BEARKAT FOOTBALL: This time, Williams got his man

So here we are, standing in almost the same place Sam Houston State stood five years ago. It feels all too familiar and somewhat uncomfortable.

In December 2004, Todd Whitten’s name was the first to come out in SHSU’s search to replace the retiring Ron Randleman as the next Bearkat head football coach. We were promised it was not a “done deal.” A thorough nationwide search was held, some excellent candidates came forward, yet in the end Whitten was still determined to be the best choice.

Upon further review, the call on the field has been reversed.

Four weeks ago, Willie Fritz was one of the first names to pop up on the radar to replace Whitten. Again, there was a detailed search. Once again, some potentially exciting candidates were in the mix, yet the job has again been given to a moderately successful Division II head coach with ties to the SHSU program.

I know I’m not the only one who was thinking, “here we go again.”

I have to admit I wasn’t bouncing off the walls with enthusiasm when I learned Fritz had been named SHSU’s next football coach. I partially blame myself. It’s so easy to see the untapped potential of a new face or think about what a veteran coach with success at the FBS level might be able to do at the helm of a FCS program.

I partially blame Turner Gill. Five years ago, Gill was the hot name with no head coaching experience on his resume that was almost too good to resist. The Bearkats passed and went with Whitten. Since then, Gill has seen his career skyrocket, culminating in his recent appointment as the head coach at Kansas. Is it possible that SHSU has once again overlooked the next big thing?

I partially blame Whitten, because on paper Fritz looks a lot like SHSU’s former head coach. Despite an impressive 97-47 overall record in 13 seasons at Division II Central Missouri University, Fritz has only one conference championship, one playoff appearance and a whole lot of middle-of-the-pack conference finishes to show for his work.

The biggest knock on Whitten was his inability to win big games and beat the best teams in the Southland Conference. Northwest Missouri State and Pittsburg State are Division II titans and conference foes Fritz faced every year. The Mules were 5-21 against those two teams during Fritz’s tenure.

That explains the sinking feeling in my stomach.

I’ve been assured that Willy Fritz is not another Todd Whitten (keep saying it until it sinks in — Fritz is not Whitten… Fritz is not Whitten… Fritz is not Whitten…), but on paper, that’s a tough argument to sell.

Time will tell if the right decision was made. Fritz will have every opportunity to succeed as SHSU’s next head coach, and despite my initial concerns, I believe he will.

The biggest reason I believe Fritz will be successful is because Bobby Williams believes in him.

Williams does an excellent job of maintaining his poise in carrying out his executive duties as SHSU’s athletics director. But underneath the calm, cool, collected demeanor is the soul of a football coach. He hates losing, can’t sleep following defeats and, unlike the coaches who have to move on to the next game, losing eats at him for days.

Five years ago, Williams went against his instinct — the same gut feeling that moved him to hire an unknown basketball coach named Bob Marlin over the wishes of the selection committee. He hired the committee’s pick (Whitten) over his personal preference (Fritz).

It is a mistake he wasn’t going to make again.

This time, Williams was not looking to hire a coach he thought might have the ability to help SHSU to reach its full potential. He wasn’t after someone that he hoped could possibly place the Bearkats permanently in the national FCS picture. This time, Williams hired the guy he believes at his core will win at a championship level for years to come.

This time, Williams got his man, and that’s good enough for me.

BEARKAT HOOPS: Digesting the disappointment of another empty postseason

After simmering for 24 hours, I found myself parked in front of the TV tonight watching hoops with my laptop in hand and decided to see if I could make any sense of the latest postseason disappointment. I'm not sure what I learned from what I'm about to present, but it helped pass the time.

Here's what I think I now know:
• SHSU has been better than just about every team in the SLC postseason since 2000 with the exception of NW State.
• We're 1-3 in the past 3 seasons, and I think that leaves a bad taste in my mouth, the "what have you done for me lately" factor.
• Tournament play is as much about luck as it is skill; the track record of every team in the SLC supports that evidence. Even NW State for all of its impressive success has seen its season end in disappointment 8 of the past 10 years.
• All things considered, I'd damn proud to be a SHSU graduate, I still believe BM & Co. have the best program in the SLC and I'm excited about what the future holds.

