Monty Torpedoed the FB program

[astonmartin708]

Concerning the Graham/Kragthorpe/Blankenship years, our schedule was far from easy. ECU, UCF, and Houston had good teams through out that time. We played OU and OSU some, had what four top 25 teams ooc for Blankenships first year? ND and Arkansas under Graham. Had a scheduled series with Army and Texas Tech with Leach during that time period too.

It's the coach, just like it was with Burns. Just like it was with Dobbs, Graham, and Kragthorpe. Tulsa's football success or failure has largely rode on the shoulders of its coaches.

The conference schedule was far easier. We don't have the likes of UAB, Rice, UTEP, or a down Tulane.

Most difficult noncon opponents by season (Not including bowl game opponents):
03: Minn (L), Ark (L)
04: KU (L), OSU (L)
05: Minn (L), OU (L)
06: BYU (L)
07: BYU (W), OU (L)
08: Ark (L)
09: OU (L), Boise (L)
10: OSU (L), ND (W)
11: OU (L), OSU(L), Boise(L)
12: Iowa St(L), Fresno St (W), Ark (L)
13: OU (L), Iowa St (L)
14: OU (L)
15: OU (L)
16: Ohio St. (L)
17: OSU (L) , Toledo (L)
18: Texas (L), Ark (L)
19: MSU (L), OSU (L)

 

[Weatherdemon]

The conference schedule was far easier. We don't have the likes of UAB, Rice, UTEP, or a down Tulane.

Most difficult noncon opponents by season (Not including bowl game opponents):
03: Minn (L), (Ark)
04: KU (L), OSU (L)
05: Minn (L), OU (L)
06: BYU (L)
07: BYU (W), OU (L)
08: Ark (L)
09: OU (L), Boise (L)
10: OSU (L), ND (W)
11: OU (L), OSU(L), Boise(L)
12: Iowa St(L), Fresno St (W), Ark (L)
13: OU (L), Iowa St (L)
14: OU (L)
15: OU (L)
16: Ohio St. (L)
17: OSU (L) , Toledo (L)
18: Texas (L), Ark (L)
19: MSU (L), OSU (L)

We won vs Iowa St the second time in 13.

 

[astonmartin708]

We won vs Iowa St the second time in 13.

True, but that was a bowl. I ommitted bowls because they were unscheduled and the school had no say in what quality of opponent they got. We probably could have beat some better teams the years we trounced Hawaii / Bowling Green....

 

[astonmartin708]

All in all, it looks like no one did too well against top competition (though Monty has been by far the most competitive on a regular basis). Also, some guys got to run up wins in seasons like 06' and 08' when they probably should have had another loss or two if they had played tougher competition.

 

[TU4ever2]

The conference schedule was far easier. We don't have the likes of UAB, Rice, UTEP, or a down Tulane.

Most difficult noncon opponents by season (Not including bowl game opponents):
03: Minn (L), Ark (L)
04: KU (L), OSU (L)
05: Minn (L), OU (L)
06: BYU (L)
07: BYU (W), OU (L)
08: Ark (L)
09: OU (L), Boise (L)
10: OSU (L), ND (W)
11: OU (L), OSU(L), Boise(L)
12: Iowa St(L), Fresno St (W), Ark (L)
13: OU (L), Iowa St (L)
14: OU (L)
15: OU (L)
16: Ohio St. (L)
17: OSU (L) , Toledo (L)
18: Texas (L), Ark (L)
19: MSU (L), OSU (L)

Tulane has been good two seasons. They are the equivelent of Rice right now who occasionally was good.

UConn is terrible they would be Tulane.

ECU is UTEP (who was ranked during that period)

SMU has been good one year and decent one year, other wise awful they are UAB.

There isn't much difference.

Well there is in one place. Good head coaches win. How did Rice play us the year Graham was head coach? How'd they play the year before when he was DC for us and Krag?

We won big games under Dave but had no depth to make it through some seasons, still had a couple stellar teams and produced.

Kragthorpe took a terrible team to a bowl, then built a foundation and started the programs rebirth.

Graham turned around Rice and laid a foundation the next coach did pretty well with (3 bowls in six years and two 10 win seasons). Then Graham came here and help build more momentum and progress. Went on to win at Pitt and Arizona St.

Coaching matters.

