Bear Down Wildcats

Merkin wrote:Guess they weren't really OKGs.

All schools deal with injuries and transfers out.

Some adjust, some don't.

I really like RichRod a lot, but he needs to make some changes on defense.

I agree. I like RR..but I will like him even more if he fires casteel and his staff in the off season and makes a commitment to having a real college defense.

SCCats wrote:

azpenguin wrote:Well, if you're going to throw in Mackovic then don't forget to throw in 2003. They gave up 166 points in three games early. Also don't forget Stoops 2011, which led to the 2012 defense and also contributed to what we're seeing now (the 2011-2012 class is mostly gone when they should be the biggest contributors.)

You pick out Mackovick 2003 and Stoops 2012, the years those guys got fired (mid season no less), to try and find a favorable comp?

Hahaha, yeah.

That's why I'm curious on where you think they fell short in recruiting.

Again I'm not the expert. They should tell me where they've fallen short and how they're going to fix it going forward as far as maintaining the 3-3-5 goes.

As stated above, I bet that conversation would sound like a bunch of nothing as well.

Who said I was using those as favorable comparison points? Just completing the data.

Here's what I'm noticing. You're asking for an accounting but saying you're not the expert. You're clinging to metrics above all else. You are saying aside from said metrics that you don't know what is going on. You're asking for a self-criticism and a personal improvement plan. You're discounting contributing factors (injuries.) Your line of questioning and demands indicates you think that by pushing the coaching staff and telling them they're replaceable, that this is a situation you think can be fixed by just managing their way out of it with current resources (second and third stringers) and that they're just not trying hard enough or managing hard enough. You do all of this while freely admitting you don't know what the problem is. This sounds exactly like someone who is in business management.

Of course the explanations will sound like nothing to you - you aren't the expert, as you admit, so how would you expect then to package such an explanation so that you would comprehend it? The only ones they're going to owe any sort of explanation like you're demanding is to Byrne.

azpenguin wrote:

SCCats wrote:

azpenguin wrote:OK. You throw scheme and recruiting in there, implying those are the problems while discounting the injuries. The 3-3-5 has been debated to death. If you believe the recruiting is the problem, I'd like your take on just where they have fallen down on recruiting. I don't want vague "they need to recruit better" types of answers. I'm genuinely curious what you think on that.

I'm not the expert, they are. That's why they're given the chance to diagnose the specific problem, tell me how they're going to fix the problem and then execute that fix.

If they can, great. If they can't (or won't) that's fine too. Reorganization time.

But to ask them to put themselves on trial before the fanbase to "publicly gauge confidence" is... well, ridiculous.

I would say the ridiculous things are:

Allowing 6.8 yards per play attempted with no turnovers isn't going to cut it.

UA is 115th (out of 127) in passing yards allowed, and 108th in total defense.

Being in the lowest quartile like that of any industry in the world puts you on review. Period.

It's fight for your job time. If you can't (or won't), no problem.

You're implying that they aren't working to fix the problem here - you stated it twice. Do you really believe that?

I remember when Arizona was down near the bottom of the national barrel of defense due to injuries some time back. Some guy named Larry Mac Duff running the defense. Maybe they should have debated things in front of the fans fired him back in 1991 because his recruits and backups couldn't stop anything.

If the standard for maintaining your job is "working to fix your problems", then virtually no one would ever lose their job. I don't doubt Casteel & Co. trying, but this is a 'pay for performance, not effort' situation.

We are in year 4; this is year 7 of the 3-3-5 posting abysmal results under RR in a legit major conference. This is not just about this season... This is about a trend of abysmal performance that is exacerbated by some key injuries. Turituri and Scooy will be back soon; I hope they prove to be the panacea to solve all out woes, but I have my doubts.

Beyond that, if we are relying on Rob Ippolito to make or break our defense - the the problem is even bigger than I suspect.

Regardless of how this season plays out (and I do not expect much) Casteel should and will be given another year, but next year has to be 'make or break' time. Because sucking forever is not going to cut it.

ASUHATER! wrote:

Merkin wrote:Guess they weren't really OKGs.

All schools deal with injuries and transfers out.

Some adjust, some don't.

I really like RichRod a lot, but he needs to make some changes on defense.

