Wow!

Absolutely crazy news!

He's smart to hitch his wagon to PJ Fleck though. I'm happy for him.

Part of me is sad. I was excited to see his own offense next year with Colombi and I know he's a great recruiter.

I’m neither happy nor sad about this.

I'm not sure how to take the big "Yahoo" in the middle of the tweet!! is that them being happy, us being happy, both being happy, or am i reading too much into an add!!

Another year another coordinator, we should be used to that!

Sanford was underwhelming.

I did think as a year went on he did make some adjustments and was getting better. I was excited for the coming year to see what he was going to bring when he actually ran his system.

The scary part is who Gary hires to replace Sanford. Gary has only ever proven to hire from the good ol boy network. That leaves some scary names.

Kevin McGiven, Dave Schramm, Aaron Roderick, Fesi Sitake, etc.

I was not happy with Sanford this year but wanted to be patient. He was running a system he didn't know. Should he have stood up and said "I run my system or I am not taking the job." Yes. But that might have happened next year. This might just open up the door to it anyway. Or we get a new OC who actually knows how to run the spread.

Roy McAvoy wrote: ↑

January 3rd, 2020, 9:29 am

The scary part is who Gary hires to replace Sanford. Gary has only ever proven to hire from the good ol boy network. That leaves some scary names.

Kevin McGiven, Dave Schramm, Aaron Roderick, Fesi Sitake, etc.

How did Aranda and Orlando fit in the good ole boy network? Or even Wells?

I'm concerned.

Gary interfered with Sanford's ability to do his job by proclaiming that last-year's offense needed to stay in place.

Have we begun the UofU OC cycle? Will Andersen continue to handcuff our OCs and then push them out the door when the offense doesn't perform? Will we end up in a cycle of one OC after another as we either hire unqualified OCs who need someone to give them a shot, or experienced OCs needing a job and then look for a quick exit because they want more freedom?

This is what is going through my worst-case-scenario head.

brownjeans wrote: ↑

January 3rd, 2020, 10:01 am

I'm concerned.

Gary interfered with Sanford's ability to do his job by proclaiming that last-year's offense needed to stay in place.

Have we begun the UofU OC cycle? Will Andersen continue to handcuff our OCs and then push them out the door when the offense doesn't perform? Will we end up in a cycle of one OC after another as we either hire unqualified OCs who need someone to give them a shot, or experienced OCs needing a job and then look for a quick exit because they want more freedom?

This is what is going through my worst-case-scenario head.

I think it's a fair point but when you look at this I don't think it was an example of that. How could Sanford turn this job down? PJ Fleck is the hottest up and coming young coach. Sanford can really go places with him. It's also at least doubling his salary at minimum.

It doesn't sound like gary pushed sanford out. I think most people thought that keeping the same system as we had before was going to be successful obviously it didn't turn out as we had planned. I certainly am concerned about who he hires but I am fairly confident that he's going to hire someone who will be decent. One thing we have to consider is we're not going to get a high-profile person unless he was a coach before and they're paying part of his salary. With our budget we cannot pay coordinators what other teams can so that also limits what you can bring in.

brownjeans wrote:I'm concerned.

Gary interfered with Sanford's ability to do his job by proclaiming that last-year's offense needed to stay in place.

Have we begun the UofU OC cycle? Will Andersen continue to handcuff our OCs and then push them out the door when the offense doesn't perform? Will we end up in a cycle of one OC after another as we either hire unqualified OCs who need someone to give them a shot, or experienced OCs needing a job and then look for a quick exit because they want more freedom?

This is what is going through my worst-case-scenario head.

You have no clue if that’s what Gary said.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Roy McAvoy wrote: ↑

January 3rd, 2020, 9:29 am

The scary part is who Gary hires to replace Sanford. Gary has only ever proven to hire from the good ol boy network. That leaves some scary names.

Kevin McGiven, Dave Schramm, Aaron Roderick, Fesi Sitake, etc.

I wouldn't be completely opposed to bringing mcgiven. He has done a decent job as the offensive coordinator at San Jose State.

Roy McAvoy wrote: ↑

January 3rd, 2020, 10:08 am

brownjeans wrote: ↑

January 3rd, 2020, 10:01 am

I'm concerned.

Gary interfered with Sanford's ability to do his job by proclaiming that last-year's offense needed to stay in place.

