Mike Price had two Rose Bowl teams and several lesser bowl teams at WSU. He realized early on that he was not going to recruit many 4,0 GPA - All Americans to Pullman in competition with the U-Dub and the California schools. So he recruited, mostly from California, guys that he knew could play at the upper level of the PAC-10 - their athletic abilities were not in question but most had academic/citizenship challenges. They were all red-shirted the first year and given every opportunity to improve their academics and prove themselves as good citizens. The academic support program was fantastic - football players had access to computers when the Honors Program was still using IBM typewriters. The attrition was about 50%. Make said that if he ended up with at least 12 5th-year seniors, he had a bowl team. He had a number of truly wonderful turnabouts in kids who were clearly on the road to self-destruction succeeding in football and academics.

The second thing Mike did was to prepare his second string QB for active duty by putting him in for as least a series in the second and third quarters when the outcome of the game was still in question, not just mop-up duty in the last two minutes of the 4th quarter. This gave the #2 a feeling that the coach had confidence in him and it afforded #1 the opportunity to vew the game from the sidelines, gaining a different perspective.

When Miike left for his short stint at Alabama, Bill Doba thought that the Cougs had reached the point where they could compete for the best and brightest with any other school. He wasted three years of recruiting and ended up signing a bunch of left-overs. This marked the down-slide of WSU for the next decade and it has taken Mike Leach five years to partially right the ship.

George Emert often compared USU and WSU and in many respects he was right - both FB teams success depends on how much value can be added to their recruits.

Nice post Bob Wilson.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

BobWilson wrote:Mike Price had two Rose Bowl teams and several lesser bowl teams at WSU. He realized early on that he was not going to recruit many 4,0 GPA - All Americans to Pullman in competition with the U-Dub and the California schools. So he recruited, mostly from California, guys that he knew could play at the upper level of the PAC-10 - their athletic abilities were not in question but most had academic/citizenship challenges. They were all red-shirted the first year and given every opportunity to improve their academics and prove themselves as good citizens. The academic support program was fantastic - football players had access to computers when the Honors Program was still using IBM typewriters. The attrition was about 50%. Make said that if he ended up with at least 12 5th-year seniors, he had a bowl team. He had a number of truly wonderful turnabouts in kids who were clearly on the road to self-destruction succeeding in football and academics.

The second thing Mike did was to prepare his second string QB for active duty by putting him in for as least a series in the second and third quarters when the outcome of the game was still in question, not just mop-up duty in the last two minutes of the 4th quarter. This gave the #2 a feeling that the coach had confidence in him and it afforded #1 the opportunity to vew the game from the sidelines, gaining a different perspective.

When Miike left for his short stint at Alabama, Bill Doba thought that the Cougs had reached the point where they could compete for the best and brightest with any other school. He wasted three years of recruiting and ended up signing a bunch of left-overs. This marked the down-slide of WSU for the next decade and it has taken Mike Leach five years to partially right the ship.

George Emert often compared USU and WSU and in many respects he was right - both FB teams success depends on how much value can be added to their recruits.

Very good observations and a solid post. I think Wells views the program as a developmental program. The challenge is getting the kids into buying into what you're selling. GA was a master at this due to his charisma. Players just wanted to be around the guy and do whatever he asked. I think that's where Wells not being a players coach hurts him some in that regard. I think that's why GA squeezed every ounce out of the kids that he could. They wanted to work hard for him, and did.

Madmartigan wrote:

BobWilson wrote:Mike Price had two Rose Bowl teams and several lesser bowl teams at WSU. He realized early on that he was not going to recruit many 4,0 GPA - All Americans to Pullman in competition with the U-Dub and the California schools. So he recruited, mostly from California, guys that he knew could play at the upper level of the PAC-10 - their athletic abilities were not in question but most had academic/citizenship challenges. They were all red-shirted the first year and given every opportunity to improve their academics and prove themselves as good citizens. The academic support program was fantastic - football players had access to computers when the Honors Program was still using IBM typewriters. The attrition was about 50%. Make said that if he ended up with at least 12 5th-year seniors, he had a bowl team. He had a number of truly wonderful turnabouts in kids who were clearly on the road to self-destruction succeeding in football and academics.

