Marcus Freeman Revisited

[drayer54]

Recruiting:

 

[PutuporShutup]

Recruiting:

I see what Matt did there

 

[Circa]

Recruiting:

Wonder what 29 days 4 hours means? Is that signing day?

 

[Sea Turtle]

Terrible presser. I've never seen such low energy. Everyone was so afraid to ask tough question.

It will be like Thursday when I throw my first pick at our family Thanksgiving football game.

 

[BoredIrish]

Good recruiting class
Managed the portal well
Making an impact with NIL
Positive improvements (hopefully) on the coaching staff

Freeman is having a very good off-season. Gotta give him credit... he seems to be up to the challenges of the job.

 

[Riddickulous]

It hasn't been a smooth start but there have been a lot of positive changes so far. 2024 is a critical year for him.

 

[Jiggafini19Deux]

Good recruiting class
Managed the portal well
Making an impact with NIL
Positive improvements (hopefully) on the coaching staff

Freeman is having a very good off-season. Gotta give him credit... he seems to be up to the challenges of the job.

All true.

Also true is you've posted this in the thread that was started the day he lost to Marshall in his first season as HC. "Revisited."

It's a thread almost worth merging.

 

[notredomer23]

All true.

Also true is you've posted this in the thread that was started the day he lost to Marshall in his first season as HC. "Revisited."

It's a thread almost worth merging.

As the person that started it, yes it was a frustrating day, but it was also created very much tongue in cheek since the Brian Kelly Revisited thread was over 400 pages long.

 

[loweND]

Agreed. I've been critical of Freeman - but I have to say, he managed the OC situation masterfully. It's always better to have a coach leave on their own than to be fired. So much better to say to a coach, "find something else" which I assume he did here.

 

[Jiggafini19Deux]

As the person that started it, yes it was a frustrating day, but it was also created very much tongue in cheek since the Brian Kelly Revisited thread was over 400 pages long.

This one a a tenth of the way there. LOL

 

[BoredIrish]

All true.

Also true is you've posted this in the thread that was started the day he lost to Marshall in his first season as HC. "Revisited."

It's a thread almost worth merging.

I'm re-visting my re-visitation.

 

[FightingIrishLover7]

I don't want to lose Freeman - to Los Angeles.....to be the next James Bond

 

[calvegas04]

Offseason Championship?

 

[NumbersGuy0520]

With the changes to our roster, if Freeman crushes the OC hire we should be favored to make the expanded playoffs. Hell, even if not I would put it at about 50-50.

Let’s get in, make some noise, and either win the whole damn thing or add more positive momentum for 2025.

 

[Veritate Duce Progredi]

Good recruiting class
Managed the portal well
Making an impact with NIL
Positive improvements (hopefully) on the coaching staff

Freeman is having a very good off-season. Gotta give him credit... he seems to be up to the challenges of the job.

I'd maybe quibble on an item or two and add to it:

• Great recruiting class, especially on offense with some front 7 killers on defense.
• Managed the portal well - agreed
• NIL Game has improved which wasn't Freeman's doing but he gets credit for identifying where that effort goes
• TBD - coaching improvements
  • OC - we know it'll be a net positive but we're all waiting to see how positive it is.
  • S&C - seems great to me, others are quibbling about sweat and blood and grunting. I think Landow is going to make ND a leader in this field. I do not believe we're moving away from compound lifts. I do believe we will be augmenting and tailoring training to shore up weak points/energy leaks that will show up in testing and on gameday.
  • WR - at minimum we're at a B+, look forward to seeing what we think of Brown after a recruiting class and a season of play.
• Training Facility improvements - not Freeman's doing per se, but he's continued to push for what Kelly requested. Sounds like this is fully funded or close so we'll have news soon.
• Swagger - ND hasn't had this much swagger....since the late 80s? The media team is killing it and I believe Freeman at least has final approval over the direction our creative team moves.

Freeman's first two recruiting classes have been complete and filled with early contributors. We are quickly approaching the part of Freeman's tenure where everything has his fingerprints. His time to win is now.

