UMassHoops.com

Why did it take 11 years to get to 85? Isn't this abnormal even with the Covid fiasco?

Their is a 25 player limit, however with different coaches, there had been lots of transfer out and Whipple did not recruit his final year. Molnar chased away a lot of players. Don't think we even got 25 players in the early years. The big changes are the transfer rules and being able to replace players in addition to the 25 limit and of course Don Brown and company.

Steve81 wrote: Sat Aug 12, 2023 10:04 am Eldonabe, What do you say about a basketball team that finished with a net rating outside 200, 203# for a team in the A10 conference and bottom dweller. The conference does not make the team. Cal had a formula to play anyone, any where. You can succeed in any conference.

Sorry Steve I am not understanding your question or how that correlates to the football rating?


I agree you can succeed in any conference, that said the A-10 was pretty damn good for those few years - as I recall we were getting 4-6 teams into the tourney every year for a stretch. Right now though being the best team in a shitty conference (like the A-10) is just that - the best team in a shitty conference. And it is getting harder and harder to play anyone any time when "anyone" has little to gain with a win against you and everything to lose with a loss against you.

UMass net rating on hoops at 203 really sucks when you consider how weak their schedule is to go with that rating....

Same goes for Football - is their #55 passing defense respectable??? In full context no, not really.

^^^^
Total defense was 55th, not the passing defense. Whether it was skewed or not (as many have mentioned previously in this thread) by UMass being behind all of the time in every game and that correlating to the other team rushing it more than normal doesn't really matter to me. The rankings are the rankings and I would argue the opposite that having a total defensive ranking that high with such an abysmal offense was a great feat for Don Brown & Co. in 2022. If we can get to a top 30-40 total defense with a respectable offense then we may be cooking with some gas this season baby!

TheInsider wrote: Sat Aug 12, 2023 12:04 pm The D numbers were really the function of or lack there of the offense. Teams knew if they got up say 17-7 they would just have to pound the rock and run the time out against a D that spends all its time on the field. So that meant the passing yards were down and the rush was up. Our offense never put any pressure on the other team. There were many games where the D really showed early and it would end up being a close first half..Then they wore down and games got out of hand.

exactly!!!! they just ran the ball on us so obviously the passing D stat is going to be good. Statistically:

2 2022 Ind 1 11 0 .083 -19.26 -4.34 Don Brown (1-11)
3 2021 Ind 1 11 0 .083 -21.27 -4.02 Walt Bell (1-8), Alex Miller (0-3)
4 2020 Ind 0 4 0 .000 -24.68 -1.18 Walt Bell (0-4)
5 2019 Ind 1 11 0 .083 -29.95 -8.87 Walt Bell (1-11)

you can see that Gomer was absolutely CLUELESS

You can see that the last 4 years have been a horror show. But I'll give DB a ton of credit.
1 Sep 3, 2022 7:00 PM Sat Massachusetts @ Tulane American L 10 42
2 Sep 10, 2022 7:00 PM Sat Massachusetts @ Toledo MAC L 10 55
3 Sep 17, 2022 3:30 PM Sat Massachusetts Stony Brook W 20 3
4 Sep 24, 2022 2:00 PM Sat Massachusetts @ Temple American L 0 28
5 Oct 1, 2022 2:00 PM Sat Massachusetts @ Eastern MichiganMAC L 13 20
6 Oct 8, 2022 3:30 PM Sat Massachusetts Liberty Ind L 24 42
7 Oct 15, 2022 1:00 PM Sat Massachusetts Buffalo MAC L 7 34
8 Oct 29, 2022 3:30 PM Sat Massachusetts New Mexico State L 13 23
9 Nov 4, 2022 7:00 PM Fri Massachusetts @ Connecticut Ind L 10 27
10 Nov 12, 2022 3:00 PM Sat Massachusetts @ Arkansas State Sun Belt L 33 35
11 Nov 19, 2022 1:00 PM Sat Massachusetts @ Texas A&M SEC L 3 20
12 Nov 26, 2022 12:00 PM Sat Massachusetts Army Ind L 7 44
army & tulane & toledo & temple were blowouts. Tulane had their best season probably in the history of their program. just our luck Plus we suck on the road but we had some close losses: E. Mich & Ark State

UMass has had seasons prior to this one where they were fully scholarshipped. I'm not sure where the notion that this is the first time in 11 years that they have had 85 came from but that is not correct.