The second thing Mike did was to prepare his second string QB for active duty by putting him in for as least a series in the second and third quarters when the outcome of the game was still in question, not just mop-up duty in the last two minutes of the 4th quarter. This gave the #2 a feeling that the coach had confidence in him and it afforded #1 the opportunity to vew the game from the sidelines, gaining a different perspective.

When Miike left for his short stint at Alabama, Bill Doba thought that the Cougs had reached the point where they could compete for the best and brightest with any other school. He wasted three years of recruiting and ended up signing a bunch of left-overs. This marked the down-slide of WSU for the next decade and it has taken Mike Leach five years to partially right the ship.

George Emert often compared USU and WSU and in many respects he was right - both FB teams success depends on how much value can be added to their recruits.

Very good observations and a solid post. I think Wells views the program as a developmental program. The challenge is getting the kids into buying into what you're selling. GA was a master at this due to his charisma. Players just wanted to be around the guy and do whatever he asked. I think that's where Wells not being a players coach hurts him some in that regard. I think that's why GA squeezed every ounce out of the kids that he could. They wanted to work hard for him, and did.

Double-dose of truth right there.

GA was a triple threat: Recruiter, Motivator, Defensive Genius (that might be a bit strong, but hey). What he lacked was offensive scheming and QB coaching. What did he do? Hired the right guys to do that job, Wells and to a greater degree Mike Sanford when we were really good.

Without those 3 traits from your top guy, and with Wells in the top chair, you gotta make up for that in assistants and fake it 'til you make it.

Sadly, assistants have been hit or miss and the good ones fly the coop. The fakin'it ain't makin'it in the motivation department, and whatever offensive coordinator skills MW once had have been overwhelmed with deficiencies elsewhere.

We are essentially in the rebuild phase and Bob provides excellent advice in assembling a team, but I fear this advice is better placed on next year's coach and staff.

Not to be a downer...but I recall our recruiting strategy during our darkest days was exactly this; recruit the leftovers from California with off the field issues and no real motivation for the student side of the student-athlete paradigm.

I've always contended that WSU's and BSU's success is a directly inverse relationship. They both occupy a geographic recruiting footprint that is talented, yet shallow. If you think of all the good qb's to go through both schools, they have been from the Central Washington/Oregon to Eastern Montana footprint. As coaches have come and gone, especially recruiting coordinators, the teams have seen ups and downs as a result. As WSU has risen over the past few years, Boise has leveled off. It really doesn't have a lot to do with the current discussion, but I've done some loose studies and they add up.

Also, Gary Andersen was a lot of things, but his defenses were never really good for us until he gave it over to Aranda. GA was the quintessential CEO/motivational speaker/talent scout, but when he called the defense, he had results that were similar to when Wells was calling the offense as a head coach. There were just a lot of lapses in either the defense or game management despite the fact that GA was a fantastic DC when he wasn't a head coach. This is why I'm so excited that we have an OC and Wells is back to managing the game. I think we'll see more of the stuff like he did against Chris Petersen at the end of the half a while back. There just aren't many people, especially men, who can truly multi-task.

Ahbye wrote:I've always contended that WSU's and BSU's success is a directly inverse relationship. They both occupy a geographic recruiting footprint that is talented, yet shallow. If you think of all the good qb's to go through both schools, they have been from the Central Washington/Oregon to Eastern Montana footprint. As coaches have come and gone, especially recruiting coordinators, the teams have seen ups and downs as a result. As WSU has risen over the past few years, Boise has leveled off. It really doesn't have a lot to do with the current discussion, but I've done some loose studies and they add up.

Also, Gary Andersen was a lot of things, but his defenses were never really good for us until he gave it over to Aranda. GA was the quintessential CEO/motivational speaker/talent scout, but when he called the defense, he had results that were similar to when Wells was calling the offense as a head coach. There were just a lot of lapses in either the defense or game management despite the fact that GA was a fantastic DC when he wasn't a head coach. This is why I'm so excited that we have an OC and Wells is back to managing the game. I think we'll see more of the stuff like he did against Chris Petersen at the end of the half a while back. There just aren't many people, especially men, who can truly multi-task.

