View attachment 22685
So let me get this straight.... He was playing Fullbacks as nose tackles and nose tackles as fullbacks? (The kid who fumbled the ball on their first possession was reportedly a Nose tackle by trade.) That is some strategic brilliance, let me tell you!!
Actually, IIRC, he was originally a FB who moved to the DL because their depth is so perilously thin. They moved him back to FB and gave him carries because their RB depth is so perilously thin and they had been relying on a true freshman RB who had already been injured all spring.
"You are what your record says you are." I think that may be a quote from some where? Harbaugh is a good coach. Or was a good coach. Maybe his staff is just not very good after the loss of Washington and Mattison? Their "problems" are systemic right now.
And Oct 5 Iowa comes to town and will give them fits if not beat them.
And they have a" White Out" game at Ped State in their schedule.
Right now TSUN's schedule looks very challenging for them.
Here's a dirty little secret about Jim Harbaugh... he's never been a "great" coach. What he has been good at is orchestrating a quick turnaround. His manic energy has been great for taking talented, but underachieving rosters and whipping them into shape in the short term. It's the sustainment part that eludes him, because he's an intolerable asshole whose act wears thin pretty quickly.
He gets a lot of mileage out of his 4 years at Stanford where, to his credit, he took a dormant program and made them relevant. Couple things there, be did it on the back of a generational talent at qb, who, again, he deserves credit for landing, but he ain't getting that guy now. With each year, that looks more and more like an anomaly.
In SF, he inherited a very talented roster than had underachieved for years. He got them going quickly, but by year three, cracks were appearing and in year four it imploded.
At scUM, he again inherited a pretty talented roster and got them to 10 wins in each of his first two years. By year three, cracks were appearing. In year four, after a good start, they imploded and in year five, things are looking bad.
Simply put, he's very good early on because he can whip people into shape in short order, but after that, he loses his mojo because he's a goofy bastard. Very good at the turnaround, lousy at sustainment.