Posts Moved from Another Thread [Archive]

proud to be

10-21-2007, 10:54 PM

Monte: Dont let DTN get to you like that. DTN still thinks Stacy has done a good job with all of this talent.

Just out of curiosity MC, have you ever coached a sport in your life, at ANY level?? I know Coach Stacy has made some errors, on and off the field, but I am sick and tired of you, and others like you spewing your freaking negativity. You and others like you are the reason that people hate Massillon.

The type of attitude that you have is the reason why people look at us with disgust. You are the type of person who kisses the coach's A$$ when we win and kick his A$$ when we don't. Frankly your act is a little old. True fans support the system, through thick and thin. They may not be happy with the way things are going, but they don't give the program a black eye with their actions or comments.

Am I happy with a losing season?? Hell no!! Do I want to see change?? Hell yes!!

What possible good can come of your attitude??? Are you so self important that you think Coach Stacy will read your words, and somehow become the coach YOU think he should be??? Maybe you should read your posts before you hit SUBMIT, and ask yourself if it's costructive, or STUPID.

brm12

10-21-2007, 11:29 PM

Thank God to the man/woman who posted this!!!

monte81

10-22-2007, 09:19 AM

Monte: Dont let DTN get to you like that. DTN still thinks Stacy has done a good job with all of this talent.

Just as simple as I put it in my above post-----he does not matter to me the kids do!!
I am not concerned about what he thinks of Stacy and his coaching or anybody else for that matter. I just want the kids to succeed in life after the Friday Night Lights of Tigertown. Most people in the stands are about winning and losing---I love to win and lose hard everytime but I am always more concerned about the kids in Massillon that I love in my neighborhood bettering themselves. I could care less what any poster on MP thinks about me personally because I am my own man and walk to the beats I make!!

Ask the kids on the team about me that know me---I will help them in any way I can without breaking any rules, helping with college entrance tests, talking to recruiters I know, and mailing out film and bios---- staff and coaches are supposed to handle that but you know how that goes!

massillon catholic

10-22-2007, 11:36 AM

Just out of curiosity MC, have you ever coached a sport in your life, at ANY level?? I know Coach Stacy has made some errors, on and off the field, but I am sick and tired of you, and others like you spewing your freaking negativity. You and others like you are the reason that people hate Massillon.

The type of attitude that you have is the reason why people look at us with disgust. You are the type of person who kisses the coach's A$$ when we win and kick his A$$ when we don't. Frankly your act is a little old. True fans support the system, through thick and thin. They may not be happy with the way things are going, but they don't give the program a black eye with their actions or comments.

Am I happy with a losing season?? Hell no!! Do I want to see change?? Hell yes!!

What possible good can come of your attitude??? Are you so self important that you think Coach Stacy will read your words, and somehow become the coach YOU think he should be??? Maybe you should read your posts before you hit SUBMIT, and ask yourself if it's costructive, or STUPID.

I support the program and I understand when teams go through rebuilding years. However, the lack of success this year is not related to lack of talent, but rather poor leadership from the Head Coach. In your own words, you acknowledge Stacy has made errors. Some of these errors are inexcusable and you know which ones I'm talking about. There is no excuse for a coach who has been here before then went on to DI college to be making these types of leadership mistakes. To sit back and think you should do or say nothing means you accept this poor leadership. I dont!

SuperBran

10-22-2007, 11:55 AM

However, the lack of success this year is not related to lack of talent, but rather poor leadership from the Head Coach.

really? to me it seems like it's due to losing good players like huth, dailey, gamble, scassa, mcquire etc. we lost more than we've gained.

In your own words, you acknowledge Stacy has made errors. Some of these errors are inexcusable and you know which ones I'm talking about.

show me a coach who hasn't made errors. better yet, show me a coach who's NEVER made an unexcusable error.

There is no excuse for a coach who has been here before then went on to DI college to be making these types of leadership mistakes.

then perhaps the next time we have an opening you should apply.

To sit back and think you should do or say nothing means you accept this poor leadership. I dont!

funny, b/c fairly recently there were a lot of people who seemed to sit back and didn't want to make a change even though we had gone through three losing seasons. in fact, there are still people who would welcome that guy back!

it's ridiculous to throw stacey under the bus when he's yet to be here three full seasons. you talk about "all this talent" as if we are the most talented team in the state. sorry, but we don't have as much talent as you think we do.

SuperBran

10-22-2007, 11:55 AM

austinsm11

10-22-2007, 05:47 PM

really? to me it seems like it's due to losing good players like huth, dailey, gamble, scassa, mcquire etc. we lost more than we've gained.

Let me first say that I live out of state and have not been to one game this year, so take it for what its worth.

Those losses (of the players you mention) really seem to hurt us more defensively and defense wasn't the problem this year. From what I heard and read about over the summer and the scrimmages, the team would be amazing on offense and if our defense could step up a little bit then Massillon would be a very good team.

The team did lose alot in terms of the players you mention. It also picked up an OSU recruit. Very good players like KJ, JT, GJ, etc. had a year to get bigger and stronger. Didn't we have 4 of 5 o-line coming back? This should have given them another year for the coaches to help develop. We have one of the best kickers in the state. The only real unknown on offense should have been the QB. I envisioned that if we had a Craig Krenzel type, the Tigers would go very far.

Everyone keeps saying that the Tigers didn't have the talent everyone thought they had. One publication had us in the title game. I didn't feel that was a given...one bad game, one unlucky call, bad bounce, etc. can ruin that. I did feel like Massillon should be in at least the regional finals.

How many people realistically feel this a team talent-wise that shouldnt be in the playoffs at a minimum?

jeroe

10-22-2007, 06:53 PM

really? to me it seems like it's due to losing good players like huth, dailey, gamble, scassa, mcquire etc. we lost more than we've gained.

show me a coach who hasn't made errors. better yet, show me a coach who's NEVER made an unexcusable error.

then perhaps the next time we have an opening you should apply.

funny, b/c fairly recently there were a lot of people who seemed to sit back and didn't want to make a change even though we had gone through three losing seasons. in fact, there are still people who would welcome that guy back!

it's ridiculous to throw stacey under the bus when he's yet to be here three full seasons. you talk about "all this talent" as if we are the most talented team in the state. sorry, but we don't have as much talent as you think we do.

There was more than enough talent on this team to make a run in the playoffs. It is rediculous to not even make the playoffs with this team. Sorry, but you ingnoring the realities here is what is absurd! Our player losses from last were not our problem as many of the same issues were present last year. Fundamentals, Fundamentals, fundamentals, and play selection over the past 2 years have done the Tigers in. NOT TALENT!!!!!!

SuperBran

10-22-2007, 07:49 PM

There was more than enough talent on this team to make a run in the playoffs. It is rediculous to not even make the playoffs with this team.

perhaps you should wait until next week to see what happens.

Sorry, but you ingnoring the realities here is what is absurd! Our player losses from last were not our problem as many of the same issues were present last year. Fundamentals, Fundamentals, fundamentals, and play selection over the past 2 years have done the Tigers in. NOT TALENT!!!!!!

ignoring realities? how about the reality that our starting qb attempted one pass last season. how about the fact that we lost key players on offense and defense? look at the starters we lost from last season. we lost 7 of our top 10 in total tackles from last year, 3 of our top 5 receivers, top punt returner, top kickoff returner, top dbs, 3 of our top 4 sack leaders, etc. the loss of huth alone is huge.

but i guess having a stacked rb position solves all of that. i think you are the one who's ignoring reality.

again, stacey has done just as well or better than the last few coachs who came before him. was it all fun and games when shep or rose started here? even owens lost 10 games in his first three seasons combined.

has stacey made mistakes? of course, but find me a coach who hasn't. he's also shown that he can be a good coach.

the fact that some self-described "true" tiger fans can be calling for stacey's head before he's even comleted his third season is embarrassing and ridiculous. it's even more retarded when some of these same people are the ones trying to praise shepas....who gave us three very horrible losing seasons. we gave rose, owens, and shep a chance to put the system in place, so why not afford stacey the same respect.

i think some of you armchair qbs need to add your resumes to the pile when we get to the point when we need a new coach. the problem with this town is that we have so many fools who think they have the right to stick their noses into EVERY aspect of the program as if they are self-annointed ADs. it's funny how many coaches we have in this town.

if you don't like stacey, then don't show up on saturday. if you don't want to give this program your support, then you're not needed. it's plain and simple. if you want to be a bandwagon fan, go root for the bengals.

proud to be

10-22-2007, 10:19 PM

. To sit back and think you should do or say nothing means you accept this poor leadership. I dont!

