[OutsiderFan]

There is a big difference between building and sustaining.  Ca.l installed a totally new offense in 2013, was extremely young, inexperienced and lacked talent on the OL, started a True Frosh at QB, and had nothing at the RB position.  On top of that, the players were soft, had no strong team concept, and many weren't taking school seriously.  There are no parallels between the 2013 Ca.l offense and the 2014 Stanford offense worthy of discussion.  The differences are so stark that even comparing them statistically is a waste of time.

Another difference.  Tony Franklin has a long track record of producing productive offenses.  When you hear him interviewed you know why.  He has developed hismown philosophy.  He has been in charge of developing and running an offense asmthe coordinator.  He wants to threaten all areas of the field, and contrary to popular belief, he's just as happy to run the ball as throw it.  I even think he prefers running.  Bloomgren has no similar track record of success and wasn't hired as "his own man" as much as someone to implement what someone else wanted him to do. 

As for evidence when things go south they can turn around with the same person in charge, it may be possible, but in any area of life do you want the person who had responsibility for screwing something up, to be the one to fix it?  If you get your roof done and it leaks, how likely are you to call the same guy to fix it, versus finding a new one that you feel good about simply because he's  a different guy?

[OutsiderFan]

There is a big difference between building and sustaining.  Ca.l installed a totally new offense in 2013, was extremely young, inexperienced and lacked talent on the OL, started a True Frosh at QB, and had nothing at the RB position.  On top of that, the players were soft, had no strong team concept, and many weren't taking school seriously.  There are no parallels between the 2013 Ca.l offense and the 2014 Stanford offense worthy of discussion.  The differences are so stark that even comparing them statistically is a waste of time.

Another difference.  Tony Franklin has a long track record of producing productive offenses.  When you hear him interviewed you know why.  He has developed hismown philosophy.  He has been in charge of developing and running an offense asmthe coordinator.  He wants to threaten all areas of the field, and contrary to popular belief, he's just as happy to run the ball as throw it.  I even think he prefers running.  Bloomgren has no similar track record of success and wasn't hired as "his own man" as much as someone to implement what someone else wanted him to do. 

As for evidence when things go south they can turn around with the same person in charge, it may be possible, but in any area of life do you want the person who had responsibility for screwing something up, to be the one to fix it?  If you get your roof done and it leaks, how likely are you to call the same guy to fix it, versus finding a new one that you feel good about simply because he's  a different guy?