Tigers X - Number one Source to Talk Auburn Tigers Sports

Pat Dye Field => War Damn Eagle => Topic started by: AUChizad on February 10, 2010, 03:29:53 PM

Title: Q&A With Gene Chizik
Post by: AUChizad on February 10, 2010, 03:29:53 PM
http://jaygtate.blogspot.com/2010/02/gene-chizik-speaks.html (http://jaygtate.blogspot.com/2010/02/gene-chizik-speaks.html)

Quote
2.09.2010
Gene Chizik speaks
Hey everyone. I intercepted Your Head Coach, in a matter of speaking, at the Montgomery Quarterback Club's awards banquet earlier this evening.

I spent a few minutes with Gene Chizik and asked him some stuff.

I didn't have enough time to get a flow going -- he was a very popular guy at the country club -- but you're the HOTTIES and I don't want to default on my promises.

So here are my questions and his answers.

Q: Do you worry about the pressure on Cam Newton, considering he's a five-star guy whom some people see as a savior?
"I don't worry about the pressure on Cam because he's been there and done that. He knows that winning the job requires a mixture of hard work and studying -- a lot of it on his own. He's a guy who is older. He understands all that. I don't worry about him. The guys who come along at that position understand that it's all part of the deal. I don't think he's an exception to that at all. It comes with the territory."

Q: Does it give him an advantage by being kind of forgotten or overlooked in the past? He's had to fight his way back, right?
"To some extent, yes, and he's hungry. He's focused. I don't think that gives him an advantage over the guys who were on campus because they're the same way. None of them started a game last year. Some of them have age and experience under their belt; some more than others. It doesn't hurt him that he's been there and done that."

Q: Trooper Taylor and Curtis Luper were rated among the nation's top 20 recruiters by Rivals.com on Monday. Is that an odd thing to see as a coach considering how important recruiting is to your entire staff?
"That's great for them. It's a recognition they deserve. They're very good at what they do. With that said, we recruit as a team. We recruit as a village. That's how we do it. If some guys get isolated for what they do, they get some awards, that's great. At the end of the day, everybody on your staff knows it's a team deal. They all carry their weight in different ways."

Q: Is there a different feel at these club meetings now? Can you sense a different level of anticipation or enthusiasm from the supporters?
"I think they're excited. I want them to be excited. I want them to be realistic about where the program is versus where we're headed. They need to understand that this is a work in progress. I want them to be excited about the future. That's good because I think the future is very bright."

Q: Auburn landed a commitment the day after Signing Day and again this weekend. Is the landscape and timetable of recruiting changing as dramatically as it seems?
"There's no off time anymore. It's a 24-7 deal, 365 days per year and it never stops. If we're not communicating with a recruit and building that relationship, someone else is. Across the country, there's a little bit of this early-commitment thing going on everywhere and it was certainly that way when we were at Texas. We were kind of out in front of everybody at that point. They haven't slowed down in that regard. I think a lot of people have caught up to that or at least closed the gap."

Q: Was that something Mack Brown was pushing on you all?
``I don't know that he was pushing it. We just wanted to get commitments when the commitment was ready to pull the trigger. Some of those kids know early. If they're ready, let's get it finished. That was the thought. It's got to be the right time. It's not something that should be rushed."
Title: Re: Q&A With Gene Chizik
Post by: djsimp on February 10, 2010, 04:03:16 PM
Quote
It's got to be the right time. It's not something that should be rushed."

I would have to say this was an interesting comment made by Chizik. Maybe I am just reading into this but it sure seems this had a little extra meaning to it.
Title: Re: Q&A With Gene Chizik
Post by: GH2001 on February 10, 2010, 10:00:19 PM
I would have to say this was an interesting comment made by Chizik. Maybe I am just reading into this but it sure seems this had a little extra meaning to it.


And its hard to argue with Mack's methods.....
Title: Re: Q&A With Gene Chizik
Post by: Kaos on February 10, 2010, 10:35:22 PM

And its hard to argue with Mack's methods.....