Have we begun the UofU OC cycle? Will Andersen continue to handcuff our OCs and then push them out the door when the offense doesn't perform? Will we end up in a cycle of one OC after another as we either hire unqualified OCs who need someone to give them a shot, or experienced OCs needing a job and then look for a quick exit because they want more freedom?

This is what is going through my worst-case-scenario head.

I think it's a fair point but when you look at this I don't think it was an example of that. How could Sanford turn this job down? PJ Fleck is the hottest up and coming young coach. Sanford can really go places with him. It's also at least doubling his salary at minimum.

Oh, I for sure think Sanford had to take this job. But I do think Andersen handcuffed him this past year and I worry about the above cycle starting.

brownjeans wrote: ↑

January 3rd, 2020, 10:01 am

I'm concerned.

Gary interfered with Sanford's ability to do his job by proclaiming that last-year's offense needed to stay in place.

Have we begun the UofU OC cycle? Will Andersen continue to handcuff our OCs and then push them out the door when the offense doesn't perform? Will we end up in a cycle of one OC after another as we either hire unqualified OCs who need someone to give them a shot, or experienced OCs needing a job and then look for a quick exit because they want more freedom?

This is what is going through my worst-case-scenario head.

Unfortunately we probably will go through several coordinators so long as we're fairly successful. We're not going to be a place where coordinators come and stay for 10 or 15 years if they're successful. Look at the Wells tenure we had a pretty successful program and he was constantly changing out coordinators as a result of that.

Aggie84025 wrote: ↑

January 3rd, 2020, 10:12 am

Roy McAvoy wrote: ↑

January 3rd, 2020, 9:29 am

The scary part is who Gary hires to replace Sanford. Gary has only ever proven to hire from the good ol boy network. That leaves some scary names.

Kevin McGiven, Dave Schramm, Aaron Roderick, Fesi Sitake, etc.

I wouldn't be completely opposed to bringing mcgiven. He has done a decent job as the offensive coordinator at San Jose State.

The reason I would be is that Mcgiven was Oregon State's OC when Gary had confessed he hired the wrong guys as assistant coaches and the team was playing horrible.

Roy McAvoy wrote: ↑

January 3rd, 2020, 10:16 am

Aggie84025 wrote: ↑

January 3rd, 2020, 10:12 am

Roy McAvoy wrote: ↑

January 3rd, 2020, 9:29 am

The scary part is who Gary hires to replace Sanford. Gary has only ever proven to hire from the good ol boy network. That leaves some scary names.

Kevin McGiven, Dave Schramm, Aaron Roderick, Fesi Sitake, etc.

I wouldn't be completely opposed to bringing mcgiven. He has done a decent job as the offensive coordinator at San Jose State.

The reason I would be is that Mcgiven was Oregon State's OC when Gary had confessed he hired the wrong guys as assistant coaches and the team was playing horrible.

I mean Josh Love did turn around the SJSU offense and got the player of the year in the Mountain West. Don't know how much McGiven would have done in that but maybe he is figuring things out as a coach.

Aggie84025 wrote: ↑

January 3rd, 2020, 10:15 am

brownjeans wrote: ↑

January 3rd, 2020, 10:01 am

I'm concerned.

Gary interfered with Sanford's ability to do his job by proclaiming that last-year's offense needed to stay in place.

Have we begun the UofU OC cycle? Will Andersen continue to handcuff our OCs and then push them out the door when the offense doesn't perform? Will we end up in a cycle of one OC after another as we either hire unqualified OCs who need someone to give them a shot, or experienced OCs needing a job and then look for a quick exit because they want more freedom?

This is what is going through my worst-case-scenario head.

Unfortunately we probably will go through several coordinators so long as we're fairly successful. We're not going to be a place where coordinators come and stay for 10 or 15 years if they're successful. Look at the Wells tenure we had a pretty successful program and he was constantly changing out coordinators as a result of that.

If we're successful and lose OCs, great. That's not fear I outlined above.

Aggie84025 wrote: ↑

January 3rd, 2020, 10:12 am

Roy McAvoy wrote: ↑

January 3rd, 2020, 9:29 am

The scary part is who Gary hires to replace Sanford. Gary has only ever proven to hire from the good ol boy network. That leaves some scary names.

Kevin McGiven, Dave Schramm, Aaron Roderick, Fesi Sitake, etc.

I wouldn't be completely opposed to bringing mcgiven. He has done a decent job as the offensive coordinator at San Jose State.

For the love of Percocet no!

Shocked that this is how we're parting ways, and to a program like Minnesota. I'll take it though. As much as I liked his recruiting I wasn't a fan of his play calling, QB coaching, and ingame adjustments.

Maybe Chuckie Keeton or Bouknight would come back?

I'm OK with with this. It'll be interesting to see who we hire.

hipsterdoofus21 wrote: ↑

January 3rd, 2020, 10:34 am

Shocked that this is how we're parting ways, and to a program like Minnesota. I'll take it though. As much as I liked his recruiting I wasn't a fan of his play calling, QB coaching, and ingame adjustments.

Maybe Chuckie Keeton or Bouknight would come back?

I would love chuckie as the qb coach but we need someone with more experience than chuckie at calling plays.

Not sad.
Wish him and his family luck.

2004AG wrote: ↑

January 3rd, 2020, 10:10 am

brownjeans wrote:I'm concerned.

Gary interfered with Sanford's ability to do his job by proclaiming that last-year's offense needed to stay in place.

Have we begun the UofU OC cycle? Will Andersen continue to handcuff our OCs and then push them out the door when the offense doesn't perform? Will we end up in a cycle of one OC after another as we either hire unqualified OCs who need someone to give them a shot, or experienced OCs needing a job and then look for a quick exit because they want more freedom?

This is what is going through my worst-case-scenario head.

You have no clue if that’s what Gary said.

Well, I have this clue:

Gary Andersen - Press Conference 12/11/2018 wrote: Will there be carry over? Absolutely. That's a tremendous challenge on both sides. When you have players in the program that believe in what they've done. It's not going to be exact, but there is some core that will stay here, absolutely. Any time there's change, there's always going to be personalities, there are different ways, there will be a couple tweaks here and there. That's also the same with the offense and the defense. The challenges when you come in with a new offense and a new defense, are the players going to have to learn everything? Or are coaches going to learn everything? Do you want 100 people to learn something or 50 people on one side of the ball, or do you want coaches to learn something.

This wasn't the only such remark, just the one I was able to find quickly. There was also the clue that showed up on the field.

What clues do you have to prove Andersen didn't direct Sanford to keep it the same?

Roy McAvoy wrote: ↑

January 3rd, 2020, 9:29 am

The scary part is who Gary hires to replace Sanford. Gary has only ever proven to hire from the good ol boy network. That leaves some scary names.

Kevin McGiven, Dave Schramm, Aaron Roderick, Fesi Sitake, etc.

Considering what Gary did to McGiven at OSU he won’t be coming here, although he has done a great job at San Jose state.

brownjeans wrote:

2004AG wrote: ↑

January 3rd, 2020, 10:10 am

brownjeans wrote:I'm concerned.

Gary interfered with Sanford's ability to do his job by proclaiming that last-year's offense needed to stay in place.

Have we begun the UofU OC cycle? Will Andersen continue to handcuff our OCs and then push them out the door when the offense doesn't perform? Will we end up in a cycle of one OC after another as we either hire unqualified OCs who need someone to give them a shot, or experienced OCs needing a job and then look for a quick exit because they want more freedom?

This is what is going through my worst-case-scenario head.

You have no clue if that’s what Gary said.

Well, I have this clue:

Gary Andersen - Press Conference 12/11/2018 wrote: Will there be carry over? Absolutely. That's a tremendous challenge on both sides. When you have players in the program that believe in what they've done. It's not going to be exact, but there is some core that will stay here, absolutely. Any time there's change, there's always going to be personalities, there are different ways, there will be a couple tweaks here and there. That's also the same with the offense and the defense. The challenges when you come in with a new offense and a new defense, are the players going to have to learn everything? Or are coaches going to learn everything? Do you want 100 people to learn something or 50 people on one side of the ball, or do you want coaches to learn something.

This wasn't the only such remark, just the one I was able to find quickly. There was also the clue that showed up on the field.

What clues do you have to prove Andersen didn't direct Sanford to keep it the same?

You still don’t have a clue.

How do you know what conversations took place between Sanford and Gary? How do you know they both didn’t come up with that “solution”. How do you know it wasn’t Sanfords idea to keep things as similar as possible? You just assume Sanford wanted things one way and Gary made him to things 180 degrees from what he wanted.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

2004AG wrote: ↑

January 3rd, 2020, 11:11 am

You still don’t have a clue.

How do you know what conversations took place between Sanford and Gary? How do you know they both didn’t come up with that “solution”. How do you know it wasn’t Sanfords idea to keep things as similar as possible? You just assume Sanford wanted things one way and Gary made him to things 180 degrees from what he wanted.

You asked for a clue, not knowledge. I gave you a clue. Gary said publicly he wanted to keep it the same (before he even hired Sanford). Then the players during camp said they were keeping it the same. Then the product on the field looked very different from what Sanford has done in the past. Those all seem to be pretty good clues.

Do you have any evidence that Gary wanted a different offense? Or that he didn't direct Sanford to keep things the same? Or that it was Sanford's idea to keep it the same?

brownjeans wrote:

2004AG wrote: ↑

January 3rd, 2020, 11:11 am

You still don’t have a clue.

How do you know what conversations took place between Sanford and Gary? How do you know they both didn’t come up with that “solution”. How do you know it wasn’t Sanfords idea to keep things as similar as possible? You just assume Sanford wanted things one way and Gary made him to things 180 degrees from what he wanted.

You asked for a clue, not knowledge. I gave you a clue. Gary said publicly he wanted to keep it the same (before he even hired Sanford). Then the players during camp said they were keeping it the same. Then the product on the field looked very different from what Sanford has done in the past. Those all seem to be pretty good clues.

Do you have any evidence that Gary wanted a different offense? Or that he didn't direct Sanford to keep things the same? Or that it was Sanford's idea to keep it the same?

No, because I didn’t sit in on any staff meetings and game planning sessions.

And neither did you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't understand why people are frustrated that Gary decided to keep the same offense we had 2 years ago. It was wildly successful and you brought back the quarterback that ran it. I had no issue with them trying to run the same offense, hindsight it probably would have been better to implement Sanford's system but I understand the reasoning of why they decided to keep it.

brownjeans wrote: ↑

January 3rd, 2020, 10:46 am

2004AG wrote: ↑

January 3rd, 2020, 10:10 am

brownjeans wrote:I'm concerned.

Gary interfered with Sanford's ability to do his job by proclaiming that last-year's offense needed to stay in place.

Have we begun the UofU OC cycle? Will Andersen continue to handcuff our OCs and then push them out the door when the offense doesn't perform? Will we end up in a cycle of one OC after another as we either hire unqualified OCs who need someone to give them a shot, or experienced OCs needing a job and then look for a quick exit because they want more freedom?

This is what is going through my worst-case-scenario head.

You have no clue if that’s what Gary said.

Well, I have this clue:

Gary Andersen - Press Conference 12/11/2018 wrote: Will there be carry over? Absolutely. That's a tremendous challenge on both sides. When you have players in the program that believe in what they've done. It's not going to be exact, but there is some core that will stay here, absolutely. Any time there's change, there's always going to be personalities, there are different ways, there will be a couple tweaks here and there. That's also the same with the offense and the defense. The challenges when you come in with a new offense and a new defense, are the players going to have to learn everything? Or are coaches going to learn everything? Do you want 100 people to learn something or 50 people on one side of the ball, or do you want coaches to learn something.

This wasn't the only such remark, just the one I was able to find quickly. There was also the clue that showed up on the field.

What clues do you have to prove Andersen didn't direct Sanford to keep it the same?

Huge stretch there to conclude that Gary interfered with his ability to do his job from that. Here's a quote from Sanford who said it was "awesome" learning different terminology.

Q: Will Aggie fans see a similar offense this fall as compared to last year?

Sanford: "We knew there were six new coaches coming in, seven or eight including graduate assistants and off the field quality control-type coaches. We figured it was more of a natural transition for seven or eight of us to learn the terminology from last year, rather than 45 offensive players to learn our terminology or my terminology. That's something I've never actually done in a new environment, and it's been awesome. I've really enjoyed learning the system and also putting our wrinkles on it, as well. I think our players have really enjoyed that combination and there will be a lot similarity. The biggest thing is we want to have an identity in what we do. We want to do whatever is needed of us on offense for us to hoist that Mountain West championship trophy. If that means scoring 55 points a game, so be it. If that means controlling the football, the clock and being there when our defense is in a battle for their lives, we want to be that for our defense. What we're really looking for is to play championship offensive football. Stats are stats, but championships are what we're really looking for."

Seems like all of it is coach speak and not "clues" as to who forced who to do what.

2004AG wrote: ↑

January 3rd, 2020, 11:24 am

brownjeans wrote:

2004AG wrote: ↑

January 3rd, 2020, 11:11 am

You still don’t have a clue.

How do you know what conversations took place between Sanford and Gary? How do you know they both didn’t come up with that “solution”. How do you know it wasn’t Sanfords idea to keep things as similar as possible? You just assume Sanford wanted things one way and Gary made him to things 180 degrees from what he wanted.

You asked for a clue, not knowledge. I gave you a clue. Gary said publicly he wanted to keep it the same (before he even hired Sanford). Then the players during camp said they were keeping it the same. Then the product on the field looked very different from what Sanford has done in the past. Those all seem to be pretty good clues.

Do you have any evidence that Gary wanted a different offense? Or that he didn't direct Sanford to keep things the same? Or that it was Sanford's idea to keep it the same?

No, because I didn’t sit in on any staff meetings and game planning sessions.

And neither did you.

Nope, but I have public statements and resulting offense as evidence to my hypothesis.

And I've watched what's gone on at UofU for years (Gary's nursery) and have concerns about it happening here. I'm just sharing those concerns. If you don't share them, good for you.

Aggieiester wrote: ↑

January 3rd, 2020, 11:32 am

Huge stretch there to conclude that Gary interfered with his ability to do his job from that. Here's a quote from Sanford who said it was "awesome" learning different terminology.

Q: Will Aggie fans see a similar offense this fall as compared to last year?

Sanford: "We knew there were six new coaches coming in, seven or eight including graduate assistants and off the field quality control-type coaches. We figured it was more of a natural transition for seven or eight of us to learn the terminology from last year, rather than 45 offensive players to learn our terminology or my terminology. That's something I've never actually done in a new environment, and it's been awesome. I've really enjoyed learning the system and also putting our wrinkles on it, as well. I think our players have really enjoyed that combination and there will be a lot similarity. The biggest thing is we want to have an identity in what we do. We want to do whatever is needed of us on offense for us to hoist that Mountain West championship trophy. If that means scoring 55 points a game, so be it. If that means controlling the football, the clock and being there when our defense is in a battle for their lives, we want to be that for our defense. What we're really looking for is to play championship offensive football. Stats are stats, but championships are what we're really looking for."

Seems like all of it is coach speak and not "clues" as to who forced who to do what.

Sounds like a guy who knows how to toe the line and make his employer happy.

Aggie84025 wrote: ↑

January 3rd, 2020, 11:30 am

I don't understand why people are frustrated that Gary decided to keep the same offense we had 2 years ago. It was wildly successful and you brought back the quarterback that ran it. I had no issue with them trying to run the same offense, hindsight it probably would have been better to implement Sanford's system but I understand the reasoning of why they decided to keep it.

It's a good system, but it's not Sanford's system.

If I hire Seurat and asked him to paint like Cezanne, I should expect to be dissapointed. Because Seurat is good, it will probably still be good, but it won't be a Cezanne. I should let Seurat paint how he paints or I should hire someone else.

brownjeans wrote: ↑

January 3rd, 2020, 11:32 am

2004AG wrote: ↑

January 3rd, 2020, 11:24 am

brownjeans wrote:

2004AG wrote: ↑

January 3rd, 2020, 11:11 am

You still don’t have a clue.

How do you know what conversations took place between Sanford and Gary? How do you know they both didn’t come up with that “solution”. How do you know it wasn’t Sanfords idea to keep things as similar as possible? You just assume Sanford wanted things one way and Gary made him to things 180 degrees from what he wanted.

You asked for a clue, not knowledge. I gave you a clue. Gary said publicly he wanted to keep it the same (before he even hired Sanford). Then the players during camp said they were keeping it the same. Then the product on the field looked very different from what Sanford has done in the past. Those all seem to be pretty good clues.

Do you have any evidence that Gary wanted a different offense? Or that he didn't direct Sanford to keep things the same? Or that it was Sanford's idea to keep it the same?

No, because I didn’t sit in on any staff meetings and game planning sessions.

And neither did you.

Nope, but I have public statements and resulting offense as evidence to my hypothesis.

And I've watched what's gone on at UofU for years (Gary's nursery) and have concerns about it happening here. I'm just sharing those concerns. If you don't share them, good for you.

Maybe you can straighten this out for me, you have concerns that Gary is going to turn USU in to the UofU 2.0 but then accuse Gary of forcing an offensive coordinator to keep an offense that is the exact opposite of the UofU formula? Which one is it that you are "concerned" about? Also what is so bad about having a physical, elite defensive program that finishes at the top of the conference nearly every year?