Officially off the Macintyre bandwagon

[Sykobuff]

By this time next year this thread will be like the Never Ending Story. Lots of time for folks to bitch and moan. Pace yourselves!

What would you like fans to do? They had a chance to stabilize this program and keep moving forward. Instead, they have ****ed themselves since the Utah game last year.

They go 5-7 and no bowl game, that's two steps back. Last thing they needed, especially the way recruiting is going.

 

[aghcsm]

No way MM is gone until after / during the 2019 season, IF both 2018 and 2019 (and 2017) are losing records. Just the facts, not necessarily my preference. Overall it’s more stable for a program to wait 2-3 years beyond typical fan or troll tolerance and make sure the HC is not going to succeed, than to dump him quickly when web forum fans request it.

 

[SINKRATZ]

No way MM is gone until after / during the 2019 season, IF both 2018 and 2019 (and 2017) are losing records. Just the facts, not necessarily my preference. Overall it’s more stable for a program to wait 2-3 years beyond typical fan or troll tolerance and make sure the HC is not going to succeed, than to dump him quickly when web forum fans request it.

To play devil's advocate - how many coaches can you remember that were fired prematurely and went on to great success elsewhere? Seems like hanging on to guys too long is more common than dumping someone early and regretting it later.

 

[DrunkRalphie]

The less I know the more I'm sure of it.

 

[AllStarBuffs]

No way MM is gone until after / during the 2019 season, IF both 2018 and 2019 (and 2017) are losing records. Just the facts, not necessarily my preference. Overall it’s more stable for a program to wait 2-3 years beyond typical fan or troll tolerance and make sure the HC is not going to succeed, than to dump him quickly when web forum fans request it.

So you're saying MM needs 7 years, 6 of which have losing records and 1 winning season which was an anomaly, in order to make sure he isn't going to succeed?

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

When Utah beats CU next week, I would hope that MM sends the coach of the year trophy he got last year to JMFL!

Such a hot take, per usual

 

[aghcsm]

To play devil's advocate - how many coaches can you remember that were fired prematurely and went on to great success elsewhere? Seems like hanging on to guys too long is more common than dumping someone early and regretting it later.

I’m sure there are plenty of exceptions, but my general observation is that coaches at top programs tend to do well immediately or very quickly, then stay a long time and are heralded as top coaches. And maybe they are. Coaches at good mid level programs (like CU) may either get on a roll that carries onto their successors (mac1-Neuheisel-Barnett) or drift into mediocrity or worse that also carries on (Hawkins-embers-mac2???).

So how do we know when it’s been too long? 5 years with no evidence of improvement (Hawk) is enough. For MM, skipping 2016 would place him perhaps a little ahead of Hawk - but 2016 did happen and bought him 3 more years IMO. Another decent year or two will buy him more time. 5-7 (if that happens) is not a decent year.

So I don’t have a massive database to confirm or reject your claim that coaches are often held for too long, but I suppose that fits any coach who never has a successful (winning) season, so almost every coach in a weak program is therefore kept too long by definition. And of course this is almost never an issue for the relatively few elite programs.

Given the benefits of stability for recruiting and retaining players, adjusting to the program culture, and creating a routine for directing a football team, every HC replacement is a setback / reset to some extent, and therefore confirming that a coach is unsuitable is a decision approached carefully. For this reason (as well as contract economics) I don’t see MM gone until after 2019, and then only if he has 3 straight losing records.

 

[8Jah]

I think you learn alot about a team's coaching from how well they do after a bye. When they get an extra week to prepare, but also deal with outside distractions and loss of focus.

Many buff fans have observed that some of MM's worst games each year come after a bye. ...and in fact the buffs have been outscored by a total of 81 points after a bye or bowl prep during MM's time at CU. There has been one bye win (close win at home against UCLA's backup QB in 2016) and we only got 1/2 week bye that year.

MM has stated before that he sees byes as weeks to rest more and to get caught up on other things...kind of a vacation from the grind. To me this is more evidence for lack of gritty work ethic across the whole team (of course we have a few individuals born with that grit).

We also heard many observations that a lot of buff players were surprisingly lax and indifferent during the prebowl layoff last year.

Worrisome quote this week: "If you win, you get to keep playing," CU head coach Mike MacIntyre said. "That's the fun the part of it, so hopefully our guys understand that and want to do that." There is no hope, you have to build a team that understands that in their bones coach!

I hope we can say bye bye to this next week.

