[stupac2]

By the way, w/r/t my Nussmeier suggestion: he's the guy who coordinated UW during that 2011 season. Had solid records at Alabama. Michigan's offense stinks -- but is that Brady Hoke's fault?

(Remember, here's how you can describe some of the most successful members of the staff:
"N.D.'s defensive line stinks -- but is that Randy Hart's fault?"
"Texas's defense stinks -- but is that Duane Akina's fault?"
"C.al's special teams stink -- but is that Pete Alamar's fault?")

Funny, even though I don't actually think we definitely need a new OC this year, Nussmeier is who I thought of too. I have to wonder how much of his success at Alabama was him, vs his godly OLs and RBs. But Alabama's offense with McCarron was basically what we want from ours...

[stupac2]

By the way, w/r/t my Nussmeier suggestion: he's the guy who coordinated UW during that 2011 season. Had solid records at Alabama. Michigan's offense stinks -- but is that Brady Hoke's fault?

(Remember, here's how you can describe some of the most successful members of the staff:
"N.D.'s defensive line stinks -- but is that Randy Hart's fault?"
"Texas's defense stinks -- but is that Duane Akina's fault?"
"C.al's special teams stink -- but is that Pete Alamar's fault?")

Funny, even though I don't actually think we definitely need a new OC this year, Nussmeier is who I thought of too. I have to wonder how much of his success at Alabama was him, vs his godly OLs and RBs. But Alabama's offense with McCarron was basically what we want from ours...

[washingtonismoney]

Funny, even though I don't actually think we definitely need a new OC this year, Nussmeier is who I thought of too. I have to wonder how much of his success at Alabama was him, vs his godly OLs and RBs. But Alabama's offense with McCarron was basically what we want from ours...

His record at UW is pretty reassuring in that respect. Also coaxed some good offenses out of athletic-but-(in a football sense)-dumb Jake Locker.

[washingtonismoney]

Funny, even though I don't actually think we definitely need a new OC this year, Nussmeier is who I thought of too. I have to wonder how much of his success at Alabama was him, vs his godly OLs and RBs. But Alabama's offense with McCarron was basically what we want from ours...

His record at UW is pretty reassuring in that respect. Also coaxed some good offenses out of athletic-but-(in a football sense)-dumb Jake Locker.

[CTcard]

By the way, w/r/t my Nussmeier suggestion: he's the guy who coordinated UW during that 2011 season. Had solid records at Alabama. Michigan's offense stinks -- but is that Brady Hoke's fault?

(Remember, here's how you can describe some of the most successful members of the staff:
"N.D.'s defensive line stinks -- but is that Randy Hart's fault?"
"Texas's defense stinks -- but is that Duane Akina's fault?"
"C.al's special teams stink -- but is that Pete Alamar's fault?")

I think that your post highlights that we are now on a topic that this board is particularly ill-suited for having an intelligent opinion.

Outside of the extremes, to have a good idea on which coaches are doing a good or bad job you have to know something from the inside about what is going on. To have a good idea about who would be a good hire, you have to have an extensive knowledge of the coaching world and who is good at what.

Here we are pretty much limited to throwing out names of guys who are either semi-famous or ex-Stanford guys. My hunch is that most of the time the best candidates, particularly for position coaches but even coordinators, are none of the above.

[CTcard]

By the way, w/r/t my Nussmeier suggestion: he's the guy who coordinated UW during that 2011 season. Had solid records at Alabama. Michigan's offense stinks -- but is that Brady Hoke's fault?

(Remember, here's how you can describe some of the most successful members of the staff:
"N.D.'s defensive line stinks -- but is that Randy Hart's fault?"
"Texas's defense stinks -- but is that Duane Akina's fault?"
"C.al's special teams stink -- but is that Pete Alamar's fault?")

I think that your post highlights that we are now on a topic that this board is particularly ill-suited for having an intelligent opinion.

Outside of the extremes, to have a good idea on which coaches are doing a good or bad job you have to know something from the inside about what is going on. To have a good idea about who would be a good hire, you have to have an extensive knowledge of the coaching world and who is good at what.

Here we are pretty much limited to throwing out names of guys who are either semi-famous or ex-Stanford guys. My hunch is that most of the time the best candidates, particularly for position coaches but even coordinators, are none of the above.

[OutsiderFan]

I know Tom Brady is the QB, but I really like the New England Patriots offense.  They have, IMO, the best coaching staff in the NFL.  They routinely adapt to personnel losses, have been excellent at getting good OL play even with different guys rotating in, use two TEs, maintain a commitment to running the ball, even though they can pass it a lot in some games, and they don't waste time with long play calls.

