OK - what follows here is the result of many conversations and collaboration between myself and FireMoose, this also includes our discussions with others, BUT, the words are mine ---

This is my take on the transformation throughout the season ---
I am a firm believer that the early problems were directly related to youth and not coaching or the lack thereof -
The offense ---
They found their identity earlier than the defense - I wasn't a proponent of benching Kam early - I felt he needed to play his way out of the starting position but it was clear that Taylor was the future. Early on there was a rotation on the OL almost on every other possession and I feel it took a few games with viewing film, etc., for the coaches to determine a true list of starters and their backups - this then gives the coaches the identity they are looking for and even though a rotation continued, there was a clear group of #1s and I think they saw that they could be a true power running team - Run first, pass second and with Taylor the run with the QB was now more of a option. With the WRs they now had a QB with whom they did not play with last year so their reps and knowledge of each other were somewhat limited and this took time to jell --- By seeing that the OL could now handle the blocking they could move backs/TEs into the backfield and really become a power running team more than a true spread offense as we didn't need to spread people all over the field - this again took some time ---
The defense ---
In my opinion this was almost totally dictated by youth - we had very young guys starting from the outset with now as many as 4 true freshmen starting - early on there was some uncertainty about the best position for a couple of guys - this takes time and actual game review - Some were yelling early on about no blitzes, etc., however Woody couldn't call for many blitzes if he wasn't confident that our cornerbacks could play nose to nose man to man - As you remember our guys were burned deep a couple of times early this season - So it took time to make sure the core inner 7 could handle the basics of his defense before giving them more - this again happens with time --- Once he felt confident that they could grasp what he wanted he could begin with a more attacking defense and this developed as well because our cornerbacks were now getting better with the man-to-man and the safeties knew their responsibilities and coverages - remember we are playing a true freshmen, a junior and a sophomore at the safety positions --- He also wanted the rotation in the place he needed it without running different guys in and out every series and this, in turn, led to the cohesiveness of the group - One thing some don't understand when they make comments like, "the defense sucks" is that in watching film there might be 9 guys doing exactly the right thing and maybe 2 not - these are correctable mistakes - then possibly it's 10 guys in place and 1 misread - then it could be all 11 guys with the proper read but a missed tackle led to a big gain - again all these are correctable but also take time with young players --- Woody didn't all of a sudden realize anything - he was working these guys to get to where we are now ---
Also something that hasn't been talked about on the board (that I remember) is the situation Coach Satterfield and his staff faced with the Juniors and Seniors on this team - They weren't their recruits but there was a carry-over from a successful time in APP football (as compared to some programs who do a complete overhaul, top to bottom) so the coaches faced a dilemma with the guys like Kam and Deuce and Fisher, etc., He made in my opinion the correct decision about how to handle this - He didn't bench the Jr/Sr for younger players right off the bat - he played them while playing younger players as well - and remember all this happens at practice as well - He gave the time for it to be clear to the players that the younger guys were better and gave APP a better chance of winning. If he had made these decisions earlier he would face the possibility of losing the upperclassmen and creating dissension in the locker room but by giving it time even the players could see for themselves who the better players were and this kept the team together - Again, this took time ---
It has been a process - not drastic changes ---

One thing that I noticed that helped the decision on what OL to go with was Gossett being healthy and able to play. Once he started to play, they went with the starting OL we have now and it has paid huge dividends. Think if he had been healthy to start the season, what would the offense have looked like?

Having Gossett and Nunn on the right side was the foundation of the new running game we've had during this streak

Amen!!!! It was the combo of Nunn and Gossett and the changes on D that have us where we are.... Man, the future is sooooo bright!!!!

Passes AF11 some shades

Bright indeed!!! Only losing Lamm (OL), Bailey (H-back) and Heimrich (LS/SS)as starters on O and Ross (CB) as a starter on D.

Losing Corbin and Fisher (OL) off the O's 2-deep and Duece (DE) and Shriner (LB) from the D's 2-deep.

Are you sure about all this, WV? An awful lot of people on here think the turnaround had to do with all their bitching and moaning and pictures of for sale signs. Just sayin.'

