BSL: It's Time to Talk About Randy Edsall

http://baltimorespor...k-randy-edsall/

In this article, I outline the reasons that I stuck with Edsall for as long as I did, the reasons that he needs to be fired, when the Terrapins should fire him, and who I think would be the best man to replace him.

So who do you think should replace Edsall? What are you looking for in the next head coach?

Way too flattering of Edsall's abilities as a coach, the job he did at Maryland, and his program building.  Edsall's obviously been overmatched from day 1.  His entire legacy is signing two recruits (Diggs and Haskins) one of which will never play here (or at the very least certainly will never play for Edsall).  That's not enough to qualify him as a great recruiter, IMO, his overall classes have never been anything special or anything better than Maryland should expect.  If he's a great program builder, then why did the program incinerate as soon as he showed up and hasn't made any progress at all to work it's way back up from those ashes (unless you consider two embarrassing defeats in the minorest of minor bowls to be a resurrection)?  So if those are the two biggest assets he brings, you'd have to consider him to be a completely worthless head coach as neither of his strengths are even really strengths.

But, since you've moved on and are ok with firing him, that can be water under the bridge.  Really good discussion of some candidates and what type of candidates for the Terps to look into.  I would lean more towards making the best hire you can rather than focusing on guys who run a certain style.  We've had a certain type of player under Edsall, and it makes some sense to find a coach who fits the current players here, but you'd think that a new coach would eventually bring in players best fit to run his system.  Maybe it's much of the same style, maybe it's different. 

I think Frost is a pipe dream, since he's probably the biggest "up and coming" name available and why would that type of candidate come here if there are other options.  I don't know enough about the other candidates to have much of an opinion on any of them, but the summaries of each coach's resume's and styles are really good.  I'd rather have an assistant from a big program than a head coach of a lower-tier program, but that's a horribly biased opinion based on the last disaster that we had hiring a head coach from a lower-tier program.

Zack has been one of the biggest Edsall defenders. I don't want to speak for him -- but I can't imagine this was an easy article for him to write. I give him credit for writing it, even if I don't agree with a lot of what he wrote.

I think Frost is a pipe dream, since he's probably the biggest "up and coming" name available and why would that type of candidate come here if there are other options.

I have to disagree. Yes, he is the biggest "up and coming" name, but what other jobs are going to be available? Let's take a look by conference:

ACC

I don't see a job that might be available other than Virginia. And I can't see them buying out London's contract after this year.

Big Ten

Illinois obviously needs a coach. Purdue and Rutgers could be others. Isn't Maryland above all three of those? I'd have to think so.

Big 12

I see Kansas and Iowa State possibly open. Maryland is above those two. Unless Texas fires Strong, I don't see there being a big job available here.

Pac-12

Washington State won't fire Leach after this year, and Washington won't fire Chris Petersen. No jobs here.

SEC

South Carolina won't fire Spurrier yet. Vanderbilt probably won't get rid of Mason quite yet. Auburn won't dump Malzahn. Maybe Arkansas fires Bielema? I don't really see it, though.

So what better offer would he get exactly?

So what better offer would he get exactly?

New Mexico State?

I have to disagree. Yes, he is the biggest "up and coming" name, but what other jobs are going to be available? Let's take a look by conference:

 

ACC

I don't see a job that might be available other than Virginia. And I can't see them buying out London's contract after this year.

 

Big Ten

Illinois obviously needs a coach. Purdue and Rutgers could be others. Isn't Maryland above all three of those? I'd have to think so.

 

Big 12

I see Kansas and Iowa State possibly open. Maryland is above those two. Unless Texas fires Strong, I don't see there being a big job available here.

 

Pac-12

Washington State won't fire Leach after this year, and Washington won't fire Chris Petersen. No jobs here.

 

SEC

South Carolina won't fire Spurrier yet. Vanderbilt probably won't get rid of Mason quite yet. Auburn won't dump Malzahn. Maybe Arkansas fires Bielema? I don't really see it, though.

 

So what better offer would he get exactly?

Is Maryland a better job than Illinois? I'm guessing people affiliated with Illinois don't think so.

Is Maryland a better job than Illinois? I'm guessing people affiliated with Illinois don't think so.

It's close, but I'd say yes. The brand new indoor facility, with a bigger local recruiting presence. Illinois has Ohio nearby, but competes with a lot of programs for those recruits. Maryland competes with other programs, but has more of a hold on the area. Also, Illinois may just keep Bill Cubit (interim), he's gone 3-1 this year so far. They also seem to like P.J. Fleck a lot.

Illinois is a basketball school as well, though they do have better fan support for football, especially among the students (but we're working on that at Maryland - slow and steady).