This is your rationalization to judge Stacy, or any other coach, when you may NOT BE QUALIFIED TO DO SO.

You still haven't answered my question....

Have you coached a sport? Have you even played?? At least tell me that you spent 5 years coaching middle school or something????!!!! As much criticism as you offer, I can only assume that you are speaking from a highly enlightened position, right?

I DO NOT ACCEPT the losing season, or the attitude that surrounds the team. Oddly enough, I AGREE with you that leadership sets the tone for the team. I just don't choose to repeatedly bludgeon the coaching staff in print. In my opinion, to outsiders of this program, it makes us look stupid, and just fuels the Massillon hatred. Win or lose, we have to do it better, and classier than everyone else. That is the price we pay for the high profile program we support.

jeroe

10-23-2007, 12:29 AM

ignoring realities? how about the reality that our starting qb attempted one pass last season. how about the fact that we lost key players on offense and defense? look at the starters we lost from last season. we lost 7 of our top 10 in total tackles from last year, 3 of our top 5 receivers, top punt returner, top kickoff returner, top dbs, 3 of our top 4 sack leaders, etc. the loss of huth alone is huge.

OK we have a QB who lacks experience but it sure helped our situation with an alternating QB every play. No consistency in this philosophy and was the biggest mistake to begin the season.

Improved backfield over 2006 helps keep the QB from having to make as many plays!!!!!!!

3 of the Top 10 returning tacklers, inserting Turner full time on Defense and with the exception of Daily an Improved Linebacker core as a whole. Defense was not our problem this year.

2 of the top 5 receivers and the top receiver athletically back. Insert Turner whom we never use on offense worst case scenario this is a push, but personally this is a more talented core of players in 2007.

but i guess having a stacked rb position solves all of that. i think you are the one who's ignoring reality.

You said this not me. You are over stating the player losses and ignoring the problem.

again, stacey has done just as well or better than the last few coachs who came before him. was it all fun and games when shep or rose started here? even owens lost 10 games in his first three seasons combined.

I haven't called for Stacey's, Shepas's or Rose's head ever. None of them. I usually avoid these and read instead of post. But you trying to insinuate this year is a talent problem is way off base. This is about the coaching staff not getting it done on a couple of fronts. Line development was our major problem both this year and last year plain and simple. Not skilled position or defensive players, which are more than adequate. Play selection is predicatable, and our oponents have adjusted to Stacey's offense while we haven't adjusted since season 1!

has stacey made mistakes? of course, but find me a coach who hasn't. he's also shown that he can be a good coach .

Never stated he couldn't or shouldn't. I haven't jumped on Stacey at all. I am getting on you for trying to candy coat the issue with talent drop off. This team again is not lacking talent!!!!! It is lacking Fundamentals, just like in 2006!!!!!!

the fact that some self-described "true" tiger fans can be calling for stacey's head before he's even comleted his third season is embarrassing and ridiculous. it's even more retarded when some of these same people are the ones trying to praise shepas....who gave us three very horrible losing seasons. we gave rose, owens, and shep a chance to put the system in place, so why not afford stacey the same respect.

This doesn't apply to me. Never called for Stacey's head. Also haven't praised or trashed Shepas, and am not a self described fan. Sounds to me like you are the one getting on Shepas's case and into Stacey's jock strap. I think Stacey leaving is a mistake for the program, but improvements are needed in teaching fundamentals just as it has been for over a decade! I contend the last time we had a true program in Tigertown was under Currence!

i think some of you armchair qbs need to add your resumes to the pile when we get to the point when we need a new coach. the problem with this town is that we have so many fools who think they have the right to stick their noses into EVERY aspect of the program as if they are self-annointed ADs. it's funny how many coaches we have in this town.

I find you amusing. There have been armchair QB's in Massillon forever and a day. I am a fan of high school football. Nothing more nothing less. I don't stick my nose in anything related to the program. Never have never will. But I also from time to time will come on this board and express an opinion. And quite frankly you my friend are missing the point that this team had more talent than was utilized or displayed up to this point. Your talking about last years player losses as if they were the reason for this season then why last year were they 6-4? They lacked fundamentals and coaching blunders in multiple games cost the TIGERS! Whitmer and Warren come to mind. Should the coach be crucified, no he is a high school football coach, but I saw the same trends this year. If he stays I am sure he can have a different result in future years, but I have never gotten the impression he was a long term solution to begin with. Not because of his philosophy or performance, but it just didn’t seem to me he wanted to stay at this level to begin with.

if you don't like stacey, then don't show up on saturday. if you don't want to give this program your support, then you're not needed. it's plain and simple. if you want to be a bandwagon fan, go root for the bengals.

Can you show me one post where I have stated I didn't like Stacey. Look real hard you won't find one. Have I criticized him on rare occasion? Sure I have. Nothing over the top or disrespectful. Also I have never insinuated the program needed me and quite frankly I will come root for the Tigers on Saturday as I have for many years. I will continue to do so as long as I am able and willing. Calling anyone who has been going to Massillon games since infancy a Bandwagon fan is a joke!

But since you, the all knowing Tiger fan says so, I guess I will take your word for it the Tiger's problem this year was lack of talent. Even though my eyes tell me different.

SuperBran

10-23-2007, 12:01 PM

OK we have a QB who lacks experience but it sure helped our situation with an alternating QB every play. No consistency in this philosophy and was the biggest mistake to begin the season.

and how long did that rotation last, genius? did the rotation cause us to lose to mentor or iggy?

Improved backfield over 2006 helps keep the QB from having to make as many plays!!!!!!!

yeah, and it gives the defense one less thing to worry about. run, run, run, run....wonder what they'll do next? i'm sure iggy was really worried about their pass coverage.

3 of the Top 10 returning tacklers, inserting Turner full time on Defense and with the exception of Daily an Improved Linebacker core as a whole. Defense was not our problem this year.

how much varsity experience did turner have before this year? sorry, but athletic ability alone is not always enough.

so you want to compare lb cores, yet take away dailey? i'll take our lbs from last year, with scassa and dailey, over this year's group anytime.

[QUOTE=jeroe;80923]2 of the top 5 receivers and the top receiver athletically back. Insert Turner whom we never use on offense worst case scenario this is a push, but personally this is a more talented core of players in 2007.

even if you thrown in turner, last year we had jackson, dailey, miller and sheegog.

regardless of which group was better, what does it matter when you have an unexperienced qb? yep, it's great to have so many great wrs when you have no one to get them the ball. you simply have to have some sort of passing game in order to be successful.

You said this not me. You are over stating the player losses and ignoring the problem.

no, i'm trying to get it into your thick head that losses from last year have really hurt this team, especially at the qb position.

I haven't called for Stacey's, Shepas's or Rose's head ever. None of them. I usually avoid these and read instead of post.

and i never said you did. if you'd actually read you'd see that my comment was not directed to any specific person.

But you trying to insinuate this year is a talent problem is way off base. This is about the coaching staff not getting it done on a couple of fronts.

no, i'm not saying that this year's problems are ENTIRELY due to the loss of players, but to say that it's entirely on the coaching staff is not entirely true and ridiculous. that is also way off bas.

