Mike Sanford on the job market

Mike Sanford on the job market - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Mike Sanford on the job market (/thread-22682.html)

Pages: 1 2

Mike Sanford on the job market - needle - 11-30-2021

Fired from Minnesota, where he was the OC

https://www.twincities.com/2021/11/29/gophers-part-ways-with-offensive-coordinator-mike-sanford-jr-in-2022/

Reminder that he was hired by Shaw and has said publicly that Shaw is a mentor

https://www.espn.com/blog/pac12/post/_/id/77539/shaw-petersen-share-mentoring-role

RE: Mike Sanford on the job market - newguy - 11-30-2021

would he consider a head coaching position?

RE: Mike Sanford on the job market - OutsiderFan - 11-30-2021

The David Shaw coaching tree has had all but one limb lopped off, and there may soon be yellow tape around its meager trunk.

RE: Mike Sanford on the job market - needle - 12-17-2021

Named OC at Colorado

https://cubuffs.com/news/2021/12/17/football-sanford-named-cu-offensive-coordinator.aspx

RE: Mike Sanford on the job market - lex24 - 12-17-2021

Always interested in what he’s doing. He was QB at LAHS (recruited and went to USC) when I was Freshman. BMOC. But a good guy.

RE: Mike Sanford on the job market - Austroturf - 12-18-2021

(12-17-2021, 08:47 PM)lex24 Wrote: Always interested in what he’s doing. He was QB at LAHS (recruited and went to USC) when I was Freshman. BMOC. But a good guy.

Did Sanford Jr. also play at USC? I know his father did.

RE: Mike Sanford on the job market - 82lsju - 12-18-2021

(12-18-2021, 09:04 AM)Austroturf Wrote:
(12-17-2021, 08:47 PM)lex24 Wrote: Always interested in what he’s doing. He was QB at LAHS (recruited and went to USC) when I was Freshman. BMOC. But a good guy.

Did Sanford Jr. also play at USC? I know his father did.

Sanford Jr played at Boise State

lex24 - lex24 - 12-18-2021

(12-18-2021, 09:23 AM)82lsju Wrote:
(12-18-2021, 09:04 AM)Austroturf Wrote:
(12-17-2021, 08:47 PM)lex24 Wrote: Always interested in what he’s doing. He was QB at LAHS (recruited and went to USC) when I was Freshman. BMOC. But a good guy.

Did Sanford Jr. also play at USC? I know his father did.

Sanford Jr played at Boise State

No. Didn’t know it was junior. My mistake. I was referring to Sr.

RE: Mike Sanford on the job market - winflop - 12-18-2021

(12-17-2021, 07:46 PM)needle Wrote: Named OC at Colorado

https://cubuffs.com/news/2021/12/17/football-sanford-named-cu-offensive-coordinator.aspx

Not that I expected anything different than ShawVita next year, but this was a missed opportunity.

RE: Mike Sanford on the job market - Austroturf - 12-18-2021

(12-18-2021, 09:48 AM)winflop Wrote:
(12-17-2021, 07:46 PM)needle Wrote: Named OC at Colorado

https://cubuffs.com/news/2021/12/17/football-sanford-named-cu-offensive-coordinator.aspx

Not that I expected anything different than ShawVita next year, but this was a missed opportunity.

I predict there will be no changes to the staff. Zero. Unless, of course, a staff member leaves for a better opportunity elsewhere. Otherwise, it will be status quo.

RE: Mike Sanford on the job market - BostonCard - 12-18-2021

So. On the one hand, Mike Stanford’s Minnesota offense averaged 26 ppg, which is almost a full touchdown better than Pritchard’s Stanford offense. On the other hand, in 2019, the year before Sanford became OC, Minnesota averaged 34 points per game, while in the two year’s he’s been OC, they fell to 27.3 and 26.1 ppg.

In 2019, Minnesota averaged 4.15 yards per carry and 179 yards per game rushing. In 2021, they improved to 4.23 yards per carry and 193 yards per game. However, their passing went from 10.2 yards per pass attempt, 253 yards per game and a 178 pass efficiency rating down to 8.2 yards per attempt, 166 passing yards per game, and a PER of 137. Now, if Sanford had to bring up a new QB after a highly rated QB got drafted by the NFL this might have been understandable, but it turns out that the QB, Tanner Morgan, was a sophomore in 2019 and regressed quite a bit by his senior year. I don’t know enough about Minnesota to know if the talent surrounding him went down, but I’m guessing that’s the rationale for Mike Sanford being fired.

I think we ought to get a new OC, but i don’t want to get one just because they are conveniently available, especially if they were some other team’s cast-off.