The king of close but no cigar?  They got the one NC, but...
Title: Re: Q&A With Gene Chizik
Post by: War Eagle!!! on February 11, 2010, 08:31:07 AM
The king of close but no cigar?  They got the one NC, but...

I could be wrong, although I think he was talking about his recruiting efforts.
Title: Re: Q&A With Gene Chizik
Post by: djsimp on February 11, 2010, 09:35:59 AM

And its hard to argue with Mack's methods.....

I was actually thinking the last statement was towards another coach across the state.
Title: Re: Q&A With Gene Chizik
Post by: bottomfeeder on February 11, 2010, 10:16:42 AM
I was actually thinking the last statement was towards another coach across the state.
  :pwnd: :popcorn:
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Title: Re: Q&A With Gene Chizik
Post by: GH2001 on February 11, 2010, 12:48:46 PM
I could be wrong, although I think he was talking about his recruiting efforts.


You got it.....Mack is the best recruiter the last 10 years in CFB. I was simply meaning from a recruiting standpoint as that was the topic Gene was speaking of about his time at Texas and committing.
Title: Re: Q&A With Gene Chizik
Post by: AUChizad on February 11, 2010, 01:29:04 PM
The king of close but no cigar?  They got the one NC, but...
What year did they get that one NC? Who was on the staff that year?
Title: Re: Q&A With Gene Chizik
Post by: AWK on February 11, 2010, 01:29:43 PM
What year did they get that one NC? Who was on the staff that year?
Vince Young?
Title: Re: Q&A With Gene Chizik
Post by: War Eagle!!! on February 11, 2010, 01:32:22 PM
What year did they get that one NC? Who was on the staff that year?

Mack Brown is nothing without Chizik
Title: Re: Q&A With Gene Chizik
Post by: AUChizad on February 11, 2010, 01:37:52 PM
Mack Brown is nothing without Chizik
Bingo. By Kaos's own implications at least.

Every other year he's "the king of close, but no cigar".

The difference is Chizik.
Title: Re: Q&A With Gene Chizik
Post by: jadennis on February 11, 2010, 02:20:37 PM
Bingo. By Kaos's own implications at least.

Every other year he's "the king of close, but no cigar".

The difference is Chizik.

I know you don't really mean this.  AWK hit it with Vince Young.

However, he does have a cigar...that's key.  You can't say "close but no" about him anymore. 

What's most impressive and totally necessary is staying in that "close but" category year after year.  If you stay there, you will get the cigar.  If you stay there long enough, you'll get more than one. 

Bobby Bowden finished in the Top 5 for 14 straight years....that got him a whopping two titles.   Both titles took Heisman trophy winners to win (Chris Weinke and Charlie Ward), just like it took Vince Young to get Texas over the hump.  Bowden has 18 ten-win seasons.  He has 11 eleven-win seasons.  All that winning only led to 2 titles.

Joe Paterno has 21 ten-win seasons and 15 eleven-win seasons.  Hell, he even has 5 undefeated seasons.  Yet he too only has 2 titles. 

And it's not just football.  Look at how much winning Dean Smith did, he only had two titles. Bobby Knight won 900 games....3 titles in 42 years.

It's just actually very, very hard to win it all, despite what Meyer made it look like in his first 5 years at Florida.  (Even he just went 13-1 last year, yet didn't win it all). 

If Mack Brown stays there another 5-7 years at Texas, he'll have a chance to win another one I bet.
Title: Re: Q&A With Gene Chizik
Post by: jadennis on February 11, 2010, 02:22:41 PM
Also, I kinda feel like the wall of coach-speak is coming down a little with Chizik.  His answers these days occassionally seem a little less general and "duh" but actually include some of his opinion.
Title: Re: Q&A With Gene Chizik
Post by: AUChizad on February 11, 2010, 07:18:58 PM
Also, I kinda feel like the wall of coach-speak is coming down a little with Chizik.  His answers these days occassionally seem a little less general and "duh" but actually include some of his opinion.
I think that's by design. Up until recently there were too many looking for any wild interpretation of anything he could possibly say to be spun into a negative. So he kept it to absolutes so as not to give ammo to his detractors from the Finebaums to the Kaoses of the world. Perhaps now he feels he's earned his keep enough to get the benefit of the doubt from most.
Title: Re: Q&A With Gene Chizik
Post by: GH2001 on February 11, 2010, 09:56:57 PM
I know you don't really mean this.  AWK hit it with Vince Young.