That in mind, how about a former NFL OC who is the Patriots' TE coach and was once a GA at Michigan State:
http://www.patriots.com/team/coaches/dab...91387dc206

[OutsiderFan]

I know Tom Brady is the QB, but I really like the New England Patriots offense.  They have, IMO, the best coaching staff in the NFL.  They routinely adapt to personnel losses, have been excellent at getting good OL play even with different guys rotating in, use two TEs, maintain a commitment to running the ball, even though they can pass it a lot in some games, and they don't waste time with long play calls.

That in mind, how about a former NFL OC who is the Patriots' TE coach and was once a GA at Michigan State:
http://www.patriots.com/team/coaches/dab...91387dc206

[stupac2]

I know Tom Brady is the QB, but I really like the New England Patriots offense.  They have, IMO, the best coaching staff in the NFL.  They routinely adapt to personnel losses, have been excellent at getting good OL play even with different guys rotating in, use two TEs, maintain a commitment to running the ball, even though they can pass it a lot in some games, and they don't waste time with long play calls.

That in mind, how about a former NFL OC who is the Patriots' TE coach and was once a GA at Michigan State:
http://www.patriots.com/team/coaches/dab...91387dc206

I dunno, Patriots OCs have an epic history of suckitude at other jobs. Charlie Weiss alone should make anyone recoil in horror at the thought of touching a Patriots offensive assistant. Then again, O'Brien does seem to be doing fine so far. But I'd really want to see someone who has had success with a quarterback other than one who's in the top 5 all time at the position.

[stupac2]

I know Tom Brady is the QB, but I really like the New England Patriots offense.  They have, IMO, the best coaching staff in the NFL.  They routinely adapt to personnel losses, have been excellent at getting good OL play even with different guys rotating in, use two TEs, maintain a commitment to running the ball, even though they can pass it a lot in some games, and they don't waste time with long play calls.

That in mind, how about a former NFL OC who is the Patriots' TE coach and was once a GA at Michigan State:
http://www.patriots.com/team/coaches/dab...91387dc206

I dunno, Patriots OCs have an epic history of suckitude at other jobs. Charlie Weiss alone should make anyone recoil in horror at the thought of touching a Patriots offensive assistant. Then again, O'Brien does seem to be doing fine so far. But I'd really want to see someone who has had success with a quarterback other than one who's in the top 5 all time at the position.

[OutsiderFan]

I think that your post highlights that we are now on a topic that this board is particularly ill-suited for having an intelligent opinion.

Outside of the extremes, to have a good idea on which coaches are doing a good or bad job you have to know something from the inside about what is going on. To have a good idea about who would be a good hire, you have to have an extensive knowledge of the coaching world and who is good at what.

Here we are pretty much limited to throwing out names of guys who are either semi-famous or ex-Stanford guys. My hunch is that most of the time the best candidates, particularly for position coaches but even coordinators, are none of the above.

The nice thing about sports is even though someone might not understand all the technical aspects, everyone can see who's units perform well and who's don't, by watching the games and looking at the stats and scores.

Here's an example.  By now everyone on this board is aware that Ca.l has the same record Stanford does, one year removed from being 1-11.  And they are probably also aware Ca.l's roster is not nearly as talented as Stanford's, but the team is putting up (and giving up) way more points than Stanford.  They may not be aware that Ca.l has developed a better running game than Stanford this year, with far less heralded OL recruits.  Here's some evidence that demonstrates why Ca.l is running the ball well this season, from the Oregon State game this past weekend.  Any Stanford RB running behind this kind of blocking would be putting up big numbers.

True Soph OG Chris Borrayo:
https://vine.co/v/OOHmpFlDUZb

RS Frosh OT Aaron Cochran:
http://instagram.com/p/u9jC-ljWjb/

The Ca.l OL coach is 29 year old Zach Yenser.  Nobody needs to know specific OL blocking techniques to see this guy can coach.  All you need to do is watch these clips, watch them play, and see the stats.  The Borrayo one demonstrates a guy who can get his pads low, deliver a hit, maintain his balance, and drive with his legs.  It's textbook.  If Stanford's OL was blocking thusly, this thread may not exist.  You don't need to be a football coach or even played the game to see that.

[OutsiderFan]

I think that your post highlights that we are now on a topic that this board is particularly ill-suited for having an intelligent opinion.

