Readers Chime in to the RG-J

The appearance of six letters to the editor in the RG-J this (Sunday) morning gives me the perfect fodder to get back into the blogging game, and just in time for the new year! I'll go through a few things in a sequence what really makes sense only to me and my ol' smell hound.

For reference, please refer to 2007 NCAA Football Rules. Likewise, for the original letters, refer to RG-J Letters to the Sports Editor, and for Sean Patrick's guest column of December 22, refer to Ault is not the source of Pack's plight. So, on with the quotes!



In my opinion there should only be one grade for the entire team and that is the grade given to the coaches.

I can see your point; the coaches represent the team in the same way that the Electoral College represents the states in order to decide the Presidency. Don't get me wrong here, I'm actually a fan of the Electoral College to a point. As go the coaches, so goes the team. However, as in politics, it is a bit more complicated than that: these are adults playing football and I have no objection to their performance being critiqued; heck, for any of them who will be lucky enough to prolong their carreers by playing professionally they will be getting a LOT more of that from many, much larger journalistic sources. The coaching is also graded, and the two can be weighed against each other with the reader deciding the weight of each side. I do agree, though, in spirit with your idea here, and it is true that the plight of the team, especially over time, rests in the hands of the coaching staff.

How can you call three or four linemen a defensive line? Five 300-pound offensive linemen can easily handle three or four defensive players and that gives the quarterback a lot of time to do whatever he needs to do.

NCAA rules specify that: "At the snap, at least seven men are on the offensive scrimmage line, with not less than five numbered 50-79." These numbers 50-79 are the offensive linemen excluding the tight ends. There are a number of rules governing what these "interior linemen" can and cannot do. In passing situations they are considered to be "inelligible receivers," and cannot be across the neutral zone before another player (not counting the QB) has touched the ball. They therefore have very specific jobs to do. The defense is not hampered by the same rules; their jobs are to pressure the offense. In a very general sense, defensive schemes consist of two players in the rear (safties or rovers), two players at the far ends (cornerbacks who, together with the safties comprise the "secondary"), three to four linebackers (depending upon the formation) and three to four down linemen (depending upon the formation). Sometimes these positions are somewhat juxtaposed on the field, but the down linemen can be distinguished from the linebackers as they are "down" in a three-point stance whereas the 'backers are not. Since the offensive "interior" linemen really can't do a whole lot, especially in passing plays, they become a fortification of sorts to protect the action in the offensive backfield. The defense (or coaches) will decide how much pressure to apply to the offensive backfield and how much downfield coverage they will be using (single, man-on-man coverage, doubles, &c.). In a pass happy conference like the WAC the 3-4 design seems outwardly to be pretty sound because it shifts a player from the front slightly to the rear where adjustments can be made depending on a nearly infinite number of possibilities, and this is why I'm a big fan of the 3-4 defense. These linebackers can, as I have alluded, cram the line with the down linemen as well in order to apply greater up-front pressure. Overall, the defensive setup places players in different clusters around the field than the offensive setup will, and with the duties of the offensive linemen so strictly regulated the necesity of down linemen on the defensive side is relaxed somewhat (they get more help from their backfield than their offensive counterparts get, after all, so that pass rushing can realistically come from anywhere on the defensive side). As a bit of an aside, I've always viewed the jobs of the offensive linemen to "stop" whereas the defensive linemen "pound," and their physical builds reflect this somewhat. After all of this is in place, it comes down to execution, and that is where we meet with our concern here, along with having enough players in place with the kind of speed you really need. If you really wanted you could put five or six down linemen on defense, but if you did you'd better plan on sacking the QB every down because that leaves you very little downfield to stop much of anything.

Whew, sorry that was so long.

...Our unfortunate players deserve a coach who's experienced in modern-day football and in coaching in Division 1. Ault is now the "great pretender" and doing great harm to his players in blaming his losses on them.

Ault has some good things going for him. Some very good things, in fact. He normally places blame where it is due, and, as I've said above, these are adults, not Pop Warner kids. He's also pretty consistent with it, and after the New Mexico debacle he did use "we" an awful lot to describe the failures. He also called out the offensive line; and we did on here, too. The offensive line was awful! Credit where it is due. The problem is that I just don't think that Ault is the complete package: he administers too heavily in certain areas and leaves others in the hands of his assistants whereas he needs to administer to the whole team and let the assistants do their jobs. I know he has a good heart for offense, and I wouldn't even mind having him as an offensive coordinator. But as a head coach he needs to manage the whole team as an entity and realize that he needs to have as much to do with the successes of the defense and special teams as he does the QB play. Even our receivers have not displayed the kind of consistency that they really need to in the wild, wild WAC.

College players should always be optimistic.

We have been over the Sean Patrick article a bit, but I will get into my feelings a bit more here. I don't believe it's ever satisfactory to settle for mediocrity. Ever! Where we end up at the end is one thing, but should we be aiming for #2 in the WAC every year? And with the stink that the WAC has been making the past few years (remember, Boise St. was being invited to non-WAC affiliated games for a number of years, not just the Fiesta Bowl), we should be aiming for the same things.

Nebraska didn't have much of a football program prior to Devaney, but he built that program himself and stayed on to see it through. Boise St. hasn't exactly had that same kind of stability, but when a coach lands there he generally stays around for at least a little while. I don't necesarily ask that we spend $2.5 million per year for a coach who will be here for his lifetime, but Boise St. has had some pretty fair success doing what they've been doing. Also, as far as our being a "revolving door," well, yes, you can say that. But look at the basketball scene here: TJ was here for five years and only left when his dream job opened at Stanford; Fox is now in his fourth year and has turned down other offers (such as Nebraska, for one). For what it's worth, Fox was also an internal hire. Do we need to hire from outside? Maybe. Will we get the next Bob Devaney? Maybe. But questions such as these are moot; what we need is a coach who believes that the proverbial "it" is possible and can really give the University and the community something truly special. It has happend before! I'm sure most people don't remember the so-called "powerhouse" years of the late '40's, but we had a couple of very special years as what was then known as a "major university."

One thing I will note about Mr. Patrick's article:

Tormey's final two seasons were riddled with news of Wolf Pack players in the police blotters more often than they were on the sports pages. Is that what you'd like to see again?

Are you kidding? This is a joke, right. Don't patronize us like this. Yes, the Tormey era reigned over several black eyes for the program. I commend Ault's stance on player behavior. But am I to believe that a new coach will bring in bank robbers and coke dealers? are we, as fans? Does success come with a price of jailtime for players? Don't be preposterous.

To all: have a fantastic (and safe) New Year, and we'll catch you on the flip side.