I wanted Jinks gone after 2 years as well. I'm not happy with this, but I really don't see how it gets fixed easily or fast. I do believe things were every bit as bad as we believe they were -- and probably worse. But even saying that, you have to start showing improvement at some point, even if it's only in flashes of young talent or better discipline as a team.MarkL wrote:I was ready to fire Jinks after two years. Someone who thinks he should be given more time would not come to the conclusions I wrote three years ago. Jinks inherited a pretty good situation and tanked it.
Jinks was given three years. Which was at minimum one more year than he should have been given. Loeffler has a vision and it aligns with the AD's vision. So you can guarantee Loeffler will be given at least as much time as Jinks had.
Now something to also remember. The AD talked in an interview with the blade about how he is not putting pressure on Loeffler to win now. He also said he is going to continually evaluate for progress. He is not just going to give Loeffler all the time to do damage with no payoff. After this disaster of a year do not be surprised if the AD steps in to push for some changes. Anyone remember that article? Can't find it but I remember reading it. I think this past offseason.
Akron Game
- Falconwriter
- Peregrine

- Posts: 938
- Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 11:37 am
- Location: Columbus
Re: Akron Game
The poster formerly known as BGwriter
Re: Akron Game
That's the part that sucks. I don't think anybody here had any delusions this would be anything more than a rough season. But when you've lowered the expectations to the point of simply "don't get boat races by freaking Akron" and still falling short? That's a problem.Falconwriter wrote:I wanted Jinks gone after 2 years as well. I'm not happy with this, but I really don't see how it gets fixed easily or fast. I do believe things were every bit as bad as we believe they were -- and probably worse. But even saying that, you have to start showing improvement at some point, even if it's only in flashes of young talent or better discipline as a team.MarkL wrote:I was ready to fire Jinks after two years. Someone who thinks he should be given more time would not come to the conclusions I wrote three years ago. Jinks inherited a pretty good situation and tanked it.
Jinks was given three years. Which was at minimum one more year than he should have been given. Loeffler has a vision and it aligns with the AD's vision. So you can guarantee Loeffler will be given at least as much time as Jinks had.
Now something to also remember. The AD talked in an interview with the blade about how he is not putting pressure on Loeffler to win now. He also said he is going to continually evaluate for progress. He is not just going to give Loeffler all the time to do damage with no payoff. After this disaster of a year do not be surprised if the AD steps in to push for some changes. Anyone remember that article? Can't find it but I remember reading it. I think this past offseason.
I fully appreciate what an awful situation this was when Loeffler got here. But near as I can tell he's done nothing to improve upon it. In some ways (talent at QB being a major one) it's gotten far worse.