I agree. I like RR..but I will like him even more if he fires casteel and his staff in the off season and makes a commitment to having a real college defense.

That not going to happen unless Byrne came to his office and basically tell RR to fire Casteel and the rest of Defensive staff. That like saying out do the bad for good. It not going to happen under RR. I read some other thread on WVU that some poster believe RR is too loyal too casteel and 3-3-5.

Ignoring the horrific numbers that Merkin has posted regarding our pathetic defense, and the talk of firing/keeping Casteel....days after the loss this is still sticking in my head....

splitsecond wrote:4th and 1 and in the red zone and you don't line up someone in at least the 1 technique, let alone the 0?

I didn't understand the D call when the game was live, and I still don't understand it days later. Same thing with the 3rd and short on the last drive wasn't it?

I don't know exactly what to file it under, but the general "not putting your team in the best position to win" category seems fitting when you just give up the first down in those situations by not putting anyone in front of center and the QB.

Ug.

azpenguin wrote:You're asking for an accounting but saying you're not the expert.

Correct.

You're clinging to metrics above all else.

When the metrics are as bad as they are, you don't need anything else. There's no talking your way out of our stats.

You are saying aside from said metrics that you don't know what is going on.

Oh I know what's going on: we suck on D.

You're asking for a self-criticism and a personal improvement plan.

Correct.

You're discounting contributing factors (injuries.)

If the injuries moved us from a fringe top 25 defense to a fringe top 35 defense we wouldn't be having this discussion. But that's not where we are.

Your line of questioning and demands indicates you think that by pushing the coaching staff and telling them they're replaceable, that this is a situation you think can be fixed by just managing their way out of it with current resources (second and third stringers) and that they're just not trying hard enough or managing hard enough. You do all of this while freely admitting you don't know what the problem is.

I'm not interested in telling them they're replaceable. I'm interested in hearing from them specifically what they think the problem(s) is and how they are going to fix it.

If we had that discussion publicly, we would all (I believe) realize they have no answers; if they did, they would have already executed those things.

At that moment we could all realize together they have no answers and have this big cathartic moment where we all (they and us) realize together we need to move onto something else.

Of course the explanations will sound like nothing to you - you aren't the expert, as you admit, so how would you expect then to package such an explanation so that you would comprehend it?

I would be ecstatic to hear they've come up with something revolutionary since Saturday to fix these problems. Nothing would make me happier.

The reality is we all know how the conversation would go: more of the same. Hope Scooby comes back healthy and saves us.

The one thing I can say that would be both revolutionary decisionmaking that has occurred since Saturday and that my novice ass would understand: 'We're moving to a 4-3.'

But none of that is going to happen. We're going to continue on as we have before, looking at a back half four games of the PAC season where we probably need a D but won't have one.

C'est le vie.

We'll all put on our drinking smocks because we're going to need them.

SCCats really lays it out there. We are of exactly the same mind, and having to slog through every reason for what is plainly obvious not just on paper, but to most other fanbases, really holds up necessary progress--especially (and IMHO shockingly so) in a program that has built what tradition it has on defense.

Next year, I agree, is make or break time for Casteel and his defense. Nobody's asking for the return of the Double Eagle Flex, because coaches finally figured that out.

What is very reasonable, though, is to have a defense that fights every down. Not bleeds points and first downs in the first halves of games, then adjusts with varying degrees of success.

Recruits see that kind of defensive inertia, and such a performance affects recruiting more than any other factor anyone else has cared to grasp at.

azgreg wrote:

injuries are not the only reason that so many different players have started, and they certainly are not what separates this unit from Desert Swarm.

Harvey Specter wrote:injuries are not the only reason that so many different players have started, and they certainly are not what separates this unit from Desert Swarm.

I didn't say otherwise.

A 95 percent Red Zone conversion rate by the opponent's offense separates this unit from Desert Swarm.

I guess this will be Casteel last season as our DC this season. This game is just terrible, Getting your ass kick by the UW team with the worst offense in the pac 12.

Soooooooooo...

Hard to pin this one on the defense when the offense does absolutely nothing at all the entire night. UW could have stopped scoring after the first TD and it still wouldn't have mattered.

It's not gonna happen

AZarchery wrote:It's not gonna happen

If it doesn't happen...

