Realistic Options

[AUTiger1]

That is Satan stealing the recruits... Get your facts straight.  We don't lose them, they are stolen by the Dark Lord.

 

[The Six]

There are no realistic options. From the AD on down they would rather sink the football program then to admit they were wrong. We will most likely go into next year with this same staff and most likely have the same record again and then and only then will some changes be made, and of course this will be after losing the top recruits they we may have had.

I don't think Scot Loeffler will be back. Based on the stuff Ove read from PMarshall about the spread,
I think Chizik may go back to that and get a coordinator to develop Frazier. unless they leave for other jobs, I expect to see the staff return largely intact. Guess we will just have to get All In.

[AWK]

I don't think Scot Loeffler will be back. Based on the stuff Ove read from PMarshall about the spread,
I think Chizik may go back to that and get a coordinator to develop Frazier. unless they leave for other jobs, I expect to see the staff return largely intact. Guess we will just have to get All In.

If Chizik isn't fired, the repercussions will be huge.

[dallaswareagle]

I don't think Scot Loeffler will be back. Based on the stuff Ove read from PMarshall about the spread,
I think Chizik may go back to that and get a coordinator to develop Frazier. unless they leave for other jobs, I expect to see the staff return largely intact. Guess we will just have to get All In.

Yea, we are gonna get it "All In"

[JR4AU]

What I hear (skreetz) about Patterson is that his wife is a Dallas socialite and the TCU alum-base pooled their resources and gave him royalties to a shale reserve.  Who knows if that's true, but it would explain his reluctance to leave TCU.

Strong would be a great choice.  Not a home-run, but a solid hire who has rebuilt Kragthorpe's mess at UL and is regarded is a good recruiter.

The SunBelt guys (GM included) don't really blow my skirt up, but this isn't exactly a seller's market for coaches. 

Chip Kelley can eat a dick.  Do not want.  Bad coach and worse human.

Holgerson and/or the Leach-tree flavor of the week can all pound sand.

Patterson, Strong, both good choices.  Don't know anything about Patterson's situation. 

I didn't believe it at first, but am now convinced you can't have a fast tempo spread offense and a good defense.  Don't know why you can't have both, but you just can't.  For that reason, I don't want any of those coaches.  Can't say Chip Kelly is a bad coach when he wins like he does, and his teams execute like they do, but don't want him either.  Not sure what you know that makes him a "bad human".    All the Air Raid/Leach/Franklin/Holgorsen guys, same same on defenses, don't get it, but don't want to go through shootouts like we saw between aTm and La Tech.  Is it possible Tubs has cracked the code on how to have both a tempo spread offense, and a good Defense?   

Here's the thing though, if you don't go hire a winner because of scheme, then who is there that's absolutely proven?  I like Rhodes, but fact is, he's a .500 head coach.  Same with strong until this year, and the year is only half over.  And let's be realistic, they L'ville doesn't have a ranked team on their schedule. 

[JR4AU]

If Chizik isn't fired, the repercussions will be huge.

It will take some world class convincing of the PTB, the fans, and players that he has a solid plan for an immediate turn around, and I don't think the tired old line of "we're going to get back to work" is going to do it.

Bad as Loeffler appears to be, I still think he's a symptom of the bigger problem. 

[CCTAU]

It will take some world class convincing of the PTB, the fans, and players that he has a solid plan for an immediate turn around, and I don't think the tired old line of "we're going to get back to work" is going to do it.

Bad as Loeffler appears to be, I still think he's a symptom of the bigger problem.

Is Loeffler really the problem? Or is he used to coaching a better prepared athlete. He has done well in the past. Were those athletes better athletes? Or were they just better prepared mentally to fight through the mistakes.

We are a team that seems to have a bunch of players that have never had to face adversity. They were highly rated and came from successful programs. As such, do they have to be coached differently than this staff is used to?

We used to say that Tubs got more out of a bunch of three stars than anyone. Maybe it was because the three stars always had to work harder. I don't know. But it sure looks like for all of our great talent, we have very little resolve.

[DnATL]

Forget "ALL IN" - we're moving to a Raiders-style vertical passing game - "BALLS DEEP!!"

(Snaggle will be SOL)

[jmar]

It will take some world class convincing of the PTB, the fans, and players that he has a solid plan for an immediate turn around, and I don't think the tired old line of "we're going to get back to work" is going to do it.

Bad as Loeffler appears to be, I still think he's a symptom of the bigger problem.

True, and the losses will multiply and the scores will get even more lopsided. I can stand a re-building year from time to time. It happens. But what positives will this team take with them after this season mercifully ends? There are none! You can't build on incompetence and lack of development. Auburn is a bottom dweller. I guess the next thing we will hear is that this is some kind of character building experience.

 

[AUJarhead]

Is Loeffler really the problem? Or is he used to coaching a better prepared athlete.

I wonder how much coaching did Tom Brady and Tim Tebow really need?

[Snaggletiger]

Forget "ALL IN" - we're moving to a Raiders-style vertical passing game - "BALLS DEEP!!"