BC

RE: Mike Sanford on the job market - Giants - 12-18-2021

(12-18-2021, 11:02 AM)BostonCard Wrote: So. On the one hand, Mike Stanford’s Minnesota offense averaged 26 ppg, which is almost a full touchdown better than Pritchard’s Stanford offense. On the other hand, in 2019, the year before Sanford became OC, Minnesota averaged 34 points per game, while in the two year’s he’s been OC, they fell to 27.3 and 26.1 ppg.

In 2019, Minnesota averaged 4.15 yards per carry and 179 yards per game rushing. In 2021, they improved to 4.23 yards per carry and 193 yards per game. However, their passing went from 10.2 yards per pass attempt, 253 yards per game and a 178 pass efficiency rating down to 8.2 yards per attempt, 166 passing yards per game, and a PER of 137. Now, if Sanford had to bring up a new QB after a highly rated QB got drafted by the NFL this might have been understandable, but it turns out that the QB, Tanner Morgan, was a sophomore in 2019 and regressed quite a bit by his senior year. I don’t know enough about Minnesota to know if the talent surrounding him went down, but I’m guessing that’s the rationale for Mike Sanford being fired.

I think we ought to get a new OC, but i don’t want to get one just because they are conveniently available, especially if they were some other team’s cast-off.

BC

In 2019, Minnesota had two receivers who are now in the NFL. Both were stars in college.

Tyler Johnson led the Big Ten in receptions and reception yardage in 2019 and was drafted in the fifth round in 2020 by Tampa.

Rashod Bateman was #2 in reception yardage in the Big Ten in 2019 and a first round selection by Baltimore in the 2021 draft.

RE: Mike Sanford on the job market - SamuelMcF - 12-18-2021

(12-18-2021, 09:48 AM)winflop Wrote:
(12-17-2021, 07:46 PM)needle Wrote: Named OC at Colorado

https://cubuffs.com/news/2021/12/17/football-sanford-named-cu-offensive-coordinator.aspx

Not that I expected anything different than ShawVita next year, but this was a missed opportunity.

Disagree with the second half of your sentence. Sanford was DREADFUL at Minnesota, and Gopher fans were ecstatic he was canned.

RE: Mike Sanford on the job market - Austroturf - 12-18-2021

(12-18-2021, 11:02 AM)BostonCard Wrote: So. On the one hand, Mike Stanford’s Minnesota offense averaged 26 ppg, which is almost a full touchdown better than Pritchard’s Stanford offense. On the other hand, in 2019, the year before Sanford became OC, Minnesota averaged 34 points per game, while in the two year’s he’s been OC, they fell to 27.3 and 26.1 ppg.

In 2019, Minnesota averaged 4.15 yards per carry and 179 yards per game rushing. In 2021, they improved to 4.23 yards per carry and 193 yards per game. However, their passing went from 10.2 yards per pass attempt, 253 yards per game and a 178 pass efficiency rating down to 8.2 yards per attempt, 166 passing yards per game, and a PER of 137. Now, if Sanford had to bring up a new QB after a highly rated QB got drafted by the NFL this might have been understandable, but it turns out that the QB, Tanner Morgan, was a sophomore in 2019 and regressed quite a bit by his senior year. I don’t know enough about Minnesota to know if the talent surrounding him went down, but I’m guessing that’s the rationale for Mike Sanford being fired.

I think we ought to get a new OC, but i don’t want to get one just because they are conveniently available, especially if they were some other team’s cast-off.

BC

Agree, we want ... in fact, we NEED the best available.

RE: Mike Sanford on the job market - Hurlburt88 - 12-19-2021

I tend to agree that Sanford would not be a net improvement given his performance in MN, despite the loss of the 2 receivers noted. I also felt like other teams were able to scout the MN passing game better this year and Sanford was was not able to further adjust in turn. Agreeing with Win and others, and repeating many of my other posts, I do remain eager for some staff upgrades. I would probably start with S&C and defense before offense, but in any case at the end of the day if there are no improvements I'll go into next season pessimistic that we can leverage the talent we have attracted to the Farm.

RE: Mike Sanford on the job market - teejers1 - 12-19-2021

(12-18-2021, 01:16 PM)Austroturf Wrote:
(12-18-2021, 11:02 AM)BostonCard Wrote: So. On the one hand, Mike Stanford’s Minnesota offense averaged 26 ppg, which is almost a full touchdown better than Pritchard’s Stanford offense. On the other hand, in 2019, the year before Sanford became OC, Minnesota averaged 34 points per game, while in the two year’s he’s been OC, they fell to 27.3 and 26.1 ppg.