 

[astonmartin708]

Tulane has been good two seasons. They are the equivelent of Rice right now who occasionally was good.

UConn is terrible they would be Tulane.

ECU is UTEP (who was ranked during that period)

SMU has been good one year and decent one year, other wise awful they are UAB.

There isn't much difference.

Well there is in one place. Good head coaches win. How did Rice play us the year Graham was head coach? How'd they play the year before when he was DC for us and Krag?

We won big games under Dave but had no depth to make it through some seasons, still had a couple stellar teams and produced.

Kragthorpe took a terrible team to a bowl, then built a foundation and started the programs rebirth.

Graham turned around Rice and laid a foundation the next coach did pretty well with (3 bowls in six years and two 10 win seasons). Then Graham came here and help build more momentum and progress. Went on to win at Pitt and Arizona St.

Coaching matters.

Uconn and ECU aren't in our division like Rice (Bad), Tulane(Bad), UTEP(Bad), and SMU(Bad) were.

 

[astonmartin708]

Tulane has been good two seasons. They are the equivelent of Rice right now who occasionally was good.

UConn is terrible they would be Tulane.

ECU is UTEP (who was ranked during that period)

SMU has been good one year and decent one year, other wise awful they are UAB.

There isn't much difference.

Well there is in one place. Good head coaches win. How did Rice play us the year Graham was head coach? How'd they play the year before when he was DC for us and Krag?

We won big games under Dave but had no depth to make it through some seasons, still had a couple stellar teams and produced.

Kragthorpe took a terrible team to a bowl, then built a foundation and started the programs rebirth.

Graham turned around Rice and laid a foundation the next coach did pretty well with (3 bowls in six years and two 10 win seasons). Then Graham came here and help build more momentum and progress. Went on to win at Pitt and Arizona St.

Coaching matters.

He went 6-6 at Pitt. He also had a tendency to beat the wheels off of bad teams and lose handily to good teams.

 

[TU4ever2]

Just to be clear:

There have been 5 ten or more win seasons in the last 12 years of football for Tulsa, 6 winning seasons, and 7 bowl games. Since 2003 we have had four coaches have a losing season, but only one has been allowed to have four losing seasons. Four. Not one or two; four of his five years are losing seasons. We didn't let Burns get away with that and there was a serious push to shut down football.

Since Kragthorpe came here in 2003 until Blankenship was fired we had four losing seasons with the last two leading to Blankenship getting fired.l, Monty has already matched the other three coaches. His only winning season was one with Blankenship's players.

We have had three losing seasons in a row.

Its Monty.

 

[Fmr'Cane16]

I’m not a TG honk but the dude wins. Took 4 different programs to bowl games 10 out of 12 years. It doesn’t just happen

 

[TU4ever2]

Uconn and ECU aren't in our division like Rice (Bad), Tulane(Bad), UTEP(Bad), and SMU(Bad) were.

SMU has been bad and in our division. Until last year so was Tulane. We played either UConn or ECU every year in the AAC. We have also played a terrible Cincy team under Tuberville for his last year (an overtime win). A bad Navy team last year. So their have been three or four easily winnable games each year in conference.

Try again.

 

[Hurricane Drummer]

An AAC schedule nowadays is much tougher than a CUSA schedule was when we were in it. Anyone can see that.

Past coaches padded the win column against bad teams. None of them ever beat OU, OSU, or Arkansas. That speaks to the strength of the program, not the coaches.

 

[Tulsafanzz]

I’m not a TG honk but the dude wins. Took 4 different programs to bowl games 10 out of 12 years. It doesn’t just happen

,
Agree. Graham also recruited very well and hired OCs that ran exciting offenses. He creates a lot of work for an AD, but he’s worth it.

 

[aTUfan]

I guess no news , Is not good news.

 

[astonmartin708]

Just to be clear:

There have been 5 ten or more win seasons in the last 12 years of football for Tulsa, 6 winning seasons, and 7 bowl games. Since 2003 we have had four coaches have a losing season, but only one has been allowed to have four losing seasons. Four. Not one or two; four of his five years are losing seasons. We didn't let Burns get away with that and there was a serious push to shut down football.

Since Kragthorpe came here in 2003 until Blankenship was fired we had four losing seasons with the last two leading to Blankenship getting fired.l, Monty has already matched the other three coaches. His only winning season was one with Blankenship's players.

