bottom line is he was handed a roster with better players then he was ever given credit.
Dana inherited a roster with 10 pros and-counting in 2011...
- Thread starter wvpaper
- Start date
Even if that were anything more than your biased opinion, youre match still sucks, pal
you Dana lovers have very little to justify him being hired so its funny watching you deflect when you have nothing.
dana worshipers taking a beating. only going to get worse for them. november is coming.
not on scholarship lmao! Might wanna pay attention. A walk on is different.
bottom line, Sills and Crest have terrible throwing motions. According to Statewide radio Chugs is slow. We have no one behind Howard who is average at this point (great kid, Works hard and I love his sprite) but Dana has done a poor job of recruiting and developing QB's.
I don't think Dana goes this year, but all these guys that have defended him with such aggression are losing cred by the day. Problem is the signs Dana was not head coach material were right in front for everyone to see but lots of people putting their heads in the sand.
I'm not ready to say that a NC can never be gained by the football program. But I am very willing to admit that on average we will not have an upper-crust B12 team.
Maybe if we moved WVU to somewhere in Texas we might have a better shot at having a great team year in and year out.
quit aware of it..but it's fairly simple..go to the official rosters on WVU's site and just count the scholarship players..I don't see anything close to your 55-60 claim..so how did Stewart deplete the roster in two recruiting classes by 30, when over 40 total were signed in 09 and 10?
A walk-on is different. As I have shown,, not counting walk-ons there were more than scholarship players on the 2011 roster inherited by Dana. Even jock-sniffing Keaton wouldn't venture below 65 and as I replied his count was low (scholarship players who transferred out were still on the 2011 roster and he missed a number of scholarship players) so his count actually put it over 70. Also, no one has challenged the math I used to show the current team is also in the 70s so the difference is negligible now.
It kind of goes without saying that the whole premise for the argument is stupid in any event. Teams don't win or lose because of who sits on the bench holding scholarships 55-85. Games are won or lost by, surpsingly enough, those who play when the game is in doubt.
Holgorsen has had 4 full recruiting classes ( a potential 100 players) to address any things that could actually be an problem, which is not the raw numbers but, whether the players are better either in terms of raw talent or suitability for the systems we now employ.
If any of his defenders had a clue and thought there was a winning argument to be made in that regard, they should have made it rather then brainlessly repeating things that weren't true and wouldn't be relevant to 2015 if they were.
It kind of goes without saying that the whole premise for the argument is stupid in any event. Teams don't win or lose because of who sits on the bench holding scholarships 55-85. Games are won or lost by, surpsingly enough, those who play when the game is in doubt.
Holgorsen has had 4 full recruiting classes ( a potential 100 players) to address any things that could actually be an problem, which is not the raw numbers but, whether the players are better either in terms of raw talent or suitability for the systems we now employ.
If any of his defenders had a clue and thought there was a winning argument to be made in that regard, they should have made it rather then brainlessly repeating things that weren't true and wouldn't be relevant to 2015 if they were.
lmao good grief. No reason to worry when you are 25-30 scholarship players down because the players on the bench aren't in the game? Who do you think replaces the Karl Joseph's when they get hurt? Which is better, walkons/low rated talent or 3-4 star players (our average)? Who provides competition for playing time? Who do you think replaces graduating starters? This short sighted dumb shit is why this fan base fails in most levels. Learn football.
Last edited:
Someone in the top 50 players replaces him, OBVIOUSLY!!!!
And again, what part of the "we were never 25-30 scholarship players down," doesn't penetrate your thick skull? What about the, "it's s now 2015 and Dana has had 4 recruiting classes to "fix" any issues, " is too complicated for you to understand?
And again, what part of the "we were never 25-30 scholarship players down," doesn't penetrate your thick skull? What about the, "it's s now 2015 and Dana has had 4 recruiting classes to "fix" any issues, " is too complicated for you to understand?
that awkward moment when Low Mountain completely ignored the fact that Dana, upon arrival, had to go out and seek 5th-year transfers like Devon Brown and others to add scholarhip-level players to the roster that had less than 60 scholarship athletes............
107 roster spot
42 walk-ons (subtracting Taylor and the Roberts twins from the 45 posted)
----------------------------
65 scholarship players INCLUDING LATE-ADDITION 5TH YEAR TRANSFERS
out of an NCAA-granted 85............. 20 extra free rides left over.......... handed out to walk ons
107 roster spot
42 walk-ons (subtracting Taylor and the Roberts twins from the 45 posted)
----------------------------
65 scholarship players INCLUDING LATE-ADDITION 5TH YEAR TRANSFERS
out of an NCAA-granted 85............. 20 extra free rides left over.......... handed out to walk ons
That is untrue. Ignoring EVERYONE Dana played any role in bringing aboard prior to the 2011 season we were closer to 70 than 60 let alone below it. (And why would people he chose to bring in somehow not count in assessing depth?) Moreover, even if it was 60 counting "his" players we've had 4 full recruiting classes between then and now.