I am getting on you for trying to candy coat the issue with talent drop off.

and i'm trying to cure that myopia that you seem to be suffering from in thinking that it's entirely the fault of the coaching staff.

This doesn't apply to me. Never called for Stacey's head. Also haven't praised or trashed Shepas, and am not a self described fan.

and again, if you'd actually read you'd know that i didn't direct my statement at you.

I find you amusing. There have been armchair QB's in Massillon forever and a day.

and that makes it alright? the fact that some want to get rid of a coach before the end of his third year is a JOKE.

I don't stick my nose in anything related to the program. Never have never will.

never said you did, but isn't that what you're doing now by publically blaming the coaches??

Your talking about last years player losses as if they were the reason for this season

and i think "your" too bullheaded to realize that the losses from last year do hurt us.

then why last year were they 6-4?

look at the losses:

moeller - took colerain to the wire in the playoffs.
mentor - state finals
ignatius - always a difficult game.
warren - regional finals, losing to mentor

pretty good teams, if you ask me.

Whitmer and Warren come to mind.

you mean the warren game in which we lost by 5 points and had THREE turnovers, TWO of which were returned for scores? yep, blame the coaches on that.

Not because of his philosophy or performance, but it just didn’t seem to me he wanted to stay at this level to begin with.

and how many coaches have we had where you've thought they wanted to stay on this level?

Calling anyone who has been going to Massillon games since infancy a Bandwagon fan is a joke!

AGAIN, never directed it specifically at you.

btw - the fact that you resort to calling me "Superlame" shows your total lack of intelligence. how old are you? i think it's time for you to crawl back into your hole.

jeroe

10-23-2007, 08:43 PM

and how long did that rotation last, genius? did the rotation cause us to lose to mentor or iggy?
The rotation hurt QB development and consistency, and showed leadership’s hesitance to make any decision. Leadership is about making decisions this was the equivalent of avoiding a decision.

No one Loss or Win is the end all be all here. This was a series of things that occurred over a season. I am sure there are things the coaches would do differently if they had a chance.
how much varsity experience did turner have before this year? sorry, but athletic ability alone is not always enough.
How much experience did Gamble have prior to his Junior year? 2 can play this silly game.

even if you thrown in turner, last year we had jackson, dailey, miller and sheegog.
I like how you leave out Massey, I will take Jackson, Massey, and Turner as my top 3 WR any year. I say again this was not our problem.
and i'm trying to cure that myopia that you seem to be suffering from in thinking that it's entirely the fault of the coaching staff.
And
and i think "your" too bullheaded to realize that the losses from last year do hurt us.
No myopia here, nor am I too bullheaded. I think there were certain player issues on this team, but I do not care to discuss those on this board in detail. Putting down teenage players is not the approach I prefer to take. I will state there appears to be a lack of player leadership on this team. I have felt all along that all though the team was talented this team was like an engine not firing on all cylinders.

I never said this was the most talented team Massillon ever had, I also never said losing previous years starters doesn’t hurt. It doesn’t explain however what transpired this year. News flash we will lose players every year.

Have you any concept about leadership? Your position leads me to believe you have not spent any extensive time around strong leaders. A leader is responsible for the failures of those they are responsible to lead. Stacey had a rough year on multiple fronts. He is the leader! If you can’t admit that than you are the one living in some fantasy land. I hope things turn out differently in the future as I like the man. However this year is not one I bet the coach’s think to themselves, we just didn’t have the talent! I certainly hope we start teaching better fundamentals or this trend will continue, and those losing season you referred to in your previous post will return.
btw - the fact that you resort to calling me "Superlame" shows your total lack of intelligence. how old are you? i think it's time for you to crawl back into your hole.

You’re the one who started the name calling with calling me a Bandwagon fan. And before you say you didn’t, as you attempted to say on multiple occasions on other insinuations in the previous response, your utilization of quotes from me in the entire post implied it was directed at me. I the reader interpret what you the writer are communicating. Your intention was clear.

“How old are you” and “crawl back into your hole”. As for my intelligence I certainly will not let your opinion make one bit of a difference. I play a joke at your expense because you clearly are taking this entirely too seriously and the next thing you know look at you!!!! Spewing insults repeatedly. Give it a rest already.

Massillon under achieved this year. Considering the coaching staff I think we have, and the personnel they had to work with. They not for me, or any other fan, but for themselves didn’t get it done. And I don’t think any of them from the players to the coaches would state it any other way.

Sorry SuperFan and I think you are a good fan the majority of the end result lies at the feet of the coaches. Any strong leader would have it no other way!

SuperBran

10-23-2007, 09:26 PM

The rotation hurt QB development and consistency, and showed leadership’s hesitance to make any decision.

you act as if we've been rotating qbs all year. that experiment ended early in the year. have we developed since then? no. why? b/c we're very green at that position.

How much experience did Gamble have prior to his Junior year? 2 can play this silly game.

um, in 2004 gamble was second on the team in tackles. he played in just about every game. next question?

[QUOTE=jeroe;81110]I like how you leave out Massey, I will take Jackson, Massey, and Turner as my top 3 WR any year. I say again this was not our problem.

AGAIN, it doesn't matter who had the better receivers. even if this years' receivers are 10 times better it doesn't matter when we don't have a qb that can get them the ball. we have five guys with over 20 catches last year.....ZERO this year.

I think there were certain player issues on this team, but I do not care to discuss those on this board in detail.

so you admit there are player issues, but yet still blame everything on the coach. there are some player issues a coach cannot fix.

I will state there appears to be a lack of player leadership on this team. I have felt all along that all though the team was talented this team was like an engine not firing on all cylinders.'

so the TEAM is not firing on all cylinders, but you blame everything entirely on the coaches?

Have you any concept about leadership? Your position leads me to believe you have not spent any extensive time around strong leaders. A leader is responsible for the failures of those they are responsible to lead.

please. that's just ridiculous.

is stacey not taking responsibility? does he just point his finger at the kids? he is taking responsibility, as a leader should.

a leader is ultimately responsible; however being responsible does not mean that you are solely at fault. if a player fumbles the ball and it's run back for the game winning touchdown, was the leader at fault?

have ou any concept about the team? obviously you don't. you win as a team and you lose as a team.

Stacey had a rough year on multiple fronts. He is the leader! If you can’t admit that than you are the one living in some fantasy land.

i never said that there were no coaching problems. i'm saying that you can't blame EVERYTHING on the coaches.

Sorry SuperFan and I think you are a good fan the majority of the end result lies at the feet of the coaches. Any strong leader would have it no other way!

are the coaches not taking responsibility? again, is stacey pointing fingers?

my whole point is that i'm sick of people calling for stacey's head when he's yet to be here three full seasons. yes, there have been problems, but he has also do some great things. he has a winning record versus mckinley, beat ignatius for the first time, got us to the playoffs the last two years (with one appearance to the finals), and won some games we were picked to lose (e.g., mckinley, st. eds, iggy). he deserves a chance to right the ship, just like the coaches before him. some foolishly act as though our program is in decline.

we can agree to disagree. i won't change your opinion and you won't change mine so let's just move on.

Seeker

10-23-2007, 10:14 PM

I moved this discussion to its own thread from another thread.
It was against my better judgement to let it continue, but the posters were working so hard I couldn't bring myself to delete it all.

:oops2:

jeroe

10-23-2007, 10:15 PM

please. i have more leadership experience than you could ever imagine having

I need not imagine anything. I know this, I take responsibility for my team’s performance. When someone on my team does not execute I take responsibility for that failure. I am not insinuated Coach Stacey does not or has not taken responsibility. My entire discussion as relates to leadership is based on YOUR argument that looks too vigorously at limiting the leadership’s responsibility, and placing it on the failure of the followers or the inabilities of the followers to execute. I have a hunch you my friend are overstating those leadership experiences or you would have never put up the argument you have!

Leaders do not rationalize, and lash out the way you have!

I will agree to disagree but you are putting words in my mouth. I never have blamed everything on the coaches.