I give Edsall credit for 2 things. First, he quickly got the program's academic house in order, and while it doesn't directly show up in the standings, it is important (you're not going to win much if your players are academically ineligible and the NCAA is docking you scholarships for poor APR). And second....no, his recruiting classes were nothing special overall, but he did a decent job of setting a priority of reaching out to the local programs and building a good relationship. For whatever reason, Friedgen did not do that. Hopefully the current commitments from top local kids, even if they don't follow through, are a good foundation for the next coach.

I won't go into the negatives, I've stated them here ad nauseam, and now that we are all in agreement there isn't much point in going on with it.

As for Scott Frost, Nebraska (which I would think is his ultimate dream job) didn't seem to show much interest in him and went with Mike Riley, a mostly uninspiring choice. (Having watched Riley closely out here for years, he has some very admirable traits as a coach, but I think Nebraska hiring him is very similar to MD choosing Edsall). Anyway, the Husker's lack of interest in Frost, especially given the charge he'd likely put into the fanbase, tells me that maybe he really isn't in high demand just yet, and perhaps a program like MD could definitely hire him right now.

The Oregonian: Scott Frost to leave Oregon? It might not be as inevitable as you think for Ducks offensive coordinator

http://www.oregonliv..._oregon_it.html

Good read here from last December.

Fair enough, hire Frost!

I agree with Mackus re: your positives from Edsall.

A few other thoughts come to mind.  First, and this might just be me, but I'm not in favor of the spread offense.  I read an article earlier this year about how the NFL is having an incredibly difficult time finding a pro style type of QB because all colleges have gone to the spread.  Isn't Haskins a pro-style guy?  

Also, I think defense, as you pointed out, is always going to be an issue on the line.  I wouldn't want the uptempo style to put them on the field more often.  

I agree with your preference for coordinators over older established guys.  

This might well be gibberish because I'm very sick today.  

Good read and well done.

I agree with Mackus re: your positives from Edsall.

 

A few other thoughts come to mind.  First, and this might just be me, but I'm not in favor of the spread offense.  I read an article earlier this year about how the NFL is having an incredibly difficult time finding a pro style type of QB because all colleges have gone to the spread.  Isn't Haskins a pro-style guy?  

 

Also, I think defense, as you pointed out, is always going to be an issue on the line.  I wouldn't want the uptempo style to put them on the field more often.  

 

I agree with your preference for coordinators over older established guys.  

 

This might well be gibberish because I'm very sick today.  

 

Good read and well done.

The spread offense is basically already run by most of the teams in the NFL nowadays, so that argument doesn't really hold much weight. Plus, very few college recruits are swayed by that "we run a pro-style system so you can be better prepared for the NFL" argument nowadays. They see offenses like Oregon's, Baylor's, Notre Dame's, and Ohio State's and want to play in systems like that. Plus, college coaches should be doing the things that give them the best chance of winning, not of developing players for the NFL. I fully believe that the spread offense is what would give the Terrapins the best chance of winning.

And while Haskins is ranked as a pro-style quarterback, he is very mobile. I believe he runs a 4.6/4.7 second 40-yard dash. He may not be C.J. Brown, but the only reason he's not ranked as a dual-threat quarterback is because of how much arm talent he has.

The whole "defense on the field a lot more" argument is also becoming very dated. You just need a little deeper defense where you can rotate different players in. And if you're putting up more points, the defense's job becomes much easier.

The spread offense is basically already run by most of the teams in the NFL nowadays, so that argument doesn't really hold much weight. Plus, very few college recruits are swayed by that "we run a pro-style system so you can be better prepared for the NFL" argument nowadays. They see offenses like Oregon's, Baylor's, Notre Dame's, and Ohio State's and want to play in systems like that. Plus, college coaches should be doing the things that give them the best chance of winning, not of developing players for the NFL. I fully believe that the spread offense is what would give the Terrapins the best chance of winning.

 

And while Haskins is ranked as a pro-style quarterback, he is very mobile. I believe he runs a 4.6/4.7 second 40-yard dash. He may not be C.J. Brown, but the only reason he's not ranked as a dual-threat quarterback is because of how much arm talent he has.

 

The whole "defense on the field a lot more" argument is also becoming very dated. You just need a little deeper defense where you can rotate different players in. And if you're putting up more points, the defense's job becomes much easier.

Did you just call me old?  Damn dude.

I hear what you are saying, its just an opinion.  I'd rather be Bama than Auburn, so to speak.

I agree with Mackus re: your positives from Edsall.

 

A few other thoughts come to mind.  First, and this might just be me, but I'm not in favor of the spread offense.  I read an article earlier this year about how the NFL is having an incredibly difficult time finding a pro style type of QB because all colleges have gone to the spread.  Isn't Haskins a pro-style guy?  

 

Also, I think defense, as you pointed out, is always going to be an issue on the line.  I wouldn't want the uptempo style to put them on the field more often.  

 

I agree with your preference for coordinators over older established guys.  

 

This might well be gibberish because I'm very sick today.  

 

Good read and well done.

I have posted the same point here before, regarding an aversion to spread offenses. I'm more open to it than I was, but I believe many of the top-rated high school kids dream of playing in the NFL, and a pro-style attack still appears best-suited for offensive players to achieve this end. If I'm going to establish a system here at Maryland, I'd rather establish one that recruits can look at as a predecessor to the pro game. Some will argue that the NFL is adapting away from traditional sets, and while true to a degree, most should agree that a pro-style system will better prepare a young man for the NFL. Marcus Mariota is an exception, not the rule.

As I stated earlier, I'm not completely opposed to the idea, but push come to shove, I'd rather be Alabama-like, than Oregon-like. I'd be very curious to find out what these recruits (Haskins in particular) are thinking in this regard. Perhaps they don't care as much about spread vs pro-style as I think. Perhaps we are all overthinking it.

A good man, from all indications, currently has the reigns, but when staunch supporters -like Zack- jump ship, the end seems inevitable. A shocking win or two against some of the B1G boys of our league may be the only hope Edsall has... but even then it may be too late. We can only hope Kevin Anderson has started the process of firing Edsall and finding his replacement... for every day he waits is another day the program, and we fans, suffer(s).
 

Did you just call me old?  Damn dude.

 

I hear what you are saying, its just an opinion.  I'd rather be Bama than Auburn, so to speak.

You and me both (old). LOL!

An interesting article revolving around the spread vs pro thing... http://www.cbssports...-offense-league

It's more prevalent than I realized. I'd still rather be Alabama than Oregon, but perhaps being older (50) has me seeing that as the more comfortable option? Could be.

An interesting article revolving around the spread vs pro thing... http://www.cbssports...-offense-league

It's more prevalent than I realized. I'd still rather be Alabama than Oregon, but perhaps being older (50) has me seeing that as the more comfortable option? Could be.

And that's what I'm talking about. What is a pro-style offense? Most people would say it's an offense that uses a huddle, a fullback, and multiple tight ends. But I could count on one hand the NFL teams who still use that model. So the pro-style offense is something very different. It's primarily an offense based out of the pistol/shotgun with 3-4 receivers split wide. Most offenses still run the ball 55% of the time, but it's based on a college-esque spread-to-run principle. In fact, if you were watching the Ravens closely against the Raiders towards the end of the game, they moved away from their under-center running attack and instead ran power out of the shotgun with 4 receivers split wide.

In fact, I'd hesitate to call Alabama a pro-style offensive team. Ever since Lane Kiffin arrived in 2014, they've rarely operated with a huddle, and run most of their offense out of either the pistol or the shotgun. It's not necessarily an up-tempo offense, but they certainly go fast after big plays and first downs.

I think my next article will have to dispel some of these myths about "pro-style" offenses just to get everyone on the same page.

One other name that I want to add here that I forgot to add to the article:

Noel Mazzone - Offensive Coordinator, UCLA Bruins

He's a bit older than my other coordinator candidates at 58-years old, but I'm a big fan of Mazzone's offensive system. He has assistant coaching experience at both the college ranks and in the NFL. He has been Jim Mora's offensive coordinator at UCLA since 2012, and served as Arizona State's offensive coordinator from 2010-2011.

His system is a spread system, but is less reliant on the quarterback running than others around the country. He tutored Brett Hundley into an NFL draft pick, and he is now serving as Aaron Rodgers' backup in Green Bay. His system is more finesse in nature than an offense like Notre Dame's or Ohio State's, but is always very balanced between the run and the pass. He's a guy that not many people think about as a first-time head coach because of his age, but I believe he'd be a solid candidate for the Terrapins.

I was an Edsall-backer as well.  I thought he was a good hire at the time and was unfairly piled on his first year on the job (and I still believe the latter).  I thought what he did at UCONN was extremely impressive.

He's done a lot of good things regarding politicking with local schools.  Gotten recruits from places like Gilman and Dematha, schools which hadn't sent a kid to Maryland in years.  Gotten a few high-profile recruits to come along as well.  The importance of these things should not be minimized.

Fortunately, I think most people have also finally come around that he's not a bad guy.  

Having said all of that, after having seen the team the past few years, I have absolutely no idea how he did what he did at UCONN.  This team is not at talented as West Virginia, but they're not 38-0 at halftime behind in the talent department.  It's not quite like they're bringing a knife to a gun fight; it's more like they're bringing a gun that's not quite as good and they have no idea how to use it.  

I'll put a lot of the blame on Locksley, but Edsall brought in Locksley so the buck stops with him.  The defense doesn't look good either, but it's really tough to judge a defense when the offense can't sustain a drive for more than 30 seconds.

Regarding recruits, if you don't think he's the right man then you don't hold on to him because of recruits.  Recruits come and go.  I do think you need to try to consider that a new coach needs to be someone who's willing to continue the legwork that Edsall has put in locally.