Sanford will not be back next year - Opinion not news

Donate To GopherHole

MNVCGUY said:
The biggest issues in that game were failures to get TDs in the redzone and for this one game, the defense really let us down with some missed opportunities and big plays allowed to a very mediocre Iowa offense.
Click to expand...
This.

And we still had so many chances to win the damn thing.
 

forever a gopher said:
Maybe it's just me, but I'm not sure a ton of people are throwing Sanford under the bus for the Iowa game specifically. I've said it before, but I thought the offensive gameplan gave us a chance to win. Some poor choices by PJ, and lack of excecution in the passing game is what did the team in, IMO. Yes, the D gave up some chunk plays with missed tackles. You can certainly count those as well.

The problem is that if Sanford wasn't the QB coach, I think he'd be off the hook for the IA game. However, with Tanner obviously regressing on a massive scale, you have to look to the QB coach. So gameplan, Sanford (and maybe Simon was involved more in this game, per PJ's comments at half?) did pretty well. QB coach Sanford certainly still deserves heat. And of course, games don't happen in vacuums. These things aggregate over the year. The passing game has been garbage all year, and you can't win consistently in modern day football without a passing game. Obviously, there are exceptions to every rule -think Wisky, but they have an elite, lock-down defense to compensate.
Click to expand...

Tanner Morgan's regression has been shocking. After what I saw of him in 2018 and 2019, I would have predicted that a hard-working, team-first, smart, dedicated player like Morgan would just keep getting better over the course of his career. Obviously, that has not happened.

Every once in awhile he looks like he's getting into a 2019-like groove, but it never lasts.

The change in coordinators seems to have had a negative impact on him.
 

RememberMurray said:
Tanner Morgan's regression has been shocking. After what I saw of him in 2018 and 2019, I would have predicted that a hard-working, team-first, smart, dedicated player like Morgan would just keep getting better over the course of his career. Obviously, that has not happened.

Every once in awhile he looks like he's getting into a 2019-like groove, but it never lasts.

The change in coordinators seems to have had a negative impact on him.
Click to expand...
We have seen qb regression before.
 

Spaulding!No! said:
We have seen qb regression before.
Click to expand...
Not like this. Someone put up a TJ highlight reel from '19. Fun to see all the great catches he made in traffic but you also see on most of those Morgan put the ball in the perfect spot where only Tyler could get to it. Morgan was a very good QB two years ago.
 


Sanford will do just enough to keep his job this year. Wouldn't be surprised at all to see us end up at 9-4. And then we'll get off to another slow start next season and Fleck will make the change when the season is already lost a la Robb Smith.
 

The more I think about it, the more I would be interested in seeing clay patterson get a shot. His offenses at a junior college level broke quite a few records. I know it's junior college so obviously the competition is different, but still, seems to have the resume to get a shot...
 

RememberMurray said:
Tanner Morgan's regression has been shocking. After what I saw of him in 2018 and 2019, I would have predicted that a hard-working, team-first, smart, dedicated player like Morgan would just keep getting better over the course of his career. Obviously, that has not happened.

Every once in awhile he looks like he's getting into a 2019-like groove, but it never lasts.

The change in coordinators seems to have had a negative impact on him.
Click to expand...
It really is hard to watch. I really like him as a leader and he appears to be a fine young man. It was painful to watch his interview where he keeps saying he has to play better.....
 

GringaGopher said:
It really is hard to watch. I really like him as a leader and he appears to be a fine young man. It was painful to watch his interview where he keeps saying he has to play better.....
Click to expand...

Let's hope good Tanner is back for next 3 games.
 



My favorite is when Luke Buer calls Sanford…..Stanford. Cuz he works on a lot of projects for Stanford university. Just the worst.
 

MNVCGUY said:
Like others was a little bummed to see it wasn't based on actual info but just opinion. That said, I won't be shocked to see Sanford take a job somewhere else in the off season. I don't know that Fleck will flat out fire him but that doesn't mean he won't be strongly encouraged to actively seek other opportunities.
Click to expand...
Wherever there’s a good quarterback to damage…he’ll be there.
 