I don't blame either coach for the 2011 class. To the extent it was below par our brilliant ex-AD bears responsibility for that. And, that class while low in numbers perhaps produced:
Barber
Bruce
Chestnut
Clay
Kwiatkowski
Lucas
Myers
Petteway
Rose
9 5th seniors not only is not only not a sign of a terrible class, it's a sign that that at some point along the line there was sufficient depth we could actually redshirt them (Barber and Petteway had injuries).
The people who left after Holgorsen assumed the HC job and all subsequent classes cannot be attributed to Stewart. Obviously, no one who signed up prior to 2011 could possibly be playing now regardless, and the ones who could but chose to leave (or were encouraged to do so) did so under Holgorsen's watch.
Again
for
the
really
slow
We were recruiting from 2012-15, the 100 potential players aggregate in those years obviously means any lingering issues have nothing to do with what did or did not happen 5 seasons ago.
I don't blame either coach for the 2011 class. To the extent it was below par our brilliant ex-AD bears responsibility for that. And, that class while low in numbers perhaps produced:
Barber
Bruce
Chestnut
Clay
Kwiatkowski
Lucas
Myers
Petteway
Rose
9 5th seniors not only is not only not a sign of a terrible class, it's a sign that that at some point along the line there was sufficient depth we could actually redshirt them (Barber and Petteway had injuries).
The people who left after Holgorsen assumed the HC job and all subsequent classes cannot be attributed to Stewart. Obviously, no one who signed up prior to 2011 could possibly be playing now regardless, and the ones who could but chose to leave (or were encouraged to do so) did so under Holgorsen's watch.
Again
for
the
really
slow
We were recruiting from 2012-15, the 100 potential players aggregate in those years obviously means any lingering issues have nothing to do with what did or did not happen 5 seasons ago.
"That is untrue. Ignoring EVERYONE Dana played any role in bringing aboard prior to the 2011 season we were closer to 70 than 60 let alone below it. "
so now we're rejecting basic math?
and this:
"To the extent it was below par our brilliant ex-AD bears responsibility for that. "
so now we're rejecting basic math?
and this:
"To the extent it was below par our brilliant ex-AD bears responsibility for that. "
You are. I've provided the actual players on the 2011 roster and there were more than 70 who had scholarships in 2011.
Your attempt to reduce it to 65 failed when I showed you failed to count some and that it was invalid to subtract players who transferred out under Holgorsen's watch
I think it's fair to say my initial impression that you are both obnoxious and stupid, was a gross understatement.
That a handful of people here may fall for your idiocy, can't change facts.
Your attempt to reduce it to 65 failed when I showed you failed to count some and that it was invalid to subtract players who transferred out under Holgorsen's watch
I think it's fair to say my initial impression that you are both obnoxious and stupid, was a gross understatement.
That a handful of people here may fall for your idiocy, can't change facts.
Explain how it is unfair to subtract transfer-outs................ but is ok to count walk ons given a scholarship simply because we had so many extra?
The fact remains that in 2011 when Dana took over, he had 1 QB on roster........ including walk ons....
How anyone COULDN"T blame Bill Stewart and his regime for that is idiocy. There were zero depth behind Geno Smith (an upperclassman)...
And because Stewart and staff were catching so much hell for such large number of scholarships being unused, they dished out free rides left and right to walk ons on their way out the door.........
The fact remains that in 2011 when Dana took over, he had 1 QB on roster........ including walk ons....
How anyone COULDN"T blame Bill Stewart and his regime for that is idiocy. There were zero depth behind Geno Smith (an upperclassman)...
And because Stewart and staff were catching so much hell for such large number of scholarships being unused, they dished out free rides left and right to walk ons on their way out the door.........
Who among the walk-ons who were awarded scholarships by 2011 do you deem worthless layers who were gifted? Has not Dana also awarded scholarships to players who initially walked on? Don't just about all coaches?
You still have not addressed the issue of Dana having a full complement of scholarships to give every year from 2012-15. If he had added and retained an average of about 18 players a year for each of those 4 years we would be at the overall cap now when you add the 5th year guys. (and most of those 5th year guys contribute-- a lot). If the majority of those players were actually better players than we have recruited in the past, one would expect we would be far better than we used to be.
