Blog Article

Bob Chesney’s James Madison Experiment Is About To Get Very Real

Mark Haines on August 4, 2025

Most first-year coaching hires crash and burn within 24 months.

Bob Chesney’s .912 hot seat rating after Year One suggests he might be different. The former Holy Cross coach took James Madison from transition chaos to 9 wins and a bowl victory in 12 months. But here’s what nobody wants to admit: Year Two is when the real coaching begins.

The Numbers Don’t Lie About Chesney’s Instant Impact

Chesney inherited a program in flux and immediately delivered results that veteran FBS coaches spend years trying to achieve:

  • 407.6 yards per game on offense
  • 33.3 points scored per contest
  • 321.8 yards allowed defensively
  • 20.5 points surrendered per game
  • 9-4 overall record with a bowl victory

These aren’t empty statistics padded against weak competition. This represents systematic excellence across 13 games against Sun Belt opponents who had zero respect for a Holy Cross coordinator learning on the job.

The Offensive Balance That Separates Good Coaches From Great Ones

Chesney’s attack showcased the kind of dual-threat capability that keeps defensive coordinators awake at night.

The passing game generated 216.1 yards per contest with quarterback Alonza Barnett III throwing for 2,598 yards and 26 touchdowns. Meanwhile, the ground attack churned out 191.5 rushing yards per game behind a three-headed monster that created matchup nightmares:

  • George Pettaway: 980 yards, 6.0 yards per carry
  • Wayne Knight: 449 yards, 5.8 yards per attempt
  • Barnett III: 442 yards, 7 rushing touchdowns

This isn’t luck or inherited talent producing results.

The Defensive Transformation Nobody Saw Coming

Defense wins championships, and Chesney’s unit delivered championship-level performance immediately.

James Madison allowed just 115.4 rushing yards per game on 3.5 yards per carry. The pass rush generated 41 sacks while the secondary picked off 17 passes. Individual performances reflected the culture Chesney built from day one:

  • Eric O’Neill: 13 sacks, 1 interception return for touchdown
  • Terrence Spence: 5 interceptions, 1 returned for a score
  • Jacob Dobbs: 74 tackles despite missing games

But Here’s The Problem With First-Year Success Stories

College football history is littered with coaches who engineered impressive debut seasons only to collapse when opponents developed better game plans.

The difference between one-year wonders and sustained excellence lies in adaptability. Can Chesney evolve his schemes when opposing coordinators spend entire offseasons studying his tendencies? Will his recruiting relationships prove strong enough to reload talent when players graduate or transfer?

The Transfer Portal Test That Reveals Coaching Sophistication

Chesney’s offseason roster management provides the first glimpse into his strategic thinking.

Rather than panic about departures, he targeted specific needs with surgical precision. Quarterback Matthew Sluka brings experience behind Barnett. Wide receiver Isaiah Alston helps replace graduated targets Omarion Dollison and Taylor Thompson, who combined for 1,081 receiving yards and 12 touchdowns.

More importantly, Chesney retained his rushing attack’s core. Pettaway, Knight, and Jobi Malary all return, providing offensive consistency that first-year coaches rarely enjoy.

The Schedule Reality Check That Will Define Everything

Year Two brings a brutal test of Chesney’s tactical development.

Road games at Louisville and Liberty represent massive step-ups from 2024’s competition level. Home contests against Appalachian State and Georgia Southern feature established coaching staffs with proven Sun Belt success. Washington State’s addition brings Pac-12 talent to Harrisonburg.

These games matter because they remove the “weak competition” qualifier from Chesney’s hot seat rating.

The Sustainability Question That Haunts Every Coaching Success

Chesney’s .912 rating reflects exceptional first-year performance, but sustaining excellence demands different skills than creating it.

The foundation exists through balanced offensive production, stifling defensive improvement, and tactical sophistication that translates into tangible results. The 27-17 Boca Raton Bowl victory over Western Kentucky provided the capstone moment, demonstrating game-planning abilities that justify every bit of optimism surrounding his hire.

The Bottom Line: Validation Season Starts Now

Bob Chesney exceeded every reasonable expectation in Year One.

Year Two determines whether he represents James Madison’s long-term solution or simply benefited from perfect timing and favorable circumstances. His .912 hot seat rating provides breathing room most coaches never enjoy, but sustained success requires proving excellence was no accident.

The real measure of Chesney’s coaching ability begins when 2025 games start counting.

BACK TO THE BLOG ARCHIVE
No related posts found.
VISIT OUR SHOP [COMING SOON]

LOAD MORE BLOG ARTICLES

Blog Article

How I Watched ‘Clueless Clay’ Fool Georgia Southern Into Overpaying for Mediocrity

Mark Haines on July 31, 2025

Clay Helton just got paid like a winner after three straight losing seasons at Georgia Southern.

The Contract That Defies Logic

Georgia Southern rewarded their 20-19 coach with a five-year extension worth $1 million annually through 2029.

The math doesn’t add up:

  • Three consecutive 6-7, 6-7, 8-5 seasons
  • Three bowl game losses in three appearances
  • A .513 winning percentage over 39 games
  • A hot seat rating of .859 against weak competition

Yet somehow, this earned Helton a raise from $805,000 to seven figures annually.

The USC Mirage That Fooled Georgia Southern

Helton’s resume looked impressive on paper, which explains why Eagles fans were excited about the hire.

At USC, he went 46-24 overall and won big games with other coaches’ recruits:

  • Rose Bowl victory over Penn State following the 2016 season
  • Pac-12 championship in 2017
  • Multiple wins over ranked opponents
  • Three conference championship game appearances

But USC fans nicknamed him “Clueless Clay” because they understood the truth: Helton inherited elite recruiting classes from Lane Kiffin, Steve Sarkisian, and Ed Orgeron. When forced to recruit his talent, everything collapsed.

His actual failures included:

  • Posted USC’s first losing season (5-7) since 2000 in 2018
  • USC’s 2020 recruiting class ranked dead last in the Pac-12
  • Lost elite California prospects like Bryce Young to Alabama and DJ Uiagalelei to Clemson
  • Recruiting fell from a consistent top-5 nationally to outside the top 50
  • Fired 14 assistant coaches in constant staff turnover
  • Fan attendance plummeted as apathy set in
  • Finally fired after a 1-1 start in 2021 following a 42-28 home loss to Stanford

Trojan fans celebrated his firing. Georgia Southern fans celebrated his hiring. Only one group understood what they were getting.

Why Mediocrity Became the New Excellence

Georgia Southern hasn’t won a bowl game since 2020.

Before Helton arrived in November 2021, the Eagles had missed bowls entirely in multiple seasons since moving to FBS in 2014. Three straight postseason appearances represent progress, even if the results sting.

The institutional memory matters more than the win-loss record. Georgia Southern values stability over ceiling, consistency over championship potential.

The 2024 Numbers That Justified Everything

The Eagles finally had their breakthrough season.

Georgia Southern went 8-5 overall and 6-2 in Sun Belt play, their best record since 2020. They averaged 28.0 points per game while allowing 33.0—hardly dominant but sufficient for consistent competitiveness.

Key statistical achievements included:

  • JC French: 2,831 passing yards, 65.6% completion rate
  • Balanced receiving attack with three 590+ yard receivers
  • 21 takeaways on defense despite allowing big numbers
  • 4-2 home record, 4-2 road record

The New Orleans Bowl loss to Sam Houston (26-31) stung, but reaching three straight bowls had never happened in program history.

The Pattern Recognition Problem Nobody Wants to Discuss

Three years of data reveal troubling consistency.

Helton’s Georgia Southern tenure follows an identical script each season:

  • Start with high hopes and roster optimism
  • Compete respectably through the regular season
  • Reach a bowl game with 6-7 wins
  • Lose the postseason game convincingly
  • Celebrate the “progress” while ignoring the ceiling

His overall bowl record stands at 2-6 between USC and Georgia Southern. The pattern suggests teams that peak during the regular season but lack the extra gear required for postseason success.

The Quarterback Development Success Story

French’s emergence validates Helton’s offensive system.

The redshirt junior completed his first full season as a starter by distributing the ball effectively to Josh Dallas (614 yards, 6 TD), Dalen Cobb (599 yards, 4 TD), and Derwin Burgess Jr. (659 yards, 3 TD).

French added 239 rushing yards and accounted for 19 total touchdowns, providing the dual-threat capability that makes Helton’s offense functional against Sun Belt competition.

The Defensive Reality Check

The Eagles allowed 428.6 yards per game in 2024.

Breaking down the defensive struggles:

  • 258.6 passing yards allowed per game
  • 170.0 rushing yards allowed per game
  • 33.0 points allowed per game
  • Massive differences between home/road performance

Leading tackler Marques Watson-Trent (120 tackles) graduated, along with most of the linebacker corps. Replacing that production requires either internal development or transfer portal success, both of which are uncertain propositions.