He's been doing better lately. Still not sure if I'm on board w him but it's tough to blame him for the Iowa loss when we got 400 plus yards.

That said I think there's better options out there. Ciarrocca??
 



MNVCGUY said:
Like others was a little bummed to see it wasn't based on actual info but just opinion. That said, I won't be shocked to see Sanford take a job somewhere else in the off season. I don't know that Fleck will flat out fire him but that doesn't mean he won't be strongly encouraged to actively seek other opportunities.
Click to expand...
The only way a change is made, at least in my opinion, is if Sanford already has a landing spot lined up and Fleck already has a very attractive replacement lined up (not attractive as in swimsuit model, but experience-wise). I just highly doubt this is some kind of public execution of Sanford, he's thrown out as one of the primary problems, et al.

It could sure happen, but he's not just going to be shown the door. He'll be allowed to save face, he had a different opportunity lined up, etc. I might be wrong, but that's how I see it
 

Mike already got a fast-track shot at being a head ball coach, thanks to his daddy's connections at Western Kentucky.

He crashed and burned.


His buddy Fleck hired him to a pretty sweet gig here. I think he was able to feather in a nice seven-figures salary? That's plenty to live a very comfortable life here.

Why would he ever leave Fleck's side, so long as things are working out??


If we keep winning games, and scoring a decent amount of points, he'll never be fired so long as Fleck is around.

He'd have to voluntarily choose to leave for something else.
 

I was actually impressed with the offensive game plan vs. Iowa, at least in the run game (it's always hard to tell in the passing game while watching TV). Tanner and the receivers had a poor game but it seemed like receivers were open.

Yesterday, I was happy to see the offense get more balanced with more passing than running in the 1st half even with Tanner's slow start throwing. Granted, Indiana is terrible, but some of the throws and catches were very good. We haven't seen that much this year.

I think Sanford's position rides on these last two games. If the offense is imaginative vs Wisconsin, and it will need to be, and then again in a bowl game, that's a sign things are pointed in the right direction.

CAB's Tweet about Tanner I've seen elsewhere makes me wonder if there might be nagging injury issues.
 

Anyone catch that Fleck said the following thing in the post-game presser?

If you ask any quarterback, would you like to get into rhythm early, most guys are gonna say yes, right? And I think Mike and Matt did a really good job of doing that.


Wonder if anything significant changed after ILL? True "Co-" ????
 

MplsGopher said:
Anyone catch that Fleck said the following thing in the post-game presser?

If you ask any quarterback, would you like to get into rhythm early, most guys are gonna say yes, right? And I think Mike and Matt did a really good job of doing that.


Wonder if anything significant changed after ILL? True "Co-" ????
Click to expand...
The Mike & Matt thing isn’t new. Fleck has said that multiple times this season and not just in recent weeks.

one thing I have noticed in the last few pressers is that Fleck isn’t doing a great job tuning out the noise from outside. Has specifically brought up the conservative vs aggressive thing and even playfully (I think) went at Chip a little bit
 

MplsGopher said:
"Some chunk plays" :sneaky:

On three separate plays, one guy on the defense screwed up, and it either directly resulted in a TD or directly setup a TD.
Click to expand...
Two 3rd and longs for Iowa late in the 4th quarter and the D allowed first downs on the same exact play. That needs to be addressed imho
 

MplsGopher said:
Mike already got a fast-track shot at being a head ball coach, thanks to his daddy's connections at Western Kentucky.

He crashed and burned.


His buddy Fleck hired him to a pretty sweet gig here. I think he was able to feather in a nice seven-figures salary? That's plenty to live a very comfortable life here.

Why would he ever leave Fleck's side, so long as things are working out??


If we keep winning games, and scoring a decent amount of points, he'll never be fired so long as Fleck is around.

He'd have to voluntarily choose to leave for something else.
Click to expand...

Regarding the bolded part, if any team is indeed winning games and scoring well, as you say, then it would seem highly unlikely that any coach would fire the offensive coordinator.

