Ay-Ziggy-Zoomba.com

I am mindful of the fact that Bowling Green may have never truly fired a head coach in modern history. This is the history I'm aware of:

Urban Meyer (2001-02): Resigned to coach at Utah
Gary Blackney (1991-2000): Resigned (in what I believe was the last year of his contract).
Moe Ankney (1986-90): Contract not renewed.
Denny Stolz (1977-85): Resigned to coach at San Diego State.
Don Nehlen (1968-76): Contract not renewed.
Bob Gibson (1965-67): ???
Doyt Perry (1955-64): Resigned to become athletic director.

I'm also aware that financial considerations are probably a big factor in this history.

Still, I would suggest that if Bowling Green were a more typical Division I-A environment, 2007 would be a make or break season for coach Gregg Brandon, bless his heart.

I don't know the magic number for 2007. Is it 7-5? Is it 8-4? It depends on the strength of schedule, on whether or not the kids (again) play their hearts out. Ultimately, it will be like porn: I'll know it when I see it.

I guess that's a round about way of saying that I haven't lit my torch yet, but I do have my lighter ready and a pitchfork within arm's reach.

Yet, I take this stance with humility. I am mindful of the fact that a pitchfork brigade helped usher out Don Nehlen, and that the wisdom of that decision is not nearly so clear in retrospect.

It also occurs to me that an enterprising individual could set up a firegreggbrandon.com site -- complete with an e-commerce section and the goal of raising $100,000 to transform this to a more typical Division I-A environment. Certainly, with $100,000 available to him, our new AD could pull the trigger if that was his wont.

And, yet...

I cannot help reflect upon the opportunity cost. If Brandon -- bless his heart -- turns in a 5-6 campaign in 2007, would a buyout be the highest and best use of this money, hard won in smallish chunks from alumni of our beloved overgrown teachers college?

I don't know that it would be. I tend to think a chunk of change like that would be better spent on further facility improvements -- such as the ironish fencing, the statue of Coach Perry, stuff we love to dream about here, stuff we know would make a favorable impression on future recruits. Perhaps, in this scenario, it would be best to suffer another year before choosing a new field general who, hopefully, would lead us back to the promised land of the Associated Press Top 25.

I guess I'd close with a couple of final observations:

1. In my view, our team exhibited heart and passion this entire season, and that reflects favorably on Brandon, despite everything else.

2. The very best thing President Ribeau could do for our football program might be to beef up our computer science progam. As much of a blessing as Bob Sebo has been for our program, it seems to me he could use the help of a homegrown Mark Cuban, a Phil Knight -- soeone for whom $100,000 is a rounding error.

And, finally, I apologize if much of this ground is as well-trod as Perry Stadium hosting Miami.

Schadenfreude wrote:If Brandon -- bless his heart -- turns in a 5-6 campaign in 2007,

I'll eat a bug if we go 5-6 next year.


We play at least 12 games.


And as for the team playing with a lot of heart all season, sorry, but I didn't see much of that vs. Toledo.

Schadenfreude wrote: 1. In my view, our team exhibited heart and passion this entire season, and that reflects favorably on Brandon, despite everything else.

No offense meant Schad, but I'm not sure what you've been watching this season with regards to this statement.

The only unit I saw exhibit enthusiasm this year was the defense, and even that wasn't consistent. I saw our offense and special teams act as if they'd rather be somewhere else most of the season. One of the biggest indictments against the current staff, is that their teams rarely show up to play. Other teams usually come out fired up against us, and we usually just sit there and take it.

If you want some evidence of this largely observational and subjective statement, the only thing I can think off is to look at the number of big plays. We had almost no big plays this season, and our opponents regularly had them. For the most part, they simply wanted it more than we did. We lack toughness as a team, and that comes, or in our case didn't come, from the head coach.

No offense, but I think you're taking it a little far. We certainly played hard against Miami, and in every close game we had. There were certainly moments, but I don't think playing hard was what held this team back. Just my opinion.

orangeandbrown wrote:No offense, but I think you're taking it a little far. We certainly played hard against Miami, and in every close game we had. There were certainly moments, but I don't think playing hard was what held this team back. Just my opinion.

I don't either. I would hope our guys would play hard all the time, but I'm talking about what schad brought up -- passion and toughness. Other than sporadically, and from a few specific players (mainly on defense), I didn't see much of either this season.

Buffalo comes to mind as an instance when we actually overcame some adversity and gutted it out. But the fact that it had to come to that against that team at home isn't really a good thing, as the rest of the season bore out.

I stand by what I posted. Heart is another way of saying "played hard." There are plenty of teams that don't play hard -- and virtually all of them are poorly-coached.

Much can be said about Brandon, but it appears (to me) that his players never gave up on him or tuned him out.

Schadenfreude wrote:I stand by what I posted. Heart is another way of saying "played hard." There are plenty of teams that don't play hard -- and virtually all of them are poorly-coached.

Much can be said about Brandon, but it appears (to me) that his players never gave up on him or tuned him out.

We lost our last 5 games. I don't know what to call that other than giving up.