And next year the defense looks similarish to this year...

It won't be Casteel's job on the line.

My guess is the next three games will make this clear, if it isn't already.

It's time for a change.

We as Arizona fans request a change for our team.

AZarchery wrote:It's not gonna happen

It won't happen unless Byrne grows a pair and makes it happen. RRod won't shoot his drinking buddies.

And we do NOT need to give Casteel another year to turn it around. One problem most AD's make is that they wait too
long to make necessary changes. We have seen all we need to in order to make an accurate judgement of the capabilities of this
defensive staff.

SCCats wrote:I'm not interested in telling them they're replaceable. I'm interested in hearing from them specifically what they think the problem(s) is and how they are going to fix it.

If we had that discussion publicly, we would all (I believe) realize they have no answers; if they did, they would have already executed those things.

At that moment we could all realize together they have no answers and have this big cathartic moment where we all (they and us) realize together we need to move onto something else.

I think that Washington game was just about our "moment."

We'll all put on our drinking smocks because we're going to need them.

And I hope you had your best (and thickest) drinking smock out.

Damn that sucked.

After tonight, it is no longer an option to give Casteel another year. The whole unit showed so little fight that something needs to be shaken up now.

Biggest embarrassment tonight since Stoops' final half season.

dmjcat wrote:

AZarchery wrote:It's not gonna happen

It won't happen unless Byrne grows a pair and makes it happen. RRod won't shoot his drinking buddies.

And we do NOT need to give Casteel another year to turn it around. One problem most AD's make is that they wait too
long to make necessary changes. We have seen all we need to in order to make an accurate judgement of the capabilities of this
defensive staff.

I would guess that the only way Casteel leaves after this season is if it is to accompany RR to a new destination that is of their own choosing,

But if there is ever a change that needs to be made at the DC position in the RR era, and RR continues to insist on running the 3-3-5, I seriously doubt a new DC will matter.

We have 2 wins against BCS conference competition this season; those 2 wins came against teams that have combined for 1 win (in 12 tries?) against a BCS conference team - against (you guessed it) the other of those 2 teams. We are the 10the best team in the league, and are 1-1 in close games.

But, in honor of the 'how to lie with statistics' consortium... we are ONE win away from our 4th bowl game in as many years - an accomplishment that this program has never before achieved!

Guys I'm just gonna throw this out there.

I'm as displeased as anyone else on here but keep this in mind.

In 1991 Washington smoked us 54-0 and our defense was a joke. The next year we beat the #1 ranked huskies 16-3 and the desert swarm was born.

Now do I think that's gonna happen? Absolutely not. But this is college football and weird shit happens every year, you just never know.

And just in case anyone asks Larry MacDuff was the DC when the defense was shit and when it turned around.

dmjcat wrote:

AZarchery wrote:It's not gonna happen

It won't happen unless Byrne grows a pair and makes it happen. RRod won't shoot his drinking buddies.

And we do NOT need to give Casteel another year to turn it around. One problem most AD's make is that they wait too
long to make necessary changes. We have seen all we need to in order to make an accurate judgement of the capabilities of this
defensive staff.

Like what exactly the bigger picture hear. That we lost our Three top LB to injury and Defensive couldn't find suitable replacement.

That 3-3-5 cant stop Football team that are good but it can do good against weak football team.

Even if Byrne tell RR that something has to give on whether or not Changes have to be made Defense. And that not going to be easy on RR to make decision and say Casteel and Defensive Staff that has been with since WVU days to say You're Fired.

The real question has to say is Will RR be committed of having his team running a 3-4 or 4-3 for improving.

We all know Casteel will not be fired, he probably has one or two more years left before that decision is made for Rich Rod. But the rest of the staff should be let go at the end of the year. Our DB's are so soft so there goes lockwood. Our d line has been garbage for 4 years so see ya Kirelawich. Safety has not be the worst position this year but Caponi probably should go as well.

Id really like to see what happens as USC because Chris Wilson (former Miss St coach) could be a really good hire for Arizona. As for the DB and Safety, i wish they would go after pendergast. He's a much better position coach then a D coordinator. I think that would provide a better staff then we have now, but who knows.

The defense is fine. Just give Casteel four more years and he'll turn it around.

chiefzona wrote:The defense is fine. Just give Casteel four more years and he'll turn it around.