The Schedule Reality That Changes Everything

2025 won’t provide mercy for continued development.

The non-conference slate opens with road trips to Fresno State (August 30) and USC (September 6). These aren’t developmental opportunities—they’re potential blowouts that could destroy confidence before Sun Belt play begins.

Conference games include dangerous road trips to James Madison and Appalachian State, traditional powers with more resources and recent success.

Bowl eligibility requires six wins, a target that appeared routine after 8-5 but remains challenging given roster turnover and schedule difficulty.

The Coaching Reality Check Nobody Discusses

Helton’s actual coaching ability remains questionable.

At USC, he inherited talent recruited by previous coaches—Lane Kiffin, Steve Sarkisian, and Ed Orgeron did the heavy lifting on roster construction. When forced to recruit his players, the program collapsed.

The pattern at Georgia Southern suggests similar limitations. His teams consistently compete but rarely dominate. They reach bowls but lose them. The 20-19 overall record reflects adequate program management rather than exceptional coaching ability.

But here’s the key difference: Georgia Southern’s expectations align with Helton’s ceiling. USC demanded national championships. Georgia Southern celebrates bowl appearances.

The Million-Dollar Investment That Changed the Conversation

The contract extension indicates administrative satisfaction with baseline competency.

Georgia Southern’s athletic department believes in gradual improvement over dramatic change. The deal creates pressure to achieve more than adequacy, particularly given the salary increase and length of commitment.

The financial commitment suggests institutional patience and long-term thinking rather than championship expectations.

The Hot Seat Temperature: Artificially Cooled

Helton’s .859 rating reflects the gap between external expectations and internal reality.

The “weak competition” qualifier suggests that even modest goals require maximum effort to achieve. But context matters more than perception for program evaluation.

Georgia Southern’s recent history includes multiple coaching changes, inconsistent recruiting, and declining fan interest. Helton has stabilized the program while establishing baseline competency.

The 2025 Verdict: Prove the Investment or Accept the Ceiling

Year four becomes crucial for demonstrating that stability translates to sustainable success.

French returns at quarterback with most receiving targets intact. The secondary offers experience through Chance Gamble (48 tackles, 3 INT) and Tracy Hill Jr. (36 tackles, 2 INT).

Success requires bowl eligibility plus competitive games against quality opponents. Helton needs to prove Georgia Southern can win games it’s supposed to win while occasionally stealing victories against superior competition.

The contract extension provides job security but increases performance expectations.

The Bottom Line: Mediocrity Never Felt So Expensive

Clay Helton’s job security isn’t in question—his ceiling is.

Georgia Southern invested in stability over potential upheaval. Whether that represents appropriate expectations or limited ambition depends on maximizing returning talent and roster improvements.

The foundation exists for the program’s best season under Helton, but the schedule demands more than hoping for adequacy.

Hot Seat Temperature: Contractually protected. The million-dollar investment changed the conversation from job security to championship expectations—a pressure Helton has never handled successfully.

BACK TO THE BLOG ARCHIVE
No related posts found.
VISIT OUR SHOP [COMING SOON]

LOAD MORE BLOG ARTICLES

Blog Article

Dell McGee’s Georgia State Football Nightmare Is Just Beginning

Mark Haines on July 31, 2025

Dell McGee’s first season at Georgia State ended exactly how everyone feared it would.

The former Georgia running backs coach—who helped develop Nick Chubb, Sony Michel, and D’Andre Swift into NFL stars—managed just 3 wins in 12 games. His hot seat rating of .702 against weak competition tells the brutal truth: even lowered expectations proved too high.

But the real nightmare isn’t what happened in 2024.

It’s what’s coming in 2025.

The 3-9 Disaster That Nobody Saw Coming (Except Everyone Did)

McGee inherited a Georgia State program that won 7 games and a bowl in 2023 under Shawn Elliott.

Twelve months later, the Panthers managed wins against:

  • Chattanooga (24-21)
  • Vanderbilt (36-32)
  • Texas State (52-44)

That’s it.

The offensive numbers expose the systematic failure. Georgia State averaged 23.7 points per game—exactly matching the 23.7 points they surrendered on defense. This wasn’t a team learning a new system. This was a program drowning in mediocrity.

The tale of two seasons lived within individual games.

In victories, McGee’s offense exploded for 440.3 yards per game with 176.3 rushing yards. In losses, those numbers collapsed to 371.9 total yards and a pathetic 118.9 rushing yards per game.

For a coach whose specialty was developing elite ground games, watching his rushing attack average 4.4 yards per carry had to be torture.

The Position Coach Paradox That’s Destroying Everything

Here’s the uncomfortable truth about Dell McGee: his resume creates impossible expectations.

Eight seasons at Georgia. Back-to-back national championships. 56 NFL draft picks developed, including 15 first-rounders. National Recruiter of the Year in 2018.

Yet his Georgia State debut featured:

  • A quarterback (Christian Veilleux) with 11 interceptions against 13 touchdowns
  • A defense surrendering 6.2 yards per play
  • A rushing offense that managed just 133.3 yards per game

The cruelest reality in college football is that excellence doesn’t transfer between roles.

McGee spent decades perfecting individual player development. Running backs coach. Recruiting specialist. Position-specific guru.

Head coaching demands something entirely different—program architecture, culture building, staff management, game-day decision making.

The disconnect shows up everywhere. McGee’s Georgia offenses operated with surgical precision. His Georgia State offense completed 60.4% of passes while turning the ball over 1.6 times per game.

The 68-Player Roster Explosion That Could Backfire Spectacularly

McGee’s response to 2024’s failure? Blow up the entire roster.

Georgia State brought in 68 new players for 2025:

  • 33 true freshmen
  • Multiple FBS transfers
  • Power Five running backs Rashod Amos (Ole Miss), Djay Braswell (South Carolina), Branson Robinson (Georgia)
  • Wide receiver Leo Blackburn from Georgia Tech
  • Four-star defensive tackle Jartavius Flounoy

This represents more than 60% roster turnover—the college football equivalent of burning down the house to kill a spider.

The recruiting class ranks as Georgia State’s best in program history and tops in the Sun Belt according to 247Sports. On paper, it solves every problem that plagued 2024.

But here’s what nobody wants to admit: chemistry matters more than talent.

Team cohesion doesn’t develop overnight. When three-quarters of your roster is new, you’re essentially coaching a completely different team. New problems emerge even as old ones theoretically get solved.

McGee is gambling his career on unproven players developing instant chemistry while learning his system.

The odds are not in his favor.

The Hue Jackson Hire That Should Terrify Georgia State Fans

McGee replaced offensive coordinator Jim Chaney with former NFL head coach Hue Jackson.

On the surface, this looks smart. Jackson brings play-calling experience from both college and professional levels. He should address the offensive inconsistencies that plagued 2024.

But Hue Jackson’s history reveals a pattern of organizational destruction that should keep Georgia State administrators awake at night.

Jackson’s NFL tenure ended with a historically bad 3-36-1 record with Cleveland. Former quarterback Baker Mayfield called Jackson “fake” after he immediately joined division rival Cincinnati following his firing.

The pattern repeats everywhere Jackson coaches:

  • NFLs Oakland Raiders fired him in 2011 after he publicly criticized his team and defensive coordinator following a season-ending loss
  • The Cleveland Browns fired him after 2.5 seasons of historic futility
  • Grambling State fired him after just two seasons amid complaints about “lack of transparency, coordination, and collaboration.”

Jackson’s documented tendency toward organizational undermining creates a ticking time bomb within McGee’s staff.

His X’s and O’s knowledge is legitimate. His ability to function within organizational structures remains questionable.

For a first-time head coach already fighting for credibility, bringing in a coordinator with Jackson’s baggage represents either desperation or poor judgment.

The Schedule From Hell That Will Expose Every Weakness

The 2025 schedule offers zero mercy for a program attempting massive reconstruction.

Non-conference games include:

  • At Ole Miss (August 30)
  • Memphis (September 6)
  • At Vanderbilt (September 20)

These aren’t tune-up games—they’re potential blowouts that could destroy confidence before Sun Belt play begins.

The conference schedule presents additional nightmares. James Madison, Appalachian State, and Georgia Southern all possess the talent to embarrass Georgia State if the roster overhaul fails to gel quickly.

McGee’s 1-7 Sun Belt record in 2024 demands immediate improvement. The roster upheaval creates uncertainty about whether improvement is even possible.

Bowl eligibility requires six wins. Based on the current trajectory, that target appears optimistic rather than achievable.

The Hot Seat Mathematics That Don’t Add Up

Dell McGee’s .702 Hot Seat Rating reflects a harsh reality: even modest expectations exceeded actual performance.

