Bruin, You couldn't be more incorrect in your assessment of the situation. Try taking off your Glaser-colored glasses, really watching games, observing practices, and talking to the players.

 

In just one season, Wolford's DC hire, Bart Bruner, dramatically improved a defense that had 10 new starters &, allegedly, far less talent than Wolford's first DC had at his disposal. I believe Wolford will now bring aboard a Bruner-caliber offensive coordinator.

 

You do realize Bruner had already been with the program he only took a year or 2 leave. You make it sound as if Bruner was a stranger and Wolford went and found him. Also nothing wrong with glaser tinted glasses.

You do realize Bruner had already been with the program he only took a year or 2 leave. You make it sound as if Bruner was a stranger and Wolford went and found him. Also nothing wrong with glaser tinted glasses.

 

Yeah, I do. Coach Bruner wasn't DC at St. X until the 2014 season. And, yeah, a lot wrong with those glasses

The Glaser glasses are an interesting phenomenon. So many X fans wanted him gone. Now, because Wolford hasn't won big yet, Glaser is fondly remembered. I'm convinced Coach Wolford is learning on the job. Good news is he's willing to learn. And I think Coach Bruner returned to the staff because he believes in where the program is heading. That tells me all I need to know.

Tigermom,

 

I have only based my assessments on the Wolford fiasco on facts.

 

Fact: He had virtually no high school coaching experience.

 

Fact: In his first season he hired an offensive staff with little or no high school experience.

 

Fact: The offensive point production has decreased dramatically from Glaser's last 2 years to Wolford's first 2 years while playing virtually the same schedule. Actually, it could be argued that Wolford's schedule has been easier with Lexington Catholic and Bryan Station replacing Riverdale (TN) and Dutch Fork (SC). Glaser's last 2 years: 33 points per game. Wolford's first 2 years: 24 points per game.

 

Fact: Contrary to prevailing opinion, the PASSING GAME production has also decreased from the last 2 years of the Glaser era to the first 2 years of the Wolford era. The completion percentages of Alex Mattingly (2011) and Austin Gahafer (2012) is significantly higher than BJ Nagle (2013) and Noah Houk (2014).

 

Based on the above numbers, Glaser's offense was vastly underrated and Wolford's offense has been significantly less productive.

 

While preference as to style is a debatable topic, production is not.

Tigermom,

 

I have only based my assessments on the Wolford fiasco on facts.

 

Fact: He had virtually no high school coaching experience.

 

Fact: In his first season he hired an offensive staff with little or no high school experience.

 

Fact: The offensive point production has decreased dramatically from Glaser's last 2 years to Wolford's first 2 years while playing virtually the same schedule. Actually, it could be argued that Wolford's schedule has been easier with Lexington Catholic and Bryan Station replacing Riverdale (TN) and Dutch Fork (SC). Glaser's last 2 years: 33 points per game. Wolford's first 2 years: 24 points per game.

 

Fact: Contrary to prevailing opinion, the PASSING GAME production has also decreased from the last 2 years of the Glaser era to the first 2 years of the Wolford era. The completion percentages of Alex Mattingly (2011) and Austin Gahafer (2012) is significantly higher than BJ Nagle (2013) and Noah Houk (2014).

 

Based on the above numbers, Glaser's offense was vastly underrated and Wolford's offense has been significantly less productive.

 

While preference as to style is a debatable topic, production is not.

 

You selectively choose partial facts to characterize entire seasons, conveniently overlooking many other significant factors, including (not limited to) quality of all opponents; quality and talent of players -- Tigers and opponents -- season's worth of all key team stats; etc.

 

So go ahead and cling to your theory that one coach wasn't appropriately heralded for his offensive genius.

You selectively choose partial facts to characterize entire seasons, conveniently overlooking many other significant factors, including (not limited to) quality of all opponents; quality and talent of players -- Tigers and opponents -- season's worth of all key team stats; etc.

 

So go ahead and cling to your theory that one coach wasn't appropriately heralded for his offensive genius.

 

Just to make sure I understand you here. You are actively saying that you support forcing out one of the winningest coaches in KY football history (and a man who dedicated his life to St.X) in favor of an unknown quantity. Got it.

Or maybe she's saying the same thing many St X fans, and their Trinity counterparts were saying: Coach Glaser's time had come and gone, and let's support the kix s and staff now in place. Just speculating.

It's funny how quickly a thread about an OC turned into a discussion about the HC.... Probably need to change the thread title at this point....just sayin.

Yeah, I do. Coach Bruner wasn't DC at St. X until the 2014 season. And, yeah, a lot wrong with those glasses

 

I'll stick to the glaser tinted glasses. The St. X staff made a good hire in bringing bruner back , but don't make it seem as If it was all Wolford who found someone off the street.

Wolford's mishandling of Percell, Walker, and Davis took away some of my luster for X football. It's a shame, that a man of his football stature looked so lost at times.

Tigermom,

 

I never mentioned the words "offensive genius." Just productivity. Preference as to style is debatable. Productivity is simply a matter of fact. To me, it is about points scored, not necessarily the manner in which they are scored.

 

There have been state championships won among various levels of football utilizing just about every offensive system ever used. The type of system used is not as important as the detail to which it has been implemented and the level to which it is adaptable to the players available in a given year.

I can only speak for myself, but what has been missing from the Wolford era thus far is consistency. Part of the issue with consistency could have to do with the assistants that were and are still on staff. The HC of any program has to hire good assistants that can effectively teach and coach the overall philosophy of the program. Coach Walsh did a great job as the DC, but moving him out of that position and bringing Coach Bruner back on staff was a great decision; I hope Coach Wolford can make a similar hire on the offensive side of the ball.

 

Year 3 in the Wolford Era could be a pivotal one for Coach Wolford.

LongTimeReader,

 

You make valid points. However, before there can be consistency among the assistants, there has to be an overall philosophy of the program. And I think that has been what has been lacking from Wolford the most. I'm not sure he really knows what his philosophy is. And that is mainly due to his lack of experience at the high school level.

 

However, it is not entirely his fault. Basically, he just accepted a job that was offered to him. I place more of the blame on the powers that be who offered a head coaching job at one of the premier programs in the state to someone without the necessary qualifications.

Tigermom,

 

I never mentioned the words "offensive genius." Just productivity. Preference as to style is debatable. Productivity is simply a matter of fact. To me, it is about points scored, not necessarily the manner in which they are scored.

 

There have been state championships won among various levels of football utilizing just about every offensive system ever used. The type of system used is not as important as the detail to which it has been implemented and the level to which it is adaptable to the players available in a given year.

 

Bruin66: You take a narrow slice of data (points scored) as the basis for your argument. That's the point.

Just to make sure I understand you here. You are actively saying that you support forcing out one of the winningest coaches in KY football history (and a man who dedicated his life to St.X) in favor of an unknown quantity. Got it.

 

Pep Rock, this thread's about how to accurately characterize St. X's search for a new OC: decisive leadership vs. grasping at straws. I consider it the former & said so. Another poster considers it the latter. His argument was a comparison of coaches' effectiveness based on a very narrow slice of data.

 

Got it?