FIRE ARCHER. THIS BEND DON'T BREAK SHIT LET OUR RIVAL DROP 10 LARGE ON US. THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE. THERE IS NO REASON A DYNAMIC LINEBACKER SUCH AS ROBBIE LEONARD SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO HAVE AN INTERCEPTION. FIRE HIM

11/22/2008 4:25:58 PM

lols

11/22/2008 4:35:00 PM

Haha yeah and this zone defense BS doesn't produce any turnovers!

11/22/2008 9:39:05 PM

It was hot this year. THAT'S PROOF OF GLOBAL WARMING!!!!

The defense played its best game this year, but don't let your idiocy fool you into believing this guy is good. Believe it or not, a bad coach can have good games -- see Chuck Amato.

Archers scheme had nothing to do with any of the fumbles -- that was the players tackling better and demonstrating technique they hadn't all year. One pick was legitimately due to the scheme putting a player in good position, and the last two picks were in garbage time against a QB coming in cold.

We'll see if this improvement is aberrant or permanent improvement. If we can play a whole season as we did, then Archer gets his credit. One game doesn't erase his pathetic record.

11/22/2008 10:23:14 PM

Quote :

"One game doesn't erase his pathetic record."

What is his defensive record with and without Irving/Clem Johnson/Cash though???

11/22/2008 10:26:28 PM

What's chuck amato's without Rivers? The presence of good or bad players has no bearing on whether a coach is good or not.

There are two types of observers:

A. If you said that amato was a bad coach when Rivers was here, then you actually knew what you were talking about and could discern good coaching ability from extenuating circumstances.

B. You had to wait for Rivers to leave to see this guy was not good. Therefore, your opinion was no better than stating the obvious.

With Archer, you are conflating extenuating circumstances with Archer's coaching performance. We will see that archer isn't any better than he was at everywhere he was previously (which is bad).

We need our coaches and our AD to be the first type of observers (Fowler sure as hell isn't) so we don't stick with losers too long. These are the type of people that build up programs.

[Edited on November 22, 2008 at 10:37 PM. Reason : .]

11/22/2008 10:35:25 PM

I've said it all season since Irving got hurt. If he plays, our defense is ok, if Irving is not there, we suck ass. Most teams without much depth would be in the same situation if they lost their best player on one side of the ball.

I was pissed at Archer when we seemingly could not stop 3rd and forever in the games against BC, FSU, and Maryland, but ever since he called out the D before the Duke game, we have been stout. Gotta give him some credit for firing up the team.

11/22/2008 10:40:44 PM

Quote :

"We will see that archer isn't any better than he was at everywhere he was previously (which is bad)."

My 3 minutes of googling just doesn't give me this impression. He spent 7 years with the Steelers and coached a yoyo like Joey Porter, among some other good LBs there. Then he was at UK where he (per wikipedia) had a lot of injuries and talent issues (sound familiar?) and eventually helped turn them into an 8-5 squad before leaving to rejoin O'Brien. You're going to have to do a better job of making your case.

Quote :

"that was the players tackling better and demonstrating technique they hadn't all year."

So, when the D was looking a little sketchy at times in the first part of the year, it was definitely Archer and not the players, but now that the players are playing better, it's definitely the players and not Archer?

Quote :

"The defense played its best game this year, but don't let your idiocy fool you into believing this guy is good. Believe it or not, a bad coach can have good games -- see Chuck Amato."

I've seen 2 years of steady improvement out of our program, something I NEVER saw in a Chuck Amato coached team. We knew from game 1 what we had under ALL QBs with Amato.

But...the more important thing is, you have to have an extreme level of cognitive dissonance that you refuse to recognize the hodge podge collection of players that make up our secondary. Irving and I guess Morgan are the only ones that belong as a starters for a D1 school that likes to think itself a contender for their conference championship or more.

11/22/2008 10:54:11 PM

You know it, I know it, he still must be fired. That effort against UM was terrible, we almost lost that game with his stupid bend don't break theories. Did you see how they just drove down the field on us with minutes to go, down by a ton? And then...and then he had the audacity as the D Cordinator to let them get the onside kick back. WHY THIS GUY IS TERRIBLE FOR OUR PROGRAM. FIRE HIM TODAY.

12/1/2008 10:54:43 AM

archer is fine folks. nothing to see here.

12/1/2008 10:57:20 AM

Quote :

"A. If you said that amato was a bad coach when Rivers was here, then you actually knew what you were talking about and could discern good coaching ability from extenuating circumstances."

True.

Quote :

"B. You had to wait for Rivers to leave to see this guy was not good. Therefore, your opinion was no better than stating the obvious."

False. You're assuming that those falling into category B based their evaluation of Amato on NC State's losing record (i.e. the results on the field). This is true for a lot of people, but not me.

First off, you have to recognize that, in Amato's case, we had seven years of games and stats with which to evaluate his coaching ability. That allows for a much more in-depth, comprehensive evaluation. In seven years I saw a steady decline in discipline and good fundamentals. Those things were easy to overlook while we were winning with Rivers 'n company.

If you saw through those problems, then good for you. Start sending out your resume' to football programs around the country and put those keen observations skills to good use.

In Archer's case, we have only two years worth of games and stats with which to evaluate his coaching ability. Now consider that this is a team sport which allows schools 85 scholarship players. Is it possible to draw conclusions on Archer's coaching ability at this point? Yes, but I wouldn't put much weight on them. Keep in mind that every upperclassmen on the field was recruited BEFORE Archer ever set foot on campus.

The defense has indeed struggled, but a lot of that can be attributed to the transition between coaching staffs and injuries to an already thin roster. Archer, like the rest of the staff, has dealt with some tough situations so far at State. I don't think it's too much to ask to see how he and the team perform next year and the next before drawing any conclusions.

In other words, show some fucking patience

12/1/2008 1:19:49 PM

^ Point

12/1/2008 1:50:08 PM