 

[SINKRATZ]

I’m sure there are plenty of exceptions, but my general observation is that coaches at top programs tend to do well immediately or very quickly, then stay a long time and are heralded as top coaches. And maybe they are. Coaches at good mid level programs (like CU) may either get on a roll that carries onto their successors (mac1-Neuheisel-Barnett) or drift into mediocrity or worse that also carries on (Hawkins-embers-mac2???).

So how do we know when it’s been too long? 5 years with no evidence of improvement (Hawk) is enough. For MM, skipping 2016 would place him perhaps a little ahead of Hawk - but 2016 did happen and bought him 3 more years IMO. Another decent year or two will buy him more time. 5-7 (if that happens) is not a decent year.

So I don’t have a massive database to confirm or reject your claim that coaches are often held for too long, but I suppose that fits any coach who never has a successful (winning) season, so almost every coach in a weak program is therefore kept too long by definition. And of course this is almost never an issue for the relatively few elite programs.

Given the benefits of stability for recruiting and retaining players, adjusting to the program culture, and creating a routine for directing a football team, every HC replacement is a setback / reset to some extent, and therefore confirming that a coach is unsuitable is a decision approached carefully. For this reason (as well as contract economics) I don’t see MM gone until after 2019, and then only if he has 3 straight losing records.

I don't think last year bought Mac 3 seasons. In fact, a good year rarely buys any coach 3 seasons without continued success.

 

[aghcsm]

I don't think last year bought Mac 3 seasons. In fact, a good year rarely buys any coach 3 seasons without continued success.

That’s my guess in combination with the contract (this year was one of the 3). We’ll see. If MM is the wrong guy and losing seasons continue, it would be unfortunate to go 2 more years with him. But I think we’ve got 2 more years at least.

 

[Agent Dave Kujan]

My feeling is that HCMM really isn’t happy here anymore. I watch his press conferences and post game interviews and I really don’t get the sense his heart is in it. I’m not sure why although I have a strong suspicion that the Tumpkin thing took the wind completely out of his sails. Heck I feel that I’m more upset about these losses than he is.
When you look at the focus and behavior of this team with Captains getting suspended, players getting kicked off the team, lack of fundamental execution, and the disconnect with Montez, it is obvious that he does not have same connection to this year’s group (especially the seniors) and they are not at all playing or coaching for anything larger. They have played without purpose all year. I really don’t know this means for his future.

 

[Duff Man]

I think you learn alot about a team's coaching from how well they do after a bye. When they get an extra week to prepare, but also deal with outside distractions and loss of focus.

Many buff fans have observed that some of MM's worst games each year come after a bye. ...and in fact the buffs have been outscored by a total of 81 points after a bye or bowl prep during MM's time at CU. There has been one bye win (close win at home against UCLA's backup QB in 2016) and we only got 1/2 week bye that year.

MM has stated before that he sees byes as weeks to rest more and to get caught up on other things...kind of a vacation from the grind. To me this is more evidence for lack of gritty work ethic across the whole team (of course we have a few individuals born with that grit).

We also heard many observations that a lot of buff players were surprisingly lax and indifferent during the prebowl layoff last year.

Worrisome quote this week: "If you win, you get to keep playing," CU head coach Mike MacIntyre said. "That's the fun the part of it, so hopefully our guys understand that and want to do that." There is no hope, you have to build a team that understands that in their bones coach!

I hope we can say bye bye to this next week.

I think your bye week stat is misleading. Yes, the Buffs have not been great off of byes under MacIntyre, but one of those losses was in 2013 after the Fresno State games had been cancelled due to the floods, so the team had an odd layoff. Is that relevant to how the team performs in 2017 against Utah? The others were a blowout loss to USC in 2014, a close win against Top 5 Defensive Coordinator Bradley in 2016, and the bowl game blowout against Okie Lite. Is there REALLY a trend there?

 

[Sykobuff]

I think your bye week stat is misleading. Yes, the Buffs have not been great off of byes under MacIntyre, but one of those losses was in 2013 after the Fresno State games had been cancelled due to the floods, so the team had an odd layoff. Is that relevant to how the team performs in 2017 against Utah? The others were a blowout loss to USC in 2014, a close win against Top 5 Defensive Coordinator Bradley in 2016, and the bowl game blowout against Okie Lite. Is there REALLY a trend there?

The way this season has gone, the first post about the game will be...

"They had two weeks to prepare and this is how they come out and play?"

They haven't had a killer instinct all year, that they will somehow find it on the road all of a sudden has me skeptical.

Has more to do with CU than utah and I still don't think they are very good either, if this game was at home, I have no doubt CU would win.