Outside of the extremes, to have a good idea on which coaches are doing a good or bad job you have to know something from the inside about what is going on. To have a good idea about who would be a good hire, you have to have an extensive knowledge of the coaching world and who is good at what.

Here we are pretty much limited to throwing out names of guys who are either semi-famous or ex-Stanford guys. My hunch is that most of the time the best candidates, particularly for position coaches but even coordinators, are none of the above.

The nice thing about sports is even though someone might not understand all the technical aspects, everyone can see who's units perform well and who's don't, by watching the games and looking at the stats and scores.

Here's an example.  By now everyone on this board is aware that Ca.l has the same record Stanford does, one year removed from being 1-11.  And they are probably also aware Ca.l's roster is not nearly as talented as Stanford's, but the team is putting up (and giving up) way more points than Stanford.  They may not be aware that Ca.l has developed a better running game than Stanford this year, with far less heralded OL recruits.  Here's some evidence that demonstrates why Ca.l is running the ball well this season, from the Oregon State game this past weekend.  Any Stanford RB running behind this kind of blocking would be putting up big numbers.

True Soph OG Chris Borrayo:
https://vine.co/v/OOHmpFlDUZb

RS Frosh OT Aaron Cochran:
http://instagram.com/p/u9jC-ljWjb/

The Ca.l OL coach is 29 year old Zach Yenser.  Nobody needs to know specific OL blocking techniques to see this guy can coach.  All you need to do is watch these clips, watch them play, and see the stats.  The Borrayo one demonstrates a guy who can get his pads low, deliver a hit, maintain his balance, and drive with his legs.  It's textbook.  If Stanford's OL was blocking thusly, this thread may not exist.  You don't need to be a football coach or even played the game to see that.

[BobK]

Lofton won't be coaching.  Troy Walters is and seems to be doing well.

Look at gostanford the nine coaches are listed.

[BobK]

Lofton won't be coaching.  Troy Walters is and seems to be doing well.

Look at gostanford the nine coaches are listed.

[CTcard]

The nice thing about sports is even though someone might not understand all the technical aspects, everyone can see who's units perform well and who's don't, by watching the games and looking at the stats and scores.

Here's an example. 
...  They may not be aware that Ca.l has developed a better running game than Stanford this year, with far less heralded OL recruits. 
...
The Ca.l OL coach is 29 year old Zach Yenser.  ... If Stanford's OL was blocking thusly, this thread may not exist.  You don't need to be a football coach or even played the game to see that.

Excellent. You bring up just about a perfect example of the issue I raised.

Mike Bloomgren has been Stanford's Oline coach since 2011. For the past two years, he has also been the offensive coordinator.
Over that time Stanford had the following offensive lines:
2011 - possibly the best Oline in Stanford history, at least in the discussion.
2012 - a weak Oline put together with spit and bailing wire. Yankey at LT was not ideal, but somebody was needed there.
2013 - a very good Oline with players that had been around the program for awhile but not necessarily top recruits ... plus Peat.
2014 - a struggling Oline particularly with cohesion issues. Four new starters, most were highly rated recruits.

I don't think it is feasible that Bloomgren was a great Oline coach in 2011 and 2013 and a terrible Oline coach in 2012 and 2014. There are reasons you might dismiss the good performances of 2012 and 2014 as not being primarily to his credit and there are reasons you might attribute the poor performances of 2012 and 2014 to issues mostly beyond his control.
Deciding where everything comes down on balance takes something a little more.

Further, assuming 29 y.o. Yenser is an excellent young coach, tell us who is the next Yenser out there. Two years ago before he came to Cal, for that matter 1 year ago, how many folks on this board would have identified him as an up and coming coach who would make an excellent hire?
A few folks on this board seem to have some inside connections, but I haven't seen many posts pointing out hot young position coaches across the country, or wily veterans not high in the public eye. I would be very interested in reading that kind of info, but it doesn't seem to be something we have here.


and p.s.
Cal does not have a better running game than Stanford. So far Cal has averaged 4.02 yards against weaker defensive competition than against which Stanford has averaged 4.18 yds/rush. Cal also tends to use the run as a surprise option against defenses primarily trying to defend the pass.
Cal does have a better offense overall than Stanford, with a nice improvement this year.

[CTcard]

The nice thing about sports is even though someone might not understand all the technical aspects, everyone can see who's units perform well and who's don't, by watching the games and looking at the stats and scores.

