Mike Sanford Fired

[Bob_Loblaw]

If I asked you, who ran the ball on

you can’t say, I feel like it was _____

If I asked you which ref threw the flag you can’t say
I feel like it was _______


well you can say whatever you want but it’s pretty dumb to think your feeling is right. It either is right or isn’t right. And it isn’t because of something you felt

Well no, your examples are things either of us COULD know. Like, I could rewind the tape and find out.

If you're ever asking a factual statement about things that people are not privy, they will always give their opinion. We all do this every day.

I doubt anyone on this message board knows who was calling which plays. So any of us who have an opinion on the subject are clearly just giving their opinion.

 

[goldengophers]

Not that anybody cares, but where does Sanford go from here? A quality program would be stupid to hire him. I think his Power 5 decent program days are over, at least as an OC. Amazing how Fleck missed on that hire and didn’t know.

He coaches like a 62 year old on the verge of retirement, he needs to get embedded with a program that stresses tempo and modern route concepts.

 

[CentralGopher]

I'd be all on board with Simon, or whoever Fleck chooses, and Simon may very well be a great selection in the long run... but the love for a guy that spent a month putting together the game plan against Auburn always puzzled me.

Whoever Fleck goes with, I'm all on board!

Peo

I would be surprised if Simon is the new OC, but I could be wrong. If he was not involved very much in the play-calling at any point in this season, I think it would be quite a stretch for Fleck to go with an almost entirely unproven play-caller. The absolutely last thing this program can do is take a step back next year.

Also guessing an announcement could be made awfully soon because I doubt this process just started in the last couple days. I would imagine conversations have taken place, privately, with a number of potential candidates.

I think the smart thing would be a proven guy that has a history at a slightly lower level program of calling plays and running the entire show on the offensive side of the ball. If I were a betting man, this is what I think happens.

I wouldn’t be that surprised. People do earn promotions and I’m sure it’s happened hundreds of times elsewhere. It isn’t like he’s never called a game before and probably had an increased role since Illinois. Put yourself in Simon’s shoes if you will. If you get passed over for a second time in a row by your boss for promotion do you still stick around or go elsewhere?

 

[btowngopher]

It should have been sooner. I assumed he was going to stick around until next year after he wasn’t fired post-IL which was an absolute disaster of a game for him, the second in one season amid some other average output. Why keep him then and fire now?

In reality, it looks like he was internally demoted at that time and this has been a long goodbye. I suppose it could be looked at in different ways from a recruiting standpoint.

Maybe just out of respect. Optics?

 

[MNVCGUY]

Unproven conspiracy warning...

The offense had enough subtle changes post-Illinois that I've been wondering if PJ hired an offensive consultant. Any chance of that? Either that or the Illinois loss just lit a fire underneath some people.

Doubtful that they brought someone in from the outside but there was a definite shift in the offense after the Illinois game. My guess is that this is when Sanford was actually "fired" even if the announcement didn't happen until after the Wisconsin game.

 

[MNVCGUY]

Maybe just out of respect. Optics?

Sanford and Fleck are buddies so out of respect Fleck was probably willing to hold off on anything official until after the Wisconsin game since it was already pretty late in the season. Not a lot to gain from a public firing. But there was a very clear shift internally after Illinois, which makes a lot more sense now given how quick we found out about Sanford not coming back for next year.

 

[A_Slab_of_Bacon]

Sanford and Fleck are buddies so out of respect Fleck was probably willing to hold off on anything official until after the Wisconsin game since it was already pretty late in the season. Not a lot to gain from a public firing. But there was a very clear shift internally after Illinois, which makes a lot more sense now given how quick we found out about Sanford not coming back for next year.

Yeah I also doubt this was a surprise to Sanford too.

 

[MaxyJR1]

His contract was up and he was cut loose. He was a Co-coordinator who was very creative in the run game, something Fleck will use going forward.