Solid points and I agree with your assessment with a single caveat. I think better talent on the defense coincided with Aranda being the DC. That 2012 defense was quite loaded at almost every position. Two NFL corners on defense and two borderline NFL safeties. Filimeautu, Doughty, Fackrell, and Vigil at the starting 4 at LB. Then add to that a solid rotation on the line. We also played a little bit less stiff competition in 2012. We played some really bad teams: NMSU, Idaho, Texas State, UTSA. Those were very easy games. Then we had some decent teams in LA Tech, SJSU, BYU, and Wisconsin.

I have hope for the offense with a true OC calling all the shots. A functional offense would make a world of difference.

That's all very true. I think when a lot of fans look back on those hallowed days of Gary Andersen, they forget that we were boosted along by a weak schedule and caught some breaks along the way. That doesn't take anything away from what he did here. I've known GA since he was at ISU back in the early 90's when I was playing football there. He's always been one of those "posse guys", the one's who always have a bunch of people around them because they exude charisma. He always remembered faces and names as well. Back when he arrived at usu, he saw me and kind of did a double take, came over and asked how everything had been for the past 15 years. I had talked to him maybe a handful of times in the training room at ISU when I was running track back then. Really good guy at the right time for us. I like Wells too though. He's different but it's a good different. I just turned 40 and it's weird to think that he was this age with all of those people looking at him. Had to grow up fast. I think we'll be pleasantly surprised this season.

I like the idea of recruiting in-state guys. I like the idea of giving QB2 some meaningful time.

However, when Brent Guy was the coach, he took in a lot of guys that had less than stellar academics but were decently athletic. The reason the team was bad that year, the reason the team has been bad recently- and the reason those people had bad grades wasn't because they didn't have the ability. They lacked the character. Recently the team has been mixed (more so than in the past). Gary was able to deal with it and bring out the best in people despite the flaws people had (because it's human nature and correctable). I know Guy didn't have that ability, and I guess we will see with Wells.

Just a quick note on the academic piece... You also need to keep in mind that era at WSU was before the era of APR/GSR/APP. Meaning recruiting crap academics may have hurt a program but nowhere near what it can now. Especially in a community like Logan, I don't think bringing in guys known for questionable character would be a good idea at all.

I think it's also important to note that it can be very challenging to build any kind of prestige for the campus, department, and team with the mentality of 'we will take the scraps we can as long as you are athletic'. That's what I liked about GA, he didn't try to act like we were anyone's little brother.

Imakeitrain wrote:I like the idea of recruiting in-state guys. I like the idea of giving QB2 some meaningful time.

However, when Brent Guy was the coach, he took in a lot of guys that had less than stellar academics but were decently athletic. The reason the team was bad that year, the reason the team has been bad recently- and the reason those people had bad grades wasn't because they didn't have the ability. They lacked the character. Recently the team has been mixed (more so than in the past). Gary was able to deal with it and bring out the best in people despite the flaws people had (because it's human nature and correctable). I know Guy didn't have that ability, and I guess we will see with Wells.

For what it's worth Guy actually did a pretty good job at cleaning up the roster with those guys. I worked in the TSC while he was there and if any of his FB guys caused any problems it was a quick phone call and it seemed it would always be addressed. Many of those 'touble' guys who expected to get away with things didn't last.

Ahbye wrote:That's all very true. I think when a lot of fans look back on those hallowed days of Gary Andersen, they forget that we were boosted along by a weak schedule and caught some breaks along the way. That doesn't take anything away from what he did here. I've known GA since he was at ISU back in the early 90's when I was playing football there. He's always been one of those "posse guys", the one's who always have a bunch of people around them because they exude charisma. He always remembered faces and names as well. Back when he arrived at usu, he saw me and kind of did a double take, came over and asked how everything had been for the past 15 years. I had talked to him maybe a handful of times in the training room at ISU when I was running track back then. Really good guy at the right time for us. I like Wells too though. He's different but it's a good different. I just turned 40 and it's weird to think that he was this age with all of those people looking at him. Had to grow up fast. I think we'll be pleasantly surprised this season.

Every face to face interaction I've had with Wells has been positive. I think he's a really good guy. I hope you're right. He had some great tactical moments in his first few years. We sort of remember GA in an unfair favorable light, but he certainly had glaring flaws that carried over to his last two jobs.

Madmartigan wrote:Every face to face interaction I've had with Wells has been positive. I think he's a really good guy. I hope you're right. He had some great tactical moments in his first few years. We sort of remember GA in an unfair favorable light, but he certainly had glaring flaws that carried over to his last two jobs.

