Stop. The. Presses.
OT: Auburn fans unhappy with OC Scot Loeffler
I think this would be much more noteworthy if Auburn was 6-1 and their OC was under fire. Or alternatively, at 1-6 they are in fact happy with his performance.
1-6 and the fans aren't happy? I'm with you, stop the presses...
Loeffler has been terrible and is ruining that offense. Chizik needs to fire him and move on with the program. If he doesn't fire him, he will lose his own job.
Sorry to be the one to break the news on this one, but it's Chizek own doing. Every Auburn fan I know has come to the realization that the Newton era was a total fluke and that Chizek just flat out cannot develop players.
But whatever offense they had has only become worse this year. Last year's team was average, but at least they could compete. This year's offense is simply pathetic. I agree Chizik capitalized off of a gift in the form of Cam Newton, but I just think this was a poor hire on his part.
Did anybody expect a seamless transition when going to Malzahn's super spread to a pro-style offense? Auburn has had issues every year even in the year they lucked into Newton and Fairley; those players just masked the issues. Blaming a first year coordinator is as ridiculous as when RR laid 2008 at the feet of Schafer. The only consistent in all of Auburn's sub-par years is Chizik.
It's not a gift if you pay for it.
you mean Cam (or his dad) being paid a lot of money to play for Auburn and Chizek being hired to say nothing and accept it.
Now now, jblaze, this board is not a place to throw around unfounded accusations of unethical behavior about other football programs.
Your comment in no way violates this premise. Carry on.
It's not unfounded. His father admits to having been paid money to get Newton to Auburn. The "defense" is that both Auburn and Cam Newton were unaware of the payments.
Scot Loeffler was a popular coordinator last winter after leading Temple's (Temple!) offense under Steve Addazio to reasonable success in the MAC and a bowl win. Temple's teams last year ran the hell out of the ball...passed when absolutely necessary, sometimes...and ran the ball some more.
They also had a good defense.
Last year, Scot Loeffler had Bernard Pierce doing the running for him and the mostly reliable and Tebow like Chris Coyer at QB at Temple. Pierce is doing okay in the NFL now and Coyer is seeking his 'inner Tebow' each week (with on and off success).
I doubt that Loeffler has lost his ability to call a game or that the SEC is so overwhelming...but he doesn't have the RB/QB combo he had at Temple...
Auburn fans delude themselves that National Championships are theirs (when they don't compensate the QB at $200k per year).
Sounds a lot like the hullabaloo going on in East Lansing, where Spartan fans want Dan Rouchar's head. The Spartan fans next to me in the stands on Saturday kept bitching about Rouchar's play-calling. Eventually I turned to him and the conversation went something like this:
Me: "You keep criticizing Rouchar, but didn't he coach offenses the past few seasons that performed pretty well? He didn't get stupid in just one season didn't he?"
Sparty Fan: "Yeah, but he had Cousins and Cunningham to bail him out."
Me: "So your real issue is that your offensive talent this season has dropped off a cliff, which is really a recruiting issue, which really falls back in Dantonio's lap, doesn't it?"
Sparty Fan: "I still think Rouchar sucks and want him gone."
I shrugged my shoulders at that point and went back to watching the game at that point.
I love that you tried to have a rational conversation with them.
I think it was cute and very touching that he tried to reach out to the handicapped
I mean every Spartan fan to a man seems to want to pin this whole disaster of a season on Rouchar and not acknowledge that the past 4 years were an aberration and that the rivalry is slipping back to the old pattern of the past. The Spartan fans I've talked to literally think that they begin another 4 year win streak starting next season and that Dantonio is going to own Hoke in the long run. You point out how their past success had more to do with coaching chaos and a huge experience gap created by player attrition and that the massive recruiting deficit that MSU is facing against U of M and Ohio is about to assert itself and they just think we're rationalizing. It's hilarious.
It should be fun to see how stupid Dantonio gets over the next 5 years in the eyes of the fanbase.