That being said, the QB regression we've witnessed needs to be addressed, without question. This team will likely be breaking in a new QB next season. I want the new starter to be given every advantage possible, including top-notch coaching. That needs to happen, no matter what.
 

matt said:
I’m not saying I agree with Mason, but the Iowa game fell primarily on Morgan’s shoulders imo. Bowling Green and Illinois are far more embarrassing, and both of those belong primarily to Sanford.
Click to expand...
Illinois and Iowa have to partially fall on the wideouts.
Bowling green probably falls on everyone in the history of the program
 





Pompous Elitist said:
Alright, we agree the run attack looked pretty good against Iowa. Someone explain to me what what happening versus Illinois. What was happening versus Bowling Green. Was Sanfords scheme and attack explainable? I haven’t heard anyone able to give a coherent answer. Not one.

Add that to TMs regression, the overall disjointed, extreme run heavy, predictable nature of the offense and it’s more than concerning. I’ve seen enough.
Click to expand...
I wonder if some of the clamoring here for more passing is because the writer enjoys watching passing or because he thinks it wins more. I understand that and the rules favor passing for marketing reasons. I admit to a strong bias for rushing so I can see one's bias influencing opinion. To me, there is nothing more formidable and reliable in football than a solid rushing attack. Then sprinkle in passes at favorable times rather than when it's necessary to gamble for a longer gain. But I'm an old geezer who prefers toe placekickers. :)
 

No one is saying that we need to become Air Raid or pass for the sake of passing. The problem was obvious when 75% of offensive calls were running plays and on top of that, the sequencing was completely predictable. With the offense bunched into a "heavy" package much of the time as well.

Saturday's game was a nice deviation from that. Different sets, passing on various downs, sometimes even on consecutive downs and some spread out packages. Quick throws. And surprise! Indiana didn't appear to anticipate most plays like we had been seeing in the past. Tanner didn't see the same kind of pass rush and my guess is that the run game ultimately benefited from a greater threat of passing.
 

Six to Eight said:
No one is saying that we need to become Air Raid or pass for the sake of passing. The problem was obvious when 75% of offensive calls were running plays and on top of that, the sequencing was completely predictable. With the offense bunched into a "heavy" package much of the time as well.

Saturday's game was a nice deviation from that. Different sets, passing on various downs, sometimes even on consecutive downs and some spread out packages. Quick throws. And surprise! Indiana didn't appear to anticipate most plays like we had been seeing in the past. Tanner didn't see the same kind of pass rush and my guess is that the run game ultimately benefited from a greater threat of passing.
Click to expand...

I'm 100% in favor of run-heavy play-calling, and playing a smash-mouth style of football, provided your o-line is dominating the other team and your backs are running well. But that's not always going to be the case, and so you must have a few other weapons in your arsenal, ready for use when needed.

I really believe the Gophers' passing game can be good enough to compliment our strong rushing attack, and to beat Wisconsin, and to play hard and competitively in Indianapolis, and to win a decent bowl game against a quality opponent.
 

Back to the OP - I don't see any way that Fleck fires Sanford. If Sanford wants to come back, he'll be back.

Now, I think it's entirely plausible that Fleck, Sanford, Simon, Burns - the whole offensive brain trust - sit down and talk about priorities, tendencies, etc in the off-season and try to make some tweaks.

But this is Fleck's team and Fleck's offensive philosophy.

with this disclaimer - if there is a different starting QB next year, let's say a more mobile QB - will the brain trust incorporate that into the game plan? That, to me, is the $64,000 question.
 

RememberMurray said:
I'm 100% in favor of run-heavy play-calling, and playing a smash-mouth style of football, provided your o-line is dominating the other team and your backs are running well. But that's not always going to be the case, and so you must have a few other weapons in your arsenal, ready for use when needed.

I really believe the Gophers' passing game can be good enough to compliment our strong rushing attack, and to beat Wisconsin, and to play hard and competitively in Indianapolis, and to win a decent bowl game against a quality opponent.
Click to expand...
The 2 Fr. backs are fun to watch when things are going well. Thomas seemed to have a great game as far as his vision and running lanes. The Irving touchdown was slick, with contact in the backfield and him making multiple guys miss. They've also both been good at avoiding fumbles.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom