Neuheisel On: The Chemistry Equation
Rick Neuheisel had an interesting bit on chemistry, or lack thereof, last season in the coaching staff, and I pulled him aside to talk about the issue more after media day:
Explain the chemistry situation a little more...
Rick Neuheisel: "Leadership on a football field; there's a voice on a practice field. There's an offensive voice and a defensive voice, and it's important to me that those voices are eager, energetic and are hugely postiive. I'm not saying anybody wasn't. I'm just saying it didn't feel like I felt like it needed to feel."
Football is a lot about feel and intangibles, so when did it start not feeling right? What finally made you make the decisions?
RN: "It's easy to talk about it after the fact. Ultimately the decisions that were made here with regards to the staff here are mine. I wish everybody here that was here a year ago the absolute best. I think they're all wonderful guys. I think they're all very good football coaches. I just felt we needed to reorganize the chemistry."
Sometimes people think chemistry is two guys grabbing a lunch before practice and laughing it up, but isn't it more about that unified voice? You mentioned that pessimism seemed to seep in...
"Therein lies the magic of it - it's important for me to impart my belief and my optimism into the coaching staff, and that's an easier thing to do if they're already bent that way. I just want these players to realize were as eager as they are. We have young coaches, we have older coaches - it doesn't matter - you're in this business because you wanted to stay a kid. You love the game, everything about it, and there's a freshness to it. As long as the personality stays fresh, the players will respond, whether you're young or old."
When were you able to tell this staff had it?
"It's too early. It's too early to have this conversation. We'll see. I know our guys are eager for this season. They want what was a bad taste of 2010 out of their bouth. Only way to do that is to get a new flavor."
Was last season an aberration? Was it a 4-8 team?
"It was an absolute aberration. There were a number of things that went south on us. No. 1 was injuries, No. 2 a very difficult schedule, No. 3 lack of consistency at quarterback, No. 4 we tried a new offense at a time our defensive front wasn't able to control the line of scrimmage. We just didn't play well enough. There's reason to believe we can have a real successful turnaround."
"But we were a 4-8 team. That's the reality of it. Ultimately, it's up to us to do better than that. To prove we can player better than that. To play smarter than that. To be mentally tougher than that."
Nice interview here, Jon.
It answered topics I wondered about even early on last season. Things never looked on the same page, never had top-to-bottome flow -- aside from a few quarters against what turned out to be a 5-7 Texas team, anyways. Then it just got nasty ugly.
I too, agree, the hot seat here is very hot.
But it is refreshing to see CRN laying it out very straight: These are his calls, this is his team, and the responsibility for all of this to come, good or bad, falls on him.
I, for one, would love to see it fall in place a bit, sort of what looked like might happen after the 7-6 (2009) season.
There ain't no hot seat....the media is saying it. He could only win 3 three games, and not get th boot.
Wow. Really?
I'm not saying I agree with it, but CRN would be gone by Week 9 if he only has 3 wins. That is life on this stage in this day and age.
Even CRN would tell you that he is done if he follows up a 4-8 with a 3-9.
Obviously, you confused this with the Wazzu site.
.500 football made here...school accepts it, so where is pressure to win?
you'll see pressure when 3 wins linger vs. mounting losses.