KSUFans Archives

Sports => Snyder's Electronic Cyber Space World => Topic started by: sonofdaxjones on January 01, 2007, 05:27:21 PM

Title: Bielema . . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on January 01, 2007, 05:27:21 PM
leads Wisky to their best season ever.  12-1

 :frown:
Title: Re: Bielema . . . .
Post by: fatty fat fat on January 01, 2007, 05:35:44 PM


 :frown:

Umm..why?
Title: Re: Bielema . . . .
Post by: pissclams on January 01, 2007, 05:46:23 PM
Bielema . . . .???
Never heard of him.
Title: Re: Bielema . . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on January 01, 2007, 06:44:41 PM


 :frown:

Umm..why?

I am not a member of the "we don't really miss Brent Bielema" club.

Title: Re: Bielema . . . .
Post by: chum1 on January 01, 2007, 07:46:00 PM
Wisc HC gig > K-St HC gig.  Life's not fair.  I don't blame him.
Title: Re: Bielema . . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on January 01, 2007, 07:55:11 PM
Wisc HC gig > K-St HC gig.  Life's not fair.  I don't blame him.

Billy Packer Capt. Obvious post of the day.
Title: Re: Bielema . . . .
Post by: fatty fat fat on January 01, 2007, 09:40:45 PM


 :frown:

Umm..why?

I am not a member of the "we don't really miss Brent Bielema" club.



So? We HAD NO CHANCE AT BB YOU DIP@#%$.

This isn't Brent Venables taking a Big 10 team and leading them to a 12-1 season. Then you could be your jayhox/bitter self.
Title: Re: Bielema . . . .
Post by: Saulbadguy on January 01, 2007, 09:42:20 PM
Wisc HC gig > K-St HC gig.  Life's not fair.  I don't blame him.

Billy Packer Capt. Obvious post of the day.
Name it the Moosehawk/Blackshirts13 Captain obvious post of the day.
Title: Re: Bielema . . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on January 01, 2007, 09:57:51 PM


 :frown:

Umm..why?

I am not a member of the "we don't really miss Brent Bielema" club.



So? We HAD NO CHANCE AT BB YOU DIP@#%$.

This isn't Brent Venables taking a Big 10 team and leading them to a 12-1 season. Then you could be your jayhox/bitter self.

Really dumbass?? We had NO SHOT at keeping BB at KSU??   No shot, or didn't even attempt at taking a shot at keeping him??

Title: Re: Bielema . . . .
Post by: fatty fat fat on January 01, 2007, 10:04:34 PM
No. He left for a full-time DC job. Did you want to Fire Elliot after two straight top 10 defenses? Damn, hindsight is fun!
Title: Re: Bielema . . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on January 01, 2007, 10:13:57 PM
Sure is . . . don't understand why it bothers you so much.

Title: Re: Bielema . . . .
Post by: Racquetball_Ninja on January 01, 2007, 10:24:41 PM
He was not going to take the job here, Bielma was Snyder's boy and that was the only reason he was in Manhattan.  Once he knew the old man was gone he was gone as well.
Title: Re: Bielema . . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on January 01, 2007, 10:31:48 PM
He was not going to take the job here, Bielma was Snyder's boy and that was the only reason he was in Manhattan.  Once he knew the old man was gone he was gone as well.

He left the year before Snyder Retired.

I don't think KSU made any real effort to entice him to stay.   A signficant strategic error.

Title: Re: Bielema . . . .
Post by: michigancat on January 01, 2007, 11:46:58 PM
Wisc HC gig > K-St HC gig.  Life's not fair.  I don't blame him.

We offered him more money before we hired Prince.

Wisc HC gig > KSU HC gig +$300k?

Well, obviously, but it has to be pretty close.
Title: Re: Bielema . . . .
Post by: Racquetball_Ninja on January 02, 2007, 01:00:45 AM
He was not going to take the job here, Bielma was Snyder's boy and that was the only reason he was in Manhattan.  Once he knew the old man was gone he was gone as well.

He left the year before Snyder Retired.

I don't think KSU made any real effort to entice him to stay.   A signficant strategic error.



My conspiracy theory is that the old man told him he was out the door and that if he had an opportunity to take it he should.  Que the Barry Alvarez.
Title: Re: Bielema . . . .
Post by: ScubaSteve on January 02, 2007, 01:09:44 AM
Beilema had no love for KSU.  Beilema is a blip in KSU history and this further confirms what a dufus you are.
Title: Re: Bielema . . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on January 02, 2007, 09:49:27 AM
Beilema had no love for KSU.  Beilema is a blip in KSU history and this further confirms what a dufus you are.

Never said he had any love for KSU . . . it's a business not love.