Here's an example. 
...  They may not be aware that Ca.l has developed a better running game than Stanford this year, with far less heralded OL recruits. 
...
The Ca.l OL coach is 29 year old Zach Yenser.  ... If Stanford's OL was blocking thusly, this thread may not exist.  You don't need to be a football coach or even played the game to see that.

Excellent. You bring up just about a perfect example of the issue I raised.

Mike Bloomgren has been Stanford's Oline coach since 2011. For the past two years, he has also been the offensive coordinator.
Over that time Stanford had the following offensive lines:
2011 - possibly the best Oline in Stanford history, at least in the discussion.
2012 - a weak Oline put together with spit and bailing wire. Yankey at LT was not ideal, but somebody was needed there.
2013 - a very good Oline with players that had been around the program for awhile but not necessarily top recruits ... plus Peat.
2014 - a struggling Oline particularly with cohesion issues. Four new starters, most were highly rated recruits.

I don't think it is feasible that Bloomgren was a great Oline coach in 2011 and 2013 and a terrible Oline coach in 2012 and 2014. There are reasons you might dismiss the good performances of 2012 and 2014 as not being primarily to his credit and there are reasons you might attribute the poor performances of 2012 and 2014 to issues mostly beyond his control.
Deciding where everything comes down on balance takes something a little more.

Further, assuming 29 y.o. Yenser is an excellent young coach, tell us who is the next Yenser out there. Two years ago before he came to Cal, for that matter 1 year ago, how many folks on this board would have identified him as an up and coming coach who would make an excellent hire?
A few folks on this board seem to have some inside connections, but I haven't seen many posts pointing out hot young position coaches across the country, or wily veterans not high in the public eye. I would be very interested in reading that kind of info, but it doesn't seem to be something we have here.


and p.s.
Cal does not have a better running game than Stanford. So far Cal has averaged 4.02 yards against weaker defensive competition than against which Stanford has averaged 4.18 yds/rush. Cal also tends to use the run as a surprise option against defenses primarily trying to defend the pass.
Cal does have a better offense overall than Stanford, with a nice improvement this year.

[OutsiderFan]

I've seen Ca.l run and seen Stanford run this year.  Cal is better this year.  It's a combination of the OL and their RBs being more physical.  Daniel Lasco, who was injured most of 2013, has been transformed by their coaching staff from a guy who ran with finesse under Tedford to one that runs with physicality now.  And it does help to not have to run against 7 and 8 man fronts all the time for sure, but Tony Franklin is a big believer in running the ball.  In fact, they inserted the undersized Frosh QB from Arizona in to their offense to hedge their bets they could present some credible run threat this year. 

Good point on Bloomgren.  For the record, I don't want him out as the OL coach, just as OC.  The strongest case to be made is both his areas of responsibility have weakened since he was made the OC in addition to OL coach.  It's just that in order to bring in a new OC, there has to be some staff shuffling.  Maybe Pritchard is the one it makes most sense to move out, so Bloomgren can focus on the OL and a new OC can be brought in as well, and then Lance Taylor can take on RBs and WRs.  That's always been a pretty common position coach.

So:  Bloomgren to OL coach only, Taylor gets WRs and RBs, New OC and QB coach, Morgan Turner is the only one that stays the same, and Pritchard is out, or maybe Pritchard gets RBs and WRs and Taylor is out.  Either way, it seems either Taylor or Pritchard would be the odd man out.

After this "discussion" it seems this might be the best way to shake up the offensive coaching staff.  Now, who is the new OC and QB coach?

[OutsiderFan]

I've seen Ca.l run and seen Stanford run this year.  Cal is better this year.  It's a combination of the OL and their RBs being more physical.  Daniel Lasco, who was injured most of 2013, has been transformed by their coaching staff from a guy who ran with finesse under Tedford to one that runs with physicality now.  And it does help to not have to run against 7 and 8 man fronts all the time for sure, but Tony Franklin is a big believer in running the ball.  In fact, they inserted the undersized Frosh QB from Arizona in to their offense to hedge their bets they could present some credible run threat this year. 

Good point on Bloomgren.  For the record, I don't want him out as the OL coach, just as OC.  The strongest case to be made is both his areas of responsibility have weakened since he was made the OC in addition to OL coach.  It's just that in order to bring in a new OC, there has to be some staff shuffling.  Maybe Pritchard is the one it makes most sense to move out, so Bloomgren can focus on the OL and a new OC can be brought in as well, and then Lance Taylor can take on RBs and WRs.  That's always been a pretty common position coach.