SuperBran

10-23-2007, 11:06 PM

I need not imagine anything. I know this, I take responsibility for my team’s performance. When someone on my team does not execute I take responsibility for that failure.

so when your team loses, you're always at fault? as i've stated before, there's a difference between being responsible and being at fault. stacey has taken responsibility, but that doesn't mean that he's the only one at fault.

when one of your players does not execute you may take responsibility but you may not be at fault. you can be the best teacher in the world, but if a kid just doesn't execute it doesn't necessarily mean that you have failed.

My entire discussion as relates to leadership is based on YOUR argument that looks too vigorously at limiting the leadership’s responsibility, and placing it on the failure of the followers or the inabilities of the followers to execute.

if you think that's what my argument is, then you haven't actually read what i've posted. my position is that everyone has contributed to our failures. it's not just the players and it's not just the coaches. i'm not minimizing leadership, but pointing out that our troubles lie beyond coaching.

I have a hunch you my friend are overstating those leadership experiences or you would have never put up the argument you have!

and i know you're completely off base. i'm not basing my opinions on the point of view of the head coach. i'm not tom stacey. i'm a neutral observer who understands that the problem isn't as simple as people think it is and realizes that there are many things that have contribued to our problems. the problem lies with the coaches AND the players. win as a team and lose as a team. to blame only the coaches is ridiculous.

I never have blamed everything on the coaches.

so you agree that it's more than just the coaching? if so, then you've just agreed with what i've been saying all along.

austinsm11

10-24-2007, 06:37 AM

have we developed since then? no. why? b/c we're very green at that position.

Our qb has not developed since the start of the year? I'm not saying that our qb has or has not improved, but no matter how green we were at that position, shouldn't we have seen some development? Especially considering the background of the coach?

RRanger

10-24-2007, 08:38 AM

Red50Go

10-24-2007, 10:10 AM

Maybe MC is over the top but bottom line, holding our coaches & program to a high standard is what made us great and will keep us great. It is a fine line but when I read arguments that our expectations are too high - that scares me. Especially when I read for 2 years that our work ethic has become no better than your AVERAGE team.

SuperBran

10-24-2007, 10:12 AM

Our qb has not developed since the start of the year? I'm not saying that our qb has or has not improved, but no matter how green we were at that position, shouldn't we have seen some development? Especially considering the background of the coach?

charlie weis has been credited with the development of tom brady. he's known for his ability to work with qbs, and people acknowledge that he really helped brady quinn become a better passer.

weis landed the top rated high school qb in the nation (clausen), who was VERY highly rated and recruited. clausen has started in his first year at nd, but hasn't really developed. does that mean that weis is a bad qb coach? absolutely not.

i wasn't really clear when i said that the qb position hasn't developed. what i meant was that we really haven't opened up the passing game. i think that's mainly due to the fact that our line hasn't been that great and we have a very inexperienced qb. efficiency-wise he's not been bad at all (116 rating, opposed to huth's rating of 143 last year). however the experience really showed against teams like mentor and iggy.

Red50Go

10-24-2007, 10:39 AM

SuperBran, I cant argue too much w/ that. My biggest regret simply as a fan this year is not getting to see DT at lb or JT at rb. I dont know any behind the scenes stuff, nor why it remains there. All I can go w/ is Stacy's explanation to keep both fresh. That is small consolation when you miss the playoffs. And unlike the QB (1st year starter), the O-line did not improve enough. Both have gotten better as the season progressed, but as I said very early on, the season is too late and too short to make up for an entire offseason. It seems to me someone was asleep at the wheel for several months and we paid for it, especially early on.

austinsm11

10-24-2007, 04:42 PM

weis landed the top rated high school qb in the nation (clausen), who was VERY highly rated and recruited. clausen has started in his first year at nd, but hasn't really developed. does that mean that weis is a bad qb coach? absolutely not.

i wasn't really clear when i said that the qb position hasn't developed. what i meant was that we really haven't opened up the passing game. i think that's mainly due to the fact that our line hasn't been that great and we have a very inexperienced qb. efficiency-wise he's not been bad at all (116 rating, opposed to huth's rating of 143 last year). however the experience really showed against teams like mentor and iggy.

Good points.

GR8ING

10-24-2007, 06:10 PM

Who would ever want to bring Shepas' name into this, he was a goof. He couldn't even get quality assistants, they all quite cause they couldn't stand him

DAWGH8R

10-24-2007, 06:17 PM

Who would ever want to bring Shepas' name into this, he was a goof. He couldn't even get quality assistants, they all quite cause they couldn't stand him

:wall: UGH!!!

DAWGH8R

10-24-2007, 06:19 PM

Who would ever want to bring Shepas' name into this, he was a goof. He couldn't even get quality assistants, they all quite cause they couldn't stand him

I'll take Salvino over anything that has replaced him !

massillon catholic

10-24-2007, 07:41 PM

No need to argue. It will be water under the bridge in a month:tonguewave:

Benchboss1

10-24-2007, 11:04 PM

tiger#22

10-24-2007, 11:36 PM

tiger74

10-25-2007, 06:32 AM

Those 7 things that benchboss1 said really hurt us this year plus the fact you didn't have massillon playing as a TEAM. If one of there goals was to make it to the playoffs they hurt that effort by not playing for the guy next to you. Maybe the young guys coming back will learn that you have to play as a TEAM and go to your workouts. If they want to be the best they can be they must fight for it and take nothing for granted. As for not playing are best both ways Jt got dinged up and after that he was just on defense. I really thought we could have ran {more then we did} the darren McFadden type play were he is at QB. Hopefully we use the TE against mckinley because those 2 could have been more of a weapon for us. I know one was hurt but we had another TE too.

OTC TIGER

10-25-2007, 01:30 PM

[QUOTE=SuperBran;81113]

i'm saying that you can't blame EVERYTHING on the coaches.

That's funny comming from a someone that consistently blamed the prior
coach for anything & everything that went wrong during his tenure :huh:

DAWGH8R

10-25-2007, 01:42 PM

[QUOTE]

That's funny comming from a someone that consistently blamed the prior
coach for anything & everything that went wrong during his tenure

:drinkem: :biggrin:

jobdone

10-25-2007, 02:03 PM

Good luck to our Tigers on Saturday.

Win or lose, Massillon always!!

Massillon Catholic. Friday night go to one of the other football games being played in this area. Then come back and give us your honest opinion on how bad the losing coach was and all the things he did wrong. If your opinions stand up to the opinions of most of the other posters. Them maybe we will give your opinions some credability.

SuperBran

10-25-2007, 03:15 PM

[QUOTE]

That's funny comming from a someone that consistently blamed the prior
coach for anything & everything that went wrong during his tenure :huh:

don't be such a complete fool (i know it'll be hard).

if you think that i blamed shepas for "anything and everything" that went wrong during his tenure then you have no clue whatsoever. don't be so ignorant. my recent comments about shepas were directed to those people who thought he walked on water. they were directed to the people who rip on stacey and say that our program is now a joke, to show them that shepas wasn't as great of a coach as people think.

was shepas the cause of all problem? absolutely not. he had to face tough schdules and lack of talent, just like other massillon coaches have faced. did shepas contribute to the problems, though? of course he did.

stacey's first three years have been better than shepas' first three years. shepas had an opportunity to turn things around, which he did, so why not give stacey a chance? i hear excuse after excuse given for the man who gave us nearly half of our losing seasons. too bad stacey doesn't get as many excuses.

OTC TIGER

10-25-2007, 03:19 PM

Who would ever want to bring Shepas' name into this, he was a goof. He couldn't even get quality assistants, they all quite cause they couldn't stand him

So Jeff Huffman & Jamie Palma weren't / aren't quality assistants :doh:

SuperBran

10-25-2007, 03:48 PM

Some examples of coaching responsibilities that have helped lead us to where we are.