We have had three losing seasons in a row.

Its Monty.

One "losing season" was a close bowl loss to VT....

 

[Raisin_Cane]

One "losing season" was a close bowl loss to VT....

I’m in the minority but losing seasons aren’t the same as 6-6 seasons where you lose in a bowl game against a random opponent. All I care about is bowl vs. non bowl. So 2 of 5 seasons have ended in a bowl. And to say that first season wasn’t a success on the back of a 2-10 season is ludicrous. Putting up 50 points on a Bud Foster defense is still insane.

 

[HuffyCane]

I’m not a TG honk but the dude wins. Took 4 different programs to bowl games 10 out of 12 years. It doesn’t just happen

He probably doesn’t even know that stat but why do I think that if he does, then this stat is going up on a billboard on I-10 west of San Anton tomorrow ....

 

[aTUfan]

It's going to be difficult to get excited in August for the upcoming season.

 

[TU_BLA]

Just to be clear:

There have been 5 ten or more win seasons in the last 12 years of football for Tulsa, 6 winning seasons, and 7 bowl games. Since 2003 we have had four coaches have a losing season, but only one has been allowed to have four losing seasons. Four. Not one or two; four of his five years are losing seasons. We didn't let Burns get away with that and there was a serious push to shut down football.

Since Kragthorpe came here in 2003 until Blankenship was fired we had four losing seasons with the last two leading to Blankenship getting fired.l, Monty has already matched the other three coaches. His only winning season was one with Blankenship's players.

We have had three losing seasons in a row.

Its Monty.

We can give credit for Monty having 3 losing seasons (the last 3). I don't count the 1st season as a losing season because he made a bowl game which was a stark turn around from the previous 2 seasons. No one would ever consider that season a failure considering what he inherited in terms of teams who didn't know how to win (he obviously inherited a ton of talent as evidenced by how many points they put up). Yes the record technically is 6-7 with the loss to VaTech in the bowl game (BTW, the best bowl game of any that year in terms of pure entertainment value). I'm all for relieving Monty of his duties for failure at his job, but that year wasn't a failure by anyone's standards.

Removing BB's losing seasons which were disasters and we all seem to have a grasp as to why, that leaves Kragthorpe's 2nd season (4-8) but I seem to recall some injury issues. And Graham's 3rd season which was the Graham as OC season. I have long maintained the single most important play in that season was the non-recovery of the onside kick vs. Houston. If we come up with that and take the knee to run the clock out, I think that season ends up 8-4 or 7-5 at worst We just seemed in a downward spiral after that one that lasted the rest of the regular season. Graham of course realized the need for an actual OC and turned it around the next season with Morris (10-3). Of course after the K and Graham bad seasons, fans weren't all up in arms over it because they could see an actual process and plan in place to get better. I can't say that with Monty. I don't have hope that next year will improve at all despite having some really talented players in the mix.

 

[astonmartin708]

We can give credit for Monty having 3 losing seasons (the last 3). I don't count the 1st season as a losing season because he made a bowl game which was a stark turn around from the previous 2 seasons. No one would ever consider that season a failure considering what he inherited in terms of teams who didn't know how to win (he obviously inherited a ton of talent as evidenced by how many points they put up). Yes the record technically is 6-7 with the loss to VaTech in the bowl game (BTW, the best bowl game of any that year in terms of pure entertainment value). I'm all for relieving Monty of his duties for failure at his job, but that year wasn't a failure by anyone's standards.

Removing BB's losing seasons which were disasters and we all seem to have a grasp as to why, that leaves Kragthorpe's 2nd season (4-8) but I seem to recall some injury issues. And Graham's 3rd season which was the Graham as OC season. I have long maintained the single most important play in that season was the non-recovery of the onside kick vs. Houston. If we come up with that and take the knee to run the clock out, I think that season ends up 8-4 or 7-5 at worst We just seemed in a downward spiral after that one that lasted the rest of the regular season. Graham of course realized the need for an actual OC and turned it around the next season with Morris (10-3). Of course after the K and Graham bad seasons, fans weren't all up in arms over it because they could see an actual process and plan in place to get better. I can't say that with Monty. I don't have hope that next year will improve at all despite having some really talented players in the mix.

