Mick McCall is gone

Gocatsgo2003

All-Conference
Mar 30, 2006
47,096
3,443
78
If you’re actually interested, which I’m extremely confident you’re not, I’ll attempt to break this down.

1. I make a comment that explains why I view it as okay to root for McCall to be fired.

2. I get a response to said point saying McCall is a person.

3. I response to number 2 saying that he is a person, but so is his replacement, so that’s not a moot point.

4. You accuse me of making a pointless post by saying he’s a person.

5. I question how you got there given that that my post was a response to a contradiction/criticism of my post, assigning responsibility of point number 2 discussed above to me.

6. You seemingly disregard the completely valid explanation and reiterate point number 4.

I responded to the most recent pointless post. Of course he’s a person, as is his replacement. Both the post you responded to and your response were pointless.
 

evanston09

Freshman
Nov 6, 2009
1,268
99
36
I responded to the most recent pointless post. Of course he’s a person, as is his replacement. Both the post you responded to and your response were pointless.

then I suggest you take that up with the person who posed that as an opposition to my point, and/or read the rest of my post(s).

Have a good evening.
 

Hungry Jack

All-Conference
Nov 17, 2008
38,070
4,054
67
These personal pissing matches are idiotic. They become nauseating when the point-counterpoints spill over two pages. Now we have an argument over how the argument got started. A meta argument!

If you cannot understand that:
1) a post you consider to be dumb is not a personal affront to you;
2) you are not obligated to reply to dumb posts;
3) the internet is full of dumb posts;
4) dumb posts can never be made smart, regardless of how hard you try;
5) dumb posts are generally best left alone

then maybe the Internet isn’t for you.
 
Last edited:

ricko6543211

Junior
Nov 15, 2006
4,231
229
47
Is this for real?
I heard it secondhand. But the way I heard it, and from who the source(s) supposedly was, it seemed believable. I said there is a “good chance”, not that it will happen. I do not know whether it is true or if it is complete mullarkey, but if he retires it would not surprise me. We will see. If he wants to come back another year, that would be excellent and I have no doubt that Fitz would welcome him.
 
Last edited:

zeek55

Junior
Nov 21, 2010
3,651
277
83
McCall had a good, long run here. I think (as I've said before many times) that he coached his best season last year going through multiple changes to the offense (due to injuries) and yet still getting the job done in most of the tight games.

But it was clearly time for a change; the offense reached the nadir this past season, and even if you don't care for statistics, we should never have an offense that's even in the discussion for worst in FBS given the talent we bring on...

Regardless, I'm glad this year ended with a win against the Illini, and I trust Fitz to bring on somebody he's comfortable with who will have a chance to bring their own philosophy to the offense and make appropriate changes to get players being more productive.
 

TheC

All-Conference
May 29, 2001
19,242
1,337
62
There personal pissing matches are idiotic. They become nauseating when the point-counterpoints spill over two pages. Now we have an argument over how the argument got started. A meta argument!

If you cannot understand that:
1) a post you consider to be dumb is not a personal affront to you;
2) you are not obligated to reply to dumb posts;
3) the internet is full of dumb posts;
4) dumb posts can never be made smart, regardless of how hard you try;
5) dumb posts are generally best left alone

then maybe the Internet isn’t for you.
And people complain about me just because I ***** and moan a little bit in the game thread. Geez! This is supposed to be a good news thread. We are getting the change that 90% of us wanted!
 

Hungry Jack

All-Conference
Nov 17, 2008
38,070
4,054
67
And people complain about me just because I ***** and moan a little bit in the game thread. Geez! This is supposed to be a good news thread. We are getting the change that 90% of us wanted!
Gotta find something to kvetch about.

As for me, I was at that the DMV on Friday. Nuff said.
 

catsattackfor3

Freshman
Mar 2, 2011
2,629
53
0
I know I am in the minority, but I hope the new OC brings an entirely new offense. I think NU would do well running the triple option. The Wing T is another choice, although unproven in D1 football. If we ran the same triple option as the service academies we would quickly become the pesky purple pain-in-the-*** of the Big Ten.
Cannot do it. You will hurt recruiting big time: QB, WR, TE's and even O-lineman in that system are a different breed and you will eliminate interest from a great majority of potential recruits.

Just read an article about the legendary High School coach in Chicago from Mount Carmel who was let go 2 years ago because stud grammar school kids were starting to not attend the schoool because of the Wing T offense he ran successfully for 11 state championships. The school moved on to alum and former NIU great Jordan Lynch because he would bring a modern day offense to attract kids. I f a power house high school program worries about that its a non starter for a Big 10 school. Navy / Army have to run it to compete they recruit a different breed of athlete.
 

jimmyNU

Redshirt
Sep 12, 2005
286
0
0
Paul Johnson, in 11 years at GaTech running the triple option, won 4 division crowns but only one conference title (and the conference title and one of the other division crowns were the first two years he was there, before teams knew how to defend his offense). He went to 9 bowl games but only won 3. He never got anywhere near a playoff berth. No thanks.

Besides, option offenses are boring to watch.
You have nothing to fear. It's not going to happen. I'm sure McCall's replacement will run something similar to what we've had since 2000.
 

NUCat320

Senior
Dec 4, 2005
19,469
495
0
You have nothing to fear. It's not going to happen. I'm sure McCall's replacement will run something similar to what we've had since 2000.
I appreciate that you’re realistic.