It's an f'in shame that they spent all that money and they're only 1-6. I guess Pro-style players who can run a power offense cost too much these days.
Following Gus Malzahn is not the best of career moves. Following Gus Malzahn and trying to install an offense diametrically opposed to the traits that Gus Malzahn selected for in his recruits is *really* not a good career move.
And finally, running Gus Malzahn out of town and replacing him with an OC that will need at least two years to get some suitable talent to run an offense is legally actionable malpractice.
And trying to get suitable talent to run an offense now that Colonial Bank has failed? Probably impossible even given two years.
Yep. They're struggling right now for the same reason that Rich Rodriguez struggled in 2008. He's got the personnel for a totally different offense. Frazier, McCalebb, etc. are guys who should be playing in a zone spread offense.
Book it and awesome!
If you want to start giving people nightmares around here, suggest that Hoke will start bringing back Carr-era position coaches...
You mean like Brady Hoke?
That total failure of a coach, 1992-94 DL coach, 1995-96 DC Greg Mattison. How awful would things be if he got anywhere near Ann Arbor?
Okay, so I had a brain fart and forgot Hoke was a position coach under Carr. But your Mattison point is invalid.
Just a joke, didn't mean anything by it.
I believe Hoke coached under Moeller. Lloyd was around as an assistant coach, but Hoke left the year before Lloyd was promoted.
I'm guessing you mean Mattison. He DCd a year under Carr.
He was our DC in both 1995 and '96.
As for the above comment, I don't remember people being too upset with Carr's position coaches (aside from perhaps Andy Moeller on the OL). It was the coordinators who got a lot more flak.
Yeah, there really needs to be a "delete" button.
All hell breaking loose with a Chizik-coached team. Wow. Will wonders ever cease?
was probably a very good one.
Arkansas State is 4-3 and their offense is already ranked 35th in YPG.
Malzahn could never have foreseen this situation, but next year he could get consideration for not only the Auburn job (Chizik may be toast, but can the Auburn AD even afford to fire him?), but perhaps the Arkansas HC job in Fayetteville too after John L. Smith leaves. Malzahn first major coaching stint was for Houston Nutt at Arkansas.
As for Loeffler, he is a proven QB coach and would probably get a nice job someplace else.
I liked EDSBS' take on Gus Malzahn:
Bailing: He lived. In comparison, what Gus Malzahn has survived is piddling, but comparable in terms of timing. Malzahn was hired in a cheap recruiting ploy at Arkansas, then thrown clear into the arms of Todd Graham at Tulsa. Malzahn's offenses thrived, but fate intervened again as Malzahn opted to move to Auburn, and thus both missed the Todd Graham Pitt disaster and met up with Cam Newton. After one non-Cam season at Auburn, Malzahn then took the oddball move of going to Arkansas State. This looked very strange until Auburn imploded this year and Arkansas got Petrino'd, and now Gus Malzahn is 3-3 at Arkansas State, comfortable and in line for interviews as a head coach in the offseason.
Corollary: If Gus Malzahn suddenly leaves a bus you are riding, you leave with him. That bus is about to explode.
From the Alphabetical, http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2012/10/9/3480156/college-footb...
He's a coordinator, not an HC.
He was co-DC with Duane Akina for Texas' national title team in 2005, but as HC at Iowa State Chizik went 5-19 in 2 years. For Iowa State football, Chizik was actually a step down from Dan McCarney. That says it all right there.
I'll NEVER understand what the hell Auburn's AD saw in Chizik as an HC. The NC season with Newton and a good defense seemed to justify the case that Auburn had struck gold with the hire.
But in 2012 I don't see Auburn winning any more SEC contests.. They should beat New Mexico State and Alabama A&M, but no guarantees man, Auburn is that bad.
Hard not to call a 3-9 finish for Auburn already (worst since 1998).
I can't believe it may cost Auburn something like $7 million to get rid of Chizik.