In your opinion, what are GA's glaring flaws and how have they affected his last two jobs?
I'm not trying to defend GA here. Just curious to know what you're referring to.

Naked Bull Rider wrote:

Madmartigan wrote:Every face to face interaction I've had with Wells has been positive. I think he's a really good guy. I hope you're right. He had some great tactical moments in his first few years. We sort of remember GA in an unfair favorable light, but he certainly had glaring flaws that carried over to his last two jobs.

In your opinion, what are GA's glaring flaws and how have they affected his last two jobs?
I'm not trying to defend GA here. Just curious to know what you're referring to.

Bill Busch


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Naked Bull Rider wrote:

Madmartigan wrote:Every face to face interaction I've had with Wells has been positive. I think he's a really good guy. I hope you're right. He had some great tactical moments in his first few years. We sort of remember GA in an unfair favorable light, but he certainly had glaring flaws that carried over to his last two jobs.

In your opinion, what are GA's glaring flaws and how have they affected his last two jobs?
I'm not trying to defend GA here. Just curious to know what you're referring to.

Some interesting late game gaffes that cost us games in particular. Weird clock management against Wisconsin. When he was at Wisconsin he had a game against ASU that ended badly. A game he should've won. There was an issue with an ASU player climbing on the ball and not letting them snap it (on the refs), but they had plenty of time and shouldn't have ever been in that situation.

End of games during close games seemed chaotic at times. Gary's teams also played very well in the first half and took commanding leads. The third quarter came and the other squad made adjustments and caught up quickly all too often. We were up 14-3 on Wisconsin and dominating them on defense, then a PR TD later and a missed FG cost us the game. Seemed like second half adjustments he was always getting outcoached.

Special teams: BYU in 2011 and 2012, Auburn in 2011, Wisconsin in 2012, CSU in 2011. We won LA tech, but they got back into it due largely to a KR TD. His ST never seemed to be great.

I think we are right to remember GA with fondness. We still forget some of his bugaboos, even if his strengths more than made up for any in game coaching issues he had.

Dave Baldwin

Madmartigan wrote:

Naked Bull Rider wrote:

Madmartigan wrote:Every face to face interaction I've had with Wells has been positive. I think he's a really good guy. I hope you're right. He had some great tactical moments in his first few years. We sort of remember GA in an unfair favorable light, but he certainly had glaring flaws that carried over to his last two jobs.

In your opinion, what are GA's glaring flaws and how have they affected his last two jobs?
I'm not trying to defend GA here. Just curious to know what you're referring to.

Some interesting late game gaffes that cost us games in particular. Weird clock management against Wisconsin. When he was at Wisconsin he had a game against ASU that ended badly. A game he should've won. There was an issue with an ASU player climbing on the ball and not letting them snap it (on the refs), but they had plenty of time and shouldn't have ever been in that situation.

End of games during close games seemed chaotic at times. Gary's teams also played very well in the first half and took commanding leads. The third quarter came and the other squad made adjustments and caught up quickly all too often. We were up 14-3 on Wisconsin and dominating them on defense, then a PR TD later and a missed FG cost us the game. Seemed like second half adjustments he was always getting outcoached.

Special teams: BYU in 2011 and 2012, Auburn in 2011, Wisconsin in 2012, CSU in 2011. We won LA tech, but they got back into it due largely to a KR TD. His ST never seemed to be great.

I think we are right to remember GA with fondness. We still forget some of his bugaboos, even if his strengths more than made up for any in game coaching issues he had.

Oh man- not sure I was mentally prepared to relive some of those bad memories when I started reading your reply! All good points though. I remember watching that Wisconsin/ASU blunder too.

It makes you wonder if offensive-minded coaches historically are better overall at game-time adjustments and clock management.When looking at Wells- you see flashes of greatness like the end of the first half against Boise in '13 and then complete meltdowns like NM in '16. I really think the end of that Lobos game was the 'nail in the coffin' for many of our fans when talking about their feelings and attitudes toward Wells. Really hope we don't experience anything that embarrassing again.

That UNM games was certainly my end point. I don't have confidence in him. I hope he can turn it around and make me look stupid.