(Snaggle will be SOL)

The Raiders are 1-4

[JR4AU]

Is Loeffler really the problem? Or is he used to coaching a better prepared athlete. He has done well in the past. Were those athletes better athletes? Or were they just better prepared mentally to fight through the mistakes.

We are a team that seems to have a bunch of players that have never had to face adversity. They were highly rated and came from successful programs. As such, do they have to be coached differently than this staff is used to?

We used to say that Tubs got more out of a bunch of three stars than anyone. Maybe it was because the three stars always had to work harder. I don't know. But it sure looks like for all of our great talent, we have very little resolve.

He's the offensive mind.  He's being allowed to do what he does, but I have to assume that the offense is mostly his.  The Game Plan mostly his, with Chizik's overall philosophy applied.  But I see him do things that don't make sense.  Mason was having a fair amount of success running the ball Saturday, and carried 13 times in the first half.   Then only 5 carries in the second half.  Go here, and look at the play calling http://espn.go.com/ncf/playbyplay?gameId=322870145&period=3  Every time Mason would have success, he'd go away from him.

Mason for 6 yards, the next play OMac for zero, or incomplete pass.  Mason breaks one for 26, next play OMac for loss.  It makes no fucking sense.  We were only down by 7, and Mason was no where to be found in the early part of the 4th...2 carries for negative yardage.  A RB can't get in any groove like that.

This wildcat shit.  As I've said, it's nothing but Power O, and Counter.  Solid Xs and Os.  However, Wallace is our least productive runner with 11 carries for 40 yards, and that's all he's being allowed to do.   He's only run Power and Counter.  So, when he's on the field, that's the only 2 plays that threaten the defense.  Wasted plays in my opinion.  The flip side  is we have those 2 blocking schemes in, yet don't use them in the I or one back sets, and run almost exclusively zone type plays, and maybe ISO,but I'm not sure on the ISO.    I think we tried to run counter once out of the gun with Moseley in, and some kind of Jet sweep action...it went for a loss if I recall.  It just doesn't make any sense.  None of it does.

[Buzz Killington]

No matter what happens, I will be sorely disappointed if the PTB don't make Brian Kelly turn them down at least once.

[jmar]

No matter what happens, I will be sorely disappointed if the PTB don't make Brian Kelly turn them down at least once.

Notre Dame is his dream job. We stand as good a chance getting Pete Carroll.

[Snaggletiger]

He's the offensive mind.  He's being allowed to do what he does, but I have to assume that the offense is mostly his.  The Game Plan mostly his, with Chizik's overall philosophy applied.  But I see him do things that don't make sense.  Mason was having a fair amount of success running the ball Saturday, and carried 13 times in the first half.   Then only 5 carries in the second half.  Go here, and look at the play calling http://espn.go.com/ncf/playbyplay?gameId=322870145&period=3  Every time Mason would have success, he'd go away from him.

Mason for 6 yards, the next play OMac for zero, or incomplete pass.  Mason breaks one for 26, next play OMac for loss.  It makes no fucking sense.  We were only down by 7, and Mason was no where to be found in the early part of the 4th...2 carries for negative yardage.  A RB can't get in any groove like that.

This wildcat shit.  As I've said, it's nothing but Power O, and Counter.  Solid Xs and Os.  However, Wallace is our least productive runner with 11 carries for 40 yards, and that's all he's being allowed to do.   He's only run Power and Counter.  So, when he's on the field, that's the only 2 plays that threaten the defense.  Wasted plays in my opinion.  The flip side  is we have those 2 blocking schemes in, yet don't use them in the I or one back sets, and run almost exclusively zone type plays, and maybe ISO,but I'm not sure on the ISO.    I think we tried to run counter once out of the gun with Moseley in, and some kind of Jet sweep action...it went for a loss if I recall.  It just doesn't make any sense.  None of it does.

Yep, the Mildcat was maddening.  As you said, they've only let Wallace do one of two things.  The defense knows exactly what's coming and they're running it at times that make no sense whatsoever.  Wallace is not a good passer from what I saw, but if you insist on putting him in that much, would it not make sense to let him pull up and hit the TE or somebody else...at least once.  Wouldn't that make the defense respect other options when Wallace comes in.  But, it's pretty much the exact same thing they did with Frazzers the entire last half of the season last year. 

[RWS]

It just doesn't make any sense.  None of it does.

AU's current offense reminds me of last year's offense.  It looks like the same shit for the most part, and same philosophy. The same thing that happened with Frazier is now happening with Wallace.  If you're using him, let him throw it every now and then. 

[Godfather]

No matter what happens, I will be sorely disappointed if the PTB don't make Brian Kelly turn them down at least once.

Never go full tard.

[JR4AU]

AU's current offense reminds me of last year's offense.  It looks like the same shit for the most part, and same philosophy. The same thing that happened with Frazier is now happening with Wallace.  If you're using him, let him throw it every now and then.

With the exception of the I formation and true FB, it is pretty much the same.  The I formation stuff was supposed to be what we were going to.  And the crap people talk about Frazier being spread QB is bullshit.  90% of QBs coming out of HS are "spread QBs".

[Saniflush]

Never go full tard.

He's simple Jack.

[Godfather]

He's simple Jack.

It sounded good in his h-h-head movies.