He continued to call plays and meet with the media. You don’t think it would have leaked over 3 weeks if he still wasn’t the OC? Fleck may have allowed more Simon influence in game plan, but they were also going up against Iowa and WI. Creativity was going to be needed, no matter what, against those defenses.

The lesson that should be learned is to put the pedal to the metal every week in game planning.

In the end, Fleck made the right call based on QB and passing game over 12 games

 

[Gold Rush]

Doubtful that they brought someone in from the outside but there was a definite shift in the offense after the Illinois game. My guess is that this is when Sanford was actually "fired" even if the announcement didn't happen until after the Wisconsin game.

I thought the win over Wisconsin might have saved his job, that perhaps he had finally "gotten it" but the timing of the firing is a little off - you don't fire the OC off what was a pretty good offensive game plan and upset victory over the Badgers unless ------ this was a done deal and decision made well before the game. If Simon was indeed the offensive mastermind the last few weeks and they handed him the keys a while back -- then it is a no-brainer they give the OC job to Simon. If Sanford drew up that game plan and called the plays vs. Wisconsin and before that Indiana, then I find this firing very odd. It would be interesting to see what happened behind the scenes but we will probably never really know.

 

[Ogee Ogilthorpe]

I thought the win over Wisconsin might have saved his job, that perhaps he had finally "gotten it" but the timing of the firing is a little off - you don't fire the OC off what was a pretty good offensive game plan and upset victory over the Badgers unless ------ this was a done deal and decision made well before the game. If Simon was indeed the offensive mastermind the last few weeks and they handed him the keys a while back -- then it is a no-brainer they give the OC job to Simon. If Sanford drew up that game plan and called the plays vs. Wisconsin and before that Indiana, then I find this firing very odd. It would be interesting to see what happened behind the scenes but we will probably never really know.

You're not wrong on any of this, but the one thing that would trump all of this that you mentioned is that Fleck has had his guy tabbed for several weeks now or longer. Fleck doesn't make this move without having the replacement lined up, I just think there's no chance of that. We'll hear something awfully soon on a replacement, likely within a couple days of the conference champ games this weekend I would think.

 

[MNVCGUY]

I thought the win over Wisconsin might have saved his job, that perhaps he had finally "gotten it" but the timing of the firing is a little off - you don't fire the OC off what was a pretty good offensive game plan and upset victory over the Badgers unless ------ this was a done deal and decision made well before the game. If Simon was indeed the offensive mastermind the last few weeks and they handed him the keys a while back -- then it is a no-brainer they give the OC job to Simon. If Sanford drew up that game plan and called the plays vs. Wisconsin and before that Indiana, then I find this firing very odd. It would be interesting to see what happened behind the scenes but we will probably never really know.

If Simon is given the OC job it will be a pretty clear indication that there was a shift to him taking charge in season. If they bring in someone from the outside then I agree that we will probably never really know what went down that caused the offense to look different over the last few weeks of the year.

 

[goldengophers]

With Tanner coming back and Sanford gone I'm believing Simon has to be the choice. Would Tanner have really signed up for a completely new system for one year?

 

[cjbfbp]

I've had some of highest scoring offenses on old EA sports NCAA football

Don't take that so lightly! To many people, that alone would make you more qualified than Sanford. You can't be sure than Sanford would come close to that accomplishment.

 

[btowngopher]

His contract was up and he was cut loose. He was a Co-coordinator who was very creative in the run game, something Fleck will use going forward.

He continued to call plays and meet with the media. You don’t think it would have leaked over 3 weeks if he still wasn’t the OC? Fleck may have allowed more Simon influence in game plan, but they were also going up against Iowa and WI. Creativity was going to be needed, no matter what, against those defenses.

The lesson that should be learned is to put the pedal to the metal every week in game planning.

In the end, Fleck made the right call based on QB and passing game over 12 games

I dunno, we still don't know what the Potts injury was do we?

 

[A_Slab_of_Bacon]

The lesson that should be learned is to put the pedal to the metal every week in game planning.

Was it a lack of pedal to the metal?

I don't even know what Simon was doing.

There was a play call from deep in our own end against Illinois.

Illinois DBs and LBs lined up about 5 yards back, our WRs all ran .... 5 yards and turned around and sat there. What was that? We didn't just need more than 5 yards ... why have a play where the WRs run to the coverage and turn around and sit? Tanner had nothing he could do and the play failed. NOBODY was at a different level on the field, no options at all.

Illinois safeties were playing WAY back and didn't even have to move ... they were able to defend it with even fewer players in the play than we had....

That was not the only inexplicable play like that. I'm usually likely to deferr to the coaches as I don't understand play calling deeply but that made no sense and it wasn't the only play like that.

That coupled with the slant routes vanishing, NO SCREEN PLAYS and few outlet dump off passes to the RB, in the face of pass blitz after pass blitz ... I just didn't understand what Sanford thought was going to happen with those calls.

I wish him the best of luck none the less, I just didn't get it.

 

[Gold Rush]

If Simon is given the OC job it will be a pretty clear indication that there was a shift to him taking charge in season. If they bring in someone from the outside then I agree that we will probably never really know what went down that caused the offense to look different over the last few weeks of the year.

I hope it WAS Simon that took over as I thought it was a good game plan and the team kind of looked like they did in 2019 the last couple weeks. (The game plan vs. Indiana was also very good)

In a game plan I am not expecting perfection and I know the defenses we are up against are being drawn up by some very good coaches being implemented by very good athletes. However, as you can see from the awful game plans for the Bowling Green and Illinois you have GOT to be smarter than that and you can't just "mail it in" with a predictable and bland offense. In both cases, they thought they could just run it up the middle 50 times and they couldn't be stopped. They were wrong and I get that - sometimes the plan isn't working. But if it ISN'T working you better be able to come up with a plan B on the fly and make adjustments. It was excruciating listening to Burnsie's commentary on the game and showing how the plays being run had virtually zero chance of working.

And just as the OC and DC's need to be able to come up with in-game adjustments and change things that aren't working, the head coach needs to make changes on a broader scale that aren't working. Unfortunately, in this case it was the OC Mike Sanford. It had to be done.

 

[FormerFatOL]

Was it a lack of pedal to the metal?

I don't even know what Simon was doing.

There was a play call from deep in our own end against Illinois.

Illinois DBs and LBs lined up about 5 yards back, our WRs all ran .... 5 yards and turned around and sat there. What was that? We didn't just need more than 5 yards ... why have a play where the WRs run to the coverage and turn around and sit? Tanner had nothing he could do and the play failed. NOBODY was at a different level on the field, no options at all.

Illinois safeties were playing WAY back and didn't even have to move ... they were able to defend it with even fewer players in the play than we had....

That was not the only inexplicable play like that. I'm usually likely to deferr to the coaches as I don't understand play calling deeply but that made no sense and it wasn't the only play like that.

That coupled with the slant routes vanishing, NO SCREEN PLAYS and few outlet dump off passes to the RB, in the face of pass blitz after pass blitz ... I just didn't understand what Sanford thought was going to happen with those calls.

I wish him the best of luck none the less, I just didn't get it.

The bolded was my frustration repeatedly with the passing game (receivers running a short route into coverage then standing there). It made no sense.

 

[btowngopher]

Was it a lack of pedal to the metal?

I don't even know what Simon was doing.

There was a play call from deep in our own end against Illinois.

Illinois DBs and LBs lined up about 5 yards back, our WRs all ran .... 5 yards and turned around and sat there. What was that? We didn't just need more than 5 yards ... why have a play where the WRs run to the coverage and turn around and sit? Tanner had nothing he could do and the play failed. NOBODY was at a different level on the field, no options at all.

Illinois safeties were playing WAY back and didn't even have to move ... they were able to defend it with even fewer players in the play than we had....