The “weak competition” qualifier stings because it suggests Georgia State couldn’t meet diminished standards. When your floor becomes your ceiling, the trajectory points in only one direction.

The financial commitment suggests institutional patience, but college football rarely affords extended timelines.

McGee signed a five-year deal worth approximately $850,000 annually. That investment should provide job security.

But Georgia State’s overall program record of 54-92 across 12 seasons creates fan apathy that demands a dramatic reversal rather than gradual improvement.

Year two becomes crucial for demonstrating that 2024’s struggles represented growing pains rather than fundamental limitations.

The Uncomfortable Truth Nobody Wants to Acknowledge

McGee’s situation exposes college football’s cruelest contradiction.

Fans and administrators expect immediate improvement while simultaneously understanding that roster reconstruction takes time. This creates impossible expectations that doom coaches before systems fully develop.

The hot seat rating reflects broader impatience with Georgia State football’s entire existence.

The program has never achieved sustained success. Four different head coaches. Multiple conference changes. A fanbase that’s watched 12 years of mostly mediocre football.

McGee inherited not just personnel problems but cultural ones. He needs to simultaneously rebuild the roster and manage expectations in a market that’s already given up on the program.

Success in 2025 depends less on McGee’s coaching ability than on his capacity to manage a program undergoing complete identity transformation.

The massive roster turnover represents both opportunity and vulnerability. Potential solutions that could easily become new problems if chemistry and execution falter.

Dell McGee’s future hinges on proving that elite position coaching translates to program leadership.

The early evidence remains incomplete, but the hot seat temperature continues rising with each passing month.

Year two will determine whether Dell McGee represents Georgia State’s future or merely another transition point in the program’s ongoing search for something it has never actually achieved: sustained success.

The nightmare is just beginning.

BACK TO THE BLOG ARCHIVE
No related posts found.
VISIT OUR SHOP [COMING SOON]

LOAD MORE BLOG ARTICLES

Blog Article

The Parker Paradox: Why Troy Football’s $900K Gamble Is Already Backfiring

Mark Haines on July 31, 2025

Gerad Parker’s hot seat rating of .613 tells you everything you need to know about Troy football’s desperate situation.

The Million-Dollar Question Nobody’s Asking

Why did Troy pay $900,000 annually for a coordinator who had never proven he could build a program?

Parker’s resume looks impressive on paper:

  • Notre Dame offensive coordinator (2023): 39.1 points per game, 8th nationally
  • West Virginia offensive coordinator (2020-21)
  • Penn State passing game coordinator (2019)
  • Previous head coaching experience: 0-6 as Purdue’s interim coach in 2016

That last bullet point should have been a red flag the size of Alabama.

The Inheritance Trap

Parker walked into what appeared to be a goldmine.

Jon Sumrall left him with explosive talent across the roster:

  • Devonte Ross finished with 1,043 yards and 11 touchdowns as the Sun Belt’s most dangerous receiver
  • Damien Taylor had just rushed for 1,010 yards
  • The offensive line had protected championship-level quarterbacks for two straight conference titles

But the highlight reels didn’t show the real story.

The Hidden Reality

Troy had just 12 players in their final year of eligibility – the fewest in the country.

The roster turnover told a different story:

  • Forty-six scholarship newcomers joined the roster, ranking third-most nationally
  • Only four players who started six or more games the previous season returned
  • The transfer portal had gutted the program’s experience while maintaining the illusion of talent

Parker inherited the appearance of experience, not the reality of it.

When Offensive Genius Meets Defensive Reality

The 2024 numbers expose the gap between reputation and results.

Offensive performance showed flashes but lacked consistency:

  • 369.2 yards per game
  • 26.0 points per game
  • 49.7% third-down conversion rate
  • 94.6% red zone scoring rate

Defensive struggles told a different story:

  • 28.4 points allowed per game
  • 366.9 yards allowed per game
  • Negative-four turnover margin
  • 58.8 penalty yards per game

These statistics reveal a program searching for identity.

The November Mirage

Troy’s late-season surge deserves context, not celebration.

In November, the Trojans went 3-1 and averaged 449.8 yards per game with 224 rushing yards per contest. They demolished Southern Miss 52-20 in their finale. Headlines proclaimed they were “turning the corner” and “finding their identity.” But look at who they beat:

  • Coastal Carolina (5-7 final record)
  • Georgia Southern (8-4)
  • Southern Miss (1-11)

When the games mattered earlier in the season, Parker’s offense struggled against quality competition.

The Transfer Portal Gamble

Parker’s response to Year One has been an aggressive roster overhaul.

Key departures include the program’s best players:

  • Devonte Ross (1,043 receiving yards, 12 total TDs)
  • Damien Taylor (1,010 rushing yards)
  • Matthew Caldwell and Will Crowder (starting quarterbacks)

Portal additions bring experience, but unknown chemistry:

  • David Daniel-Sisavanh (S, Vanderbilt)
  • Garner Langlo (OL, App State/Auburn)
  • Trey Cooley (RB, Georgia Tech)
  • Seven additional transfers

This isn’t roster management – it’s roster panic.

The Recruiting Silver Lining

Parker’s 2025 recruiting class provides the only genuine bright spot.

Ranked 72nd nationally by On3 with an 84.76 score, it represents Troy’s best recruiting class in program history. Landing the Sun Belt’s top class despite being hired weeks before National Signing Day demonstrates Parker’s ability to sell a vision. The class includes talent across multiple positions with several three-star prospects.

Whether he can coach this talent remains another question entirely.

The Schedule Reality Check

2025 won’t provide mercy for Parker’s learning curve.

Brutal early tests await the inexperienced roster:

  • Road trip to Clemson (September 6)
  • Memphis at home (September 13)
  • Trip to Buffalo (September 20)

Sun Belt schedule includes dangerous opponents:

  • Louisiana visits Troy
  • Road trip to Texas State
  • Arkansas State comes to town

Every game becomes a referendum on Parker’s progress.

The Quarterback Nightmare

Parker enters Year Two without a proven starter under center.

The competition features question marks at every turn:

  • Tucker Kilcrease saw limited 2024 action
  • Goose Crowder missed most of 2024 with injury
  • Transfer additions bring unknown quantities
  • Incoming freshman Jack James lacks college experience

Parker’s offensive system demands precision and experience that none of these options have demonstrated.

The Cultural Problem Nobody Mentions

Championship programs don’t celebrate moral victories.

“The first thing I’m most proud of is our current roster,” Parker said after the season. “It’s been impressive the belief this team has in each other.” This sounds like a coach trying to convince himself as much as his audience. Neal Brown and Jon Sumrall built Troy’s reputation on toughness and execution. Parker’s team looked fragile early, prone to mistakes, and easily rattled by adversity.

Belief doesn’t win games – performance does.

The Infrastructure Investment

Troy’s administration is betting heavily on Parker’s potential.

The $11.6 million indoor practice facility, beginning construction in January, represents a significant institutional commitment. Combined with Parker’s $900,000 annual salary, Troy has invested serious resources in this experiment. Modern facilities attract recruits and demonstrate program commitment.

But facilities don’t coach games, and recruiting rankings don’t make tackles.

The Bottom Line: Year Two Decides Everything

Parker’s .613 hot seat rating reflects a harsh truth about modern college football.

Programs don’t provide patience for proven coordinators learning on the job. His six-game stint as Purdue’s interim coach (0-6 record) provides the only previous evidence of his head coaching ability. The November surge bought Parker time, but it didn’t buy him credibility. Year Two demands tangible improvement:

  • Bowl game appearance minimum
  • Competitive games against quality opponents
  • Evidence that the culture matches the talent

Troy fans deserve championships, not moral victories.

Hot Seat Temperature: Warming rapidly. One more disappointing season, and Parker’s $900K investment becomes Troy’s most expensive mistake.

BACK TO THE BLOG ARCHIVE
No related posts found.
VISIT OUR SHOP [COMING SOON]

LOAD MORE BLOG ARTICLES

Blog Article

New Mexico Football 2025 Season Preview: Jason Eck’s Zero-Point Rebuild

Mark Haines on July 28, 2025

Jason Eck inherits a New Mexico Football program that generated 33.5 points per game but surrendered 41.0, creating the classic high-floor, low-ceiling scenario that defines coaching transitions.

With a hot seat rating of 0 as a brand-new coach, Eck has maximum runway but faces the psychological reality that New Mexico fans have been conditioned to expect disappointment after decades of false starts. The numbers tell a story of offensive competence masking defensive futility. At the same time, the deeper challenge involves rebuilding confidence in a program that has systematically trained its supporters to expect coaching turnover.

What Eck Inherited: The Foundation

The numbers reveal a more nuanced reality than a simple 5-7 record suggests.