So:  Bloomgren to OL coach only, Taylor gets WRs and RBs, New OC and QB coach, Morgan Turner is the only one that stays the same, and Pritchard is out, or maybe Pritchard gets RBs and WRs and Taylor is out.  Either way, it seems either Taylor or Pritchard would be the odd man out.

After this "discussion" it seems this might be the best way to shake up the offensive coaching staff.  Now, who is the new OC and QB coach?

[Redrum]

I'm not alone in noting this.  But most of the comments focus on replacing Bloomgren as OC for offensive scheme failings.  Fact is, when taking on OC responsibilities he damaged his chances at continuing our recent excellent OL tradition ...and increased his problems executing his offensive plan.  It has been mentioned many times over the years and has the added advantage of being true that more teaching and technique go into the OL than any other position.  Gotta be that way for 5/6 guys to meld different physical skills with an offensive scheme and the timing of the other offensive players.  In many of the other previous regimes, including Harbaugh, two coaches were working the OL...one on the interior and a second w/ tackles and TEs.  This seems like a no-brainer.  Bloomgren knows his OL stuff, but you gotta wonder if he'd take the nominal demotion.  Well, whoever it is, he should have only one thing on his mind: how to make the OL better and develop the younger players as part of that.

Quite apart from the Shaw lynch mob atmosphere,  this move to take a high-functioning position coach and put him in a position to be mediocre at several responsibilities rests squarely on Shaw's shoulders.  He's gotta own it as a mistake and he's gotta fix it.

P.S.  There is a legit argument that early in Harbaugh/Shaw we had an exceptionally gifted OL recruiting and that there is no substitute for physical talent.  And boy do we miss those guys.  OK, but that there will always be talent hits and misses, variability in development, that's all the more reason for the OL coach(es) to be spending the bulk of his time evaluating/ recruiting/ teaching replacement talent of equal caliber. 

[Redrum]

I'm not alone in noting this.  But most of the comments focus on replacing Bloomgren as OC for offensive scheme failings.  Fact is, when taking on OC responsibilities he damaged his chances at continuing our recent excellent OL tradition ...and increased his problems executing his offensive plan.  It has been mentioned many times over the years and has the added advantage of being true that more teaching and technique go into the OL than any other position.  Gotta be that way for 5/6 guys to meld different physical skills with an offensive scheme and the timing of the other offensive players.  In many of the other previous regimes, including Harbaugh, two coaches were working the OL...one on the interior and a second w/ tackles and TEs.  This seems like a no-brainer.  Bloomgren knows his OL stuff, but you gotta wonder if he'd take the nominal demotion.  Well, whoever it is, he should have only one thing on his mind: how to make the OL better and develop the younger players as part of that.

Quite apart from the Shaw lynch mob atmosphere,  this move to take a high-functioning position coach and put him in a position to be mediocre at several responsibilities rests squarely on Shaw's shoulders.  He's gotta own it as a mistake and he's gotta fix it.

P.S.  There is a legit argument that early in Harbaugh/Shaw we had an exceptionally gifted OL recruiting and that there is no substitute for physical talent.  And boy do we miss those guys.  OK, but that there will always be talent hits and misses, variability in development, that's all the more reason for the OL coach(es) to be spending the bulk of his time evaluating/ recruiting/ teaching replacement talent of equal caliber. 

[washingtonismoney]

Are we sure there's an OL coaching problem? Bloomgren took the dual role as OC/OL coach in 2013. But the OL improved between 2012 and 2013, which makes it hard to completely endorse the theory that Bloomgren's coaching is at fault.

Not sure we have enough information to really make a good judgment. Something's gone wrong at most levels of the offense, but I'm not sure there's a complete working theory here.

[washingtonismoney]

Are we sure there's an OL coaching problem? Bloomgren took the dual role as OC/OL coach in 2013. But the OL improved between 2012 and 2013, which makes it hard to completely endorse the theory that Bloomgren's coaching is at fault.

Not sure we have enough information to really make a good judgment. Something's gone wrong at most levels of the offense, but I'm not sure there's a complete working theory here.

[BostonCard]

Is the OC job a full-time one at most schools?

No

[BostonCard]

Is the OC job a full-time one at most schools?

No

[fullmetal]

True Soph OG Chris Borrayo:
https://vine.co/v/OOHmpFlDUZb

RS Frosh OT Aaron Cochran:
http://instagram.com/p/u9jC-ljWjb/

Those are pretty good clips.  Are there any of the Stanford OL similarly manhandling opponents this season?