 

[jprue24]

Still need RKGs. This is another way to say "a different aisle"

 

[bobbyok1]

It hasn't been a smooth start but there have been a lot of positive changes so far. 2024 is a critical year for him.

Agreed. I think three years is a good metric to see where he is as a head coach.

People often compare Kelly to Freeman and make the point Kelly was given a longer leash. The reason for that was Kelly had earned a longer leash. He had a proven track record as a head coach, therefore, people were reasonably more patient expecting him to get it done as he had other places.

Freeman has no track record as a head coach. So the leash is rightfully shorter. We can't afford to give a guy 5-7 years only to figure out he is not cut out to be a head coach.

Hopefully year 3 shows he can do it.

 

[bobbyok1]

jprue24 Careful posting reasonable comments in this thread about Marcus Freeman. sfk324 will come after you with "boos" ​

 

[ab2cmiller]

Agreed. I think three years is a good metric to see where he is as a head coach.

People often compare Kelly to Freeman and make the point Kelly was given a longer leash. The reason for that was Kelly had earned a longer leash. He had a proven track record as a head coach, therefore, people were reasonably more patient expecting him to get it done as he had other places.

Freeman has no track record as a head coach. So the leash is rightfully shorter. We can't afford to give a guy 5-7 years only to figure out he is not cut out to be a head coach.

Hopefully year 3 shows he can do it.

LOL.

Longer leash had absolutely nothing do do with what you posted.

You get a longer leash if you inherit a crappy team. BK inherited a team that was 3-9, 7-6, 6-6 the previous 3 years.

You get a shorter leash if you inherit a good team. MF inherited a team that went 10-3, 12-1, 11-2 the previous 3 years.

The only other item that matters in regards to leash is recruiting. If you have a mediocre record but continue to recruit well, you usually get more leash as long as the record doesn't trend down. If you have a mediocre record and recruiting starts to falter, the leash shortens.

 

[sfk324]

jprue24 Careful posting reasonable comments in this thread about Marcus Freeman. sfk324 will come after you with "boos" ​

Your takes are garbage. To answer your question from another thread, it's why you and LSUbeard have the same rep.

 

[Jimmy3Putt]

I don't know if he ever wins a national championship, but he's going to win big for the foreseeable future.

If we were still doing the BCS then I'd predict a title, but having to win three playoff games sounds pretty daunting.

 

[IrishSteelhead]

LOL.

Longer leash had absolutely nothing do do with what you posted.

You get a longer leash if you inherit a crappy team. BK inherited a team that was 3-9, 7-6, 6-6 the previous 3 years.

You get a shorter leash if you inherit a good team. MF inherited a team that went 10-3, 12-1, 11-2 the previous 3 years.

The only other item that matters in regards to leash is recruiting. If you have a mediocre record but continue to recruit well, you usually get more leash as long as the record doesn't trend down. If you have a mediocre record and recruiting starts to falter, the leash shortens.

The 2010 Notre Dame roster was superior to the 2022 Notre Dame roster. BK inherited more talent than MF. This is not even debatable. Go look at the rosters and you will agree unless you are trolling.

You can easily argue though that MF inherited a way better culture and state of the program.

Be objective at least, and don’t act like MF was born on third base.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[sfk324]

LOL.

Longer leash had absolutely nothing do do with what you posted.

You get a longer leash if you inherit a crappy team. BK inherited a team that was 3-9, 7-6, 6-6 the previous 3 years.

You get a shorter leash if you inherit a good team. MF inherited a team that went 10-3, 12-1, 11-2 the previous 3 years.

The only other item that matters in regards to leash is recruiting. If you have a mediocre record but continue to recruit well, you usually get more leash as long as the record doesn't trend down. If you have a mediocre record and recruiting starts to falter, the leash shortens.

Counterpoint, MF has had to essentially completely remake every skill position because the roster he was left there was garbage, despite the record the 3 years prior. The journeys of Buchner and Pyne have been pointed out. So have the receivers. Our best DBs are underclassmen and a converted receiver. Tyree was probably the most productive offensive skill player and he's gone and there aren't a lot of tears being shed over it.