When you said our defense is fine.
It not fine.
49-3.
49 unanswered points that our defense gave up.
And your saying Four more years of no quality defense in 3-3-5.
A lot people has been wondering how long it take for this defense to improve.
Will RR make tough decision of firing entire defensive staff
Will something give at this point. because the season is lost.
And you know what really suck to see other team beating the team we should have beaten.

Can't believe Casteel takes a salary for this stuff he puts on the field called a defense.

cordera89 wrote:

chiefzona wrote:The defense is fine. Just give Casteel four more years and he'll turn it around.

When you said our defense is fine.
It not fine.
49-3.
49 unanswered points that our defense gave up.
And your saying Four more years of no quality defense in 3-3-5.
A lot people has been wondering how long it take for this defense to improve.
Will RR make tough decision of firing entire defensive staff
Will something give at this point. because the season is lost.
And you know what really suck to see other team beating the team we should have beaten.

Cordera - Chief is being sarcastic. He's been posting against the 3-3-5 and Casteel's methods since the beginning on this board, the old GoAz Cats board and Scout premium. He's taken a mountain of shit from a lot of posters for being reasonably critical of the defense.

BearDown89 wrote:

cordera89 wrote:

chiefzona wrote:The defense is fine. Just give Casteel four more years and he'll turn it around.

When you said our defense is fine.
It not fine.
49-3.
49 unanswered points that our defense gave up.
And your saying Four more years of no quality defense in 3-3-5.
A lot people has been wondering how long it take for this defense to improve.
Will RR make tough decision of firing entire defensive staff
Will something give at this point. because the season is lost.
And you know what really suck to see other team beating the team we should have beaten.

Cordera - Chief is being sarcastic. He's been posting against the 3-3-5 and Casteel's methods since the beginning on this board, the old GoAz Cats board and Scout premium. He's taken a mountain of shit from a lot of posters for being reasonably critical of the defense.

Even if Chief was being sarcastic I wouldn't rather try to stir the pot of saying the defense is fine and need four more year to be better.
I been on scout broad and i have already read some of those comment on their. Everyone Disbelief.

Let's have everyone be very clear. Rich Rod is not firing Casteel and if Greg Byrne tries to make him RR will leave. Additionally the defensive roster is not set up for more traditional defenses.

So still want Casteel gone? It will mean even worse defenses next year or two and RR being elsewhere

PHXCATS wrote:Let's have everyone be very clear. Rich Rod is not firing Casteel and if Greg Byrne tries to make him RR will leave. Additionally the defensive roster is not set up for more traditional defenses.

So still want Casteel gone? It will mean even worse defenses next year or two and RR being elsewhere

So the solution is to just always have an awful defense and giving up on finding a solution. Ok then.

PHXCATS wrote:Let's have everyone be very clear. Rich Rod is not firing Casteel and if Greg Byrne tries to make him RR will leave. Additionally the defensive roster is not set up for more traditional defenses.

So still want Casteel gone? It will mean even worse defenses next year or two and RR being elsewhere

I'm cool with it.

You don't do business with family or friends. If RR wants the Casteel albatross around his neck, so bet it.

Have fun in Blacksburg, which I'm sure he would bring from those hills, but man, not being from there myself that sure is a shitty part of the country.

Turned down a very high paying job, just so I didn't have to live in that Tricities area of TN, VA, KY

PHXCATS wrote:Let's have everyone be very clear. Rich Rod is not firing Casteel and if Greg Byrne tries to make him RR will leave. Additionally the defensive roster is not set up for more traditional defenses.

So still want Casteel gone? It will mean even worse defenses next year or two and RR being elsewhere

Even if RR does or doesn't want to fired Casteel but at some point he going to have too at fired him.

Your trying to say that if he doesn't he going to leave Arizona for another job he cant fired a closed friend. How HC have fired a close friend on his staff. Can you name me one HC that has done that.

Only thing byrne is going to do is sit down and talk to him and give his take on defense and whether or not Casteel should be given another year. Every single fan knows about RR not helping the defense, Do you think that most of the fans of the vacate jobs would hired him and entire staff and the 3-3-5.

