Can you win at SMSU???

[SW_Mustang]

I'd even be fine if we could find a way to bring the program to a 5-6 to 7-4 program with some level of consistency, and we need to clear the MSU hurdle. No shame in shooting for a MWB appearance when you're historically below it.

If we can do that, then I'll think about what I want next.

[Otis Day]

USF started playing football in the late 1800s. IIRC, until their current winning season streak started in 1994, the football team had only three winning seasons total prior to that. They were notoriously bad at football.

I agree, it can happen.

Tundra - I decided to check your work. Not that I didn't believe you, but even though I've heard stories of how bad SuFuCo football was in the past, that stat really grabbed my attention. Here's what I found perusing an old media guide...

• Prior to the streak, USF had only 16 winning seasons total and 7 additional seasons of .500 football. So not quite 3 seasons, but still not good. At all. And 6 of those 16 can be attributed to the man below, the savior of USF football, Bob Young. A few those are 2 and 3 win seasons in the 1910s so take that with what you will.
• The 40s and 50s were particularly dreadful. Following a .500 season in 1937, USF did get back to successful football until 1960. 23 years. That USF team was led by non other than a young Bob Young.
• No coach prior to our version of Bill Synder/Mel Tjeerdsma in the GOAT himself Bob Young, had a winning record. Coach Young started in 1983 and only had 3 losing seasons, 1986, 1987, and 1993 in 22 years at the helm.

So can it be done at SMSU? Sure. In theory, I suppose anything is possible. But it'll take the right coach, and administrative support to truly make it happen. The real question has come up as of late, what do SMSU fans expect from their football program? What should they expect? I cannot answer that completely but do you just want winning seasons and the ability to compete against the likes of Kato, USF, Augie, and WSU in the South? Or do you realistically see the POs as a possibility?

I only ask this because as a former USF player, I have completely different expectations for that football program than I do now for my D1 team in Vanderbilt. My time here at Vandy has certainly realigned my expectations as to what I expect as a fan of a perennial cellar dweller. Heck I even wrestle with expectations for a D1 program vs D2. What's realistic? What's 'fair'? That will obviously vary from fan to fan, alum to alum, and administration to administration. I do this with USF basketball as well; always good enough to compete but still not really over the hump as a regional contender.

Seeing openings at WSU and SMSU and going through a new coaching change at Vandy just has me thinking philosophically as a fan lately. Not to say, Vandy, SMSU, or whoever should accept mediocrity or losses, but wondering, what's realistic given the conditions? And/or, how can that reality be changed? As a SW MN native, I want to see SMSU do well, not against my Cougars, but well nonetheless. Hope you can find a good one and right the ship. Sorry for the novel. Guess I should get back to work.

[Tundra_Man]

Tundra - I decided to check your work. Not that I didn't believe you, but even though I've heard stories of how bad SuFuCo football was in the past, that stat really grabbed my attention. Here's what I found perusing an old media guide...

• Prior to the streak, USF had only 16 winning seasons total and 7 additional seasons of .500 football. So not quite 3 seasons, but still not good. At all. And 6 of those 16 can be attributed to the man below, the savior of USF football, Bob Young. A few those are 2 and 3 win seasons in the 1910s so take that with what you will.
• The 40s and 50s were particularly dreadful. Following a .500 season in 1937, USF did get back to successful football until 1960. 23 years. That USF team was led by non other than a young Bob Young.
• No coach prior to our version of Bill Synder/Mel Tjeerdsma in the GOAT himself Bob Young, had a winning record. Coach Young started in 1983 and only had 3 losing seasons, 1986, 1987, and 1993 in 22 years at the helm.

...

Cool! I actually wanted to double check my memory against reality before I posted, but was unable to find the stats listed anywhere. Is the media guide you looked at posted online somewhere?

But yeah, even though I was wrong, 16 winning seasons across more than 100 years of football is still comically bad.