Oregon State was a crappy program when he joined. GA only did bad at Wisconsin by Wisconsin standards and it seemed players were disappointed when he left. If I remember when he was at Wisconsin he had a great season (finished better than he ever did at USU), got steam rolled by a National Champion Ohio State team in the B1G championship game and everyone acted as if GA was the worst.

Imakeitrain wrote:Oregon State was a crappy program when he joined. GA only did bad at Wisconsin by Wisconsin standards and it seemed players were disappointed when he left. If I remember when he was at Wisconsin he had a great season (finished better than he ever did at USU), got steam rolled by a National Champion Ohio State team in the B1G championship game and everyone acted as if GA was the worst.

No arguments here. He's a fantastic head coach. NBR and I were just discussing how he's viewed as a Saint here when he had some flaws we tend to overlook or forget. That is all.

sambonethegreat wrote:

Naked Bull Rider wrote:

Madmartigan wrote:Every face to face interaction I've had with Wells has been positive. I think he's a really good guy. I hope you're right. He had some great tactical moments in his first few years. We sort of remember GA in an unfair favorable light, but he certainly had glaring flaws that carried over to his last two jobs.

In your opinion, what are GA's glaring flaws and how have they affected his last two jobs?
I'm not trying to defend GA here. Just curious to know what you're referring to.

Bill Busch


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

/thread

AngusAg wrote:

Ahbye wrote:That's all very true. I think when a lot of fans look back on those hallowed days of Gary Andersen, they forget that we were boosted along by a weak schedule and caught some breaks along the way. That doesn't take anything away from what he did here. I've known GA since he was at ISU back in the early 90's when I was playing football there. He's always been one of those "posse guys", the one's who always have a bunch of people around them because they exude charisma. He always remembered faces and names as well. Back when he arrived at usu, he saw me and kind of did a double take, came over and asked how everything had been for the past 15 years. I had talked to him maybe a handful of times in the training room at ISU when I was running track back then. Really good guy at the right time for us. I like Wells too though. He's different but it's a good different. I just turned 40 and it's weird to think that he was this age with all of those people looking at him. Had to grow up fast. I think we'll be pleasantly surprised this season.

I appreciate your posts and insights.

Thank you. I appreciate your compliment. I was reading back through my post and realized that I wasn't specific enough about what football playing age I was. I was playing high school football there in Pocatello the time I first interacted with Gary. The reason that's important is that I wasn't on his football team and therefore not on his radar--at least I shouldn't have been. However, he put me onto that radar, because that's what he did with everybody. I was far from a standout player as well. He made you feel good about yourself. If I had to pinpoint one thing about GA and everyone like him who seem to get players to run through walls for them, it's that. No matter who you are, he made you feel like you were worthwhile and valued.

Ahbye wrote:

AngusAg wrote:

Ahbye wrote:That's all very true. I think when a lot of fans look back on those hallowed days of Gary Andersen, they forget that we were boosted along by a weak schedule and caught some breaks along the way. That doesn't take anything away from what he did here. I've known GA since he was at ISU back in the early 90's when I was playing football there. He's always been one of those "posse guys", the one's who always have a bunch of people around them because they exude charisma. He always remembered faces and names as well. Back when he arrived at usu, he saw me and kind of did a double take, came over and asked how everything had been for the past 15 years. I had talked to him maybe a handful of times in the training room at ISU when I was running track back then. Really good guy at the right time for us. I like Wells too though. He's different but it's a good different. I just turned 40 and it's weird to think that he was this age with all of those people looking at him. Had to grow up fast. I think we'll be pleasantly surprised this season.

I appreciate your posts and insights.

Thank you. I appreciate your compliment. I was reading back through my post and realized that I wasn't specific enough about what football playing age I was. I was playing high school football there in Pocatello the time I first interacted with Gary. The reason that's important is that I wasn't on his football team and therefore not on his radar--at least I shouldn't have been. However, he put me onto that radar, because that's what he did with everybody. I was far from a standout player as well. He made you feel good about yourself. If I had to pinpoint one thing about GA and everyone like him who seem to get players to run through walls for them, it's that. No matter who you are, he made you feel like you were worthwhile and valued.