New Mexico’s 2024 season ended with a 3-4 Mountain West record, but those numbers obscure genuine offensive competence. The Lobos generated impressive production:

  • 484.3 yards per game (230.7 passing, 253.6 rushing)
  • 402 total points across 12 games
  • 6.8 yards per carry as a team
  • 37 rushing touchdowns

The offensive foundation centers around dual-threat quarterback Devin Dampier, who started all 12 games and accounted for 2,768 passing yards with 12 touchdowns against 12 interceptions while adding 1,166 rushing yards at 7.5 yards per carry with 19 rushing touchdowns. Running back Eli Sanders contributed 1,063 yards at 7.2 yards per carry with nine touchdowns.

However, here’s where reality sets in: they allowed 492 points, resulting in a -7.5 points per game margin.

The Defensive Disaster That Explains Everything

New Mexico’s defense was historically bad in ways that numbers can’t fully capture.

The unit surrendered 279.2 passing yards per game at a 64.6% completion rate while generating only three team interceptions all season. They gave up 2.5 passing touchdowns per game and managed just 10 total takeaways against 19 offensive turnovers, creating a minus-0.8 turnover margin per game.

This isn’t just bad defense – it’s program-killing defense that turns every game into a shootout where you need 40+ points just to have a chance.

Why The Previous Coach Succeeded (And Still Left)

Understanding Eck’s situation requires examining why Bronco Mendenhall lasted exactly one season despite showing genuine progress.

Mendenhall’s departure to Utah State wasn’t about performance failure. The 38-35 win over ranked Washington State was New Mexico’s signature victory in years, and the team was building momentum. Mendenhall left for proximity to family and the gravitational pull of coaching in Utah, where his mother lives and multiple adult children attend BYU.

This creates a fascinating paradox for Eck:

  • He inherits positive momentum without disaster-cleanup baggage
  • Players respected Mendenhall and saw tangible progress
  • Fans are skeptical because they’ve been trained to expect coaching turnover
  • Every setback gets magnified, and every positive development gets viewed suspiciously

The program is seeking its third head coach in three years, creating an environment where institutional memory conditions expectations toward failure.

Eck’s Track Record: Why This Hire Makes Sense

Eck’s credentials come from three seasons transforming Idaho from perpetual disappointment to a consistent FCS playoff contender.

His 26-13 overall record at Idaho included three straight playoff berths, with the Vandals reaching the quarterfinals in both 2023 and 2024. The 2024 Idaho team finished 10-4, winning 10 games for the first time in 36 years.

Here’s what makes Eck’s Idaho success relevant to New Mexico:

  • Turnaround Ability: Idaho had just two winning seasons in 22 years before Eck arrived
  • Offensive Innovation: 2022 Idaho ranked 5th in FCS passing efficiency (168.1) and 13th in scoring offense (35.9 points per game)
  • Personnel Development: Quarterback Gevani McCoy won the Jerry Rice Award as FCS Freshman of the Year in 2022
  • Adaptability: In 2024, replaced starting QB and 81.5% of receiving production yet still went 10-4

Before becoming a head coach, Eck spent six seasons at South Dakota State, culminating in three years as offensive coordinator from 2019-2021. His offenses averaged 32.5 points per game, including 37.5 in his final season. In 2019, he won the American Football Coaches’ Association FCS Assistant Coach of the Year award.

The Implementation Challenge: Systems and Personnel

Eck brings offensive coordinator Luke Schleusner from Idaho to install an up-tempo spread attack with zone-read elements.

This system alignment with New Mexico’s existing personnel suggests continuity rather than wholesale philosophical change. The Lobos return several key offensive contributors:

  • Receivers Michael Buckley and Caleb Medford
  • Running back Eli Sanders
  • Kicker Luke Drzewiecki

The quarterback situation presents both a challenge and an opportunity. With Dampier’s departure to the transfer portal, Eck must identify a replacement from candidates, including James Laubstein and Jack Layne. His track record developing quarterbacks suggests competence in this critical area.

Defensively, linebacker Randolph Kpai returns after recording 80 tackles in 2024, providing leadership for what must become a dramatically improved unit.

The spring game, in which the defense defeated the offense 32-23, indicates early progress in installing a more aggressive scheme focused on creating turnovers.

Schedule Reality: Immediate Tests and Realistic Opportunities

Eck’s 2025 debut presents immediate challenges that will define early perceptions.

Opening at Michigan on August 30 against a likely top-10 team creates a no-win scenario where any competitive showing gets praised while blowout losses get rationalized. The home opener against Idaho State provides a necessary confidence-building opportunity before traveling to UCLA.

The Mountain West schedule offers realistic opportunities for bowl eligibility, but the conference’s competitive balance means margin for error remains minimal.

New Mexico’s facility investments signal institutional support but won’t immediately impact on-field performance:

  • $11 million commitment to University Stadium upgrades
  • Video board improvements starting immediately
  • Long-term facility enhancement plans

The Hot Seat Reality: Maximum Institutional Patience

With a hot seat rating of 0, Eck enjoys something previous New Mexico coaches haven’t: time.

His five-year contract starting at $1.15 million annually represents serious institutional buy-in. This financial commitment (a $775,000 raise from his Idaho salary) demonstrates that Athletic Director Fernando Lovo understands that sustainable success requires stability and competitive compensation.

The contract structure, with annual escalations of $50,000, means Eck will become the highest-paid coach in school history by year three, provided he survives that long.

This investment level suggests the administration finally understands that coaching carousels kill programs.

The Expectation Paradox: Progress vs. Patience

Eck faces a unique challenge that most new coaches don’t encounter.

He’s replacing a coach who was making progress but left for personal reasons, rather than due to performance failures. This creates unrealistic expectations, where fans expect the continuation of Mendenhall’s positive trajectory without acknowledging that coaching transitions inevitably involve a Year-One regression.

New Mexico football has conditioned its fan base to expect disappointment. Even when things appear promising (like the Washington State victory), there’s an underlying assumption that disappointment is coming.

Eck must not only improve on-field performance but also rebuild psychological confidence in the program’s direction.

Why This Time Feels Different

Jason Eck represents New Mexico’s best coaching hire in years, bringing proven turnaround credentials and offensive expertise to a program with existing foundational pieces.

His FCS success translates directly to the Mountain West level, where program-building skills matter more than recruiting stars. The 2025 season will likely show growing pains as Eck implements his systems and develops quarterback play, but the offensive infrastructure suggests competitiveness.

Bowl eligibility remains achievable if the defense shows even modest improvement from its disastrous 2024 performance.

Success at New Mexico isn’t about immediate championships – it’s about building sustainable competitiveness and ending the cycle of coaching turnover that has plagued the program. By those measures, Eck’s appointment represents the program’s best opportunity for stability since Rocky Long’s tenure in the early 2000s.

The question isn’t whether Eck can coach; his Idaho record proves competence.

The question is whether New Mexico can finally provide the institutional support and patience necessary for sustained success. Early signs suggest that yes, 2025 will be a legitimate reset year, rather than another false start.

BACK TO THE BLOG ARCHIVE
No related posts found.
VISIT OUR SHOP [COMING SOON]

LOAD MORE BLOG ARTICLES

Blog Article

The Clean Slate: Matt Entz and Fresno State’s Championship Caliber Reset

Mark Haines on July 25, 2025

Fresno State’s Matt Entz isn’t just another coaching hire.

The numbers tell a brutal truth about Fresno State’s 2024 campaign that few want to acknowledge: this was a program treading water, not swimming toward anything meaningful. A 6-7 record, including a gut-wrenching 28-20 double-overtime loss to Northern Illinois in the Famous Idaho Potato Bowl, represented the culmination of systemic issues that had been festering beneath the surface of what appeared to be consistent mediocrity.

But here’s where the human element gets fascinating. Fresno State athletic director Garrett Klassy didn’t panic-hire from the hot coordinator carousel or make a desperate play for a retreaded Power Five washout. Instead, he identified Matt Entz, a championship-caliber coach whose 60-11 record at North Dakota State included two FCS national titles and a staggering 15-3 playoff record.

The decision reveals something profound about institutional self-awareness: Fresno State recognized they needed someone who knew how to build winners, not someone who merely knew how to manage talent.

The Numbers Don’t Lie: What Went Wrong in 2024

The 2024 season was a masterclass in statistical mediocrity.

The raw statistical evidence from 2024 reveals the fundamental flaws that interim head coach Tim Skipper was unable to address. Fresno State averaged 340.6 total yards per game while surrendering 355.6 to opponents. That negative yardage differential of 15 yards per game tells the story of a team consistently playing from behind the chains.

The rushing attack was historically bad:

  • Just 98.2 yards per game
  • A pathetic 3.4 yards per carry
  • Ranked 10th in the Mountain West

The defense couldn’t stop anyone on the ground:

  • Allowed 139.4 rushing yards per game
  • Created a vicious cycle of poor field position
  • Let opponents control the clock and tempo

Turnovers told the real story:

  • Generated 20 turnovers on defense (15 interceptions, 5 fumbles)
  • Gave up 17 turnovers on offense
  • Starting QB Mikey Keene threw 11 interceptions alone

Perhaps most telling was the road performance: 2-4 away from Valley Children’s Stadium, with offensive output dropping to 302.7 yards per game.