Furthermore -- the Toledo game was a pathetic display. A rivalry game, the last game of the year, and our last chance to salvage a bit of the season, and we were flat throughout and got pasted.

This team had it's moments of battling back and playing with passion, but I don't see how you can say that played with heart and toughness all season long with a straight face.

I think this playing with heart thing is a bit picking of the nits, but I"ll play. I like all of Schad's points, tone, and demeanor. But I also appreciate the no-heart crowd.

So here is my list.

Games They "Played Hard or With Heart":

Wisconsin
OT of Buffalo game
Following 1st offensive play of CMU game
FIU game
Akron game
Ohio game
1st Play of Temple game
EMU game

Games THey Gave Up or otherwise Looked Lost:
Kent
Toledo

Push
Miami
Ohio State

Dayons_Den wrote:I think this playing with heart thing is a bit picking of the nits, but I"ll play. I like all of Schad's points, tone, and demeanor. But I also appreciate the no-heart crowd.

So here is my list.

Games They "Played Hard or With Heart":

Wisconsin
OT of Buffalo game
Following 1st offensive play of CMU game
FIU game
Akron game
Ohio game
1st Play of Temple game
EMU game

Games THey Gave Up or otherwise Looked Lost:
Kent
Toledo

Push
Miami
Ohio State

I agree with this, although I'd bump the OSU game up into the heart category.

Dayons_Den wrote:I think this playing with heart thing is a bit picking of the nits, but I"ll play. I like all of Schad's points, tone, and demeanor. But I also appreciate the no-heart crowd.

So here is my list.

Games They "Played Hard or With Heart":

Wisconsin
OT of Buffalo game
Following 1st offensive play of CMU game
FIU game
Akron game
Ohio game
1st Play of Temple game
EMU game

Games THey Gave Up or otherwise Looked Lost:
Kent
Toledo

Push
Miami
Ohio State

Akrons was a give up/looked lost. The team KNEW Kent was getting their collective @ss handed to them midway through the third quarter. Freak told them
That changed nothing. Other than a few choice drives/moments, the offense still looked like they didn't know how to win the game and/or move the ball.

This team controlled its destiny at that point but didn't want it bad enough. I believe it was the Akron game when this team mailed in the season.

Other than that, I can't find fault in anything Schad posted other than our individual interpretations of "playing hard." I'm not sure the team did play hard most of the season.

So, how many days until Spring Game?

Schadenfreude wrote:

Dayons_Den wrote:I think this playing with heart thing is a bit picking of the nits, but I"ll play. I like all of Schad's points, tone, and demeanor. But I also appreciate the no-heart crowd.

So here is my list.

Games They "Played Hard or With Heart":

Wisconsin
OT of Buffalo game
Following 1st offensive play of CMU game
FIU game
Akron game
Ohio game
1st Play of Temple game
EMU game

Games THey Gave Up or otherwise Looked Lost:
Kent
Toledo

Push
Miami
Ohio State

I agree with this, although I'd bump the OSU game up into the heart category.

Yeah, they played hard in the OSU game and the Wisky game. I liked what I saw in both from the players.

So, according to Dayon's list, you agree that during regulation against Buffalo, most of the CMU and Temple games, and against Kent and Toledo, the team gave up or didn't play with heart or passion or whatever?


And I see your point about swallowing another bad year or two in order to save the money. I disagree, because I think this is a pivotal and transitional era in major college football, but I see the reasoning. I'm just not sure we can afford the damage two more years of this coaching staff may cause. I think major structrual changes are on the horizon throughout the college landscape, and I don't want us to be on the outside looking in because we fell on hard times due to not taking action when it becomes painfully obvious the head coach is in way over his head.

Waiting-out the contract does not make sense for several reasons.

To begin with, it is expensive in more than pure dollars, to take another bad year, or two, with our current coach. Attendance will flag even further, faster perhaps because the ticket price is higher than it was. Recruiting becomes more difficult as our reputation continues to decline. A recovery will take longer, and although we had a quick turn-around with Urban, and his “crowd friendly” attitude sold tickets, such might not be the case in the future.

In short, spend the money, and the fans will know that BGSU isn't “cheap.” They'll show to see the new coach, because the winning years are that far behind. The new coach will have a clearer mandate to win quick, market hard, etc. Cutting Brandon lose early, makes it clear the bar is higher. Otherwise we invite years of slow decline, painful rebuilding, and lousy attendance until that five or six year process is done. Consider how many lost ticket sales and marketing income BGSU stands to see from years more of this trash, and buying him out seems cheap.

The problem is that this line of thought doesn't seem to come easy to BGSU.

Completely agree. I think the buyout seems cheap as well.

I think the difference between the two camps, is ours is pretty certain Brandon can't be a good head coach, and the other camp wants him to turn it around and thinks he's capable. The relative expense of buying him out seems very different depending on which camp you're in.

True enough. There is an assumption that a new coach generates revenue, which is only an assumption. It is perfectly possible to bring in a new coach and have attendance go down again. Of course, with six home games next year, we should see an increase.

A new coach may not generate more revenue, but a bad current coach isn't likely to do any better, and keeping him only delays the same issues. Worse still is if the guy does just well enough to prevent losing his job for years.