[Otis Day]

Cool! I actually wanted to double check my memory against reality before I posted, but was unable to find the stats listed anywhere. Is the media guide you looked at posted online somewhere?

But yeah, even though I was wrong, 16 winning seasons across more than 100 years of football is still comically bad.

They used to have the media guides posted on the athletics website. I was unable to find them there but some Googling got me 2019's:

https://usfcougars.com/documents/201..._2019final.pdf

It was a fun distraction from work. Maybe in my nonexistent future free time, I should research and upload USF's football history to a webpage. Would be a fun project. Maybe I should've done my PhD on that instead.

[Tundra_Man]

They used to have the media guides posted on the athletics website. I was unable to find them there but some Googling got me 2019's:

https://usfcougars.com/documents/201..._2019final.pdf

It was a fun distraction from work. Maybe in my nonexistent future free time, I should research and upload USF's football history to a webpage. Would be a fun project. Maybe I should've done my PhD on that instead.

Interesting. The media guide says their first football game was in 1902. My statement that USF started football in the late 1800's was based on this page (https://www.usiouxfalls.edu/about-usf/our-history ) which has this notable event:

1890: Student newspaper, The Stylus, reports, "The football team will be ready to begin work as soon as they get a ball."

[FB Player Coach & Fan]

True, but it can be done. It won't be easy. It probably will never be to Mankato or Duluth levels. But it can happen.

I think most would agree that rebuilding or creating a respectable and relatively successful football program is possible. But, as some have hinted at there are some major hurdles to be addressed by the New Head Coach. There are a few hurdles that make the job less attractive then most might expect: Existing football staff contracts extend multiple years; which means new coach won't be able to bring his own or his selected staff with him (Unless current coaches leave for other opportunities). That is a negative for a HC that might want to apply for the job and start fresh with "his own guys" (coaches). Some might view this as a positive for a new coach since there is some stability in the football office and with existing relationships with players.
Secondly, the relative low number of scholarships would be viewed as making the job much more challenging. My thinking is that with the situation with the staff; the school administration might have to up the scholarships by a couple/few to make the job a little more attractive or provide some sort of flexibility to get out of keeping some or none of the paid staff. I think that might make the job more attractive to potential candidates and if you get the right HC--winning becomes a little easier or attainable.

[Cavalier 1]

I think most would agree that rebuilding or creating a respectable and relatively successful football program is possible. But, as some have hinted at there are some major hurdles to be addressed by the New Head Coach. There are a few hurdles that make the job less attractive then most might expect: Existing football staff contracts extend multiple years; which means new coach won't be able to bring his own or his selected staff with him (Unless current coaches leave for other opportunities). That is a negative for a HC that might want to apply for the job and start fresh with "his own guys" (coaches). Some might view this as a positive for a new coach since there is some stability in the football office and with existing relationships with players.
Secondly, the relative low number of scholarships would be viewed as making the job much more challenging. My thinking is that with the situation with the staff; the school administration might have to up the scholarships by a couple/few to make the job a little more attractive or provide some sort of flexibility to get out of keeping some or none of the paid staff. I think that might make the job more attractive to potential candidates and if you get the right HC--winning becomes a little easier or attainable.

How many scholarships does SWM have???? How low are they????

[vikingfaithful]

How many scholarships does SWM have???? How low are they????

Once again instead of question marks, find the time to look at posts on page 1 for your answers. You started this thread.

[Cavalier 1]

Once again instead of question marks, find the time to look at posts on page 1 for your answers. You started this thread.

Apparently, 24-26 but nobody knows for sure. I was looking for the "for sure" answer. Just trying to find out where they rank compared to others. Other conference threads actually have the equivalencies in a conference. It would be better for SWM with a remote location to have more rather than less. It will be interesting to see who they hire.

[SW_Mustang]

Apparently, 24-26 but nobody knows for sure. I was looking for the "for sure" answer. Just trying to find out where they rank compared to others. Other conference threads actually have the equivalencies in a conference. It would be better for SWM with a remote location to have more rather than less. It will be interesting to see who they hire.