People need to look at the situation as a whole, not cherry pick a handful of things. Freeman should get a decent leash because the program he inherited was a paper tiger. If we wanted to be an actual contender, it was going to require not insignificant changes that were going to mean a bumpy ride. People expecting immediate title contenders were duped by the fool's gold product BK was putting out. Sorry if that means you, Bobby and prue, but that's reality.

 

[Some Irish Bloke]

2024 is a critical year for him.

Definitely. It's playoffs or bust, IMO, especially with the playoff expanding. No more excuses. We've identified just about every position of need in the portal, we have a dynamic QB incoming, and the schedule is reasonable. His seat will be burning hot if they don't win 10 games next year. 10-2 gets ND in.

 

[ab2cmiller]

I will admit that the records that I cited may not have accurately represent whether BK and MF inherited good teams or crappy teams.

The point still remains that, if you inherit a crappy team, you get a longer leash. Inherit a good team, you get a shorter leash.

 

[IrishSteelhead]

I will admit that the records that I cited may not have accurately represent whether BK and MF inherited good teams or crappy teams.

The point still remains that, if you inherit a crappy team, you get a longer leash. Inherit a good team, you get a shorter leash.

I get it. The logic is there. BK was given a long leash for his pedigree and track record.

BK is a good coach, has a big name in the business, but he HAS to be the all time winningest coach to never touch a BCS/NY6 trophy, let alone a Crystal or CFP one.

With that said, his leash at LSU is tighter right now than MF’s is at ND.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[indianamouse]

Counterpoint, MF has had to essentially completely remake every skill position because the roster he was left there was garbage, despite the record the 3 years prior. The journeys of Buchner and Pyne have been pointed out. So have the receivers. Our best DBs are underclassmen and a converted receiver. Tyree was probably the most productive offensive skill player and he's gone and there aren't a lot of tears being shed over it.

People need to look at the situation as a whole, not cherry pick a handful of things. Freeman should get a decent leash because the program he inherited was a paper tiger. If we wanted to be an actual contender, it was going to require not insignificant changes that were going to mean a bumpy ride. People expecting immediate title contenders were duped by the fool's gold product BK was putting out. Sorry if that means you, Bobby and prue, but that's reality.

To add on to this look at the athletes Freeman is recruiting compared to Kelly. Yeah, Kelly recruited solid players, but time after time everyone complained about the low floor low ceiling players he recruited. I honestly believe you are going to see a faster, stronger, and more athletic product on the field these next few years.

 

[bobbyok1]

LOL.

Longer leash had absolutely nothing do do with what you posted.

You get a longer leash if you inherit a crappy team. BK inherited a team that was 3-9, 7-6, 6-6 the previous 3 years.

You get a shorter leash if you inherit a good team. MF inherited a team that went 10-3, 12-1, 11-2 the previous 3 years.

The only other item that matters in regards to leash is recruiting. If you have a mediocre record but continue to recruit well, you usually get more leash as long as the record doesn't trend down. If you have a mediocre record and recruiting starts to falter, the leash shortens.

You make some bold/definitive statements here.

Longer leash has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with your head coaching experience coming into a program? Really? So the program never thinks about how much experience a guy has or not as a head coach when considering how much leash they get? Hypothetically, a guy wins 3 national titles at another school doesn't get any more leash than a first time head coach, if both go 8-4 in their first two seasons all other things being equal with what they were handed off?

Agreed, longer leash comes with inheriting a crappy team, and shorter leash comes with inheriting a good. Never argued against that, and have understood that as it is plain.

The ONLY OTHER ITEM THAT MATTERS IN REGARDS TO LEASH IS RECRUITING? Really? Obviously recruiting matters a great deal. But recruiting is the ONLY other thing that matters? Not in-game coaching decisions? Not ability to surrounding yourself with quality position coaches? Not how you represent the University (toxic or a great rep)?

My point was not that the ONLY thing that matters on leash is previous head coaching experience. But it is A factor.

 

[bobbyok1]

Your takes are garbage. To answer your question from another thread, it's why you and LSUbeard have the same rep.

Dude all you've done is gone around clicking on boos. Pretty sure you don't have jack to say about "takes." Yours takes literally consist of clicking a button. Adios

 

[NDPhilly]

Man I love Chad