1. Naming twelve captains. Need I say more?

2. Rotating 2 quarterbacks. Rarely, if ever, works out well.

3. Having to wait until game 5 to decide to make your best running back your main weapon, instead choosing to give others carries to keep them happy.

4. Discipline, or lack of, in this case.

5. Lack of our best athletes playing both ways, AGAIN!!

6. Lack of development of returning offensive linemen.

7. Lack of development of a quarterback, ANY quarterback, by a coach that was heralded as a great developer of quarterbacks.

1. although i agree that 12 is way to much, i really don't think having less captains would have changed the outcome of our season.

2. agreed.

3. i don't quite understand your point. herring averaged about 9 carries a game the first 4 games. the last 5 games he averaged only three more carries (12) per game. therefore, the carries didn't increase that much. his production really did increase, but his carries didn't increase that much.

also, torrence wasn't being given carries just to keep him happy. he was given carries b/c he has talent.

i'm not saying you're wrong, but merely trying to understand where you're coming from.

4. agreed.

5. again? didn't we have players playing both ways last year?

6. agreed.

7. you don't think he did a good job with huth? the kid threw for over 2000 yards and 18 tds in his first season as a starter. heck, the decision to start huth over paulik should get some credit. after that he followed it up with 2000 yards and 21 tds. this year our qbs haven't developed, but not all kids can be made into stars.....or even above average players. charlie weis is a great developer of qbs, but clausen still stinks. does that make him a bad qb coach?

Benchboss1

10-25-2007, 04:21 PM

1. although i agree that 12 is way to much, i really don't think having less captains would have changed the outcome of our season.

2. agreed.

3. i don't quite understand your point. herring averaged about 9 carries a game the first 4 games. the last 5 games he averaged only three more carries (12) per game. therefore, the carries didn't increase that much. his production really did increase, but his carries didn't increase that much.

also, torrence wasn't being given carries just to keep him happy. he was given carries b/c he has talent.

i'm not saying you're wrong, but merely trying to understand where you're coming from.

4. agreed.

5. again? didn't we have players playing both ways last year?

6. agreed.

7. you don't think he did a good job with huth? the kid threw for over 2000 yards and 18 tds in his first season as a starter. heck, the decision to start huth over paulik should get some credit. after that he followed it up with 2000 yards and 21 tds. this year our qbs haven't developed, but not all kids can be made into stars.....or even above average players. charlie weis is a great developer of qbs, but clausen still stinks. does that make him a bad qb coach?

1. Having twelve captains only confirms the inability of our coach to make decisions that might upset some people.

3. My point is that when it came to the Mentor game, Stacy made a public point to get the ball to Torrence ALOT and ride him. He SHOULD have been getting the majority of the carries from the start of the season. Giving carries to any other back in tight games, Solon and Normandy, only served to keep certain folks in town happy.

5. Yes we had some players playing both ways last year, and we have a marginal number playing both ways this year, but do you REALLY believe that Turner could not help us on offense this season? What about Torrence on defense? When you are one of the smallest division 1 teams in the state of Ohio, you HAVE to play your best athletes both ways if you want to be the best you can be. Do you agree?

7. Yes, Huth was a good quarterback. Are you giving all of that credit to Stacy? How much of it had to do with Huths' natural ability and his work ethic? It sounds to me like you are saying that the only time Stacy can develop a quarterback is when he gets one that already has talent. Isn't that like saying Shep could only win when he had talented teams?

Why is it that Mike Currence ALWAYS had a serviceable qb? Can you name me a qb that Mike had that performed comparable to our qb play this season?

Your Jimmy Claussen point isn't totally the same if you ask me. I firmly believe that he just isn't ready yet and Weiss only played him out of desperation and to get folks, fans and alumni, off of his a-s. It obviously hasn't worked out in his favor.

BEAT McKINLEY!!!!!!!!:gogogo:

SuperBran

10-25-2007, 04:59 PM

1. Having twelve captains only confirms the inability of our coach to make decisions that might upset some people.

imo i don't think it was due to him thinking that he might upset people. he didn't have 12 captains the previous year. we can only speculate why he made that decision. regardless, though, having less captains wouldn't have improved our record.

3. My point is that when it came to the Mentor game, Stacy made a public point to get the ball to Torrence ALOT and ride him. He SHOULD have been getting the majority of the carries from the start of the season. Giving carries to any other back in tight games, Solon and Normandy, only served to keep certain folks in town happy.

i actually thought you were talking about herring since his carries went up after the mentor game, while torrence's went down (26 carries since the mentor game, but due to injury). herring has been a very good back lately, and actually had more yards per carry than torrence in the mentor and iggy games.

i don't blame stacey for using herring as much as he did. heck, most people on here were beaming about having a "two-headed monster." i think that if herring would have had much less time at rb we'd still be hearing people yell about how stacey needs to use him more. afterall, people continue to say the same things about turner.

5. Yes we had some players playing both ways last year, and we have a marginal number playing both ways this year, but do you REALLY believe that Turner could not help us on offense this season? What about Torrence on defense? [/QUOTE]

i agree. i thought torrence would definitely be on defense. didn't he refuse to play defense, though? if that's the case he should have been benched (as i would have done), but then we'd have people bickering about how stacey sat our best player. unfortunately i think it's a "damned if you do and damned if you don't" situation.

When you are one of the smallest division 1 teams in the state of Ohio, you HAVE to play your best athletes both ways if you want to be the best you can be. Do you agree?

i absolutely agree. i said that for years when we had the single platoon system.

7. Yes, Huth was a good quarterback. Are you giving all of that credit to Stacy? How much of it had to do with Huths' natural ability and his work ethic? It sounds to me like you are saying that the only time Stacy can develop a quarterback is when he gets one that already has talent. Isn't that like saying Shep could only win when he had talented teams?

i'm not giving all credit to crazy, but anyone would be crazy to think that stacey should receive no credit. huth did have natural ability, but i'm sure if you asked him he'd give some credit in his development to stacey. we'll really never know just how much stacey helped him develop. because of that you can't say it's one way or the other. if it's wrong to give all credit to stacey, it's wrong to assume no credit is due.

would it be accurate (or fair) to say that shepas had absolutely no hand in developing the great players that he coached, and that they only became great players b/c they had natural ability? i don't think so.

Your Jimmy Claussen point isn't totally the same if you ask me. I firmly believe that he just isn't ready yet and Weiss only played him out of desperation and to get folks, fans and alumni, off of his a-s. It obviously hasn't worked out in his favor.

jimmy has all the ability in the world, but he's inexperienced at this level. it's going to take time to develop him. you're right.....he wasn't ready.

i feel the same way about our qb this year. the kid has very little experience.....ONE pass last year. perhaps he's not ready for this stage and just didn't have enough time. afterall, he was third string last year. didn't our second string qb from last year quit the team this year?

it would be ridiculous to think that this kid would come in and would have a great season. if you look at his passer rating, though, his numbers aren't too bad. however, it was clear that we were going to be a running team (for good reason) so he simply hasn't had many opportunities to throw.

getting back to weis, though, shouldn't he (as a known developer of qbs) have prepared one of the other qbs they had to handle the position? i can understand not having time with clausen, but he had other guys to work with who had been there for at least a year.

BEAT McKINLEY!!!!!!!!:gogogo:[/QUOTE]

OTC TIGER

10-25-2007, 05:04 PM

[QUOTE=SuperBran;81361][

don't be such a complete fool (i know it'll be hard).

if you think that i blamed shepas for "anything and everything" that went wrong during his tenure then you have no clue whatsoever. don't be so ignorant. my recent comments about shepas were directed to those people who thought he walked on water. they were directed to the people who rip on stacey and say that our program is now a joke, to show them that shepas wasn't as great of a coach as people think.

was shepas the cause of all problem? absolutely not. he had to face tough schdules and lack of talent, just like other massillon coaches have faced. did shepas contribute to the problems, though? of course he did.

stacey's first three years have been better than shepas' first three years. shepas had an opportunity to turn things around, which he did, so why not give stacey a chance? i hear excuse after excuse given for the man who gave us nearly half of our losing seasons. too bad stacey doesn't get as many excuses.

