Report: Bill Stewart to retire as West Virginia coach

Submitted by aaamichfan on

http://www.sbnation.com/ncaa-football/2010/11/27/1839637/bill-stewart-retire-resign-west-virginia-coach

Although the given list of potential replacements is small, Casteel doesn't appear to be a target for the position.

Could this be what RR has been waiting for?

 

Edit: I'm not sure how credible SB Nation is. If this is completely unfounded, please excuse my ignorance.

griesecheeks

November 28th, 2010 at 1:49 AM ^

You can say what you want about Casteel's track-record of good defenses. I'm currently hating the idea of Michigan continuing to try the 3-3-5. give me 4 down linemen, PLEASE.

 

Have to defer to a fucking buckeye... read Chengelis' recap of Spielman's quotes about the defense.

 

Yes, if they are going to continue with the stack, by all means, get Casteel, but I'd just as soon like to see someone else bring a more traditional D to michigan. 

Plegerize

November 28th, 2010 at 2:02 AM ^

I think it's been discussed somewhat ad nauseam but scheme is really not the big issue here, it's the execution of the scheme that is important.

Our biggest problem right now is having a coach that has no idea what he's running and how to execute it. Getting a guy like Casteel in here, the mastermind behind this scheme much like Rodriguez is the mastermind behind the spread, would do wonders for the defense learning how to execute properly.

Sorry, but it just bothers me to no end when people try to purport that a specific scheme, offense or defense, won't work in the game of football. Obviously these people have never played or have no idea about the fundamentals of this sport.

jmblue

November 28th, 2010 at 2:21 AM ^

I'd say both execution and scheme are issues.  Yes, it hurts that neither RR nor GERG seems to understand how to run the 3-3-5 like Casteel does, but still, there are questions about whether it makes sense to run that defense against huge teams like Wisconsin.  It's a defense designed more to stop the spread.  It's possible that Casteel is fool's gold and is benefitting from going up against crappy Big East competition. (Though that is still better than GERG, whose defenses stunk against that same crappy competition.)

griesecheeks

November 30th, 2010 at 11:20 PM ^

you totally missed the part where I said... read what Spielman said about the stack. he makes a very good technical argument against it, by pointing out that with three down linemen, it's infinitely easier to get your linemen to the second level, which is how teams like MSU and Wisconsin thrive on their running game. Spielman, despite being a buckeye, is a defensive-minded guy who knows what the fuck he's talking about. 

 

I'm getting really tired of the "scheme doesn't matter" meme. yes, everyone knows execution is the key, but there's this little thing called strategy that also counts for a lot in football. if running the stack makes it easier for the opponent to hit the second level of defenders, thereby playing into the offense's strength, it's like a constant RPS (-).

 

Like I said, by all means bring in Casteel if you're set on the stack... I'm sure he could get more out of the players running the scheme, but I think, in general, I'd much rather see someone come in and throw more meat into the line of scrimmage battle.

rtyler

December 1st, 2010 at 4:04 AM ^

I get what you and Speilman are saying, but it seems like too simple an argument to have passed by the coaches.  Everbody knows football is a numbers game and having more guys on the line would be better in the LOS battle.  But that means one less guy in the secondary, or one less linebacker.  Considering where our strength and experience is, we might be better off sacrificing a bit in the LOS battle in order to have one more guy trying to prevent long passing attacks.  Then again, I'm no defensive coach.

DamnYankee

November 28th, 2010 at 7:54 AM ^

weekend.  This gentleman went to WVU and still knows people in the WVU athletic dept.  He had some very interesting things to say about RR & Casteel.  In summation:

  • RR is an awesome coach and thinks he will eventually do well here.
  • Casteel is waiting and working toward a HC job. 
  • Finally, he also said there is a reason Casteel has turned hown our DC job twice - he and RR didn't always get along at WVU.

I know it is hearsay, but I thought his comments were interesting nonetheless.  The guy seemed credible and knowledgeable and had no malice toward RR.   In fact, he said he wished RR never would have left, but the prior AD was a buffoon. 

bryemye

November 28th, 2010 at 2:05 AM ^

First off, good on Stewart for retiring if he is. He seems like a great guy who got in over his head a bit as a head coach.

If we bring in Casteel to run the stack (somehow), that would be good. I have to imagine he and RR would have to patch up their relationship but yeah.

I'm too drunk to formulate an adequate response to that scenario. Maybe it's time for bed.

Section 1

November 28th, 2010 at 2:16 AM ^

there is anything to "patch up" between Casteel and RR?

The Mountaineer Message Boards* are hilarious.  Talking about how their program has gone downhill under Bill Stewart, even as they praise him as a "true West Virginia man."

The Good Old Days = Rich Rodriguez.

Many are terrified of losing Casteel.  Many think Casteel will be offered a HC job.

 

*[Best blog name ever:  We Must Ignite This Couch.]

big john lives on 67

November 28th, 2010 at 2:19 AM ^

I was one of those dreading the potential hire of Casteel when RR was originally hired because I wanted some super-aggressive 4-3 scheme brought in by the next wonder boy D-coordinator.

After what I have seen for the last three years, I'll take Casteel now a thousand times over.  If he can get this D to boring and mediocre, it will be a crowning achievement and we might have a shot at 10 wins next year.

LB

November 28th, 2010 at 4:03 AM ^

about this whole Michigan Man thing, and they were seriously giving it some thought. Then they looked up Yost and Schembechler and saw where they were from. Their heads exploded, and they are in a bit of quandry now. When in trouble, when in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

MGlobules

November 28th, 2010 at 7:01 AM ^

then Rich would have had the chance to do it on his terms. But we don't know what he or Brandon are thinking about the D. He might now be convinced he needs a different approach on D. It's fairly clear, however, that if you have the RIGHT 3 down linemen you can do well with the 3-4-5. Hell, WE were doing okay with it through several good stretches yesterday.

bighouseinmate

November 28th, 2010 at 10:23 AM ^

.......yesterday and I saw numerous defenses employing a 3-4, some of them that are considered very good defenses. I have said before on here that having just 3 DL can work well, if they are the right type of player. I think I actually prefer the 3-4 over the 4-3 due to the ability to deal with athletic, spread type offenses more consistently than a defense employing the 4-3. The difference between the 3-3-5 and the 3-4, personnel-wise, is that the 3-3-5 has a guy more sized for safety than at LB.

neoavatara

November 28th, 2010 at 10:01 AM ^

...I think we give RRod the benefit of the doubt.  Casteel has been successful.  Now, why he is not the main candidate for the WVU job is beyond me.  That said, he has a solid track record, is RRod real choice, and fits our system.  

We will simply have to see how things play out.