In 2019, Minnesota averaged 4.15 yards per carry and 179 yards per game rushing. In 2021, they improved to 4.23 yards per carry and 193 yards per game. However, their passing went from 10.2 yards per pass attempt, 253 yards per game and a 178 pass efficiency rating down to 8.2 yards per attempt, 166 passing yards per game, and a PER of 137. Now, if Sanford had to bring up a new QB after a highly rated QB got drafted by the NFL this might have been understandable, but it turns out that the QB, Tanner Morgan, was a sophomore in 2019 and regressed quite a bit by his senior year. I don’t know enough about Minnesota to know if the talent surrounding him went down, but I’m guessing that’s the rationale for Mike Sanford being fired.

I think we ought to get a new OC, but i don’t want to get one just because they are conveniently available, especially if they were some other team’s cast-off.

BC

Agree, we want ... in fact, we NEED the best available.

Unless and until Shaw gives up the headsets and menu, it doesn't matter who is hired as OC. Honestly, I'd take letting Tavita call the plays . . . if for no other reason than to see if that guy has any ability as an OC. We're all making a bunch of assumptions about Tavita's ability as an OC, and I don't think that's warranted.

The benefit of hiring an outside OC (again, assuming Shaw relinquishes his grip on the O) is that we'll have a completely different scheme/approach installed. I view the chances of that being an upgrade/improvement to status quo as greater than 50%.

RE: Mike Sanford on the job market - BostonCard - 12-19-2021

(12-19-2021, 11:40 AM)teejers1 Wrote: We're all making a bunch of assumptions about Tavita's ability as an OC, and I don't think that's warranted.

Including yourself, it should be noted. While speaking the play into the headset is a highly visible aspect of coordinating, it is actually only a small part of what the offensive coordinator does, and all of the rest of the stuff is not visible to us.

BC

RE: Mike Sanford on the job market - cardcrimson - 12-19-2021

(12-19-2021, 11:40 AM)teejers1 Wrote: The benefit of hiring an outside OC (again, assuming Shaw relinquishes his grip on the O) is that we'll have a completely different scheme/approach installed. I view the chances of that being an upgrade/improvement to status quo as greater than 50%.

What scheme do we have? Power? Not any more. How would anyone describe what we try to do on offense? It seems the only thing we've got is the fade, and even that is, well, fading. . . .

To me, it's the lack of a consistent offensive philosophy, and recruiting to it.

RE: Mike Sanford on the job market - Goose - 12-19-2021

(12-19-2021, 11:40 AM)teejers1 Wrote: Unless and until Shaw gives up the headsets and menu, it doesn't matter who is hired as OC. Honestly, I'd take letting Tavita call the plays . . . if for no other reason than to see if that guy has any ability as an OC. We're all making a bunch of assumptions about Tavita's ability as an OC, and I don't think that's warranted.

While I agree with the concept that as long as Shaw is directly involved in the offense, the role of the OC will not be front and center, I do think the OC still matters. It is just that we have much less visibility as to how much and in what areas. Obviously, in the current system the OC and Shaw have to be very much in lockstep, not merely on the same page. I do agree that many are making assumptions about Tavita's ability as an OC that are difficult to justify by known facts. FWIW, this is often true about assistant coaches in general. For all we know, Tavita may in fact be calling the plays over the headset and Shaw is simply occasionally editing those calls. Granted, I don't think that is the case but in theory it could be.

Quote:The benefit of hiring an outside OC (again, assuming Shaw relinquishes his grip on the O) is that we'll have a completely different scheme/approach installed. I view the chances of that being an upgrade/improvement to status quo as greater than 50%.

I do not agree with you here if we are talking about a "generic" new OC. Most available hires are available for a reason. Most available hires probably don't want to work under Stanford's constraints. To expect an improvement, you must believe the particular hire brings something that is better than we have. Different does not in general mean better. If it did, Helton would still be the U$C coach as he got an entire new offense installed by administrative fiat.

RE: Mike Sanford on the job market - teejers1 - 12-19-2021

(12-19-2021, 11:50 AM)BostonCard Wrote:
(12-19-2021, 11:40 AM)teejers1 Wrote: We're all making a bunch of assumptions about Tavita's ability as an OC, and I don't think that's warranted.

Including yourself, it should be noted. While speaking the play into the headset is a highly visible aspect of coordinating, it is actually only a small part of what the offensive coordinator does, and all of the rest of the stuff is not visible to us.

BC

The guy has is head buried in the Denny's Menu for 85% of the game - including when team is on D. Have you been at the games and watched him? If he were just an occasional contributor - as opposed to the guy dictating everything about the play calls - then why would he be buried in the menu? I'd bet good money I'm right about the degree of control by Shaw in play calling. It's practically 100%.