Quote from Superbranfrom another thread:

"I'm not bashing Shep when I say this but I felt the sameway about the team after Shep's last year. Under his leadership we had three losing seasons which was shocking considering we've only had FOUR losing seasons after 1910. I really didn't feel that he could win the big game and we were only successful when we had talented teams. I felt like Shep was trying to fit a square peg in a round hole..he never seemed to tailor the system to match the level of talent we had. I would have had more faith if he would have won just a couple of games we were pegged to lose."

1) I'm not bashing Shep when I say this but...
That's like saying it's not about the money

2) With 7 direct references (Shep,his,he) I'm curious to who you are blamming

Obie Wan

10-25-2007, 05:06 PM

stacey ... stacey ... stacey ... stacey ... stacey ... stacey ... stacey
The coach's name is Tom Stacy.

SuperBran

10-25-2007, 05:13 PM

[

Quote from Superbranfrom another thread:

"I'm not bashing Shep when I say this but I felt the sameway about the team after Shep's last year. Under his leadership we had three losing seasons which was shocking considering we've only had FOUR losing seasons after 1910. I really didn't feel that he could win the big game and we were only successful when we had talented teams. I felt like Shep was trying to fit a square peg in a round hole..he never seemed to tailor the system to match the level of talent we had. I would have had more faith if he would have won just a couple of games we were pegged to lose."

1) I'm not bashing Shep when I say this but...
That's like saying it's not about the money

2) With 7 direct references (Shep,his,he) I'm curious to who you are blamming

yes, i was blaming him, but where did i state that he was the SOLE reason for EVERY loss? nice try, though. maybe i'll buy you a cookie.

and i wasn't bashing shepas. i was stating facts as well as my opinion (as i have a right to). i also stated everything respectfully. if i was bashing my words wouldn't have been so kind.

now please end this man crush that you have on me.

SuperBran

10-25-2007, 05:14 PM

The coach's name is Tom Stacy.

it's a force of habit as i work with someone who spells it that way. i'll most likely continue to spell it incorrectly.

it makes no difference, though.

Fats

10-25-2007, 05:24 PM

Some examples of coaching responsibilities that have helped lead us to where we are.

1. Naming twelve captains. Need I say more?

2. Rotating 2 quarterbacks. Rarely, if ever, works out well.

3. Having to wait until game 5 to decide to make your best running back your main weapon, instead choosing to give others carries to keep them happy.

4. Discipline, or lack of, in this case.

5. Lack of our best athletes playing both ways, AGAIN!!

6. Lack of development of returning offensive linemen.

7. Lack of development of a quarterback, ANY quarterback, by a coach that was heralded as a great developer of quarterbacks.
Benchboss , I agree with you on most of your points. Naming 12 captains- I think it just proves what Coach said that leadership was lacking.
I really think it is the Coaches fault if the team has internal problems. The Coach needs to control that. It is his job to get the players working as a team and to understand that they (all of them) are Tigers.
My main question, is why we seemed not to throw short passes ( get the ball to Torrence, Herring, Turner). It seems all we did was throw the ball down field.
I also question was (when Coach talked about a 3- Headed monster we did not see it. It seems like it took Coach 3/4 of the season to start using our talent.
I do hope that next year's team will learn from this season and play as a team and to play as Tigers should.

section3

10-25-2007, 05:29 PM

SuperBran

10-25-2007, 05:41 PM

(stacey's first three years have been better than shepas' first three years. shepas had an opportunity to turn things around, which he did, so why not give stacey a chance? i hear excuse after excuse given for the man who gave us nearly half of our losing seasons. too bad stacey doesn't get as many excuses.)

just for the record, shep's first 3 years we were 22-10, with the win saturday stacy's record will be 26-11. then shep went 12-2, 11-3, 4-6,4-6. not much differance between the first 3 years IMO.

more wins, better winning percentage, zero losing seasons, more playoff wins (five wins, compared to shep's 0), trip to the finals, first win over iggy.

which three years would you prefer?

i didn't say that stacy's first three years were leaps and bounds better than shep's first three years, or that she's first three seasons weren't good. i simply said they were better, and the facts don't lie.

npaflas

10-25-2007, 05:44 PM

The bottom line is TIGERS WIN OR LOSE ALWAYS

SuperBran

10-25-2007, 05:45 PM

The bottom line is TIGERS WIN OR LOSE ALWAYS

no truer words have been spoken.

can't wait until saturday.

:tig:

OTC TIGER

10-25-2007, 05:51 PM

nice try, though. maybe i'll buy you a cookie.

now please end this man crush that you have on me.

Please NO cookies..How bout a box of SUPERBRAN FLAKES..I'm watching
my waistline...It's that Man Crush thing :smartass:

SuperBran

10-25-2007, 05:53 PM

Please NO cookies..How bout a box of SUPERBRAN FLAKES..I'm watching
my waistline...It's that Man Crush thing :smartass:

LOL.

:gotigers:

Red50Go

10-25-2007, 08:18 PM

more wins, better winning percentage, zero losing seasons, more playoff wins (five wins, compared to shep's 0), trip to the finals, first win over iggy.

which three years would you prefer?

i didn't say that stacy's first three years were leaps and bounds better than shep's first three years, or that she's first three seasons weren't good. i simply said they were better, and the facts don't lie.

If thats all you are looking at is records then give me Moranto. I have NEVER seen performances/effort (I dont even know WHAT to call it) like some of ours this year in 30 years under any coach. Bottom line. Sorry.

There is NO QUESTION in my mind we have EXCELLENT talent this year, not just good. I feel it was wasted, hence all the frustration. Its not that we cant stomach a 6-4 season.

Benchboss1

10-25-2007, 08:57 PM

imo i don't think it was due to him thinking that he might upset people. he didn't have 12 captains the previous year. we can only speculate why he made that decision. regardless, though, having less captains wouldn't have improved our record.

i actually thought you were talking about herring since his carries went up after the mentor game, while torrence's went down (26 carries since the mentor game, but due to injury). herring has been a very good back lately, and actually had more yards per carry than torrence in the mentor and iggy games.

i don't blame stacey for using herring as much as he did. heck, most people on here were beaming about having a "two-headed monster." i think that if herring would have had much less time at rb we'd still be hearing people yell about how stacey needs to use him more. afterall, people continue to say the same things about turner.

About the captain situation, naming 12 freaking captains just shows that this season, Stacy is not making the correct decisions for this football team. Name me any other team in any other sport where you have heard of having 12 captains.

Keep in mind that Torrence played the Iggy game with a sprained ankle. That probably played a part in his less than stellar numbers in that game.

You are correct, people on here were beaming about having a three headed monster, not just a two headed one. What upset myself and probably alot of other folks is that we never used all three TOGETHER. Does that make ANY sense to you? If you have three very good running backs, why run the freaking I formation which only utilizes ONE of your tailbacks, AND where everybody knows who is getting the ball?

How about the T formation with all three backs in at the same time? Think that MIGHT cause some defensive problems for the opponent?

How about the shot gun with two of the three backs beside the quarterback? Wouldn't that allow for a few high percentage passes into the flat area for our inexperienced quarterback to throw AND get the ball into the hands of one of our best athletes in space, probably one on one with a linebacker?

Getting a little away from the running back topic, have you actually watched us play this season? If you have, would you call what you have seen from our offense a DIVERSE offensive scheme?

Not trying to start a fight, just asking a few questions.

BEAT McKINLEY!!!!

man2man

10-25-2007, 11:33 PM

Obie Wan

10-25-2007, 11:39 PM

Also, NEVER has there been the quantity and quality of off-field drama and dysfunction, starting in the last spring and lasting all the way thru this fall. Coach Stacy and his staff have done a fabulous job with this particular team.
There are those who would argue that the former statement disproves the latter.