Scuba Steve; 0 to A-Hole in .04 seconds.    :thumbsup:
Title: Re: Bielema . . . .
Post by: chum1 on January 02, 2007, 10:34:26 AM
The worst part about all of this is that we would have been 12-1 had he been our coach.
Title: Re: Bielema . . . .
Post by: Poopley on January 02, 2007, 10:50:17 AM
yes, and we would've won championships without hearing about the waffle house, the going-ashore-with-ships-aburnt, the bold & daringness, or the Best Cat Growl upon a recruit committing. what a bleak existence THAT would've been. give me a  corny coach with gimmicks ANY DAY.  :ksu:
Title: Re: Bielema . . . .
Post by: fatty fat fat on January 02, 2007, 04:10:27 PM
Beilema had no love for KSU.  Beilema is a blip in KSU history and this further confirms what a dufus you are.

Never said he had any love for KSU . . . it's a business not love.



wtf are you talking about? Just how did you expect us to lure Bielema ksujayhox?
Title: Re: Bielema . . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on January 02, 2007, 04:51:58 PM
Not lure dumbass . . . Keep, remember he WAS here at KSU already FattyMoosehawk.

Title: Re: Bielema . . . .
Post by: fatty fat fat on January 02, 2007, 04:57:43 PM
. Keep, remember he WAS here at KSU already FattyMoosehawk.



Yeah, we already covered that. How did you expect us to keep him from going to a full time DC job at a top big 10 school?

Moosehawk? Um. Ok.
Title: Re: Bielema . . . .
Post by: Saulbadguy on January 02, 2007, 05:01:38 PM
. Keep, remember he WAS here at KSU already FattyMoosehawk.



Yeah, we already covered that. How did you expect us to keep him from going to a full time DC job at a top big 10 school***?

Moosehawk? Um. Ok.
***With the promise that he would end up the HC after Alvarez retires.  I'm sure there was no such deal even discussed at KSU.
Title: Re: Bielema . . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on January 02, 2007, 05:03:42 PM
Money and a desire to keep him here . . . really its not that hard.  I am not saying he would've stayed either.   

Again, excellent strategic thinking on the part of Alvarez and Wisconsin.


Title: Re: Bielema . . . .
Post by: michigancat on January 02, 2007, 05:03:55 PM
. Keep, remember he WAS here at KSU already FattyMoosehawk.



Yeah, we already covered that. How did you expect us to keep him from going to a full time DC job at a top big 10 school***?

Moosehawk? Um. Ok.
***With the promise that he would end up the HC after Alvarez retires.  I'm sure there was no such deal even discussed at KSU.

I doubt he had that promise when he left KSU.
Title: Re: Bielema . . . .
Post by: Saulbadguy on January 02, 2007, 05:05:00 PM
. Keep, remember he WAS here at KSU already FattyMoosehawk.



Yeah, we already covered that. How did you expect us to keep him from going to a full time DC job at a top big 10 school***?

Moosehawk? Um. Ok.
***With the promise that he would end up the HC after Alvarez retires.  I'm sure there was no such deal even discussed at KSU.

I doubt he had that promise when he left KSU.
I'm thinking he did.  He was DC in the 04 season, and then at the beginning of the 05 season, Alvarez announced he would retire.
Title: Re: Bielema . . . .
Post by: fatty fat fat on January 02, 2007, 05:05:21 PM
He was our friggin LB's coach in 2003, and our HC just won the big 12! No one was discussing a Snyder retirement at that point. Our program was on cloud nine at the time.
Title: Re: Bielema . . . .
Post by: Saulbadguy on January 02, 2007, 05:08:14 PM
I was thinking it (Bielema for HC after BA retired) was discussed at the time of his hire at Wisconsin.
Title: Re: Bielema . . . .
Post by: michigancat on January 02, 2007, 05:08:30 PM
. Keep, remember he WAS here at KSU already FattyMoosehawk.



Yeah, we already covered that. How did you expect us to keep him from going to a full time DC job at a top big 10 school***?

Moosehawk? Um. Ok.
***With the promise that he would end up the HC after Alvarez retires.  I'm sure there was no such deal even discussed at KSU.

I doubt he had that promise when he left KSU.
I'm thinking he did.  He was DC in the 04 season, and then at the beginning of the 05 season, Alvarez announced he would retire.

I'm thinking his badass 04 defense was responsible for the promise.  Your scenario makes sense, though, except for the part about a Big 10 school promising a LB coach a HC job without any true coordinator experience.
Title: Re: Bielema . . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on January 02, 2007, 05:10:28 PM
He was our friggin LB's coach in 2003, and our HC just won the big 12! No one was discussing a Snyder retirement at that point. Our program was on cloud nine at the time.

So what . . . he went from being our LB coach, straight to the DC and Assistant Head Coaching job at Wisconsin, with a clear succession plan in place.  It's not like Wisconsin sucked before he got there.   They just did a better job of having a clear plan of succession plan in place, the value of having a head football coach/AD.

Props to Alvarez and Wisconsin for having such forethought.