I think we all can agree that we're happy changes were made for whatever reasons but I think the defensive changes were more from coaches feeling the heat that the schemes they were running were not working; especially after we got gashed by USA and Liberty. Satterfield himself said we can't continue to run the same coverage every play and have success......we have to bring pressure and mix up coverages. Sure enough next game we see a totally different defense. I don't think the coaches all of a sudden felt more comfortable with the players after the Liberty loss I think they knew things had to change or we would continue to give up tons of yards and points.
Pressure on a QB makes the young guys on the back end a lot better than leaving them out to dry trying to cover a receiver 4-5 seconds.
Gotta give the coaches and players credit for adjusting when things weren't working.

This is a process, I have also been one screaming that point. WVApp you outline some excellent details.

What I am really excited about is how we are transforming into a physical power offense, with a run first and pass as we choose. It is very balanced and poses significant challenges to opposing team's defensive strategy. If we can continue to mature and excel using this formula then it would allow us to compete at the upper levels of FBS. I am talking competitive against everybody with maybe the exception of top 5-10 FBS teams. Yes, we have a lot of improvements to master in our future but the formula looks sound.

Can you imagine a game controlling run oriented drive against Clemson late in the game capped by Cox physically plowing into the endzone for a game winning score? I can.

Part of this process is also the maturation of a coaching staff and decision making. I believe the the Liberty game was a turning point for the coaches too....except for the dumb rugby kick call against ULM or was it Ark St? Lastly a decision I'd like to see them make is to keep Marcus to about 25 carries max. Upshaw is capable of filling in now and I don't want to see Marcus hurt. I believe most rational App fans understood what was going on and preached patience while others ran around with their hair on fire although I must admit I was trying to figure our what Woody was doing. I am looking forward to next year.

Rekdiver wrote:Part of this process is also the maturation of a coaching staff and decision making. I believe the the Liberty game was a turning point for the coaches too....except for the dumb rugby kick call against ULM or was it Ark St? Lastly a decision I'd like to see them make is to keep Marcus to about 25 carries max. Upshaw is capable of filling in now and I don't want to see Marcus hurt. I believe most rational App fans understood what was going on and preached patience while others ran around with their hair on fire although I must admit I was trying to figure our what Woody was doing. I am looking forward to next year.

Excellent points. I agree wholeheartedly about limiting Marcus' carries. I am thinking out of the box and that decisions are made for what is good for Appalachian, but he runs like the guys that play on Sunday.. He is our horse and we should ride him but there is some value to us to having him play on Sundays and NFL teams take the number of college carries in their evaluation. I don't prescribe to the notion that the coaches matured but I can understand why some would see it that way. I am impressed with the way the coaches were able to make the youth movement without totally losing the team. I know that SS has said that the coaches had to do better at play calling and such but I think some of that could be coach speak for yea we want to do more but our kids aren't ready to do what we want. BTW I hate the rugby punt too.

I don't think Cox will be carrying the ball 35-40 times per game consistently as a rule. I believe the last two games at StAte and ULL were so important that we had to ride our horse. Also, Upshaw seemed to still be recovering from his injury in the StAte game and didn't look 100%.

Hopefully next year we will have at least two horses to split time with a 3 and 4 to supplement.

Also, another point on the process statement. The evolution of the players, coaches, etc has been and continues to be a very fluid process. The notion that one day the coaches just woke up and decided to make a single decision based on any one individual thing doesn't make sense. It is more likely that as players developed and matured it gave the coaches more options. It is also likely that the coaches probably adapted their approach based on the fluid situation.

In either case, I am totally excited and pleased with how this team continues to grow. Our upside is tremendous with our current players. What makes it even more interesting is to think that we could recruit even better athletes in upcoming classes. That makes our upside pretty darn high.

I think any coach who calls for a rugby kick should be made to clean toilets.

bcoach wrote:I think any coach who calls for a rugby kick should be made to clean toilets.

Or sanitize the protective cups.

I know a lot of coaches choose to quote SID scripts and speak many words and say nothing; the coaches for my two favorite teams do this constantly. But, I would love to attend a function and hear Coach Satt open up and really let us know his opinion about what changed. I personally think it was a combination of transitioning to SBC caliber student athletes, getting the team to become effective with the new paradigm and the coaches gaining enough confidence in the team to allow more schemes and plays to be introduced.

Also, I don't give two s***s about beating Clemson right now. I want to go undefeated in SBC play, which is quite possible next year, go to a bowl and surprise the crap out of some P5 school. If it is Clemson, then yeah it would be cool. But, why bring it up now? Or, the waivers and 2014 bowls for that matter.

Let's just destroy Itty-ho.