You sound like me with Haith. We have some good players, but I don't see us improving. For what it's worth, I think the team will be better by the sheer fact that we signed a scholarship kicker. The biggest problem is that we have to replace quite a bit on defense. Next year's problem won't be Monty's play calling / game management. It will be how our defensive coordinators adjust to new players in new spots.

 

[TU_BLA]

You sound like me with Haith. We have some good players, but I don't see us improving. For what it's worth, I think the team will be better by the sheer fact that we signed a scholarship kicker. The biggest problem is that we have to replace quite a bit on defense. Next year's problem won't be Monty's play calling / game management. It will be how our defensive coordinators adjust to new players in new spots.

I've mentioned it a few times as we critique Monty. The defense was both loaded and deep this year. We had a regular 3 group rotation on DL w/ little drop off from one group to the next. Obviously with Gipson you lose an NFL quality pass-rusher, but I think Cullen Wick and Deven Lamp are ready to step into those roles as well. Both Jaxon Player and Jajuan Blankenship return at NT, and Anthony Goodlow got a lot of meaningful snaps and showed a ton of promise at the off side DE spot. We lose Edmiston, but I think Collins may shift into the MLB role with Burnett at one of the OLB roles. I believe Cristian Williams will get his 6th yr. Kendarin Ray is going to be a monster. Allie Green is back and I would assume Akayleb Evans would start at Robinson's spot. I don't think we will have a problem finding a quality DB to take his place.

I'm not worried about the defense for next year to be honest. I think the returning group has the potential to be as good as this year's group.

Offense: We lose Keened Johnson and Chris Ivy. Ivy's spot will be filled by Tyler Smith who is much better (IMO) than Ivy was. I also think we have plenty of capable WRs on the sideline.

 

[astonmartin708]

I've mentioned it a few times as we critique Monty. The defense was both loaded and deep this year. We had a regular 3 group rotation on DL w/ little drop off from one group to the next. Obviously with Gipson you lose an NFL quality pass-rusher, but I think Cullen Wick and Deven Lamp are ready to step into those roles as well. Both Jaxon Player and Jajuan Blankenship return at NT, and Anthony Goodlow got a lot of meaningful snaps and showed a ton of promise at the off side DE spot. We lose Edmiston, but I think Collins may shift into the MLB role with Burnett at one of the OLB roles. I believe Cristian Williams will get his 6th yr. Kendarin Ray is going to be a monster. Allie Green is back and I would assume Akayleb Evans would start at Robinson's spot. I don't think we will have a problem finding a quality DB to take his place.

I'm not worried about the defense for next year to be honest. I think the returning group has the potential to be as good as this year's group.

Offense: We lose Keened Johnson and Chris Ivy. Ivy's spot will be filled by Tyler Smith who is much better (IMO) than Ivy was. I also think we have plenty of capable WRs on the sideline.

I agree that pieces are there to replace some of these guys.... but we need to rebuild depth on the defense and sure up a couple of spots (mainly LB's) I'm confident in Wick and Lamp stepping in. If Williams doesn't get his 6th year (because NCAA) or we don't move Collins inside, we might have an issue or two. I think it's solvable, but not easy.

Offense is a non-issue besides continuing to develop the OL. Hopefully we have some young guys come in and compete for starting spots there. The OL needs to improve. I'm pretty sure this is one of the only times during Monty's tenure that we didn't have a lineman on any all conference teams. Between Johnson (ISU transfer), Crawford, Stokes, and Santana I'm pretty confident in the returning skill players.

 

[TU4ever2]

I've mentioned it a few times as we critique Monty. The defense was both loaded and deep this year. We had a regular 3 group rotation on DL w/ little drop off from one group to the next. Obviously with Gipson you lose an NFL quality pass-rusher, but I think Cullen Wick and Deven Lamp are ready to step into those roles as well. Both Jaxon Player and Jajuan Blankenship return at NT, and Anthony Goodlow got a lot of meaningful snaps and showed a ton of promise at the off side DE spot. We lose Edmiston, but I think Collins may shift into the MLB role with Burnett at one of the OLB roles. I believe Cristian Williams will get his 6th yr. Kendarin Ray is going to be a monster. Allie Green is back and I would assume Akayleb Evans would start at Robinson's spot. I don't think we will have a problem finding a quality DB to take his place.

I'm not worried about the defense for next year to be honest. I think the returning group has the potential to be as good as this year's group.

Offense: We lose Keened Johnson and Chris Ivy. Ivy's spot will be filled by Tyler Smith who is much better (IMO) than Ivy was. I also think we have plenty of capable WRs on the sideline.

This sounds like we just need a qb from the last two years.

Its Monty not the talent, as proven by his woeful record in close games and his continued poor game situation decisions.

He has one winning season. Blankenship was saying before he was fired that Dane's junior year we would be a bowl team. We were. He was saying we would be really good Dane's senior year. We were. Monty got paid a lot more to do what Blankenship said he could do, doing it with Blankenship's players.

He has shown nothing that says he will win more than 3-4 games a season at any level. He refuses to change or to even look for help. The results are clear. Our improvement hasn't been on the offensive side, it has been on the defensive side, which got us one extra win this season because our special teams have been below adequate to win close games and are another area where he is stubborn.

 

[astonmartin708]

This sounds like we just need a qb from the last two years.

Its Monty not the talent, as proven by his woeful record in close games and his continued poor game situation decisions.

He has one winning season. Blankenship was saying before he was fired that Dane's junior year we would be a bowl team. We were. He was saying we would be really good Dane's senior year. We were. Monty got paid a lot more to do what Blankenship said he could do, doing it with Blankenship's players.

He has shown nothing that says he will win more than 3-4 games a season at any level. He refuses to change or to even look for help. The results are clear. Our improvement hasn't been on the offensive side, it has been on the defensive side, which got us one extra win this season because our special teams have been below adequate to win close games and are another area where he is stubborn.

Please don't defend Blankenship (as a HC) on here. I don't care what excuses he made about Dane. Blankenship returned the entire offense from a team that won a ton of games the season before and they couldn't move the ball to save their lives. What Blankenship thought he could do and what he could actually do were two different things.

Monty got much more out of Blankenship's players than Blankenship ever got out of Graham's who were arguably more talented overall. The close losses this season weren't due to play calling. Monty called those games with the same mindset that Saban or Belicheck would. "Get to the end and give yourself a chance to win." Monty gave himself a chance... the ball just went on the wrong side of the post.

 

[TU_BLA]

Please don't defend Blankenship (as a HC) on here. I don't care what excuses he made about Dane. Blankenship returned the entire offense from a team that won a ton of games the season before and they couldn't move the ball to save their lives. What Blankenship thought he could do and what he could actually do were two different things.

Monty got much more out of Blankenship's players than Blankenship ever got out of Graham's who were arguably more talented overall. The close losses this season weren't due to play calling. Monty called those games with the same mindset that Saban or Belicheck would. "Get to the end and give yourself a chance to win." Monty gave himself a chance... the ball just went on the wrong side of the post.

The inherent failure of any program is on the head coach. The fact Monty could only coach this group to 4 wins is sad really. The failure to hire an OC to manage the offense due to his own, self-admitted, trust issues and the failure to have a dedicated special teams coordinator and kicking coach is also his to own. The special teams failures the last 2 seasons are due to nothing more than not valuing their contribution to any single game. All of that is on the head coach.

 

[astonmartin708]

The inherent failure of any program is on the head coach. The fact Monty could only coach this group to 4 wins is sad really. The failure to hire an OC to manage the offense due to his own, self-admitted, trust issues and the failure to have a dedicated special teams coordinator and kicking coach is also his to own. The special teams failures the last 2 seasons are due to nothing more than not valuing their contribution to any single game. All of that is on the head coach.

I will concede the kicking coaching lies with him, though I'm not sure how much of a difference it would have made. Honestly, our offense wasn't bad this season barring the OL. A new OC doesn't fix that.

 

[maverickfp]

I will concede the kicking coaching lies with him, though I'm not sure how much of a difference it would have made. Honestly, our offense wasn't bad this season barring the OL. A new OC doesn't fix that.

maybe if he got an OC that knew what an RB screen was it would be better...you know, the type of play that help take pressure off the oline? that lets the oline let guys through then down field block for the rb.

 

[dlsnid]

I would love to see that play and use his challenge every game

 

[TU4ever2]

Please don't defend Blankenship (as a HC) on here. I don't care what excuses he made about Dane. Blankenship returned the entire offense from a team that won a ton of games the season before and they couldn't move the ball to save their lives. What Blankenship thought he could do and what he could actually do were two different things.

Monty got much more out of Blankenship's players than Blankenship ever got out of Graham's who were arguably more talented overall. The close losses this season weren't due to play calling. Monty called those games with the same mindset that Saban or Belicheck would. "Get to the end and give yourself a chance to win." Monty gave himself a chance... the ball just went on the wrong side of the post.

What's his record?

I would put up Blankenship's first two seasons against Monty's any day.

This is why I have you on ignore. Your bias is blatant and every basketball post you make just hammers it home.

Get over your little crush on Monty, he has four losing seasons out of five and had overachieved exactly zero times, while only performing to par once with Dane (a Blankenship recruit). Monty's players have won exactly 10 games in three years. The saddest part of that is any competent coach has two bowl teams out of the talent these last three years.

 

[Gmoney4WW]

What's his record?

I would put up Blankenship's first two seasons against Monty's any day.

This is why I have you on ignore. Your bias is blatant and every basketball post you make just hammers it home.

Get over your little crush on Monty, he has four losing seasons out of five and had overachieved exactly zero times, while only performing to par once with Dane (a Blankenship recruit). Monty's players have won exactly 10 games in three years. The saddest part of that is any competent coach has two bowl teams out of the talent these last three years.

If you have him on ignore, then how are you responding to him?

 

[TU_BLA]

I will concede the kicking coaching lies with him, though I'm not sure how much of a difference it would have made. Honestly, our offense wasn't bad this season barring the OL. A new OC doesn't fix that.

From watching my son take goal kicks in soccer, the biggest thing is coach telling him what he is doing wrong and how to correct it. This comes best from a goal keeper who has played the game and can break every little part down. He worked a lot on it this summer with a GK coach and he's finally to the point where if something goes wrong on a kick, he almost immediately knows what he did wrong. Golf swings are the same. It's all muscle memory. You watch Rainey and his misses are all over the place. He doesn't know what he's doing wrong necessarily and worse off he doesn't know how to fix it on his own.

 

[TU4ever2]

If you have him on ignore, then how are you responding to him?

Because people reply to him. If they mention points I also made I hit a little button at the bottom of the page and he shows up. Most the time I just laugh because his comments don't show up but the replies tell me exactly what he said without me seeing the quote.

In short they have two themes, Haith is godawful and should have been fired two years ago. Monty with an actual losing and terrible record is fine and just needs more time to do x.

 

[Gmoney4WW]

I just figure if I'm going to ignore someone, it means I really want to ignore them, because their posts are not worth responding to. Different 'ignores' for different folks.

If I can't resist replying to something somebody else quotes of them and don't have the ability to ignore them without the aid of the PC, then I really don't want to ignore them. Or just maybe, I have a political reason for ignoring my ignore.

 

[astonmartin708]

From watching my son take goal kicks in soccer, the biggest thing is coach telling him what he is doing wrong and how to correct it. This comes best from a goal keeper who has played the game and can break every little part down. He worked a lot on it this summer with a GK coach and he's finally to the point where if something goes wrong on a kick, he almost immediately knows what he did wrong. Golf swings are the same. It's all muscle memory. You watch Rainey and his misses are all over the place. He doesn't know what he's doing wrong necessarily and worse off he doesn't know how to fix it on his own.

I think he just doesn't have the nerves for the big moments. He knows how to kick when the game's not on the line.... he just doesn't have the temperament to deal with the pressure. Coaches can't teach that. The kid needs a sports psychologist.

 

[TU4ever2]

I just figure if I'm going to ignore someone, it means I really want to ignore them, because their posts are not worth responding to. Different 'ignores' for different folks.

If I can't resist replying to something somebody else quotes of them and don't have the ability to ignore them without the aid of the PC, then I really don't want to ignore them. Or just maybe, I have a political reason for ignoring my ignore.

You know what, I'm going to give you some credit for not following your usual style takes on me.

As a side note I don't remember asking you your opinion of my use of discretion to ignore or respond as I see fit, but thanks any way.

 

[Gmoney4WW]

You know what, I'm going to give you some credit for not following your usual style takes on me.

As a side note I don't remember asking you your opinion of my use of discretion to ignore or respond as I see fit, but thanks any way.

Different 'ignores'(strokes) for different folks.