October 22, 2012

"Fire London?" Postscript

Here's an exchange in the comments section of the "Fire London?" post that I didn't want anyone to miss...


Nathan:

My overall take on coaching changes is a pretty conservative one. I tend to value continuity over change. I was shell-shocked when Shanahan was cut loose by Pat Bowlen. I think the Steelers are a modern example of sticking with a coach that works.

There has to be a tipping point, though, right? This season may be it. The mere fact that the team's recent performance is SO much less than the sum of their talented parts is highly disturbing. London's strength should be motivating the team to play and clearly he's not doing it. And he doesn't have the X and O wizardry to scheme the team out of its funk. That was uninspiring, uninspired football we witnessed on Saturday.

I'm going to jump on the one more year bandwagon as of right now, with a caveat: if London can get this team to show signs of life (which is a pretty freaking low bar to set, to be honest) the rest of this year, I might extend that grace a bit. But if he has lost the team and can't get it back, we might see him hitting the bricks in the middle of next season.

Its kind of unbelievable really.


Kendall:

Very, very, very well said, Nathan. I am in exactly the same boat, though I think my trigger finger is just a bit more itchy than yours. (Still on the "conservative" side, but just barely.)

In modern college football, if you're not getting ahead you're falling behind. Nothing is worse than wasting seasons on lame duck coaches. London is either the guy, or he isn't. People are being paid handsomely to make those kinds of decisions, and I just hope the experiences with Gillen, Leitao, and Groh have made the powers that be a bit more decisive on these issues.

At the very least, we need to trade in some of our young rah-rah recruiters for some experienced Xs and Os coaches on the coaching staff. Recruiting will be fine as long as we have London and Chip West. Guys like Dex and Shawn Moore need to be giving us more than [poorly] coaching the safeties, special teams, and tight ends.

As for Lazor, I imagine we'll see him leave this offseason, one way or the other. We have a built-in replacement already on the staff in Mike Faragalli. He could install his pass-first, spread-style attack without changing much of the terminology or infrastructure established under Lazor. To me, losing Lazor and replacing him with Faragalli would represent a "circling of the wagons" for Mike London, and it's a move I would support.

Tough times as a Virginia fan. As my friend Doug said to me last night -- London did himself a disservice by winning eight games last year. If he could split the 10 wins across the 2011 and 2012 seasons, nobody would be unhappy right now. There'd still be pressure to produce in 2013, but nobody would be thinking or talking about the possibility of firing coaches.


No comments:

Post a Comment