Championship programs travel well because their identity is not dependent on environmental advantages.

The Entz Factor: Why This Hire Changes Everything

Matt Entz arrives in Fresno with credentials that surpass those of most Group of Five hires.

His tenure at North Dakota State wasn’t only successful but also historically dominant. The 2019 season saw NDSU go 16-0, making Entz the first Division I head coach to achieve a perfect season in his first full year. That team finished with a 37-game winning streak, the third-longest in Division I history.

But statistics only tell part of the story:

  • Developed eight NFL Draft picks at NDSU
  • Coached Trey Lance to become the third overall pick in 2021
  • Operated in an environment where championships were expected, not hoped for

The USC experience added another crucial dimension. In his lone season as assistant head coach for defense and linebackers, Entz helped the Trojans improve from 119th to 70th in total defense. Working under Lincoln Riley exposed him to modern offensive concepts while reinforcing his defensive principles at the FBS level.

Riley’s endorsement carried weight: “He made us better, he made me better.”

The Human Reality: Why Fresno State Fans Should Be Cautiously Optimistic

The hiring of coaches from successful FCS programs carries inherent risk.

The talent differential between the Missouri Valley Football Conference and the Mountain West is significant. However, Entz’s profile suggests someone uniquely equipped to navigate this transition. His defensive coordinator background at Western Illinois, Northern Iowa, and North Dakota State demonstrates adaptability across different systems and talent levels.

More importantly, Entz brings what Fresno State has lacked: a clear philosophical identity.

His press conference remarks about “leading the country in physicality” and building a “run-first offense” aren’t coach-speak platitudes. They represent a fundamental shift from the finesse-oriented approach that produced inconsistent results in 2024.

The roster construction for 2025 reflects this philosophical shift:

  • The transfer quarterback, E.J. Warner from Temple, provides experienced leadership
  • Sophomore Bryson Donelson returns after averaging 6.0 yards per carry as a freshman
  • Multiple offensive line additions, including junior college transfers
  • Immediate emphasis on establishing physical dominance up front

This isn’t just roster management—it’s cultural transformation.

The Realistic Expectations: What Success Looks Like in Year One

The 2025 schedule presents both opportunities and landmines.

Opening at Kansas on August 23 provides an immediate measuring stick against a Big 12 program. Home games against Georgia Southern, Nevada, San Diego State, Wyoming, and Utah State offer winnable contests if Entz can establish his system quickly.

The road slate is unforgiving:

  • Oregon State
  • Colorado State
  • Boise State
  • San Jose State

Success in 2025 won’t be measured by wins and losses alone but by evidence of systematic improvement in the areas that plagued the 2024 team.

Data-wise, watch for improved rushing offense and third-down conversion rates. If Entz can establish a ground game that consistently generates 4.5 yards per carry while improving third-down efficiency from 2024’s levels, the foundation for sustained success will be evident.

Defensively, reducing explosive plays and improving red zone defense should be immediate priorities.

The Deeper Truth: Why This Hire Matters Beyond Football

The Matt Entz hiring represents something larger than football strategy.

It signals that Fresno State refuses to accept mediocrity as its ceiling. In a landscape where Group of Five programs often settle for coaches who “understand the level,” Fresno State pursued someone who has consistently operated above it.

This philosophical approach extends beyond X’s and O’s:

  • Recruiting strategy focused on maximizing Central Valley talent
  • Cultural reset emphasizing “transformational leadership.”
  • Playing “for the logo” rather than individual accolades
  • Building for Pac-12 competition starting in 2026

The transition to the Pac-12 in 2026 adds urgency to this rebuild. Entz isn’t just preparing for Mountain West competition; he’s laying the groundwork for a program that can compete with Oregon State, Washington State, and other Pac-12 members.

The championship pedigree he brings suggests he understands the difference between building for survival and building for dominance.

The Bottom Line: A Foundation for Sustained Excellence

Matt Entz arrives at Fresno State with a hot seat rating of 0.0—the luxury afforded to new coaches with proven track records.

However, the numbers and human story suggest this hire represents more than a fresh start; it represents a fundamental shift in institutional ambition.

The 2024 season’s struggles created the conditions for meaningful change. The 6-7 record and bowl loss wasn’t just disappointing results; they were symptoms of a program that had lost its identity.

Entz brings clarity to that identity:

  • Physical, disciplined football
  • Championship-caliber expectations
  • Systematic player development
  • Cultural transformation from top to bottom

Success in 2025 should be measured not just by bowl eligibility but by evidence of systematic improvement. If Fresno State can establish a punishing ground game, reduce turnovers, and show the mental toughness to win close games on the road, the foundation for sustained excellence will be in place.

The Matt Entz era begins with unprecedented expectations for a first-time FBS head coach.

His championship pedigree and proven ability to develop talent suggest those expectations aren’t misplaced. For a program preparing to compete in the Pac-12, this hire could represent the difference between surviving conference realignment and thriving in it.

The data shows the clear truth: Fresno State needed someone who knew how to win at the highest level. The human reality is equally compelling: they found him.

Now the only question is whether the Central Valley is ready for championship-caliber football.

BACK TO THE BLOG ARCHIVE
No related posts found.
VISIT OUR SHOP [COMING SOON]

LOAD MORE BLOG ARTICLES

Blog Article

Wyoming Football 2025 Season Preview: Jay Sawvel’s Critical Second Year

Mark Haines on July 24, 2025

Jay Sawvel inherited something both precious and dangerous when he took over Wyoming football.

The 33rd head coach in program history faces a paradox that would terrify most coaches: he must honor a decade of unprecedented stability while proving he can exceed the modest ceiling that same stability created. His hot seat rating of 0.531 after just one season reveals an uncomfortable truth about coaching transitions at programs caught between respectability and relevance.

The fear isn’t just about wins and losses. It’s about determining whether Wyoming’s defensive identity under Sawvel, as coordinator, was the foundation of success or merely a byproduct of Craig Bohl’s comprehensive system. Now, with a 3-9 inaugural season behind him and mounting pressure to validate Athletic Director Tom Burman’s internal promotion, Sawvel faces the existential coaching question: was he promoted because he was the best candidate, or because he was the safest one?

When Defense Couldn’t Save the Day

Sawvel’s first season exposed the fragility of Wyoming’s recent success.

The Cowboys’ 3-9 record (2-5 Mountain West) represented their worst performance since the pre-Bohl era. The numbers tell a story of systematic offensive failure that undermined four years of defensive development:

  • Offensive output: Just 19.3 points and 327.3 yards per game
  • Passing attack: 52.2% completion rate, 189.4 yards per game, 0.9 passing touchdowns per contest
  • Quarterback instability: Evan Svoboda managed 5 touchdowns against 8 interceptions before giving way to Kaden Anderson
  • Close game struggles: 2-7 record in contests decided by eight points or fewer

The defensive side, Sawvel’s supposed area of expertise, allowed 410.6 yards per game. While not catastrophic, it represented significant regression from the units that helped define Wyoming football under Bohl. The Cowboys surrendered 218.9 passing yards and 191.7 rushing yards per game, failing to force the game-changing turnovers that had become their trademark.

Seven of their nine losses came by margins that indicated competitive capability undermined by crucial mistakes.

The Statistical Split That Reveals Everything

Here’s what makes Wyoming’s 2024 season so maddening: when they were good, they were really good.

In victories, the Cowboys averaged 39.7 points and 435 total yards per game. This 20-point differential between wins and losses exposed the binary nature of Sawvel’s first season. When things worked, they worked spectacularly. Consistency remained elusive.

The three wins showcased different versions of competitive football:

  • Air Force (31-19): Defensive dominance
  • New Mexico (49-45): Offensive explosiveness
  • Washington State (15-14): Clutch execution

Yet the Cowboys couldn’t string together this level of performance across twelve games.

Special teams provided unexpected stability amid the chaos. Kicker John Hoyland converted all 25 extra points and 15 of 19 field goals, while punter Jack Culbreath averaged 40.4 yards per punt. However, all three specialists graduated, creating another area of uncertainty for 2025.

Addition Through Subtraction: The 2025 Roster Mathematics

Wyoming’s outlook hinges on whether losing its defensive leaders can somehow improve the team.

The graduation of linebacker Shae Suiaunoa (88 tackles, 10 TFL), safety Connor Shay (76 tackles), and defensive back Wrook Brown (48 tackles, 3 interceptions) removes the defensive spine that helped define recent Wyoming teams. This isn’t just about losing tackles. It’s about losing the voices that made defensive adjustments and kept younger players focused.