PHXCATS wrote:Let's have everyone be very clear. Rich Rod is not firing Casteel and if Greg Byrne tries to make him RR will leave. Additionally the defensive roster is not set up for more traditional defenses.

So still want Casteel gone? It will mean even worse defenses next year or two and RR being elsewhere

Maybe. Take awhile to get players in, but at Michigan Hoke and staff took a roster of Rich Rod 3-3-5 defensive players that finished 110th Total Defense and 108th Scoring Defense in 2010 and finished
17th and 6th in Hoke's first season.

Agree with the Byrne dictating. Why retain a Head coach who doesn't want to change or refuses to let staff go and the AD dictates? That's not Rich Rod. He would leave with them. Really don't think Byrne would even consider dictating schemes or personell unless a legal/ethical issue.

I still have no idea why people are blaming the scheme or Casteel for this? Casteel deserves part of the blame in regards to the recruiting, because every coach on the staff deserves part of that blame, but it doesn't matter what scheme you run if you don't have talent. We don't have talent and the highly rated talent we have brought in either doesn't play defense any more or hardly to never plays at all.

ChooChooCat wrote:I still have no idea why people are blaming the scheme or Casteel for this? Casteel deserves part of the blame in regards to the recruiting, because every coach on the staff deserves part of that blame, but it doesn't matter what scheme you run if you don't have talent. We don't have talent and the highly rated talent we have brought in either doesn't play defense any more or hardly to never plays at all.

Bingo. We can run a 4-3 if you want and still give up a ton of yards and tds this year

RazorsEdgeAZ wrote:

PHXCATS wrote:Let's have everyone be very clear. Rich Rod is not firing Casteel and if Greg Byrne tries to make him RR will leave. Additionally the defensive roster is not set up for more traditional defenses.

So still want Casteel gone? It will mean even worse defenses next year or two and RR being elsewhere

Maybe. Take awhile to get players in, but at Michigan Hoke and staff took a roster of Rich Rod 3-3-5 defensive players that finished 110th Total Defense and 108th Scoring Defense in 2010 and finished
17th and 6th in Hoke's first season.

Agree with the Byrne dictating. Why retain a Head coach who doesn't want to change or refuses to let staff go and the AD dictates? That's not Rich Rod. He would leave with them. Really don't think Byrne would even consider dictating schemes or personell unless a legal/ethical issue.

The only thing Byrne will do is sit down and talk to RR about Defense or possible staff changes. Their two option that will or might not happen.

1) Something has to give either if the 3-3-5 or Casteel as DC.
2) Improvement.
3) probably recruit better prospect.
I don't think RR would leave Arizona if disagree on what Byrne might say to him. If he does leave because he doesn't want to fired a close friend then he will basically tarnish reputation as good HC instead of improving.

RazorsEdgeAZ wrote:

PHXCATS wrote:Let's have everyone be very clear. Rich Rod is not firing Casteel and if Greg Byrne tries to make him RR will leave. Additionally the defensive roster is not set up for more traditional defenses.

So still want Casteel gone? It will mean even worse defenses next year or two and RR being elsewhere

Maybe. Take awhile to get players in, but at Michigan Hoke and staff took a roster of Rich Rod 3-3-5 defensive players that finished 110th Total Defense and 108th Scoring Defense in 2010 and finished
17th and 6th in Hoke's first season.

Agree with the Byrne dictating. Why retain a Head coach who doesn't want to change or refuses to let staff go and the AD dictates? That's not Rich Rod. He would leave with them. Really don't think Byrne would even consider dictating schemes or personell unless a legal/ethical issue.

That kind of true thou because Hoke did took his worst defensive team and turn them into top 10 powerhouse defense. But RR was dealing with 3 different defensive scheme what made his defense their worst ever year. If RR chooses to make a change he has to fired the entire defense staff. Question is Who is willing to improve our Defense?

Fishclamps wrote:

ChooChooCat wrote:I still have no idea why people are blaming the scheme or Casteel for this? Casteel deserves part of the blame in regards to the recruiting, because every coach on the staff deserves part of that blame, but it doesn't matter what scheme you run if you don't have talent. We don't have talent and the highly rated talent we have brought in either doesn't play defense any more or hardly to never plays at all.