Was actually ranked in the 60s which is the lowest ranked defense by a national champion. If it weren't for Nick Fairley, Auburn defense would be even worse. He single handily dominated Oregon offense. They tried to option off Fairley and he was too quick for the read.
Cam Newton won that national title, not Gene Chizik. Newton had that unique ability of making everyone around him better. Without his transfer to Auburn, they don't get anywhere remotely close to a national title.
Newton didn't make everyone better at Florida, and I think the Panthers are 1-6 right now... He was great for that one year, but I don't think he made everyone better. He was just good.
I believe he was the Auburn DC under Tuberville for a period (including their undefeated season where they were left out of the BCS championship)... so they saw him as "coming home".
I'm not saying he's a good coach (he's absolutely not), but just answering why they were willing to take a chance on him after his awful Iowa State performance.
had a pretty concise theory about the Chizik hiring and no one else has proffered an explanation that even makes sense to me.
"Keep it down home, cuz."
It's incomprehensible otherwise.
Blame the Head Coach for hiring said coordinator. Chizik and Loeffler both will be gone at the end of this season odds are.
where they will put up crazy numbers on offense and struggle on defense.
Depends on who he hires. It has always been true, but it has become more and more apparent that a head coach's success is a direct function of the staff he associates himself with. Chizik (who must be credited with bringing Malzahn on board) is a textbook example of this. So are the most recent two head coaches at Michigan.
Offensive guys do well if they get a good defensive coach to give their offense time to come together. Urban Meyer didn't exactly set the world on fire when he went to Florida, but he had great coordinators (cough, cough) and great talent on defense that allowed his early Gator teams to win when the offense didn't perform up to snuff.
Frankly, that's exactly what is happening in South Bend this year.
It can be argued that the budget for said staff can ALSO have a huge influence on exactly who the staff will be. Watching some of the Borge-iosity, it's pretty unfortunate that a talent of the level of Denard is being utilized far below his particular skillset. (My brother, a fan, but not frequent enough visitor to games, marveled at forcing DR into a WCO QB role, when he's clearly ill-suited for it. How I wish the "we won't force players into schemes they're not suited for" was an actual truth instead of another bit of coachspeak...)
If an AD suggests here are two wheelbarrows of money, go hire THE BEST staff, does Borges get invited? It's understood there are loyalties to staff, etc. But with the money to pull in ANYONE you want, regardless of cost, makes it a VERY different proposition.
I've commented elsewhere, the stinginess of the Michigan AD regarding football coaching staff has been an albatross keeping those teams from mid-90's to 2007 from being Alabama-esque in terms of being elite and staying there.* (*Elite does NOT lose games in September, or to Minnesota, or get blown out by Iowa during homecoming.)
So your position is that when UM fired RR, it should have hired a staff based on the talent of the current players to succeed within the system that the new staff uses?
Now clearly Borges is not running a zone read spread, but i'm seeing a few more zone read plays called than is normal in a WCO. So i think what you're trying to say is that if RR had to go, then he should have been replaced with another spread coach or at least one that would hire a spread OC? And this is because Denard had two more years of eligibility?
It's not just coachspeak, but having an OC run a new system is a lot like forcing your players into a system for which they're not suited. So as an administration you have to make a decision; changing the system may see a few years of subpar performance as players matriculate and/or learn the new system. RR probably didn't get that chance, but he probably would have if he had managed to win a few more games during the transition.
BTW, the first QB Hoke/Borges recruited was classified as a tweener that has the skill set to potentially succeed in either a pro-style or a spread offense.
I know who Bellomy is...curious to see if he gets meaningful snaps and experience this year, and what kinds of plays are called while he's in (see numerous posts/threads on the topic blasting/loathing/adoring his "stats" to date). College football is rife with results where teams rise high riding the upperclassman QB, who plays 90%+ snaps, and then the drop-off-a-sheer-cliff outcome after said senior QB graduates/uses up eligibility. Have a succession plan in place, and as we've coachspoke...the expectation is to the position, not the player.