[fullmetal]

True Soph OG Chris Borrayo:
https://vine.co/v/OOHmpFlDUZb

RS Frosh OT Aaron Cochran:
http://instagram.com/p/u9jC-ljWjb/

Those are pretty good clips.  Are there any of the Stanford OL similarly manhandling opponents this season?

[CTcard]

Believe it or not, the 59ers are actually rushing more than we are, 332 attempts to 302. I'm not sure exactly what happens to those numbers if you untangle sacks and scrambles, but in any event, their rushing game is much more that a diversionary effort.

The biggest issue is that the bears run many more plays than we do - the extreme hurry up thing.
So, the bears have run about 30 more times and passed about 100 more times.
The bears run on 46% of their plays - higher than last year.
Stanford runs on about 51% of our plays - much lower than last year.
The bears have about 29% of their yards gained on the ground.
Stanford has about 36% of our yards gained on the ground.

The teams are looking more alike than last year, bad for us all the way around.

The thing that surprised me, is that despite being way behind from the get go - we actually ran more frequently vs Oregon (54+%) than we typically have this year. 

[CTcard]

Believe it or not, the 59ers are actually rushing more than we are, 332 attempts to 302. I'm not sure exactly what happens to those numbers if you untangle sacks and scrambles, but in any event, their rushing game is much more that a diversionary effort.

The biggest issue is that the bears run many more plays than we do - the extreme hurry up thing.
So, the bears have run about 30 more times and passed about 100 more times.
The bears run on 46% of their plays - higher than last year.
Stanford runs on about 51% of our plays - much lower than last year.
The bears have about 29% of their yards gained on the ground.
Stanford has about 36% of our yards gained on the ground.

The teams are looking more alike than last year, bad for us all the way around.

The thing that surprised me, is that despite being way behind from the get go - we actually ran more frequently vs Oregon (54+%) than we typically have this year. 

[OutsiderFan]

Offensive Coordinators most often are also the QB coach.

[OutsiderFan]

Offensive Coordinators most often are also the QB coach.

[BostonCard]

If the OC is by definition not a full-time gig, then what's the sense in all this talk about Blomgren being forced to split his time? It sounds like somebody's going to have to split his time.

I think the concern is that the offensive line job is already a big job.  You will recall that during the Harbaugh era, it was actually broken into two (inside OL got one coach, outside OL and TE got another coach).

BC

[BostonCard]

If the OC is by definition not a full-time gig, then what's the sense in all this talk about Blomgren being forced to split his time? It sounds like somebody's going to have to split his time.

I think the concern is that the offensive line job is already a big job.  You will recall that during the Harbaugh era, it was actually broken into two (inside OL got one coach, outside OL and TE got another coach).

BC

[BostonCard]

Is anyone else a bit troubled by the entire premise of this thread?  I'm not trying to say that a critical evaluation of the OC job is not warranted.  But I think starting a thread about looking for a new OC before any sort of announcement has been made about our existing one is a bit unsavory, in my opinion.

BC

[BostonCard]

Is anyone else a bit troubled by the entire premise of this thread?  I'm not trying to say that a critical evaluation of the OC job is not warranted.  But I think starting a thread about looking for a new OC before any sort of announcement has been made about our existing one is a bit unsavory, in my opinion.

BC

[OutsiderFan]

This is what fans do, Boston Card.  We're simply sharing ideas about what we know and might like to see happen.  If people don't like it, they don't have to participate in the thread, or even read it.

I've never been on any other sports fan forum where discussing new coaching possibilities before openings exist, is considered unsavory.

[OutsiderFan]

This is what fans do, Boston Card.  We're simply sharing ideas about what we know and might like to see happen.  If people don't like it, they don't have to participate in the thread, or even read it.

I've never been on any other sports fan forum where discussing new coaching possibilities before openings exist, is considered unsavory.

[yvonne]

Is it going too far to say that you'd like to see the head coach gone, Garvin? (Serious question. I'm not sure whether I'm reading your nuances correctly.)

[yvonne]

Is it going too far to say that you'd like to see the head coach gone, Garvin? (Serious question. I'm not sure whether I'm reading your nuances correctly.)

[fullmetal]

Shaw stays, but we need a new OC.  I can't fathom how Bloomgren has managed to do poorly at two jobs if Shaw thought he was capable of at least one of them (the most important being OL coach). 

[fullmetal]

Shaw stays, but we need a new OC.  I can't fathom how Bloomgren has managed to do poorly at two jobs if Shaw thought he was capable of at least one of them (the most important being OL coach).