However, he does have a cigar...that's key.  You can't say "close but no" about him anymore.  

What's most impressive and totally necessary is staying in that "close but" category year after year.  If you stay there, you will get the cigar.  If you stay there long enough, you'll get more than one.  

Bobby Bowden finished in the Top 5 for 14 straight years....that got him a whopping two titles.   Both titles took Heisman trophy winners to win (Chris Weinke and Charlie Ward), just like it took Vince Young to get Texas over the hump.  Bowden has 18 ten-win seasons.  He has 11 eleven-win seasons.  All that winning only led to 2 titles.

Joe Paterno has 21 ten-win seasons and 15 eleven-win seasons.  Hell, he even has 5 undefeated seasons.  Yet he too only has 2 titles.  

And it's not just football.  Look at how much winning Dean Smith did, he only had two titles. Bobby Knight won 900 games....3 titles in 42 years.

It's just actually very, very hard to win it all, despite what Meyer made it look like in his first 5 years at Florida.  (Even he just went 13-1 last year, yet didn't win it all).  

If Mack Brown stays there another 5-7 years at Texas, he'll have a chance to win another one I bet.


Tarheel is gonna kick your ass over that middle comment.

Even Bobby's 2 NC's were marred by NCAA controversy. I still have the SI from 93.

(http://www.angelfire.com/fl5/bigdave7503/SeminoleImages/TaintedTitle.jpg)

My point was - NC's or not - Mack has been the King of Recruiting, so his methods for recruiting obviously work. With that said, I dont mind at all if Gene uses those methods. Looks like they are working so far.
Title: Re: Q&A With Gene Chizik
Post by: Kaos on February 11, 2010, 10:15:01 PM
I know you don't really mean this.  AWK hit it with Vince Young.

However, he does have a cigar...that's key.  You can't say "close but no" about him anymore. 

What's most impressive and totally necessary is staying in that "close but" category year after year.  If you stay there, you will get the cigar.  If you stay there long enough, you'll get more than one. 

Bobby Bowden finished in the Top 5 for 14 straight years....that got him a whopping two titles.   Both titles took Heisman trophy winners to win (Chris Weinke and Charlie Ward), just like it took Vince Young to get Texas over the hump.  Bowden has 18 ten-win seasons.  He has 11 eleven-win seasons.  All that winning only led to 2 titles.

Joe Paterno has 21 ten-win seasons and 15 eleven-win seasons.  Hell, he even has 5 undefeated seasons.  Yet he too only has 2 titles. 

And it's not just football.  Look at how much winning Dean Smith did, he only had two titles. Bobby Knight won 900 games....3 titles in 42 years.

It's just actually very, very hard to win it all, despite what Meyer made it look like in his first 5 years at Florida.  (Even he just went 13-1 last year, yet didn't win it all). 

If Mack Brown stays there another 5-7 years at Texas, he'll have a chance to win another one I bet.

I don't disagree with any of this. 

You have to be in the mix to be in the mix.
Title: Re: Q&A With Gene Chizik
Post by: jadennis on February 12, 2010, 12:38:29 PM
Every time I go down Joe Pa's seasons, I'm always amazed at the winning he's done.  Five undefeated seasons, the 15 eleven-win seasons.   That's amazing.

It's also amazing how many times he's had to pick himself up and turn things around.  Those down seasons where he had to fight back and turn it around are probably what has kept him going all this time.  Had he not had those challenges (and instead just won 9-11 games every single year) he probably would have lost the fire by now.

After winning at least 10 from 80-82, he went 8 wins, then 6 wins in 83 and 84.  But 85 he was back at 11 and went 12-0 in 86.

