must be rebuilt and that will almost certainly take years to accomplish. Here's a link, but it is behind a paywall. https://

Just to be clear, these players are being encouraged to find a place where they might be a better fit. Is that correct?

We are among the very, VERY few that can't get fans to come out the Saturday after Thanksgiving.