As you won't even attribute the fact we are not better to the QB situation as everyone with a fraction of the clue (pro or anti Dana) agrees is obvious, you are really babbling yourself into a corner. According to you we have no QB issues and we have better talent and better depth than idiot Stew was able to muster.
Other than Dana is a bigger idiot at coaching what remains to explain the failure to improve?
You really are a piece of work. I wasn't kidding when I initially said I thought you might just be posing as an idiot because you found it amusing to confuse the slow people. I can't imagine anyone would have the persistence to keep up the joke this relentlessly.
As you won't even attribute the fact we are not better to the QB situation as everyone with a fraction of the clue (pro or anti Dana) agrees is obvious, you are really babbling yourself into a corner. According to you we have no QB issues and we have better talent and better depth than idiot Stew was able to muster.
Other than Dana is a bigger idiot at coaching what remains to explain the failure to improve?
You really are a piece of work. I wasn't kidding when I initially said I thought you might just be posing as an idiot because you found it amusing to confuse the slow people. I can't imagine anyone would have the persistence to keep up the joke this relentlessly.
sorry bud, excuse is valid. When you and your pals learn football at this level, get back to us.
B Brunetti and J Johnson decided to transfer.. that's not on Stewart or his staff..they didn't run them off (Athey)...you're drowning and grasping for anything that floats.
he's been flailing on here for days. getting harder and harder for him. i'm taking bets on how long Keaton can keep it up. the over/under is forever
since Geno never missed a game due to injury, what is the point of taking the time to type some meaningless statement about a backup QB that wasn't there?..that's going deep for sure.
fact's..Dana hand picked two QB's(Millard, Childress) and neither are here..we have been playing with transfers as starters for the past two years..that never happed with the last two head coaches.
As proven in this thread, a huge amount of misinformation about Bill Stewart's roster has been pushed by Dana and Luck's cronies over the last 4 years.
But the people who fell for it aren't total idiots. They just wanted to believe in Dana. Folks are easily convinced when they already want to believe. All it takes is for some asshat to throw meaningless stats at them, telling them these #'s prove Bill Stewart ruined the program.... and they're all ready to give Dana and Luck years to "fix it".
It was masterfully played by Luck.
But the people who fell for it aren't total idiots. They just wanted to believe in Dana. Folks are easily convinced when they already want to believe. All it takes is for some asshat to throw meaningless stats at them, telling them these #'s prove Bill Stewart ruined the program.... and they're all ready to give Dana and Luck years to "fix it".
It was masterfully played by Luck.
The lack of depth was 100% an Ollie sales job to prop his coach up and give him time. As I have said in this thread Dana issues were in full view for everyone to see but some seemed to turn their heads.
This board has become a total clown show with paper and ocean and low mountain ect trolling up from under the bridge.
Fact: none of them could do a better job than Dana.
Fact: Crest, Sills and Chugs are still unknown qb's and NOBODY knows whether they will be stars or busts.
Fact: Every day paper starts multiple threads of bumbling nonsense that get anywhere from 1-14 responses.
Fact: This board has become a turd in the WVU fan punchbowl.
Fact: none of them could do a better job than Dana.
Fact: Crest, Sills and Chugs are still unknown qb's and NOBODY knows whether they will be stars or busts.
Fact: Every day paper starts multiple threads of bumbling nonsense that get anywhere from 1-14 responses.
Fact: This board has become a turd in the WVU fan punchbowl.
very true. Now the question; which of those knuckleheads is really Hank Hill/Eersfan?
if that were true, why was i also on here before Stew was let go telling you guys about the lack of depth? Truth is, it was a fact.
There was a problem but not near what Ollie made it out to be and Stew took over with little to no depth. Also, as proven in this thread Dana ran some of those guys off, so he made the problem worse.
Fact: none of them could do a better job than Dana.
So the new standard for WVU coaches is being as good as random people off the street?
Excellent philosophy.
So the new standard for WVU coaches is being as good as random people off the street?
Excellent philosophy.
Here is fact: We ran a coach off that was winning 9 games a season. That was not good enough, so we hired a new guy that has been a red hot mess from Day 1. A large part of the WVU fans base has defended the guy and now its not working so they are having a hard time finding someone to blame. On the QB question, have you Sills and Crests throwing motion. They are not QB's period, so you lost your cred with that statement.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
Why did you choose to attend WVU for undergrad/masters? (Top reason)
- Latest: wvufaninbhm
-
-
-
-