Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

The Campen hire helped get Bozeman


Mr. Scot
 Share

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Where the hell did you get the idea that people want to get rid of Campen?

The vast majority of this board is praying we keep him.

Indeed, him and Tabor. I wouldnt mind having Wilks back as one of the DB coaches either. 

I suspected Campen played a role in the Bozeman signing, same goes for Corbett. 

  • Pie 3
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In all honesty, I wouldn't mind keeping WIlks as HC and he can hire a great offensive mind to run the offense and develop a rookie QB. Campen is a great O line coach. Tabor is one of the best special teams coaches. I don't think we have to tear this down to the studs to be successful, jmho.

  • Pie 2
  • Beer 2
  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mr. Scot said:

Can't say Matt Rhule never gave us anything, right? 😕

Even a blind squirrel finds a nut every once in a while. On balance Rhule's coaching hires look less than brilliant. But yes, Campen for sure looks like a keeper. He seems to be fixing our Oline, count me among the faithful if that continues to be the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

Can't say Matt Rhule never gave us anything, right? 😕

Judging by who started the season at center I'm not sure Rhule should get credit for that gift.

I'm getting the sense there were differences of opinions on quite a few decisions Rhule made.  I guess we will see now that Fitterer has control and Wilks can make roster decisions. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Teams do some super stupid stuff with mid-fairly good QBs. I think they are just absolutely terrified they will be stuck with a QB that is not the quality of the QB they have now, even if its someone like Daniel Jones. Lots of trash QBs go in the first round. I encourage you to take a look at the sad, sad list of first round QBs in the last 15 years.  
    • No, it will be a raw 6'7" 17-year-old European who just played basketball for the first time in March and who the idiot GM "had first on our board." He'll play the whole G-League season, get in 42 games for the Hornets and average 1.1 ppg on 35% shooting. Been there, seen that.
    • We missed on Burns at his peak value. That’s the problem with trading for picks 2-3 years away (which people were convinced the Rams would suck by now and these would be higher picks btw). Each year away the pick is the further in value it drops. Fitt was clearly hired based on turning us around quickly. It’s one of the many reasons tanking isn’t really a thing as our player JJ is telling you in this original article. It would take the whole organization from the owners down admitting they aren’t winning soon with Burns and picks 2-3 years away having more value because that’s when we are still rebuilding. It would only make sense if Fitt had a longer leash and would more than likely be the ones making these picks anyway which you wouldn’t want. The question is would you rather have those Rams picks with the strong possibility of Fitt still being here or would you rather Fitt try to “win now” like he did and expedite his firing? Altering the timeline would affect more than just the Rams picks. 
×
×
  • Create New...