 

[BuffNut]

I agree with everything you said and had a similar argument with a friend. He is not the same and not sure what specifically caused it, but have to think the Tumpkin situation played a part. Perhaps losing Leavitt and Clark was unexpected so soon as well. Stability is important and those 3 leaving couldn't have helped his plan. I don't know the answer, but if he can't find his way out of this and have a winning team in 2018, then....

 

[8Jah]

I think your bye week stat is misleading. Yes, the Buffs have not been great off of byes under MacIntyre, but one of those losses was in 2013 after the Fresno State games had been cancelled due to the floods, so the team had an odd layoff. Is that relevant to how the team performs in 2017 against Utah? The others were a blowout loss to USC in 2014, a close win against Top 5 Defensive Coordinator Bradley in 2016, and the bowl game blowout against Okie Lite. Is there REALLY a trend there?

I don’t think I even counted the unplanned bye week that would have been Fresno.

81 points is pretty ****ing bad coming off byes. I would expect you to ignore evidence, but there’s a collection of other data. There are the reports about team focus during layoffs. There is Leavitt’s assertion that MM teams don’t work hard. There is the eyeball that indicates MM teams are soft (outside certain self made individuals who we all know).

You can indulge yourself in the fantasy that we can bring in magic recruiters who can convince the Tuipulotos and Rogers of each DT draft class to come to a school with one winning season in the past decade, but it is all just rationalization. MM teams lack grit, they are soft.

 

[DBT]

I, pretty much, wish this thread could be put to bed. Mac deserves a little more respect than he’s getting from some of you guys. Last season earned him this one bad season in my mind. I’m sure he realizes how important this offseason will be. He deserves a chance to turn it back around. Let’s stop bitching and give him next season at least.

 

[Duff Man]

I don’t think I even counted the unplanned bye week that would have been Fresno.

81 points is pretty ****ing bad coming off byes. I would expect you to ignore evidence, but there’s a collection of other data. There are the reports about team focus during layoffs. There is Leavitt’s assertion that MM teams don’t work hard. There is the eyeball that indicates MM teams are soft (outside certain self made individuals who we all know).

You can indulge yourself in the fantasy that we can bring in magic recruiters who can convince the Tuipulotos and Rogers of each DT draft class to come to a school with one winning season in the past decade, but it is all just rationalization. MM teams lack grit, they are soft.

If you did not include the unplanned bye in 2013, how did you arrive at 81?

USC in 2014: -28
UCLA in 2016: +10
Okie Lite in 2016: -30

I don't even dispute there are serious issues right now which need to be addressed. You are the one asserting that Jeffcoat is somehow absolved of on-field play AND recruiting because somehow everyone else but him is dropping the ball. Only in your fantasy world can a DL coach not be responsible for a "soft" defense while also being the victim of unfortunate circumstances in recruiting.

Your fantasy is somehow one tenuous medicore DL commit is good enough because everyone else is letting Jeffcoat down.

 

[8Jah]

If you did not include the unplanned bye in 2013, how did you arrive at 81?

USC in 2014: -28
UCLA in 2016: +10
Okie Lite in 2016: -30

I don't even dispute there are serious issues right now which need to be addressed. You are the one asserting that Jeffcoat is somehow absolved of on-field play AND recruiting because somehow everyone else but him is dropping the ball. Only in your fantasy world can a DL coach not be responsible for a "soft" defense while also being the victim of unfortunate circumstances in recruiting.

Your fantasy is somehow one tenuous medicore DL commit is good enough because everyone else is letting Jeffcoat down.

I believe the FSTU game came a week before our planned bye. So we had two weeks to plan for OSU before we got slaughtered. That’s great!

 

[Duff Man]

I believe the FSTU game came a week before our planned bye. So we had two weeks to plan for OSU before we got slaughtered. That’s great!

I believe you just avoided how you came up with your 81 points.

By all means, push a 2013 game to drive your point home. It really opens my eyes.

 

[8Jah]

I believe you just avoided how you came up with your 81 points.

By all means, push a 2013 game to drive your point home. It really opens my eyes.

2013 L osu 44-17 [-27], 2014 L UO 44-10[-34], 2015 no bye, 2016 W UCLA 20-10 [+10] 2016 L OkSu 38-8[-30]. That’s 81 points.

But looks like you are right in pointing out an error. I missed an additional bye in 2014: L USC 56-28. That makes it losses by a total of 109 points after byes since MM took over. Wonderful record given you have an extra week to prepare!

