Thank goodness for reader questions during a bye week —- even if they sound kind of familiar.
If there’s a clarion call sounded almost weekly among Maryland‘s fan base —- especially in the weeks after losses —- it is the startling turnaround from Ralph Friedgen‘s first three seasons to the four-plus seasons since.
SEE RELATED:So here’s loyal reader Slatter’s take and question on this issue:
Friedgen enjoyed the bulk of his success from 2001-03, when he compiled a 31-8 record and got the Terps to three straight bowl games (including a BCS berth). In the last four and a half years, Fridge’s record has dropped to 29-25 with only two bowl appearances, and he has even said a few times this season that he doesn’t feel that he’s reaching his players. Was there a logical explanation as to why Fridge coached better with Vanderlinden’s kids? Was it just a matter of talent?
I am very reluctant to speak much of the 2002, 2003 and 2004 teams, since I wasn’t around on a every-day basis to see them at work. But I can say Friedgen’s first team was willing to run through a wall for the guy, mainly because they couldn’t seem to get over the 5-6 plateau with Ron Vanderlinden.
Friedgen certainly inherited some talent, but I think he collected just as much of it on his own. It just so happened that Maryland has not come up with a dominant offensive line, a deep collection of defensive linemen or a truly gaudy quarterback in that span. Other than maybe a corner who can take out an opponent’s best receiver, those are the things I’d want to establish more than anything else while building a program. Without them, you can dictate a lot less on a week-to-week basis.
Much as I am loath to admit it, the ACC is a nastier neighborhood than it was five years ago, and that has something to do with Maryland’s problems. No program other than Virginia Tech is a regular threat for 10 wins, but at this point just about everyone is a threat to win six —- either this year or next year. Yes, it’s the Land of 8-4 Teams —- but a bunch of 8-4 teams don’t make for an easy schedule, either.
This concept is worth a separate entry altogether, and I’ll hold off on that for a while. Other possibilities include a lack of continuity created by coaching staff turnover, the serious loss of buzz with the consecutive 5-6s in 2004 and 2005 and a few recruiting mistakes along the way.
But, as Slatter points out, the numbers don’t lie —- and Friedgen’s results since the start of the 2004 season don’t come close to stacking up with the three magical years at the start of his tenure.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.