Sometimes they may have lost someone mid-season or right before the start, but they have had 85 scholarships available since Whipple was here. There were times, namely with Bell, that they were below that because of turnover but they have had the max more than once.

Also there is no longer a hard cap of 25 new counters per cycle. You can replace 1-for-1 anyone who leaves via the Portal.

rsox1221 wrote: Mon Aug 14, 2023 3:50 pm UMass has had seasons prior to this one where they were fully scholarshipped. I'm not sure where the notion that this is the first time in 11 years that they have had 85 came from but that is not correct.

Sometimes they may have lost someone mid-season or right before the start, but they have had 85 scholarships available since Whipple was here. There were times, namely with Bell, that they were below that because of turnover but they have had the max more than once.

Also there is no longer a hard cap of 25 new counters per cycle. You can replace 1-for-1 anyone who leaves via the Portal.

Are you sure? Whipple never had a full compliment of players and I don’t think Bell did either. Molnar definitely did not.

minutefanjsf wrote: Mon Aug 14, 2023 6:16 pm

rsox1221 wrote: Mon Aug 14, 2023 3:50 pm UMass has had seasons prior to this one where they were fully scholarshipped. I'm not sure where the notion that this is the first time in 11 years that they have had 85 came from but that is not correct.

Sometimes they may have lost someone mid-season or right before the start, but they have had 85 scholarships available since Whipple was here. There were times, namely with Bell, that they were below that because of turnover but they have had the max more than once.

Also there is no longer a hard cap of 25 new counters per cycle. You can replace 1-for-1 anyone who leaves via the Portal.

Are you sure? Whipple never had a full compliment of players and I don’t think Bell did either. Molnar definitely did not.

know for a fact Bell did not have 85 schollys.....there were times we had barely enough for 2 lines. Molnar definitely did not. Plus he chased away all the 1AA guys......."big boy football"

telling you guys now: we compete this year. I just don't like the Auburn game as #2 but unless key guys get hurt in that game we will get at least 2 wins.

minutefanjsf wrote: Mon Aug 14, 2023 6:16 pm

rsox1221 wrote: Mon Aug 14, 2023 3:50 pm UMass has had seasons prior to this one where they were fully scholarshipped. I'm not sure where the notion that this is the first time in 11 years that they have had 85 came from but that is not correct.

Sometimes they may have lost someone mid-season or right before the start, but they have had 85 scholarships available since Whipple was here. There were times, namely with Bell, that they were below that because of turnover but they have had the max more than once.

Also there is no longer a hard cap of 25 new counters per cycle. You can replace 1-for-1 anyone who leaves via the Portal.

Are you sure? Whipple never had a full compliment of players and I don’t think Bell did either. Molnar definitely did not.

I'm sure. Not having a full compliment of players by choice or from extenuating circumstances is not the same as not having 85 scholarships

Molnar did not due to the transition but also the running off of players. Whipple I believe did utilize all his spots for at least one of the seasons he was back however he had 85 spots available for multiple seasons. Bell didn't at the beginning because the counter cap was still in place. He then had to deal with COVID but by the end I believe he did get to 85 he just didn't know what he was doing with them. Brown was actually fortunate to take over as HC with the Portal in full effect because he's never had to worry about a counter cap.