But then 87 to 90 he struggled through 8, 5, 8, and 9 wins.  But by 91 he was back to 10+ wins in 3 of the next 4 years, including another 12-0 in 94.  He won at least 9 games for the next five years, but then in 2000 hit a big skid again, winning 5 or fewer games in 4 of the next 5 years.

But, he stuck around to turn it around one more time and has won 51 games in the last 5 years (11 three times, 9 two times).

He went through at least 3 skids that would have gotten him fired in today's coaching world.  Luckily, they let him stick around, and each time he was able to turn things around.  It's really been amazing and I think we all forget what a legendary coach he has been.
Title: Re: Q&A With Gene Chizik
Post by: GH2001 on February 12, 2010, 12:48:22 PM
Every time I go down Joe Pa's seasons, I'm always amazed at the winning he's done.  Five undefeated seasons, the 15 eleven-win seasons.   That's amazing.

It's also amazing how many times he's had to pick himself up and turn things around.  Those down seasons where he had to fight back and turn it around are probably what has kept him going all this time.  Had he not had those challenges (and instead just won 9-11 games every single year) he probably would have lost the fire by now.

After winning at least 10 from 80-82, he went 8 wins, then 6 wins in 83 and 84.  But 85 he was back at 11 and went 12-0 in 86.

But then 87 to 90 he struggled through 8, 5, 8, and 9 wins.  But by 91 he was back to 10+ wins in 3 of the next 4 years, including another 12-0 in 94.  He won at least 9 games for the next five years, but then in 2000 hit a big skid again, winning 5 or fewer games in 4 of the next 5 years.

But, he stuck around to turn it around one more time and has won 51 games in the last 5 years (11 three times, 9 two times).

He went through at least 3 skids that would have gotten him fired in today's coaching world.  Luckily, they let him stick around, and each time he was able to turn things around.  It's really been amazing and I think we all forget what a legendary coach he has been.

With all due respect to Joe Pa, I think BB has done more.

BB: He took a program that FSU was about to wipe off the map and made it a powerhouse very quickly.
JP: Took over for Rip Engle in 1966. Engle never had a losing season at Penn St and left the program in good shape when Joe Pa took over.

BB: Even though they didnt play in a conference, Bowden quickly garnered the motto: Anybody, Anytime, Anywhere. They played Top 10 teams on the road consistently and won more than not.
JP: With all due respect to the Big 10, the Nittany Lions just did not play the same level of competition as FSU.

BB: Never had a losing season at FSU and Finished in the Top 5 more times than not. That is freaking amazing.
JP: Has had 4 losing season in just the last 12 years. And a handful of Top 5 finishes as compared to BB.

For the above 3 reasons, I think Bowden is the best coach in NCAA history. And this is coming from someone who is no fan of FSU by any means.
Title: Re: Q&A With Gene Chizik
Post by: Kaos on February 12, 2010, 01:16:24 PM
Every time I go down Joe Pa's seasons, I'm always amazed at the winning he's done.  Five undefeated seasons, the 15 eleven-win seasons.   That's amazing.

It's also amazing how many times he's had to pick himself up and turn things around.  Those down seasons where he had to fight back and turn it around are probably what has kept him going all this time.  Had he not had those challenges (and instead just won 9-11 games every single year) he probably would have lost the fire by now.

After winning at least 10 from 80-82, he went 8 wins, then 6 wins in 83 and 84.  But 85 he was back at 11 and went 12-0 in 86.

But then 87 to 90 he struggled through 8, 5, 8, and 9 wins.  But by 91 he was back to 10+ wins in 3 of the next 4 years, including another 12-0 in 94.  He won at least 9 games for the next five years, but then in 2000 hit a big skid again, winning 5 or fewer games in 4 of the next 5 years.

But, he stuck around to turn it around one more time and has won 51 games in the last 5 years (11 three times, 9 two times).

He went through at least 3 skids that would have gotten him fired in today's coaching world.  Luckily, they let him stick around, and each time he was able to turn things around.  It's really been amazing and I think we all forget what a legendary coach he has been.