Yet the offensive foundation offers genuine optimism:

  • Quarterback Kaden Anderson: Returns as a sophomore after a 58.3% completion rate, 955 yards, 6:3 TD: INT ratio in nine games
  • Running back Sam Scott: Led team with 435 yards (4.7 average) in 10 games, returns for senior season
  • Receiver Jaylen Sargent: Team leader with 480 yards and 2 TDs, brings senior experience
  • Tight end John Michael Gyllenborg: 425 yards and 3 TDs, provides reliable target

The 2025 roster reveals strategic depth additions, particularly at positions that struggled in 2024. Multiple underclassmen at quarterback, running back, and wide receiver suggest increased competition and developmental potential.

The question remains whether this depth translates to on-field improvement or merely organizational depth.

The Schedule Gauntlet: Where Championships Are Won or Lost

Wyoming’s 2025 schedule will define Sawvel’s coaching identity in the first month.

The non-conference slate begins with road trips to Akron and Colorado, sandwiched around home games against Northern Iowa and Utah. This early-season stretch will likely determine whether Sawvel gets a third year or finds himself updating his resume.

The Utah Test

The Utah home game on September 13 represents everything. The Utes’ recent success makes this a measuring-stick game that could provide early validation or expose continued deficiencies. A competitive showing against Utah suggests Sawvel’s system is taking hold. A blowout loss raises questions about year-two development that won’t go away.

Conference play offers more realistic win opportunities:

  • Home games: UNLV, San Jose State, Colorado State, Nevada
  • Challenging road trips: San Diego State, Fresno State, Hawaii

The travel demands have historically tested Wyoming’s depth and conditioning, making every road game a potential trap.

The Philosophy Under Fire

Sawvel’s coaching philosophy centers on playing “harder, faster, smarter, and longer than our opponent.”

This approach worked when applied specifically to defense. Translating it to comprehensive program leadership represents his greatest challenge. The 0.531 hot seat rating suggests external observers remain skeptical about his ability to implement system-wide change.

The promotion of Aaron Bohl to defensive coordinator represents both continuity and risk. While Bohl’s four-year tenure as linebackers coach provides institutional knowledge, his lack of coordinator experience creates another variable in an already uncertain equation.

Sawvel’s ability to delegate defensive responsibilities while focusing on offensive development will determine whether Wyoming can effectively balance both phases.

The Defensive Coordinator Syndrome

Here’s the deeper concern surrounding Sawvel’s tenure: successful coordinators often struggle with the comprehensive demands of head coaching.

The Cowboys’ offensive struggles suggest Sawvel may have over-compensated in trying to maintain defensive standards while developing offensive competence. This split focus often leads to mediocrity in both phases, exactly what Wyoming cannot afford, given its resource limitations and competitive disadvantages.

Wyoming fans have been conditioned to expect defensive competence as a baseline. The fear is that Sawvel’s attempts to modernize the offense could undermine the defensive foundation that made Wyoming competitive during the Bohl era.

This balancing act becomes even more challenging when facing the immediate pressure of hot-seat speculation after just one season.

Hot Seat Mathematics: The Year Two Reality

A 0.531 hot seat rating after one season places Sawvel in precarious territory.

While Athletic Director Tom Burman typically doesn’t place first-year coaches on hot seat status, Sawvel’s rating suggests performance expectations that transcend normal grace periods. The mathematical reality is stark: significant improvement in year two isn’t just preferred, it’s essential.

Wyoming’s recent history suggests 6-7 wins represent the minimum threshold for continued confidence. Anything less than bowl eligibility would likely push Sawvel’s rating into genuinely dangerous territory, particularly if offensive struggles persist.

However, the counter-argument remains compelling:

  • Sawvel inherited a program transitioning from a beloved, long-tenured coach
  • The 2024 season could represent growing pains rather than fundamental incompetence
  • His defensive pedigree and institutional knowledge provide advantages external hires often lack

The 2025 Projection: Breakthrough or Breakdown?

Wyoming’s season will hinge on three critical factors.

Quarterback development: Anderson’s continued growth could unlock the offensive potential glimpsed in 2024’s victories. If he stagnates or regresses, the season could unravel quickly.

Defensive leadership emergence: Young defensive players must replace graduated leadership without sacrificing competitive intensity. This transition often takes a full season to solidify.

Special teams competence: New specialists must maintain the field position advantages that kept Wyoming competitive in close games. Poor special-teams play could turn close losses into blowouts.

The schedule provides realistic opportunities for 5-7 wins, which would represent meaningful progress while potentially falling short of bowl eligibility. However, this marginal improvement might not satisfy hot-seat concerns, particularly if losses continue to come in winnable games.

Sawvel’s coaching future depends on proving that Wyoming’s defensive identity can coexist with offensive competence.

The 2024 season showed flashes of this potential, but consistency remains the ultimate challenge. Whether he can synthesize these elements into sustained success will determine not only his job security but also Wyoming’s competitive trajectory in an increasingly challenging Mountain West landscape.

For a program caught between past success and future aspirations, the stakes couldn’t be higher.

BACK TO THE BLOG ARCHIVE
No related posts found.
VISIT OUR SHOP [COMING SOON]

LOAD MORE BLOG ARTICLES

Blog Article

Nevada Football 2025 Season Preview: Jeff Choate’s Critical Second Year

Mark Haines on July 23, 2025

Jeff Choate’s honeymoon period as Nevada’s football coach is over.

After a brutal 3-10 debut season that included an embarrassing 0-7 conference record, Nevada’s second-year head coach enters 2025 with a hot seat rating of .451. This number screams one thing: urgency. With conventional wisdom granting coaches three years to show progress, 2025 becomes make-or-break time for both Choate and the Wolf Pack program.

The mathematics are simple and unforgiving. Nevada has stumbled through three consecutive 10-loss seasons, going 7-30 from 2022-24 in what represents the worst stretch in the program’s FBS history. Choate inherited a roster decimated by coaching turnover, but year two demands tangible improvement, not just moral victories and “cultural progress.”

The Painful Reality of Year One

Two stories emerged from Choate’s first season.

The encouraging narrative highlighted competitive losses to ranked opponents, SMU and Boise State, suggesting that the program had stopped the bleeding of complete blowouts that had plagued previous years. Nevada played a better brand of football but went 2-6 in one-possession games, including losses to top-10 teams.

The harsh reality revealed deeper problems:

  • Nevada’s 99 penalties tied for fifth-most nationally
  • The Wolf Pack accumulated 935 penalty yards, also fifth-most among FBS teams
  • These weren’t isolated incidents but a season-long pattern that cost Nevada winnable games against Georgia Southern, San Jose State, and Fresno State.

Even more concerning was the defensive collapse. The Wolf Pack allowed 391.5 yards per game and managed just 14 sacks—tied for the fourth fewest in the nation and the team’s least since having five in 2004.

Without a pass rush, opponents controlled games through methodical drives that Nevada’s penalty-prone defense couldn’t stop.

The Roster Revolution

Choate has essentially rebuilt Nevada from scratch.

He added 53 new players for 2025, effectively flipping roughly half the roster. This wasn’t subtle tinkering, but rather an acknowledgment that his initial roster construction had missed the mark.

“I think we made some mistakes last year because we hurried and we made it a point not to do that this year,” Choate admitted to Nevada Sports Net.

The coaching staff prioritized character and academic performance over flashy recruiting rankings:

  • They examined academic history as a predictor of work ethic
  • They evaluated family makeup and positive influences
  • They signed 30 high school players compared to just five the previous year
  • They emphasized Northern Nevada and Northern California recruits for better regional fits

This philosophical shift reflects hard-learned lessons about sustainable roster building versus quick-fix recruiting.

The Quarterback Conundrum

Brendon Lewis’s departure creates Nevada’s most pressing question mark.

Lewis accounted for 2,290 passing yards and 775 rushing yards, essentially functioning as the offense’s engine. His replacement likely comes from a group including Chubba Purdy, AJ Bianco, and newcomer Carter Jones, but none brings Lewis’s proven production.

The numbers tell a concerning story:

  • Purdy managed just 239 yards in seven games last season
  • Bianco totaled 173 yards in five appearances
  • Both showed flashes but lack the sample size to inspire confidence

The quarterback uncertainty ripples throughout an offense that already lost top receiver Jaden Smith (849 yards, 7 TDs) and leading rusher Savion Red (687 yards, 8 TDs).

Defensive Reconstruction

Nevada’s defensive makeover aims to address the unit’s glaring weaknesses.

The Wolf Pack added six transfers to the defensive backfield, addressing a secondary that consistently broke down in coverage. “That was a major priority,” Choate said of the defensive backs additions.

The coaching staff also restructured the defensive line room, combining edge rushers and interior linemen under one coordinator to improve communication and technique. This organizational change acknowledges that Nevada’s pass rush needs systematic improvement rather than personnel Band-Aids.