Benchboss1

10-26-2007, 12:19 AM

The truth is, there is a lot of stuff about this team that no one wants to hear or even knows. For example, when DT transferred, it dominated everyone's thinking. But knowledgeable fans, even a couple on here, realized this was a team with a lot of unproven players at key positions like QB and on the O-line.

Most coaches would love to have a division 1 tailback transfer into their program. Obviously our staff/team was not able to handle it.

Since we returned 4 of 5 starters on the offensive line, how exactly were they "unproven"? For arguments sake, let's assume that you are correct about them being "unproven", shouldn't then it become the job of the coaching staff to find better, more able bodied linemen? What kind of coach sticks with something that he KNOWS is "unproven" or under achieving, without trying to remedy the situation with personel changes? :help:

BEAT McKINLEY!!!!!

Benchboss1

10-26-2007, 12:28 AM

i agree. i thought torrence would definitely be on defense. didn't he refuse to play defense, though? if that's the case he should have been benched (as i would have done), but then we'd have people bickering about how stacey sat our best player. unfortunately i think it's a "damned if you do and damned if you don't" situation.

So, are you saying that Torrence runs the team? Is that the kind of leadership we should expect from our head coach?

BEAT McKINLEY!!!!!

Benchboss1

10-26-2007, 12:38 AM

i'm not giving all credit to crazy, but anyone would be crazy to think that stacey should receive no credit. huth did have natural ability, but i'm sure if you asked him he'd give some credit in his development to stacey. we'll really never know just how much stacey helped him develop. because of that you can't say it's one way or the other. if it's wrong to give all credit to stacey, it's wrong to assume no credit is due.

Keep one thing in mind, all during the "hiring process", all we were fed is about how good of a qb coach Stacy was and how he was responsible for developing Charlie Frye and Butchie Washington. If he is going to ride the coat tails of his good ones, then he da-n well better be able to take the heat when he doesn't have that type of success in developing one here.

BEAT McKINLEY!!!!!

SuperBran

10-26-2007, 12:05 PM

Keep in mind that Torrence played the Iggy game with a sprained ankle. That probably played a part in his less than stellar numbers in that game.

i agree.

What upset myself and probably alot of other folks is that we never used all three TOGETHER. Does that make ANY sense to you? If you have three very good running backs, why run the freaking I formation which only utilizes ONE of your tailbacks, AND where everybody knows who is getting the ball?

now i'm confused. in an earlier post you said that we needed to ride torrence and not give carries to others to make them happy. now you think we should be giving carries to two other guys? maybe i'm misinterpreting.

Getting a little away from the running back topic, have you actually watched us play this season? If you have, would you call what you have seen from our offense a DIVERSE offensive scheme?

i'm definitely not saying that we have a diverse offense. i think our lack of a passing game REALLY hurts us. that's what i miss about havin huth run the show.

SuperBran

10-26-2007, 12:09 PM

So, are you saying that Torrence runs the team? Is that the kind of leadership we should expect from our head coach?

BEAT McKINLEY!!!!!

definitely not. i'm just saying that it was a no win situation for stacy. either way he was going to be criticized.

do we actually really know what happened with torrence, though? i thought it was just a rumor.

SuperBran

10-26-2007, 12:16 PM

If thats all you are looking at is records

coaches are judged by their records. they are paid to win. what else do you want to look at?

if you think shepas had a better first three years, please list your reasons.

again, i'm not saying that shepas had a bad start (because overall he didn't); however there's no denying the fact that stacy had a better start when it comes to results).

SuperBran

10-26-2007, 12:29 PM

Keep one thing in mind, all during the "hiring process", all we were fed is about how good of a qb coach Stacy was and how he was responsible for developing Charlie Frye and Butchie Washington. If he is going to ride the coat tails of his good ones, then he da-n well better be able to take the heat when he doesn't have that type of success in developing one here.
BEAT McKINLEY!!!!!

so b/c stacy hasn't turned our current qb into a great player that means he's a bad qb coach? as i've stated before, i guess you can say the same about charlie weis.

you forget that he did a pretty good job with hurst (first 2000 yard passer in massillon's history), shertzer and mossides............who were all solid qbs in (IMO) a system where there was no drop back passing.

even the best coaches aren't miracle workers. sometimes you're limited by the abilities of the player you're coaching. if you get a guy who has little athletic ability and/or an inability to learn and process, you may not be able to develop him as much as you would with someone with great physical and/or mental ability. akili smith was the most athletic qb in the draft, but didn't have the natural ability to learn to read defenses. the coaches he worked with simply couldn't do much with him.

regarding our current qb, to determine how much stacy has developed him we must look at what progress he's made under stacy. keep in mind that he was third string last year. as such, he probably didn't get much one-on-one time with his head coach. this year the qb in front of him quit; therefore, he went from third string last year (attempting one pass the whole season) to being the leader of our team on the biggest stage in high school football. that's a pretty huge jump, and i give the kid all the credit in the world.

Red50Go

10-26-2007, 12:57 PM

coaches are judged by their records. they are paid to win. what else do you want to look at?

if you think shepas had a better first three years, please list your reasons.

again, i'm not saying that shepas had a bad start (because overall he didn't); however there's no denying the fact that stacy had a better start when it comes to results).

I give Stacy alot of credit for 2005. But Shep set the table - we were stacked. Since, we have gotten progressively worse, in several areas, IMO.

Shep on the other hand, had an empty shelf, and we got progressively better, stronger, & faster.

Right now, I go into year 4 w/ MANY more reservations than I did w/ Shep - w/ the whole program in general. Its not like we are petitioning the BOE and storming the building for a contract extension for Stacy are we? You can point to his last 2 4-6 seasons but I dont think we had much (and riddled w/ injuries), but I knew we were poised for a VERY good 05. If I thought we were not a playoff team (let alone semi-finalist team) you wouldn't hear a peep from me.

SuperBran

10-26-2007, 01:20 PM

But Shep set the table - we were stacked. Since, we have gotten progressively worse, in several areas, IMO.

the team had a new playbook in 2005. very little, if any, remained from shep's tenure. also, stacy made effective changes, like moving huth to qb and gamble to rb. stacy also was able to do things that shep was never able to do. with shep you knew what you were getting. good talent = wins. bad talent = losses.

stacy had a big hand in what happened in 2005.

Shep on the other hand, had an empty shelf, and we got progressively better, stronger, & faster.

we did get better, but the change wasn't drastic by any means. keep in mind, too, that our schedule wasn't quite as difficult in 2004 as it was in 2003

why is it that whenever anyone talks about shepas, they instantly start throwing out excuses for our failures as a team? people always blame injuries, the schedule, and the level of talent. with stacy, though, everyone takes the "our coach should be blamed for everything" approach.

with stacy we say how he hasn't developed his players. with shep we say how he had no talent, but don't touch on player development. if we just use lack of talent as an excuse for shep, and didn't blame him for not developing those players, then why should we treat stacy any differently? afterall, we say how stacy should have improved the line. if this was shep's team we'd have people saying "well, he doesn't really have a talented line so it's not his fault."

anyway, there are always going to be arguments on both sides. here's looking forward to a victory on saturday.

Benchboss1

10-26-2007, 09:55 PM

the team had a new playbook in 2005. very little, if any, remained from shep's tenure. also, stacy made effective changes, like moving huth to qb and gamble to rb. stacy also was able to do things that shep was never able to do. with shep you knew what you were getting. good talent = wins. bad talent = losses.

stacy had a big hand in what happened in 2005.

First of all, Shep was also going to make Huth the qb AND put Gamble at rb,albeit out of necessity. Gamble was a MUCH better receiver than he was a running back. To prove that, all you have to do is go back and look where he had the most success and that was out of the slot, right where he played as a sophmore for Shep, not to mention where is is playing now for Illinois.

When we NEEDED a big play in 2005, where did Stacy have Gamble? In the slot, right where Shep had him as a sophmore.