Proving that:

1.   Snyder did KSU no favors by up and retiring seemingly out of nowhere.

2.   The idea of giving a football coach total control and running an athletic department where many important decisions run right though the head football coaches office isn't always a good thing.





Title: Re: Bielema . . . .
Post by: Saulbadguy on January 02, 2007, 05:10:58 PM
. Keep, remember he WAS here at KSU already FattyMoosehawk.



Yeah, we already covered that. How did you expect us to keep him from going to a full time DC job at a top big 10 school***?

Moosehawk? Um. Ok.
***With the promise that he would end up the HC after Alvarez retires.  I'm sure there was no such deal even discussed at KSU.

I doubt he had that promise when he left KSU.
I'm thinking he did.  He was DC in the 04 season, and then at the beginning of the 05 season, Alvarez announced he would retire.

I'm thinking his badass 04 defense was responsible for the promise.  Your scenario makes sense, though, except for the part about a Big 10 school promising a LB coach a HC job without any true coordinator experience.
I thought he was our DC in 03? Or just a Co-DC?
Title: Re: Bielema . . . .
Post by: michigancat on January 02, 2007, 05:12:10 PM
Co-DC.
Title: Re: Bielema . . . .
Post by: Saulbadguy on January 02, 2007, 05:12:59 PM


Proving that:

1.   Snyder did KSU no favors by up and retiring seemingly out of nowhere.

2.   The idea of giving a football coach total control and running an athletic department where many important decisions run right though the head football coaches office isn't always a good thing.


:jerkoff:

So far, I think everything is working out fine.
Title: Re: Bielema . . . .
Post by: fatty fat fat on January 02, 2007, 05:13:36 PM
He was the LB and Recruiting coordinator. There is simply no reason to fret about Bielema. At the time it seemed like Elliot was doing a great job.
Title: Re: Bielema . . . .
Post by: michigancat on January 02, 2007, 05:14:57 PM


Proving that:

1.   Snyder did KSU no favors by up and retiring seemingly out of nowhere.

2.   The idea of giving a football coach total control and running an athletic department where many important decisions run right though the head football coaches office isn't always a good thing.


:jerkoff:

So far, I think everything is working out fine.

Compared to KSU 04-05, everything is dandy.

When you compare where KSU and Wisky were in 2003 to where they are in 2006, everything doesn't look fine at all.
Title: Re: Bielema . . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on January 02, 2007, 05:18:23 PM
He was the LB and Recruiting coordinator. There is simply no reason to fret about Bielema. At the time it seemed like Elliot was doing a great job.

Elliot's entire track record as a Coordinator had been one of medicrity prior to coming to KSU.   When he had Bieleme helping him, he was fine, once Bielema was gone . . . well KSU was calling defenses at the end of games they hadn't practiced on very much.

Title: Re: Bielema . . . .
Post by: Racquetball_Ninja on January 02, 2007, 10:45:55 PM
He was the LB and Recruiting coordinator. There is simply no reason to fret about Bielema. At the time it seemed like Elliot was doing a great job.

Elliot's entire track record as a Coordinator had been one of medicrity prior to coming to KSU.   When he had Bieleme helping him, he was fine, once Bielema was gone . . . well KSU was calling defenses at the end of games they hadn't practiced on very much.



Exactly, Elliot has never done anything special in college football.  Take a look at these stats and tell me where and when he was anything other than mediocre.

http://collegefootball.rivals.com/viewcoach.asp?Coach=249
Title: Re: Bielema . . . .
Post by: catzacker on January 03, 2007, 07:56:14 AM
He was the LB and Recruiting coordinator. There is simply no reason to fret about Bielema. At the time it seemed like Elliot was doing a great job.

Elliot's entire track record as a Coordinator had been one of medicrity prior to coming to KSU.   When he had Bieleme helping him, he was fine, once Bielema was gone . . . well KSU was calling defenses at the end of games they hadn't practiced on very much.



Exactly, Elliot has never done anything special in college football.  Take a look at these stats and tell me where and when he was anything other than mediocre.

http://collegefootball.rivals.com/viewcoach.asp?Coach=249

In the 4 years Elliott was here, his only recruits that actually made the field and had some sort of impact were Kyle Williams and Leon Patton and both of those had an impact after Elliott was gone.  It's hindsight by us, but foresight by Alvarez.  IIRC, when Bielma left for Whisky, at the time people thought that it would probably be Elliott leaving for Whisky.  I wonder what would have happened if Indiana would have hired Elliott after the '04 season; practically everyone including the AD were lobbying him to get him the hell out of Manhattan.    In '03, even with a defense that finished 6th in the nation, you could see signs of things to come.   
Title: Re: Bielema . . . .
Post by: cireksu on January 03, 2007, 10:48:46 AM
Bielma was an up and comer on the fast track, the OU game gave him all kinds of credibility even though I've heard that the OU game was all Elliott's game plan.