Bingo. We can run a 4-3 if you want and still give up a ton of yards and tds this year

If that was possible who would be that guy to coach our defense.

PHXCATS wrote:Let's have everyone be very clear. Rich Rod is not firing Casteel and if Greg Byrne tries to make him RR will leave. Additionally the defensive roster is not set up for more traditional defenses.

So still want Casteel gone? It will mean even worse defenses next year or two and RR being elsewhere

Apparently the defensive roster is not set up for the 3-3-5, either.

Is the second comment a serious one? I am not sure it is possible to have a defense much worse that we have now...

If we go 1-11, do we maintain status quo for fear of going 0-12?

RichRod isn't going anywhere, even if Byrne verbally smacks him around a bit at the their end of season meeting. Who would hire him?

To repeat myself:

1. Never beaten UCLA
2. Never beat rivals MSU or tOSU while at UM
3. 1-2 v. rival ASU
4. 3 conference losses by 26 points or more this season with 2 of the tougher teams coming up.


In any game that really matters RR's teams just fall apart. Look at the PAC-12 championship game last season.

PHXCATS wrote:Let's have everyone be very clear. Rich Rod is not firing Casteel and if Greg Byrne tries to make him RR will leave. Additionally the defensive roster is not set up for more traditional defenses.

So still want Casteel gone? It will mean even worse defenses next year or two and RR being elsewhere

Don't be too sure about that. If RRods choices are:

1) Stay employed, and keep half of his buddies employed Or:
2) He and all of his buddies end up unemployed

I think he picks #1. If we finish the season at 5-7 with 4 straight really bad losses (very possible at this point) nobody is going to be beating down RRods door to hire him.

Scheer said it and there are plenty of other schools that will take RR even if the Cats go 5 and 7.

PHXCATS wrote:Scheer said it and there are plenty of other schools that will take RR even if the Cats go 5 and 7.

I know Scheer said it and not you, but I can't buy that line of thinking making any sense. Any AD that wants to sell season tickets would have to win the press conference to do so. Hiring a coach who is fresh off a 5-7 record regardless of the circumstances would fail to do that. Especially a coach who failed at his biggest job prior to that. They'd have to be as dumb as the Nebraska AD who hired Mike Riley. That's worked out really well so far.

PHXCATS wrote:Scheer said it and there are plenty of other schools that will take RR even if the Cats go 5 and 7.

Scheer says a lot of things.

Yes, there are other schools that would like to hire RR even if we finish 5-7. Whether or not those schools will pay him more than he is making now, and offer him a BCS conference platform and a more enthusiastic fan base, is TBD.

Regardless, at least he will get to keep a portion of his retention bonus - even if he leaves. Never understood why that was accelerated, and damn sure do not agree with it. Same goes for Miller's.

Harvey Specter wrote:Yes, there are other schools that would like to hire RR even if we finish 5-7. Whether or not those schools will pay him more than he is making now, and offer him a BCS conference platform and a more enthusiastic fan base, is TBD.

The other question would be do they extend the invite to Casteel?

After this year that's pretty hard (at least for me) to imagine.

My guess is quite a few lateral type schools would be interested...sans Casteel.

PHXCATS wrote:Scheer said it and there are plenty of other schools that will take RR even if the Cats go 5 and 7.

And exactly where would Scheer have access to that information ?

From RRod perhaps??

I doubt very many AD's are communicating with Mr. Scheer.

I suspect even fewer AD's are actively seeking coaches with losing records for their next hire.

SCCats wrote:

Harvey Specter wrote:Yes, there are other schools that would like to hire RR even if we finish 5-7. Whether or not those schools will pay him more than he is making now, and offer him a BCS conference platform and a more enthusiastic fan base, is TBD.

The other question would be do they extend the invite to Casteel?

After this year that's pretty hard (at least for me) to imagine.

My guess is quite a few lateral type schools would be interested...sans Casteel.

Yeah. I can see a south Carolina or Minnesota or Maryland being interested...without casteel.

Va Tech keeping Foster as DC would probably be a great fit. Doubt RR would dump Casteel though.

UAEebs86 wrote:Va Tech keeping Foster as DC would probably be a great fit. Doubt RR would dump Casteel though.

Doubt Foster would be ok with pretty much going from head coach in waiting to the next Guy's DC either.