 

[Duff Man]

2013 L osu 44-17 [-27], 2014 L UO 44-10[-34], 2015 no bye, 2016 W UCLA 20-10 [+10] 2016 L OkSu 38-8[-30]. That’s 81 points.

But looks like you are right in pointing out an error. I missed an additional bye in 2014: L USC 56-28. That makes it losses by a total of 109 points after byes since MM took over. Wonderful record given you have an extra week to prepare!

Not even saying it is good by any stretch, but are 2013/2014 all that relevant to this week's game against Utah? If we win, has MacIntyre really figured out the bye week or are the games mostly unrelated?

 

[MtnBuff]

2013 L osu 44-17 [-27], 2014 L UO 44-10[-34], 2015 no bye, 2016 W UCLA 20-10 [+10] 2016 L OkSu 38-8[-30]. That’s 81 points.

But looks like you are right in pointing out an error. I missed an additional bye in 2014: L USC 56-28. That makes it losses by a total of 109 points after byes since MM took over. Wonderful record given you have an extra week to prepare!

The 2013 and 2014 numbers are irrelevant. In 2013 we were losing most PAC12 games by 40 so that loss looks like a plus. In 2014 the margins were thinning some but in any given week we would have lost to Oregon by the number they decided on, same with USC. 2016 we won the regular season game. The Okie Lite game was a bowl game with both teams having an extended bye. That was also the game in which OSU got to line up their best big play guys against our injured DBs.

 

[leftybuff]

We knew he was a good DC. Glad he could finally produce a defensive performance with a loaded roster to confirm that.

CU 327 yds./ 23.4 ypc
Cal 137 yds./ 8.05 ypc
UCLA 230 yds./ 15.33 ypc
OSU 206 yds./ 12.875 ypc
USC 161 yds./ 6.19 ypc.
WSU 146 yds./ 11.2 ypc
OU 32 yds./ 2.3 ypc.

Hmmmmm.

 

[OsideBuff]

CU 327 yds./ 23.4 ypc
Cal 137 yds./ 8.05 ypc
UCLA 230 yds./ 15.33 ypc
OSU 206 yds./ 12.875 ypc
USC 161 yds./ 6.19 ypc.
WSU 146 yds./ 11.2 ypc
OU 32 yds./ 2.3 ypc.

Hmmmmm.

Bingo....Leavitt finally gets back an offense that isn't three and out.....Herbert was back and the Oregon offense rolled. The transformation of the worst defense in FBS has been amazing....Oregon's defense against the run is excellent. Leavitt is one of the best DCs in the . Watch out for Oregon next year. I expect them to be the best in the Pac 12. UW, USC, UCLA all lose their QBs. Leavitt has an infectious personality. HCMM, on the other hand, is a dork....dull.....uninspiring. Looks like a few years of average football again. Don't be surprised to see Chiv moving on. This co-OC nonsense is just that...nonsense. Barely tolerable when winning...unacceptable when losing.

 

[MiamiBuffs]

Looking at the Ducks they've made improvements for sure.

Oregon Ducks Defense	2016 rank	2017 rank
Total Defense	116	50
Team Sacks	9	14
Tackles for Loss	27	21
Scoring Defense	115	87
Rushing Defense	73	29
Red Zone Defense	116	112
Passing Yards Allowed	125	88
Passes Intercepted	55	41
Fumbles Recovered	65	34
First Downs Defense	121	75
4th Down Defence Pct	122	22
3rd Down Defence Pct	93	23

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

 

[Agent Dave Kujan]

Given the talent that Oregon has recruited through the years, those defensive numbers really don’t impress me.

 

[Sykobuff]

Given the talent that Oregon has recruited through the years, those defensive numbers really don’t impress me.

Compare it to our DC and his defense, you'll get impressed

 

[Agent Dave Kujan]

I disagree. Given way less talent our defense has out performed Oregon quite a few times this year.........but please......that dead horse has been beat.

 

[Buffnik]

Oregon's defense had nowhere to go but up. And the new system on offense isn't as hard on a defense.

But even with that considered, Leavitt has out-performed what an average DC would have done there this year. By a good bit, I think. He's great at his craft. I think if someone can't acknowledge that he is being unfair to the man.

 

[Duff Man]

Oregon's defense had nowhere to go but up. And the new system on offense isn't as hard on a defense.

But even with that considered, Leavitt has out-performed what an average DC would have done there this year. By a good bit, I think. He's great at his craft. I think if someone can't acknowledge that he is being unfair to the man.

Or bitter... like really bitter.