Your point about Shep having good talent = wins and bad talent = losses, that is a least better than what we got this year from Stacy, which is good talent = losses.

BEAT McKINLEY!!!!!

monte81

10-26-2007, 10:55 PM

First of all, Shep was also going to make Huth the qb AND put Gamble at rb,albeit out of necessity. Gamble was a MUCH better receiver than he was a running back. To prove that, all you have to do is go back and look where he had the most success and that was out of the slot, right where he played as a sophmore for Shep, not to mention where is is playing now for Illinois.

When we NEEDED a big play in 2005, where did Stacy have Gamble? In the slot, right where Shep had him as a sophmore.

Your point about Shep having good talent = wins and bad talent = losses, that is a least better than what we got this year from Stacy, which is good talent = losses.

BEAT McKINLEY!!!!!

TRUE!!! Stacy also kept alot of kids off the field that Shep would of played making us better. Shep made those kids bigger and faster---however the same kids who NEVER missed a workout were slower and and as strong in 2006! Something changed!!

Daily, Pooder, KJ, and JT would of played a big role in our offense under Shep last year as well but Stacy kept them under wraps hurting us. All of those players accounted for big plays on offense all through school until someone said---hey lets mix it up and sit them on the other side of the ball. You cannot win in Massillon playing platoon. When we realize that we can win it all!

Saunders should of plyed both ways, daily pooder, BG, JT. KJ, Yoder, etc,... YOU PLAY YOUR BEST PLAYERS IF YOU WANT TO WIN

man2man

10-27-2007, 10:51 AM

TRUE!!! Stacy also kept alot of kids off the field that Shep would of played making us better. Shep made those kids bigger and faster

Pure 100% speculation. No coach keeps his best players off the field. If Shep was such a star maker, and everyone around him got bigger, faster and more talented, hard to explain the multiple 4-6 seasons.

There is just SOOOO much people do not know about this year's team. :sad:

monte81

10-27-2007, 11:03 AM

Pure 100% speculation. No coach keeps his best players off the field. If Shep was such a star maker, and everyone around him got bigger, faster and more talented, hard to explain the multiple 4-6 seasons.

There is just SOOOO much people do not know about this year's team. :sad:

Please read dude!I didn't say anything about this years team---we are saving those threads for after we beat McKinley!

I watched those kids since the boys club and know what I am talking about. daily could of been a great TE, Pooder should of played WR, RB, and some QB in the option, JT should of ben WR, and nickel back last year, and we wasted Saunders, KJ, and Yoder on offense last year(broken arm may have helped but this year NO EXCUSE)You must not know the kids who I am referring to very well! Alittle run down for you dude. As far as Stacy moving BG to RB he played that position all his life with pooder, and Mike Smith(who we missed) and Shep only put him the slot as a soph to get experience---but he is at that spot now until Zook moves him back to defense next season!

BG is getting 15-20 snaps a game in the Big Ten
Daily is a Big Ten Linebacker
Pooder lettered at UT as a true freshman
JT has DI offers already
KJ is a better LB than we had the past 2 years( showed it in the Arizona game)
Saunders is starting at FIndley and never played oline as he should have
Yoder will never carry another football in a game after today---should of been oline for 3 years!

keep protecting your boy but we all know he is not a great personel decision maker!

Spize

10-27-2007, 11:03 AM

Spize

10-27-2007, 11:10 AM

Please read dude!I didn't say anything about this years team---we are saving those threads for after we beat McKinley!

I watched those kids since the boys club and know what I am talking about. daily could of been a great TE, Pooder should of played WR, RB, and some QB in the option, JT should of ben WR, and nickel back last year, and we wasted Saunders, KJ, and Yoder on offense last year(broken arm may have helped but this year NO EXCUSE)You must not know the kids who I am referring to very well! Alittle run down for you dude.

BG is getting 15-20 snaps a game in the Big Ten
Daily is a Big Ten Linebacker
Pooder lettered at UT as a true freshman
JT has DI offers already
KJ is a better LB than we had the past 2 years( showed it in the Arizona game)
Saunders is starting at FIndley and never played oline as he should have
Yoder will never carry another football in a game after today---should of been oline for 3 years!

keep protecting your boy but we all know he is not a great personel decision maker!

bingo.

A lot people wrongly give him credit for a couple key moves on the 2005 team. Huth to QB and Paulik to LB were made by Shepas before he left.

Although, Shepas was never perfect, by any means

SuperBran

10-27-2007, 07:55 PM

Your point about Shep having good talent = wins and bad talent = losses, that is a least better than what we got this year from Stacy, which is good talent = losses.

please. look at our losses this year:

iggy - can't complain about this loss b/c we've lost all but one to iggy.
mentor - hard fought loss that could have gone either way.
solon - i know you said that solon didn't belong on the field as us. that's absolutely pure nonsense. solon has been to the playoffs NINE straight years, which is more than what we can say for massillon. only a fool would think solon wouldn't belong on the same field.

that leaves normandy. regardless of the fact that they're a playoff team, or the fact that we've lost to lower division teams before (see DIII buchtel in 2004), even if everyone concedes that this is a game we should have won that still means we lost ONE game we shouldn't have lost.

now i'm sure you'd also like to point out the loss to whitmer last year; however was that loss any more embarassing losing AT HOME in the first round to a team that you beat soundly during the regular season (cough....1999....cough)? what about a first round loss to MARION HARDING! you probably. yep, shep never lost a game we should have won.

with shep it was the same every year. you could look at the schedule and know what games were were going to lose........so at least he was consistent. shep also couldn't beat a ranked team.......ANY ranked team.

TigerDL71

10-27-2007, 08:42 PM

please. look at our losses this year:

iggy - can't complain about this loss b/c we've lost all but one to iggy.

that leaves normandy. regardless of the fact that they're a playoff team, or the fact that we've lost to lower division teams before (see DIII buchtel in 2004), even if everyone concedes that this is a game we should have won that still means we lost ONE game we shouldn't have lost.

with shep it was the same every year. you could look at the schedule and know what games were were going to lose........so at least he was consistent. shep also couldn't beat a ranked team.......ANY ranked team.

This years Iggy team might actually be the worst Iggy team that I have personal seen there.

Lets compare that Buchtel team to normandy. Did Normandy have a kid going to OSU as a tailback? Didn't they have some other stud in the backfield as well?

And please inform me where Warren was ranked in the Nation when shepas played them in 2002? Has Stacy beaten a team ranked as high as Warren was?

DAWGH8R

10-27-2007, 09:37 PM

please. look at our losses this year:

iggy - can't complain about this loss b/c we've lost all but one to iggy.

WORST WE EVER SAW IGGY PLAY !!

mentor - hard fought loss that could have gone either way.

NO DEFENSE !!

solon - i know you said that solon didn't belong on the field as us. that's absolutely pure nonsense. solon has been to the playoffs NINE straight years, which is more than what we can say for massillon. only a fool would think solon wouldn't belong on the same field.

NO OFFENSE & POOR PLAYCALLING !!

that leaves normandy. regardless of the fact that they're a playoff team, or the fact that we've lost to lower division teams before (see DIII buchtel in 2004), even if everyone concedes that this is a game we should have won that still means we lost ONE game we shouldn't have lost.

PUH LEEZE !!! OUR JV WOULDA BEAT THIS TEAM !!

now i'm sure you'd also like to point out the loss to whitmer last year; however was that loss any more embarassing losing AT HOME in the first round to a team that you beat soundly during the regular season (cough....1999....cough)? what about a first round loss to MARION HARDING! you probably. yep, shep never lost a game we should have won.

with shep it was the same every year. you could look at the schedule and know what games were were going to lose........so at least he was consistent. shep also couldn't beat a ranked team.......ANY ranked team.

AT LEAST HE WON THE GAMES HE SHOULD HAVE !!

This act is old, let it go !! Shep is successful and is in College. Let's worry about the here & now !!