Another comment, not particularly in response to your post, the "wait 'til Al gets his QB - Shane Morris." So what? Seems quite a few comments out there about the kid should red-shirt in 2013. Then what? Wait another year, until Morris is a R-So or R-Jr until the offense really takes off? That means 2015 is when we can expect to take on anyone, anywhere, and win. WOOF!
As very many others farther down this thread are commenting, fans are/can be stupid. What aggravates is to make a commitment* to change, and bail after 2-3 years of really awful and ugly infighting/backbiting. And unhappy results abound, on-field and off. (*not really a commitment)
But thanks for the reply...always interested in what others think/say. Not alway easy to summarize succinctly.
Wasn't the complaint this weekend that we ran the zone read too many times, and too predictably? Not sure how much of anything Saturday was West Coast Offense, but whatever.
as I recall there were some issues with Malzahn and players parents and their kids' playing time or something like that. I kind of doubt he gets that job.
they decided to go all manball but do not have the personnel. Just dumb to think anyone turns it around in a year, even two.
Of course fans call for the OC's head; that's what fans do. Fans are fickle and impatient.
Are you suggesting their fans should be patient because it takes time to turn around a 14-0 team? Or that wanting to get rid of the new OC, (who's led them to the #121st ranked offense), makes them fickle?
fans should be patient because it takes time to turn around a 14-0 team
LOL ... +1 ... made my day!
The story on THIS board seems to be that - in a win against MSU - we need to ditch both the OC and the QB. I think it's pathetic that Michigan fans could win either or both Scott Tenorman of the Week or Tears of Unfathomable Sadness when Brian writes up TWIS this week.
Was there criticism of the ofensive performance? Sure, and much of it justified, but outside of a couple nut jobs, no one was seriously suggesting we change QB's and/or the OC at this point in the season.
Stop making a mountain out of a non-existant mole hill.
"At this point in the season", no. But the general sentiment seemed to be that Borges is incompetent and Denard is the embodiment of yakkety sax ...
yes there were a lot of complaints about the offense, particularly coming off a win, but aren't they justified?
We scored a grand total of 12 points, had no td's and Denard was held in check for the 3rd straight year against Sparty. Add in the facts that it was the 3rd poor offensive outing of the season and Denard and Borges are in year 2 together and I think it is legit to be concerned.
If the offense continues to perform at this level we will struggle mightily to beat Nebraska, OSU, Wisconsin and our bowl opponent all of whom are likely better than Sparty.
them fickle. And (unless I'm missing something) everything I said holds: they had a successful spread team. They are trying to move to manball (opposite of the position UM was in under RR). Now they will have to be patient while they rebuild. That doesn't mean that Loeffler succeeds, of course, or that Chizik wasn't just lucky in the first place, or (least of all) that going to the spread was a good idea. (Maybe worth building around a special player?) I'm not a fan of Chizik or Auburn's/the SEC's traditional pay-to-play policies, that's for sure.
We might have different understandings of the word "fickle". I'd say it would apply if Malzahn was still there and they were calling for his head, not for a new guy with whom they were never enamored.
Asking for patience while they rebuild begs the obvious questions. Why are they rebuilding? Why a dramatic change in offensive philophy? Should changing your offense lead to a disastrous season? Bear in mind that their QB is a very fast dual-threat guy. It seems like it's either a horrible miscalculation on Chizik's part or very poor implementation of the new offense.
would be if Chizik had gone down for Camgate, Malzahn was made interim interim head coach for a year and then was demoted to co-coordinator when Bobby Bowden was lured out of retirement to take over the program.
That would have been fickell treatment of Malzahn.
of philosophy--or Loeffler--to begin with then they can't be accused of being fickle. But I expect that you would also acknowledge that you probably don't get to success in a half year after such a turnabout. Now whether they have to be so terrible, you may know more than I do. From what I have read they don't have a lot of great players. Anyway, it's doubtful the Auburn admin bails on Chizik; he'll get another year.