Chew on this for a while, digest it and please flush when you are finished...

SLC TOURNAMENT STATISTICS (since 1999-2000 season)

SLC Tournament appearances
9 — SHSU, UTA
8 — UTSA
7 — SFA, McNeese, NW St., Texas St.
6 — SE La., Lamar
5 — UL-Monroe%
3 — Nicholls St.
2 — A&M-CC#
% — Not a member of the SLC after 2005
# — SLC member since 2007


SLC Tournament Games Played & Record (listed in order of most games played)
NW State (19) 14-5 (6 finals appearances — 2000, 2001, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008; 2 titles — 2001, 2006)
SHSU (16) 8-8 (2 finals appearances — 2003, 2006; 1 title — 2003)
SFA (13) 7-6* (2 finals appearances)
UTSA (13) 7-6* (1 finals appearance; 1 title — 2004)
Lamar (12) 7-5 (1 finals appearance; 1 title — 2000)
McNeese (12) 6-6 (2 finals appearances — 2001, 2002; 1 title — 2002)
UTA (12) 4-8 (1 finals appearance; 1 title — 2008)
SE La. (9) 4-5 (1 finals appearance; 1 title — 2005)
Tx. St. (9) 2-7
UL-M (6) 1-5 (1 finals appearance — 2002)
A&M-CC (5) 4-1 (1 finals appearance; 1 title — 2007)
Nicholls St.(4) 1-3

* — will play Sunday in 2009 title game

Some other random facts about SHSU in the tournament…
• Record at Johnson Coliseum — 7-0
• Record at Road/Neutral site — 1-8
• Avg. margin of victory: 5.25 pts (7 wins by 6 points or less; 4 wins by 3 points or less; 1 win by 10+ points 88-70 vs. McNeese in 2005)
• Avg. margin of defeat: 11 pts (skewed by 32-points loss to SFA in 2004; 3 losses by 6 pts or less)
• 7 consecutive tournament appearances (tied most w/ UTA)
• Top 3 seed 7 times; No. 4 in 2001; lowest seed was No. 5 in 2004
• Record as favorite (higher seed) 8-4
• Record as underdog (lower seed) 0-4
• Kats are 4-0 in overtime games
• Kats are 1-4 in last 5 games

SHSU results by seed
No. 1 (2001, 2003): 3-1
No. 2 (2006, 2007) 2-2
No. 3 (2005, 2008, 2009): 2-3
No. 4 (2002): 1-1
No. 5 (2004): 0-1

SHSU results vs. opponent seed
vs. No. 1: 0-2 (L 99-82 vs. McNeese 2001 semis; L 85-87 NW St. 2006 finals)
vs. No. 2: 1-1 (W 69-66 OT vs. SFA 2003 final; L 71-62 @ SLU 2005 semis)
vs. No. 3: 1-0 (W 78-72 vs. SFA 2006 semis)
vs. No. 4: 1-1 (W 64-58 vs. McNeese 2003 semis; L 85-53 @ SFA 2004 1st round)
vs. No. 5: 1-1 (L 70-64 NW St. 2000 semis; W 103-98 2OT vs. UTA 2001 1st round)
vs. No. 6: 2-1 (W 88-70 vs. McNeese 2005 1st round; W 64-62 OT vs. McNeese 2008 1st round; L 83-74 vs. UTSA 2009 1st round)
vs. No. 7: 1-2 (W 86-64 2OT vs. UTA 2006 1st round; L 99-98 vs. Lamar 2007 1st round; L 72-66 vs. UTA 2008 semis)
vs. No. 8: 1-0 (49-48 vs. Nicholls in 2000 1st round)


SHSU result vs. opponent
vs. McNeese: 3-1
vs. UTA: 2-1
vs. SFA: 2-1
vs. Nicholls St.: 1-0
vs. NW State: 0-2
vs. UTSA: 0-1
vs. Lamar: 0-1
vs. SLU: 0-1