Overwhelmingly, what we need, is for Muschamp to turn it around. There is so much about him as a person and a football coach that I like.
This statement perplexes me. I agree that we need him to turn it around, but I don't see what you do in coach. What exactly is it as a person and a football coach do you like?
What I like about Muschamp is what we saw last year. We were well-conditioned, and dominated the fourth quarters of games in which I thought we were sunk (most notably against F$U). The team was tough, gritty, and played cohesively and with a collective identity. I have not seen those qualities in a Gator team since Tebow’s junior year. I like the way Muschamp talks – he’s honest and direct, and doesn’t engage in too much coach-speak. His players would run through a wall for him. He has integrity and has already improved the culture at UF, which Meyer left in the gutter. He’s had top 5 or even top 3 recruiting classes each year, at least as rated by the national media. And he did go 11-2 last year, finishing third at the end of the regular season (starting next year that would have been good at a shot at Notre Dame, which we would have won, followed by a shot at Bama for the NC). He did that doing things his way, and with the rebuilding project less complete than now.
Basically, even with his flawed system, he did close to as well as you can do…until this year when he lost his top deep threat and kick returner, quarterback, running back, left tackle, right guard, best pass rusher, and starting inside linebacker by the second conference game. Who could survive that? As I said in the first post, what would the 1992 Gators have looked like if they had lost those players?
1992 games | Result | Likely outcome without Matthews, Rhett, Jackson, Odom, Green, Carter, Hanks, and Miles | Likely outcome without these players, if the opposing teams were the 2013 versions |
W 35-19 | Likely win | Win | |
L 14-31 | | Win | |
L 6-30 | | Win | |
W 28-21 | Likely loss | Loss | |
W 24-9 | Call it a win at home | Loss | |
W 31-17 | Likely win | Loss | |
@ Georgia | W 26-24 | Certain loss | Loss |
W 24-20 | Likely loss, either Louisville or this one | Win | |
W 14-9 | Likely loss | Loss | |
W 41-21 | Likely win | Loss | |
L 24-45 | | Loss | |
@ Alabama | L 21-28 | Wouldn’t have been there | Wouldn’t have been there |
With the injuries I would say we would have gone about 4-7 or 5-6 if we win both the home games against the indies (USM was good that day – no way we win without Shane). But fast forward to the SEC circa 2013, with the stronger competition, and 4-7 sure looks like a likelihood (Louisville, SC, Vandy, and Auburn are much improved from their 1992 position, while UT and USM are worse and Miss St. is probably about the same – especially on Thursday night in Starkville).
I don’t love Muschamp’s system but the results speak for themselves last year. This year I don’t see SOS doing any better so what can I really ask for?
I think we’ll be in trouble because these days, losing a recruiting class sets you back. The next guy might succeed at first but in the third year he’d be in the same situation – his classes won’t be ready, and too many of Muschamp’s players will be gone. It happened to Spurrier, Zook, and Muschamp. And then in the third year people will be screaming that it isn’t working.
I wanted Zook out because it was clear to me that things had already fallen apart – once that happens, and it’s inevitable, then the sooner the better. Dealing with Zook early – combined with Meyer’s incredible success at Utah – ameliorated the problem for him somewhat.
But the real reason we’ll be in trouble is what I said before, about becoming a coach killer program. As I wrote to Jerry, if we were to dump CWM and go after a good young coach, there would be no shortage of people in his ear saying, don’t do it. It’s a lot of money, but it’s where young coaches go to get skinned alive. You’re a prospect – wait for the next offer. Take 2 mil instead of 3-4 and you might find a place where you could build a program over several years, become a legend. Like Stoops chose at Oklahoma. UF could have paid more, but Stoops wanted no part of it.
Even the coaches who had success wanted out. Spurrier is a happy man at USC. If they challenge for the SEC, they are thrilled. At Florida people were freaking out if we went 10-2. I think, when we try to evaluate our own attractiveness as a coaching destination, we need to be realistic: a guy who won two titles here left because he needed a less stressful job, like being coach at Ohio St. When a guy, making millions and having success, who has no problem with the stress of leading a program like OSU, can’t take the heat of the UF job, what does it say about how hot that seat is?
In our last two non-personal-connection coaching searches, we have hired two assistants. SOS wanted out of the job, Meyer wanted out, Stoops wasn’t interested, Shanahan wasn’t interested. We waved money in all of those guys faces like few other programs could. It didn’t help. If the UF job was so great, and we have so much more money than everyone else, they why not hire a successful head coach? Maybe a few coaches at super rich programs are out of reach (Saban) but in the corporate world, if you need a CEO, and if you can pay more, you don’t look to recruit your best interns, or go grab a mid-level manager in the open market. No, you try to steal the best guy in your industry from your competitors.
UF has not done that. If we have the money, it suggests they don’t want to come for other reasons.
Our best hope is having one of these people turn into the football version of Donovan (who was a HEAD coach BTW). I want that to be Muschamp because at least his project is 60% complete, or whatever. With a new guy – some other hot assistant – we just start the game over again at zero. And every time we do it, the job becomes just that much more undesireable.
From: gatortalk@googlegroups.com [mailto:gatortalk@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Kirkley.net
Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2013 3:42 AM
To: gatortalk@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [gatortalk] Weighing in
I think we’d be in big trouble if we tried to replace him now.
Why? At best we are 60% through rebuilding, at worse 75%, let's say we lose this recruiting class, it shouldn't put us more than a year behind, if at all.
Ken K
MNGator
On Nov 18, 2013, at 6:31 PM, "Kevin G. Dickey" <kgdickey@gmail.com> wrote:
Overwhelmingly, what we need, is for Muschamp to turn it around. There is so much about him as a person and a football coach that I like. There’s just a lot that, if it doesn’t change, is going to sink him. I think we’d be in big trouble if we tried to replace him now.
--
--
GATORS: ONE VOICE ON SATURDAY - NO VOICE ON SUNDAY!
1996 National Football Champions | 2006 National Basketball Champions
2006 National Football Champions | 2007 National Basketball Champions
2008 National Football Champions |
Three Heisman Trophy winners: Steve Spurrier (1966), Danny Wuerffel (1996),
Tim Tebow (2007) - Visit our website at www.gatornet.us
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "GatorTalk" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/gatortalk/txN7sgzjydc/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to gatortalk+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
No comments:
Post a Comment