Special Teams Overhaul

Perhaps no area received more attention than special teams.

Nevada’s failures in crucial moments contributed to several losses throughout 2024. The Wolf Pack completely rebuilt the unit, adding multiple specialists and dedicating additional coaching resources.

This investment reflects Choate’s understanding that field position and execution in crucial moments separate winners from those who settle for moral victories.

The Schedule Reality Check

Nevada’s 2025 schedule presents both opportunities and dangers.

The season opener at Penn State represents a guaranteed loss against a College Football Playoff semifinalist. However, subsequent games offer hope:

  • Sacramento State (winnable home opener)
  • Middle Tennessee (balanced opponent at home)
  • Western Kentucky (road test but manageable)

The Mountain West slate includes crucial home games against San Diego State, Boise State, San Jose State, and UNLV. These provide chances to reverse last year’s conference shutout.

Road trips to Fresno State, New Mexico, Utah State, and Wyoming will test whether Nevada’s cultural changes translate to road toughness.

The Pressure Points

Several factors will determine whether Choate survives beyond 2025.

Conference Competitiveness: A 0-7 record in Mountain West play would likely seal Choate’s fate. The program needs at least 2-3 conference wins to demonstrate tangible progress.

Penalty Discipline: “I’ve never seen this before in my life,” Choate said about Nevada’s penalty problems during the 2024 season. If the Wolf Pack continues flagging itself out of games, it signals fundamental coaching failures.

Close Game Execution: Nevada lost multiple one-possession games through mental errors and poor situational execution. Converting just two of those losses into wins would dramatically alter perception.

Player Development: The roster overhaul only matters if newcomers improve throughout the season.

Stagnant development would indicate systemic problems beyond personnel.

What Success Looks Like

Realistic improvement for Nevada means 5-6 wins and 2-3 conference victories.

Bowl eligibility would represent a massive step forward, but even falling short while showing evident progress in penalties, defense, and close-game execution could buy Choate another year.

The hot seat rating of .451 leaves little room for moral victories. “I really feel like there’s a shift in our locker room,” Choate said, entering his second season, but shifts in locker rooms must translate to shifts in the win column.

The Deeper Reality

Choate’s situation embodies the modern paradox of college football.

Programs demand immediate results while acknowledging that sustainable success requires patience and development. Nevada’s administration and fan base understand the roster challenges Choate inherited, but hot seat ratings reflect results, not excuses.

The coach’s emphasis on character and culture suggests he’s building for long-term sustainability rather than quick fixes. However, this approach only works if accompanied by visible on-field improvement.

Too many college coaches have been fired while preaching the importance of culture and character development.

The Verdict

Jeff Choate has made logical moves to address Nevada’s 2024 weaknesses.

The roster overhaul targets specific problems, the coaching adjustments reflect honest self-assessment, and the recruiting philosophy emphasizes sustainable building rather than desperate transfers.

Whether these changes translate to wins remains uncertain:

  • Choate’s hot seat rating of .451 reflects legitimate concerns about his ability to develop competitive teams quickly enough
  • Year two will determine if he’s the right leader for Nevada’s rebuild
  • The margin for error has vanished

Choate’s process appears sound, but in college football, results matter more than methodology.

Nevada needs wins, not explanations, and 2025 will determine if Jeff Choate can deliver both.

BACK TO THE BLOG ARCHIVE
No related posts found.
VISIT OUR SHOP [COMING SOON]

LOAD MORE BLOG ARTICLES

Blog Article

Spencer Danielson’s Coaching Performance: The 2025 Test That Will Define His Boise State Football Legacy

Mark Haines on July 23, 2025

Boise State Football’s Spencer Danielson walks into 2025 with a hot seat rating of 1.073 and zero pressure to save his job.

But here’s what nobody is talking about: this season represents the most brutal coaching evaluation of his career. Danielson must replace generational talent, navigate the program’s toughest schedule in years, and prove his 15-3 record wasn’t just a result of good fortune with elite players.

The numbers from 2024 paint a picture that should terrify any coach facing similar circumstances. Ashton Jeanty rushed for 2,601 yards and 29 touchdowns while finishing as Heisman Trophy runner-up. The offense averaged 37.3 points per game, ranking fifth nationally. The defense generated 55 sacks, ranking first in the nation.

Now all of that production walks out the door.

The Coaching Metrics That Reveal Everything

Danielson’s 83.3% winning percentage trails only Chris Petersen’s legendary 88.5% mark in program history.

But the context matters more than the percentage. Petersen inherited established systems and built gradually. Danielson took over a 5-5 team mid-season and immediately produced three consecutive victories, becoming the first interim head coach in FBS history to win a conference championship game.

This accomplishment required:

  • Instant roster evaluation under maximum pressure
  • Scheme adjustment with zero preparation time
  • Leadership establishment during program crisis
  • Game planning against opponents who had months to prepare

Most coaches fail catastrophically in these circumstances. Danielson thrived.

The Offensive Coaching Evolution Nobody Saw Coming

Here’s where Danielson’s coaching performance gets interesting.

Defensive coordinators typically produce conservative offensive philosophies. They focus on ball control, field position, and avoiding mistakes. Danielson shattered this stereotype completely.

Boise State averaged 466 total yards per game in 2024 with 225.6 passing yards complementing the rushing dominance. The coaching staff built schemes around Jeanty’s unique skill set while maintaining balanced attack principles that stressed defenses horizontally and vertically.

This dual-threat capability required sophisticated play calling and personnel management that many defensive-minded coaches struggle to implement. Danielson mastered it in one season.

The 2025 Replacement Challenge That Exposes Everything

Losing Jeanty forces Danielson to completely reconstruct offensive identity around a committee approach.

The numbers are stark:

  • Jambres Dubar: 99 rushing yards in 2024
  • Dylan Riley: 135 rushing yards
  • Sire Gaines: 156 rushing yards in limited action

Combined, these three players produced fewer yards than Jeanty averaged every four games. This isn’t a depth chart adjustment. This is offensive philosophy reconstruction from the ground up.

Danielson’s coaching response centers on scheme diversification rather than finding a single replacement. Smart coaches understand that personnel limitations necessitate tactical innovation, not rigid adherence to a system.

Defensive Coaching Performance: Strengths and Glaring Weaknesses

The 2024 defense generated 111 tackles for loss, ranking third nationally.

But the pass defense allowed 241.4 yards per game, with road performance deteriorating to 276.2 yards per game. The graduation of four senior defensive backs exposes potential coaching failures in depth development or recruiting evaluation.

Danielson’s response involved adding six transfers, including:

  • Demetrius Freeney from Arizona
  • Jeremiah Earby from California
  • Four additional players bringing multiple years of experience

This transfer portal activity suggests recognition of internal development shortcomings. Good coaches adapt when internal systems fail.

The Penalty Pattern That Reveals In-Game Management Problems

Boise State averaged 46.2 penalty yards per game but spiked to 70 yards per game in their two losses.

This 51% increase in penalties during defeats suggests a coaching struggle in maintaining discipline under pressure. Elite opponents exposed composure deficiencies that better preparation should have prevented.

Successful coaches drill situational awareness until it becomes instinct. Danielson’s penalty patterns indicate this drilling was insufficient against superior competition.

Roster Management Coaching in the Transfer Portal Era

Danielson retained 13 players who were “illegally recruited” by other programs during the 2024 season.

“I know for sure of 13 that are getting illegally recruited to get in the portal and get paid all this and that,” Danielson revealed. Yet zero players transferred during the season.

This retention success required:

  • Individual counseling with players and families
  • Future planning that extended beyond single seasons
  • Authentic relationship building rather than transactional interactions
  • Counter-messaging against external recruiting pressure

Most coaches lose multiple players to this pressure. Danielson lost none.

The Schedule Management Test That Changes Everything

The road trip to Notre Dame on October 4 presents the highest-profile coaching challenge in recent program history.

Danielson must prepare his team for hostile environment, superior talent, and national television pressure while managing a roster with limited big-game experience. The Mountain West road games at Air Force, Nevada, and Utah State require constant adjustments.

Home versus road performance reveals coaching adaptation challenges. Boise State went 7-0 at home, averaging 491.4 yards and 41.7 points per game. Road statistics were significantly lower.

This 50-yard difference in offensive production indicates coaching struggles with environmental adaptation.

Special Teams Coaching: The Immediate Performance Concern

Kicker Jonah Dalmas (100% on extra points, 72.2% on field goals) and punter James Ferguson-Reynolds (43.5 yards per punt) both graduated.

Danielson’s coaching response emphasizes “coverage and return units” while new specialists develop. This suggests pragmatic acceptance that immediate replacement is unrealistic.