Sounds a lot like Sitake and Whittingham too. These types of coaches are hard to come by

Sitake maybe but I heard that Whittingham is very aloof, and arms length

bullshot wrote:Sitake maybe but I heard that Whittingham is very aloof, and arms length

Yeah, I'm sure they went undefeated BCS games with him as DC and once as head coach and won two BCS bowl games because everyone hated playing for him. Just hate to have a guy like that as a coach.

hickaggie wrote:

bullshot wrote:Sitake maybe but I heard that Whittingham is very aloof, and arms length

Yeah, I'm sure they went undefeated BCS games with him as DC and once as head coach and won two BCS bowl games because everyone hated playing for him. Just hate to have a guy like that as a coach.

I've heard from many players that they hated playing for Urban Meyer even though he led them to National Titles and BCS Bowl victories. On field success doesn't always correlate with the Head Coach's ability to have a relationship with his players. Whittingham is an Urban Meyer disciple so maybe he's got a little of that as a head coach as well.

Tchei wrote:

hickaggie wrote:

bullshot wrote:Sitake maybe but I heard that Whittingham is very aloof, and arms length

Yeah, I'm sure they went undefeated BCS games with him as DC and once as head coach and won two BCS bowl games because everyone hated playing for him. Just hate to have a guy like that as a coach.

I've heard from many players that they hated playing for Urban Meyer even though he led them to National Titles and BCS Bowl victories. On field success doesn't always correlate with the Head Coach's ability to have a relationship with his players. Whittingham is an Urban Meyer disciple so maybe he's got a little of that as a head coach as well.

I would call Whittingham a Ron McBride disciple long before he could be considered Urban's guy. Urban was only there two years, with Utah simply being a pit stop for him. Many often say that Nick Saban isn't the nicest guy either but the key is to have assistant coaches that the players can go to for their issues. If the Head Coach doesn't have the "players coach" personality, it is imperative that they surround themselves with assistants that do. Many have said they perceive Coach Wells in the same light and while I'm not sure that all the assistants we have here have the "players coach" personality, there are absolutely plenty that do. Now before I'm persecuted, I'm not in any-way-shape-or-form comparing Coach Wells to Coach Saban. My only point is that coaches can be highly successful and not have the "players coach" personality, they just have to be smart enough to hire the right guys to compensate for attributes that they lack.

aggies22 wrote:

Tchei wrote:

hickaggie wrote:

bullshot wrote:Sitake maybe but I heard that Whittingham is very aloof, and arms length

Yeah, I'm sure they went undefeated BCS games with him as DC and once as head coach and won two BCS bowl games because everyone hated playing for him. Just hate to have a guy like that as a coach.

I've heard from many players that they hated playing for Urban Meyer even though he led them to National Titles and BCS Bowl victories. On field success doesn't always correlate with the Head Coach's ability to have a relationship with his players. Whittingham is an Urban Meyer disciple so maybe he's got a little of that as a head coach as well.

I would call Whittingham a Ron McBride disciple long before he could be considered Urban's guy. Urban was only there two years, with Utah simply being a pit stop for him. Many often say that Nick Saban isn't the nicest guy either but the key is to have assistant coaches that the players can go to for their issues. If the Head Coach doesn't have the "players coach" personality, it is imperative that they surround themselves with assistants that do. Many have said they perceive Coach Wells in the same light and while I'm not sure that all the assistants we have here have the "players coach" personality, there are absolutely plenty that do. Now before I'm persecuted, I'm not in any-way-shape-or-form comparing Coach Wells to Coach Saban. My only point is that coaches can be highly successful and not have the "players coach" personality, they just have to be smart enough to hire the right guys to compensate for attributes that they lack.

I would agree 100% with the addition that it all comes down to winning. If the head coach has a reputation as an aloof, jerk, disciplinarian type who doesn't mesh with young players the majority will buy in if his program i.e. conditioning, training, scheme, game planning works and kids get that feeling of winning and a confidence that their coach knows what he's doing. There will always be more factions in a team like that between those that buy in (think Stew Morrill) but most kids will buy in and love their coach.

On the flip side, Gary had a way of making everyone buy in (Players, coaches, trainers, managers, Athletic dept, fans) and this allowed him to get through 3 losing seasons as his guys believed from day 1. I think it will allow him to do the same thing at Oregon State. Wells doesn't have that leeway and when the doubts about the offense crept in 2015 as well as struggles on D with a new coordinator and injuries it all fell apart. The new offense had better produce results and wins fast because Wells seems to have very little confidence capital with his team.