Joe Paterno = Tommy Tuberville?
Title: Re: Q&A With Gene Chizik
Post by: Godfather on February 12, 2010, 01:33:56 PM
Joe Paterno = Tommy Tuberville?
When Tubs wins about 284 more games and has 2 MNC's perhaps.
Title: Re: Q&A With Gene Chizik
Post by: Kaos on February 12, 2010, 02:02:48 PM
When Tubs wins about 284 more games and has 2 MNC's perhaps.

When he's at a place for 40 years and gets to have a down year or two while he puts things back together, then maybe you'll see that. 

Bowden, Paterno, Osborne, Royal and even Bryant were successful because they lasted.  They survived lean times and kept going. 

Continuity -- if you have a quality person in the position -- is the key to that kind of success.  Blowing shit up and starting over every five to ten years is not. 
Title: Re: Q&A With Gene Chizik
Post by: Saniflush on February 12, 2010, 02:15:41 PM
When he's at a place for 40 years and gets to have a down year or two while he puts things back together, then maybe you'll see that. 

Bowden, Paterno, Osborne, Royal and even Bryant were successful because they lasted.  They survived lean times and kept going. 

Different era.  Not saying there is truth in it but it is also not the way of the world these days.
Title: Re: Q&A With Gene Chizik
Post by: jadennis on February 12, 2010, 02:43:14 PM
Joe Paterno = Tommy Tuberville?

I've never thought it that directly, but many, many times I've thought that we'll never know.

Back in December of 2008 when talk of Tuberville leaving was being tossed around, I made list after list after list of examples of why we should keep him and give him a chance to turn it around.

Just like the guys you listed, they all (except Osborne) experienced those dips.  From 67-70, Bryant won 8, 8, 6 and 6 games.  After having won 11, 10, 9, 10, 9 and 11 games the previous 6 years, he was obviously slipping, washed up, had lost touch with the kids, the game had passed him by....and whatever other career ending phrase you want to insert. 

He was done...finished.

Well, except for the fact that he wasn't.  He won 11, 10, 11, 11, 11, 9, 11, 11, 12, and 10 games in the next 10 years.

Tuberville went 9, 8, 13, 9, 11, 9, and then 5.  Would he have gone back to 11 or 9 or 13 in the next three years?  We'll never know.  But think what Penn State would have missed had they given up on Joe Pa after he won 7 games in 1970.  Or when he won 7 in 1976.  Or when he won 6 in 1984.  Or when he won 5 in 1988.  Or when he won 5 in back to back years in 00 and 01.

The list of "down" years by great coaches is long and includes a lot of hall-of-fame names.  I'm over it now, but I did used to wonder what might have been had we let Tuberville try to fix his 5 win season and situation.  Rumor was he was willing to clean house on the offensive side.  What if he had and hired Malzahn? 
Title: Re: Q&A With Gene Chizik
Post by: Godfather on February 12, 2010, 02:50:56 PM
Different era.  Not saying there is truth in it but it is also not the way of the world these days.
What he said! We want instant gratification and we want it now...dammit!
Title: Re: Q&A With Gene Chizik
Post by: Kaos on February 12, 2010, 04:32:35 PM
Different era.  Not saying there is truth in it but it is also not the way of the world these days.

Sometimes the old ways are the best. 

Where would FSU be today if they'd axed Bowden after a 6-5 season in his sixth year?  Or if they'd decided after 11 seasons that a couple of ten-win campaigns and one 11-win anomaly way back when just wasn't getting them to the next level? 

Knee jerk reaction is no way to go through life. 

That doesn't mean Lebo can stay, though.  Basketball isn't football.
Title: Re: Q&A With Gene Chizik
Post by: AWK on February 12, 2010, 05:00:06 PM
Sometimes the old ways are the best. 

Where would FSU be today if they'd axed Bowden after a 6-5 season in his sixth year?  Or if they'd decided after 11 seasons that a couple of ten-win campaigns and one 11-win anomaly way back when just wasn't getting them to the next level? 

Knee jerk reaction is no way to go through life. 

That doesn't mean Lebo can stay, though.  Basketball isn't football.
Hmmmmmmm