UMass has had their issues in FBS for a myriad of reasons but they have had the ability to offer 85 spots for a long time and they have done it more than once before this season

rsox1221 wrote: Mon Aug 14, 2023 7:46 pm

minutefanjsf wrote: Mon Aug 14, 2023 6:16 pm

rsox1221 wrote: Mon Aug 14, 2023 3:50 pm UMass has had seasons prior to this one where they were fully scholarshipped. I'm not sure where the notion that this is the first time in 11 years that they have had 85 came from but that is not correct.

Sometimes they may have lost someone mid-season or right before the start, but they have had 85 scholarships available since Whipple was here. There were times, namely with Bell, that they were below that because of turnover but they have had the max more than once.

Also there is no longer a hard cap of 25 new counters per cycle. You can replace 1-for-1 anyone who leaves via the Portal.

Are you sure? Whipple never had a full compliment of players and I don’t think Bell did either. Molnar definitely did not.

I'm sure. Not having a full compliment of players by choice or from extenuating circumstances is not the same as not having 85 scholarships

Molnar did not due to the transition but also the running off of players. Whipple I believe did utilize all his spots for at least one of the seasons he was back however he had 85 spots available for multiple seasons. Bell didn't at the beginning because the counter cap was still in place. He then had to deal with COVID but by the end I believe he did get to 85 he just didn't know what he was doing with them. Brown was actually fortunate to take over as HC with the Portal in full effect because he's never had to worry about a counter cap.

UMass has had their issues in FBS for a myriad of reasons but they have had the ability to offer 85 spots for a long time and they have done it more than once before this season

confused here: not having a full FBS roster is not the same as not having 85 schollys?? 85 players on scholly and then walk ons......could have 100 players?!?

UMass has been able to offer 85 scholarships for football for many years. They have done so on more than one occasion before this season. There have been several years where they were not at 85 because of things like the previous 25 counter cap or the coach (namely Bell) being ill-prepared for the job

The standard roster max for an FBS program is 110 players

rsox1221 wrote: Mon Aug 14, 2023 7:46 pm

minutefanjsf wrote: Mon Aug 14, 2023 6:16 pm

rsox1221 wrote: Mon Aug 14, 2023 3:50 pm UMass has had seasons prior to this one where they were fully scholarshipped. I'm not sure where the notion that this is the first time in 11 years that they have had 85 came from but that is not correct.

Sometimes they may have lost someone mid-season or right before the start, but they have had 85 scholarships available since Whipple was here. There were times, namely with Bell, that they were below that because of turnover but they have had the max more than once.

Also there is no longer a hard cap of 25 new counters per cycle. You can replace 1-for-1 anyone who leaves via the Portal.

Are you sure? Whipple never had a full compliment of players and I don’t think Bell did either. Molnar definitely did not.

I'm sure. Not having a full compliment of players by choice or from extenuating circumstances is not the same as not having 85 scholarships

Molnar did not due to the transition but also the running off of players. Whipple I believe did utilize all his spots for at least one of the seasons he was back however he had 85 spots available for multiple seasons. Bell didn't at the beginning because the counter cap was still in place. He then had to deal with COVID but by the end I believe he did get to 85 he just didn't know what he was doing with them. Brown was actually fortunate to take over as HC with the Portal in full effect because he's never had to worry about a counter cap.

UMass has had their issues in FBS for a myriad of reasons but they have had the ability to offer 85 spots for a long time and they have done it more than once before this season

also, UMass has had their "issues"......like totally sucking except for 2017 & 2018!!!! That's an easy one: 1) leaving the MAC was a HUGE mistake 2) hiring idiots for coaches like Molnar & Bell. Molnar was a bad hired by an AD who could fuckin' care less. Bell was an absolute horrendous hire. Bam fucked that one up.

rsox1221 wrote: Mon Aug 14, 2023 7:57 pm UMass has been able to offer 85 scholarships for football for many years. They have done so on more than one occasion before this season. There have been several years where they were not at 85 because of things like the previous 25 counter cap or the coach (namely Bell) being ill-prepared for the job

The standard roster max for an FBS program is 110 players

OK 25 x 4 plus random walk ons = 110

Still no QB1. This is a problem.