Special teams failures often determine the outcome of close games. Danielson’s coaching record includes no evidence of successfully developing specialists from inexperienced players.

The Faith-Based Leadership That Creates Recruiting Advantages and Limitations

“I give Jesus all the glory. I know that’s the only reason that I’m here. I’m so thankful that He put me in this seat,” Danielson stated after victories.

This authentic leadership resonates with specific recruitment demographics but may limit its appeal in an increasingly diverse roster construction. Coaching performance must strike a balance between personal authenticity and inclusive team building.

The team’s record GPA in Fall 2024 demonstrates that Danielson’s emphasis on comprehensive player development yields measurable academic results that extend beyond the football field.

Contract Extension: Institutional Confidence with Performance Pressure

The five-year deal, which runs through 2029 and averages $2.2 million annually, represents a significant investment.

“Spencer has proven to be the right leader at the right time for Boise State football and our university as a whole,” Athletic Director Jeramiah Dickey declared.

However, this confidence was earned during an exceptional season with elite talent that may not be repeatable. Contract security creates both comfort and heightened expectations for sustained performance.

The 2025 Evaluation That Determines Everything

Success in 2025 would establish Danielson among elite Group of Five coaches and validate his systematic approach to program building.

Failure would raise questions about whether his early success was due to circumstances rather than coaching excellence. The hot seat rating of 1.073 provides current security, but coaching performance is evaluated continuously.

Danielson’s coaching performance evaluation must account for the fundamental transformation of college football during his tenure. The transfer portal, NIL compensation, and conference realignment create coaching challenges that previous generations never faced.

His adaptation to these changes, while maintaining competitive performance, indicates a coaching evolution that many veteran coaches have struggled to achieve.

The 2025 season represents the definitive measurement of Danielson’s long-term coaching capabilities.

BACK TO THE BLOG ARCHIVE
No related posts found.
VISIT OUR SHOP [COMING SOON]

LOAD MORE BLOG ARTICLES

Blog Article

AirForce Falcons 2025 Season Preview: Troy Calhoun’s Excellence Amid Transformation

Mark Haines on July 22, 2025

Troy Calhoun isn’t just surviving at AirForce—he’s thriving.

With a hot seat rating of 1.124, the highest in the Mountain West Conference, Calhoun is exceeding expectations in an environment where most coaches would crumble under pressure. His 18th season at the helm represents something college football rarely sees: sustained excellence at a place where football ranks third behind academics and military preparation.

The 2024 season perfectly captured Calhoun’s coaching genius.

After a seven-game losing streak dropped Air Force to 1-7, most coaches would have faced a mutiny. Instead, Calhoun engineered one of college football’s most remarkable turnarounds, closing with four consecutive victories to finish 5-7. This wasn’t luck. This was tactical mastery and psychological warfare against despair itself.

What The Numbers Actually Reveal

The 2024 statistics expose both the challenge Calhoun faced and the precision with which he solved it.

Air Force’s passing attack was brutally inefficient:

  • 44.9% completion rate
  • 89.8 yards per game
  • Only 5 touchdown passes
  • 10 interceptions

Most coaches would panic and abandon their principles.

Calhoun doubled down on what works. The rushing attack dominated with 224 yards per game and 24 touchdowns, featuring six different players topping 100 yards. Dylan Carson led with 600 yards, Owen Allen contributed 335, proving Calhoun’s by-committee approach works at the service academy level.

Here’s where Calhoun’s genius really shows:

In Wins:

  • Outscored opponents by 6.2 points per game
  • Only 0.4 turnovers per contest
  • Disciplined, mistake-free football

In Losses:

  • Outscored by 14.6 points per game
  • 1.9 turnovers per game
  • Sloppy execution and poor preparation

The difference wasn’t talent—it was coaching.

Why The Critics Miss The Point

Anyone focusing solely on Air Force’s 5-7 record fundamentally misunderstands service academy football.

These aren’t transfer portal mercenaries chasing NIL deals. These aren’t five-star recruits dreaming of the NFL. These are future military officers navigating the nation’s most demanding academic curriculum while mastering college football’s most complex offensive system.

The fact that Calhoun has led this program to 13 bowl games represents a coaching achievement that dwarfs conference championships at traditional schools.

The late-season surge wasn’t accidental. From November forward, Air Force held opponents to 97.0 rushing yards per game—a massive improvement that reflected in-season adjustments most coaches never master. When the Falcons shut out Oregon State 28-0 and closed with authority, they revealed what happens when Calhoun’s system reaches full capacity.

The 2025 Roster Reality

Calhoun enters 2025 with a calculated approach to retention and strategic development.

Offensive Foundation:

  • Dylan Carson (Sr.), Kade Frew (Sr.), Owen Allen (Jr.) return at running back
  • Over 10 offensive linemen returning
  • Josh Johnson (Jr.) leads quarterback competition
  • Cade Harris (Sr.) and Quin Smith (Sr.) provide veteran receiving presence

Defensive Leadership:

  • Osaro Aihie (Sr.) anchors linebacker corps
  • Daniel Grobe (Sr.) and Payton Zdroik (Sr.) lead defensive line
  • Multiple departures in secondary create opportunity for emerging players

The quarterback situation presents the classic Calhoun challenge: evolution without revolution.

Johnson must develop passing consistency without abandoning the option principles that define Air Force football. This balance separates great service academy coaches from mediocre ones.

Schedule Gauntlet Ahead

Air Force’s 2025 schedule immediately separates coaching excellence from mediocrity.

Key Home Games:

  • Boise State (two-time defending MW champion)
  • Wyoming
  • Army (service academy rivalry)
  • Hawaii
  • New Mexico

Critical Road Tests:

  • Utah State (conference opener)
  • Navy (service academy rivalry)
  • Colorado State (season finale)
  • UNLV
  • San Jose State

The season opens August 30 against Bucknell, providing a crucial confidence-building opportunity.

Early tests against Utah State and Boise State will immediately reveal whether late-2024 improvements carry forward. The traditional service academy rivalries against Navy and Army remain season-defining contests that transcend conference standings.

The Passing Game Evolution

The 2025 season hinges on one critical question: Can Air Force develop enough passing threat to prevent opponents from loading the box?

This represents the eternal service academy paradox. The option offense requires precision timing and extensive practice repetition, but defensive evolution demands offensive counter-adaptation. Calhoun’s genius lies in finding the balance between foundational commitment and tactical flexibility.

With Harris and Smith returning, the foundation exists for improvement.

But the challenge remains systemic—can Air Force threaten through the air enough to keep their ground game effective?

Special Teams Wild Card

The graduation of reliable kicker Matthew Dapore creates uncertainty in a phase that often determines close games.

Four new kickers are competing for the role, and Calhoun faces the challenge of developing consistency in an area where Air Force has traditionally excelled. Special teams excellence often separates successful service academy seasons from disappointing ones.

Championship Window Analysis

ESPN projects Air Force for 6.2 wins and 94th in SP+, reflecting the challenge of replacing departed talent.

However, these projections consistently undervalue Calhoun’s ability to maximize limited resources through superior preparation and in-game adjustments. The pathway to success runs through early season stability and mid-season growth.

If Air Force navigates the opening month without significant setbacks, the late-season schedule provides opportunity for the kind of surge that characterized 2024’s conclusion.

Bowl eligibility remains the realistic goal, with conference championship aspirations dependent on breakthrough performances in marquee matchups.

Beyond The Win Column

Calhoun’s hot seat rating of 1.124 reflects more than on-field success—it represents institutional alignment.

At Air Force, winning means developing officers first and football players second:

  • 99% graduation rate among Calhoun’s players
  • Consistent Academic Progress Report excellence
  • Cultural standards that define service academy excellence

His contract extension through 2029 provides the stability that service academy programs require.

Unlike traditional college football, where coaching changes happen annually, Air Force benefits from Calhoun’s deep understanding of institutional requirements and recruiting limitations.

The 2025 Prediction

Air Force will likely finish between 6-6 and 8-4, with bowl eligibility representing success given the roster transition.

The early season determines whether the late-2024 improvements were foundational or situational. Calhoun’s track record suggests the former, but college football rarely rewards assumption over execution.

The true measure of Calhoun’s 2025 success won’t be final record but rather the trajectory established for 2026 and beyond.

If Air Force demonstrates consistent offensive balance and defensive competitiveness while maintaining the cultural standards that define service academy excellence, the season will have achieved its broader objectives.

Troy Calhoun remains the standard for service academy coaching not because of what he’s won, but because of how he’s won it.

In an era of transfer portal chaos and NIL distraction, he represents something increasingly rare: institutional commitment married to tactical excellence. The 2025 season will likely provide another chapter in that ongoing legacy, regardless of the final win total.

BACK TO THE BLOG ARCHIVE
No related posts found.
VISIT OUR SHOP [COMING SOON]

LOAD MORE BLOG ARTICLES