That was not the only inexplicable play like that. I'm usually likely to deferr to the coaches as I don't understand play calling deeply but that made no sense and it wasn't the only play like that.

That coupled with the slant routes vanishing, NO SCREEN PLAYS and few outlet dump off passes to the RB, in the face of pass blitz after pass blitz ... I just didn't understand what Sanford thought was going to happen with those calls.

I wish him the best of luck none the less, I just didn't get it.

I'd be curious to see how Morgan ranks in air yards. Which measures the distance of every pass attempt. For example a swing to the rb that he takes for 12 yards might actually by -2 air yards based on where the pass was thrown to. I get the feeling Morgan would rank pretty high.

 

[A_Slab_of_Bacon]

I'd be curious to see how Morgan ranks in air yards. Which measures the distance of every pass attempt. For example a swing to the rb that he takes for 12 yards might actually by -2 air yards based on where the pass was thrown to. I get the feeling Morgan would rank pretty high.

When I think of Morgan I think of those floating passes down the home sideline in front of where I sit that just drop in there like magic, even in tight coverage.

Those just save / make drives a couple times a game when he is ON. They largely vanished in 2020/21 until recently.

Saw those again in the Wisconsin game.... so pretty.

 

[btowngopher]

Just seemed like Sanford puts the QB in high difficulty situations too often and doesn't dial up enough easy stuff. It makes the QB look bad, but it also makes the wrs look bad in my opinion. Maybe that works with more high end talent, but I don't see it working on most college squads.

 

[A_Slab_of_Bacon]

The bolded was my frustration repeatedly with the passing game (receivers running a short route into coverage then standing there). It made no sense.

Yeah and guys weren't getting open was a common complaint but ... I think the plays often sent them there.

So strange, I really had zero clue what was going on. I mean I'm just warming a seat in the stands / not football smart, but wut was going on there plan wise?

How do you discard those slant routes? Why are the RBs always running straight forward? And so on ....

All that stopped happening / got mixed up more (we ran to the outside like crazy against wisc) and what was discarded worked again.

 

[FormerFatOL]

When I think of Morgan I think of those floating passes down the home sideline in front of where I sit that just drop in there like magic, even in tight coverage.

Those just save / make drives a couple times a game when he is ON. They largely vanished in 2020/21 until recently.

Saw those again in the Wisconsin game.... so pretty.

Morgan tried those sideline passes repeatedly this year with very little success (so successful in 2019 thrown mainly to TJ and Bateman to a lesser extent). Not all receivers are adept at making that catch which is often a 50/50 ball. Wright seemed to be the best option for that route this year but I don't recall him getting targeted very often on it before his massive WI catch.

 

[Bob_Loblaw]

Was it a lack of pedal to the metal?

I don't even know what Simon was doing.

There was a play call from deep in our own end against Illinois.

Illinois DBs and LBs lined up about 5 yards back, our WRs all ran .... 5 yards and turned around and sat there. What was that? We didn't just need more than 5 yards ... why have a play where the WRs run to the coverage and turn around and sit? Tanner had nothing he could do and the play failed. NOBODY was at a different level on the field, no options at all.

Illinois safeties were playing WAY back and didn't even have to move ... they were able to defend it with even fewer players in the play than we had....

That was not the only inexplicable play like that. I'm usually likely to deferr to the coaches as I don't understand play calling deeply but that made no sense and it wasn't the only play like that.

That coupled with the slant routes vanishing, NO SCREEN PLAYS and few outlet dump off passes to the RB, in the face of pass blitz after pass blitz ... I just didn't understand what Sanford thought was going to happen with those calls.

I wish him the best of luck none the less, I just didn't get it.

His pass plays weren't designed to take advantage of having a dominant run game.

WI and Indiana were totally different. The screen to BSF was beautiful against Indiana. Both of BSF's big plays (and Bucko's long pass play) were the result of LBers keying in on the run. We even ran a couple of fades against the one-on-ones.