I'm not sure if that info is made public. I certainly have never heard the actual number, though I'm kinda a one-man-band in my fandom, besides this board.

[SW_Mustang]

Existing football staff contracts extend multiple years; which means new coach won't be able to bring his own or his selected staff with him (Unless current coaches leave for other opportunities). That is a negative for a HC that might want to apply for the job and start fresh with "his own guys" (coaches). Some might view this as a positive for a new coach since there is some stability in the football office and with existing relationships with players.

We didn't in 2021, but the past few years we've had tremendous turnover in our coaches from what I recall. If that's a problem for a new HC, if he waits a year maybe it solves itself.

Not sure what the solution is on scholarships. In a perfect world, it would be nice if the school would up their commitment - but I know their efforts have to be focused elsewhere in the short term. Would be neat if we could fundraise like Northern could.

[Stanger86]

We didn't in 2021, but the past few years we've had tremendous turnover in our coaches from what I recall. If that's a problem for a new HC, if he waits a year maybe it solves itself.

Not sure what the solution is on scholarships. In a perfect world, it would be nice if the school would up their commitment - but I know their efforts have to be focused elsewhere in the short term. Would be neat if we could fundraise like Northern could.

GAs will always turn over, but yes, the full-time slots had too much turnover over the past 5 seasons or so.

[SW_Mustang]

GAs will always turn over, but yes, the full-time slots had too much turnover over the past 5 seasons or so.

Yeah - and I think that's fine. I was actually excited to see Bouman land at USD and I wish him the best of luck on his path. Wouldn't mind seeing him circle back around after he gains some experience too, that would be cool.

Thing is, we've hired some good coaches in the past - then they get offers they can't refuse to move up the ladder elsewhere. Really can't fault them for it, but it still stings.

[Clean Liver]

If I were a coach, I wouldn't consider a new job if I was forced to keep assistants from the previous staff. Obviously I'd want a true number on the scholarships available and how they compare to the rest of the conference, an in-depth look at how the administration, faculty, students, town and surroundin' area supports the team (are HS players and coaches given FREE passes to games), $$ ear-marked for recruitin' trips and visits, $$ designated for coach clinics and conventions (AFCA?), the strength of the Booster Club and the endowment. Seriously, that's just scratchin' the surface. If I'm makin' a commitment to a small school in a small, somewhat remote town in a strong conference, I need to know everythin'!

[FB Player Coach & Fan]

Apparently, 24-26 but nobody knows for sure. I was looking for the "for sure" answer. Just trying to find out where they rank compared to others. Other conference threads actually have the equivalencies in a conference. It would be better for SWM with a remote location to have more rather than less. It will be interesting to see who they hire.

My understanding is that it is under 20; in the high teens. As stated, having success at Southwest can be done; they were successful 2013 the 7-5 and 8-3 in 2015 and 5-6 in 2016.
But, that was before the transfer portal. I don't have statistics but I would think the transfer portal impacts all schools; I am guessing that the transfer portal disproportionately impact remote location schools and schools that struggle with their win-loss record. My point was that its a D-2 head coaching job that will be attractive to some; but there are a lot of variables that might make it less attractive to other perspective coaches:
The variables/challenges:
-Majority of current staff under contract for one more year/one coach has multiple years left on contract.
-Number of scholarships
-Remote location
-Interim AD

Positives:
-Nice Stadium
-Solid Conference (Top to bottom better division of the NSIC)
-Pay for staff is good (considering some teach classes)

I hope SW finds the right coach and finds success (however they define success). The reality on this message board and in all of football the talk is usually about winning and championships or contending for a championship and that is a reason why all of US compete or competed in this pursuit. But, some locations and schools face more challenges or obstacles to achieving that upper level of success. Sometimes success has to be measured and viewed differently because it is NOT ALWAYS A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD.