I already can see some Chizik detractors on the board, not necessarily haters, but some who are not sold on equating his teams success with his coaching abilities. If you go back to his couple of years at Iowa State I can see where some of the criticism comes from especially since Iowa St has arguably done just as well or better without him. But maybe there is more to the story.
When Mack Brown went to North Caolina in 1988 he had coached at Appalachian St (6-5) and at Tulane ((11-23). His first 3 years at North Carolina he went (8-21) and then finished out at (61-22).
He had immediate success when he went to Texas in 1998 and has since gone (133-34) including this years fall to grace (5-7). Until this year he was acclaimed to be The reason for all the success he enjoyed until this year and his 5.1 million dollar salary reflects it.
Now back to Chizik. As shown by Mack's record there was very little in his first two years at North Carolina to brag about (2-20) but in his third and fourth years he west (6-4-1 and 7-7) and then in his fifth year went (9-3). I think that reflects his ability to recruit more than any thing else because his recruits helped improvement that reflected in the won-loss record. Recruiting is what Mack does best, that and assembling a good staff of assistants. Chizik recruited and landed Newton and the impact was immediate. At Iowa St it was difficult to attract quality players to play in the lackluster Big 12 North.
At this point Auburn and Oklahoma St are probably the biggest surprises of 2010. What they have in common is that both head coaches hired in offensive coordinators that are way ahead of the curve. The success of both head coaches is reflected in this success. So hiring the right assistants and recruiting
are key elements in having and sustaining a successful program. Players come and go but the consistency of a program may have more to do with the assistants than most people want to acknowledge. Players like Newton don't grow on trees and he might have turned Mack's team around in 2010 also, who knows. But the fact is that Auburn, by hook or by crook, landed Newton and he has thrived under the system (2nd year) installed by Gus Malazhn. The rest speaks for itself.
Is Mack as great as his greatest team or is he redefined by this years non bowling team. Is Chizik to be judged by his couple of years at Iowa St. No one is now interested in how Mack did in his early years which were in fact formative years and unsuccessful by any standard. In terms of recruiting what kid would not want to go to Auburn and jump on that band wagon. Recruiting is what will define Chizik as a coach and he landed the biggest prize in 2010. He has surrounded himself with good assistant coaches and is way ahead of Mack already. Auburn has a proud tradition like Texas, and it's support has been rekindled with this years success.
I think some people are trying to detract from Chiziks success and while I am just as amazed as everyone else I think he deserves all the attention he is getting. I am more amazed at the lack of attention that Mack's record has gotten this year. Chizik has a chance to establish a dynasty of sorts if he cashes in on the recruiting aspects the next couple of years. As to whether or not Auburn's success is more attributable to Chizik or to Newton, again Chizik brought Newton into the program, placed him in the hands of a masterful offensive coordinator, and rallied the team around him. To me that is what a head coach does and at this point Chizik is doing a damned good job.
When Mack Brown went to North Caolina in 1988 he had coached at Appalachian St (6-5) and at Tulane ((11-23). His first 3 years at North Carolina he went (8-21) and then finished out at (61-22).
He had immediate success when he went to Texas in 1998 and has since gone (133-34) including this years fall to grace (5-7). Until this year he was acclaimed to be The reason for all the success he enjoyed until this year and his 5.1 million dollar salary reflects it.
Now back to Chizik. As shown by Mack's record there was very little in his first two years at North Carolina to brag about (2-20) but in his third and fourth years he west (6-4-1 and 7-7) and then in his fifth year went (9-3). I think that reflects his ability to recruit more than any thing else because his recruits helped improvement that reflected in the won-loss record. Recruiting is what Mack does best, that and assembling a good staff of assistants. Chizik recruited and landed Newton and the impact was immediate. At Iowa St it was difficult to attract quality players to play in the lackluster Big 12 North.
At this point Auburn and Oklahoma St are probably the biggest surprises of 2010. What they have in common is that both head coaches hired in offensive coordinators that are way ahead of the curve. The success of both head coaches is reflected in this success. So hiring the right assistants and recruiting
are key elements in having and sustaining a successful program. Players come and go but the consistency of a program may have more to do with the assistants than most people want to acknowledge. Players like Newton don't grow on trees and he might have turned Mack's team around in 2010 also, who knows. But the fact is that Auburn, by hook or by crook, landed Newton and he has thrived under the system (2nd year) installed by Gus Malazhn. The rest speaks for itself.
Is Mack as great as his greatest team or is he redefined by this years non bowling team. Is Chizik to be judged by his couple of years at Iowa St. No one is now interested in how Mack did in his early years which were in fact formative years and unsuccessful by any standard. In terms of recruiting what kid would not want to go to Auburn and jump on that band wagon. Recruiting is what will define Chizik as a coach and he landed the biggest prize in 2010. He has surrounded himself with good assistant coaches and is way ahead of Mack already. Auburn has a proud tradition like Texas, and it's support has been rekindled with this years success.
I think some people are trying to detract from Chiziks success and while I am just as amazed as everyone else I think he deserves all the attention he is getting. I am more amazed at the lack of attention that Mack's record has gotten this year. Chizik has a chance to establish a dynasty of sorts if he cashes in on the recruiting aspects the next couple of years. As to whether or not Auburn's success is more attributable to Chizik or to Newton, again Chizik brought Newton into the program, placed him in the hands of a masterful offensive coordinator, and rallied the team around him. To me that is what a head coach does and at this point Chizik is doing a damned good job.