I have no idea who was calling the plays. If it was Sanford, then I'm glad he made some adjustments. If it was Simon/Patterson, I hope they are our OCs next season.

For the vast majority of the season, our running game and our passing game had no synergy. The Illinois game is a perfect example. They stacked the box and then played their DBs back (to protect themselves from the box being stacked).

 

[MaxyJR1]

I'd be curious to see how Morgan ranks in air yards. Which measures the distance of every pass attempt. For example a swing to the rb that he takes for 12 yards might actually by -2 air yards based on where the pass was thrown to. I get the feeling Morgan would rank pretty high.

It has been high especially last week where he averaged 12.5 yards per completion. I know that is not air yards, but gives some insight. People look at completion % but we throw quite a few deeper passes, 50/50 type plays.

 

[Word]

What are the chances we find an OC that doesn't rely on standing with your hands out looking at the sideline because QB can't call his own audibles?

It's super common in college football, so pretty good chance the next guy does it too.

 

[A_Slab_of_Bacon]

Morgan tried those sideline passes repeatedly this year with very little success (so successful in 2019 thrown mainly to TJ and Bateman to a lesser extent). Not all receivers are adept at making that catch which is often a 50/50 ball. Wright seemed to be the best option for that route this year but I don't recall him getting targeted very often on it before his massive WI catch.

I felt like the few times they tried it earlier in the year Morgan already had a guy in his face by the time he had to start his throw.

 

[Mulligan]

His contract was up and he was cut loose. He was a Co-coordinator who was very creative in the run game, something Fleck will use going forward.

He continued to call plays and meet with the media. You don’t think it would have leaked over 3 weeks if he still wasn’t the OC? Fleck may have allowed more Simon influence in game plan, but they were also going up against Iowa and WI. Creativity was going to be needed, no matter what, against those defenses.

The lesson that should be learned is to put the pedal to the metal every week in game planning.

In the end, Fleck made the right call based on QB and passing game over 12 games

Every year I've felt like PJ holds things back at the beginning of the year. They wouldn't have been as bad as BG, but we dodged some pretty bad losses in pre-conference games. South Dakota State comes to mind. Georgia State?

 

[A_Slab_of_Bacon]

Every year I've felt like PJ holds things back at the beginning of the year. They wouldn't have been as bad as BG, but we dodged some pretty bad losses in pre-conference games. South Dakota State comes to mind.

I don't necessarily disagree, but South Dakota State ... was legit good.

And I'm not sure how much they could do when the OL in that game melted inexplicably for much of first quarter ... even half. Options kinda dwindle fast then.

 

[Bob_Loblaw]

It's super common in college football, so pretty good chance the next guy does it too.

It's also something you never notice when things go well. It just looks odd when things do not.

 

[MNVCGUY]

His pass plays weren't designed to take advantage of having a dominant run game.

WI and Indiana were totally different. The screen to BSF was beautiful against Indiana. Both of BSF's big plays (and Bucko's long pass play) were the result of LBers keying in on the run. We even ran a couple of fades against the one-on-ones.

I have no idea who was calling the plays. If it was Sanford, then I'm glad he made some adjustments. If it was Simon/Patterson, I hope they are our OCs next season.

For the vast majority of the season, our running game and our passing game had no synergy. The Illinois game is a perfect example. They stacked the box and then played their DBs back (to protect themselves from the box being stacked).

I would lump the Iowa game in with where the offense just looked different. Morgan the WR had a bit of an off day but offense put up 400 yards against a good defense and the toss play was a thing of beauty that Iowa never saw coming. We failed to finish some drives with TDs (some of that credit has to go to Iowa D) and on the flip side our defense let us down for one of the only times this year in that one.

The shift happened after Illinois, whatever it was. Given that Sanford was fired my guess is that it wasn't him suddenly figuring things out because the play calling and scheme for those last 3 games wouldn't get an OC fired.