Bet Jordan Diamond, Kris Frost, and Alex Kozan are still glad to be in the SEC and not on a soon to be B1G Championship team./S Wonder what's going to happen to their current recruiting class after Chinzik gets fired?
In the event anyone is interested in what this drop at Auburn looks like:
At the end of last season, the Auburn passing offense had gone 164 for 292, good for 56.2%, totalling 2,022 yards and amassing 17 TDs. After seven games this year, they are 96 for 164, which is actually a 58.5% completion rate, but 1,081 yards of passing offense has resulted in 4 TDs. If the current rate held (which it may not deep into their conference schedule), they would theoetically see about a 10% decrease in passing yards compared to last year and only 3 more TDs in the air in five remaining games.
The 2011 rushing offense carried the ball 536 times and managed 2,370 yards, or 4.4 YPC. To date this season, they have 856 yards on 254 carries, which is 3.4 YPC. That's actually good for a 22% reduction in the average productivity of the rushing offense, and they are on track, if the rate held, for less than 1,500 yards rushing on the year, or nearly a 40% drop, and last year's 20 rushing TDs become 10 TD this year projected.
Scoring offense will look awful as a result. Last year, Auburn amassed 4,392 yards of total offense and averaged 25.7 points per game. So far this season, they have 1,937 yards of offense and are averaging 15.7 points per game. Overall, their offensive productivity would fall by 25% or so if this kept up.
The reality is that Auburn fans simply aren't getting their money's worth this year and they are unhappy. But who can blame them -- they invested a ton of cash into this team so they expected more than 1 win.
Not really, since Loeffler used to play and coach at Michigan.
Looking ahead, Borges has never been at one place more than 4 years. I've seen some posters suggest that we could "bring home" Loeffler. I'd love to think we could start looking outside the pool of individuals with previous ties to Michigan, but I think Brandon would give an OC with Michigan ties significant preference.
"...start looking outside the pool of individuals with previous ties to Michigan."
Start? As in you don't think we're already doing that?
And of course Borges himself. Maybe I missed something in their bios but as far as I know, of the current staff only Mattison, Hoke and Mallory had Michigan ties before they were hired...and Jackson was a grad student here. And never mind the previous staff, which was chock full of people with no previous ties to Michigan.
Hoke is going to choose the next OC, not Brandon.
What else would you expect? Look who he learned from. Lloyd! One of the most boring coaches ever.
Michigan is 900-312-36 throughout history, which is a 72.1% winning percentage.
Lloyd Carr was 122-40, which is a 75.3% winning percentage, and won a national championship.
So Lloyd Carr RAISED the all-time winning percentage of the winningest program in football history. Who cares if he was boring? Rich Rodriguez was "exciting"...and he ended his career 15-22. Carr won a LOT.
Winning = Exciting to me
why they elected to move away from the offense that won them a national title is beyond me. unless this is the kind of offense chizik planned to implement when he got hired.
This is actually the second year in a row that Auburn's offense has been pretty weak.
Auburn's offensive numbers from 2011 (regular season only):
PPG: 24.3 (87th in FBS)
Total YPG: 328.2 (102nd in FBS)
Rushing YPG: 174.8
Rushing YPC: 4.3
Passing YPG: 153.4
Passing YPA: 6.84
Passing TD-to-INT: 17-13
3rd Down Conversion: 35.6%
Malazhn was still the OC in 2011, so it can't all be on Lefty.
It looks like all of those guys booing Gene Chizik as he got off the plane were right.
I can't believe people are actually calling for Borges' head. I don't think he's free from criticism, but if you are calling him out for this year's gameplan against State after last year's game and what happened earlier this season, you are crazy. I would love to see more bubble screens or at least plays designed to keep the defense from stacking the box against the run, but State has a great defense and I don't expect Borges to excel in an offense he has no history in. With that said, Borges has adjusted more than the previous staff ever did, boith to his talent and in game, and that's coming from a Rodriguez apologist. Hoke and Co. are 16-4 going through a freaking transition!!! Things will improve. Enjoy the ride and quit being ridiculous.