Being in ATL, I watched Paul Johnson’s teams moderately closely while he was here, and I loved watching those teams. But there’s just not enough firepower to compete with today’s modern offenses. (Johnson was, of course, didactically old school, down to having a substitute run in every play call...) The few years they were real good, tho, were just a blast to watch.

The most interesting thing is that Tech actually sent a fair amount of receivers to the NFL. Catching deep balls and blocking like crazy are two things that the NFL values.
 
Last edited:

stpaulcat

Senior
May 29, 2001
35,333
899
113
And people complain about me just because I ***** and moan a little bit in the game thread. Geez! This is supposed to be a good news thread. We are getting the change that 90% of us wanted!
91%
 

DaCat

All-Conference
May 29, 2001
25,682
2,085
113
There personal pissing matches are idiotic. They become nauseating when the point-counterpoints spill over two pages. Now we have an argument over how the argument got started. A meta argument!

If you cannot understand that:
1) a post you consider to be dumb is not a personal affront to you;
2) you are not obligated to reply to dumb posts;
3) the internet is full of dumb posts;
4) dumb posts can never be made smart, regardless of how hard you try;
5) dumb posts are generally best left alone

then maybe the Internet isn’t for you.

It's going to be a long off season, starting early because of no bowl game.
 

Harris_Island

Redshirt
Sep 26, 2019
622
18
18
McCall leaving makes it a little less likely for TJ Green to return, right? He had the most time in the system, but now all the QBs will be learning something at least a little bit new. And there are several QBs now who have more in-game experience.

I'm excited for next year's QBs. Hopefully Fitz finds somebody who can get them in a place to do a lot, lot better than this year.
 

stpaulcat

Senior
May 29, 2001
35,333
899
113
McCall leaving makes it a little less likely for TJ Green to return, right? He had the most time in the system, but now all the QBs will be learning something at least a little bit new. And there are several QBs now who have more in-game experience.

I'm excited for next year's QBs. Hopefully Fitz finds somebody who can get them in a place to do a lot, lot better than this year.
If Fitz doesn't, there was no point in letting McCall go.
 

evanston09

Freshman
Nov 6, 2009
1,268
99
36
McCall leaving makes it a little less likely for TJ Green to return, right? He had the most time in the system, but now all the QBs will be learning something at least a little bit new. And there are several QBs now who have more in-game experience.

I'm excited for next year's QBs. Hopefully Fitz finds somebody who can get them in a place to do a lot, lot better than this year.

From a playing time perspective this makes a lot of sense.

From a life standpoint, if he’s interested in an advanced degree a return still represents an amazing opportunity
 

EvanstonCat

Senior
May 29, 2001
50,776
775
73
No one pays me to advise or coach a football program. I'm just a fan with an internet connection. That said, you don't need to score 52 points a game when you control the ball for 41 minutes.

Excuse me, but that's the Corbi speak that got us into this damned mess of a situation in the first place.

Yes, we need to score a **** ton of points, no matter how long we control the ball. That's the object of the game. Score as many points as you can and keep the other guy from doing the same. Don't care how we do it, but we need to score.
 

phatcat_rivals223240

All-Conference
Nov 5, 2001
18,957
1,111
113
If Fitz doesn't, there was no point in letting McCall go.
Probably none of us expect an Oklahoma level of offense, but with many of the people in the M*A*S*H unit recovering, a lot of "college of hard knocks" lessons learned, a fresh start and a slightly more forgiving schedule, I'm expecting, at minimum, to be where we were 2016-2018. That might not sound like much, but let's get the patient off the operating table before we start having him running marathons.
 

kaTNap

Junior
Nov 6, 2005
2,664
270
83
You have nothing to fear. It's not going to happen. I'm sure McCall's replacement will run something similar to what we've had since 2000.

I only hope it's a lot closer to what we had in 2005 than it is to what we had in 2019.
 

stpaulcat

Senior
May 29, 2001
35,333
899
113
Probably none of us expect an Oklahoma level of offense, but with many of the people in the M*A*S*H unit recovering, a lot of "college of hard knocks" lessons learned, a fresh start and a slightly more forgiving schedule, I'm expecting, at minimum, to be where we were 2016-2018. That might not sound like much, but let's get the patient off the operating table before we start having him running marathons.
True, but it would be good if we give the patient a possibility to win a marathon.
 

Gocatsgo2003

All-Conference
Mar 30, 2006
47,096
3,443
78
I appreciate that you’re realistic.

Being in ATL, I watched Paul Johnson’s teams moderately closely while he was here, and I loved watching those teams. But there’s just not enough firepower to compete with today’s modern offenses. (Johnson was, of course, didactically old school, down to having a substitute run in every play call...) The few years they were real good, tho, was just a blast to watch.

The most interesting thing is that Tech actually sent a fair amount of receivers to the NFL. Catching deep balls and blocking like crazy are two things that the NFL values.

The NFL also values "being freak athletes like Calvin Johnson and Demaryius Thomas" (neither of whom was recruited by Johnson). DeAndre Smelter and Stephen Hill aren't exactly household names.
 

Fitz51

Senior
Oct 21, 2008
10,115
649
0
There personal pissing matches are idiotic. They become nauseating when the point-counterpoints spill over two pages. Now we have an argument over how the argument got started. A meta argument!

If you cannot understand that:
1) a post you consider to be dumb is not a personal affront to you;
2) you are not obligated to reply to dumb posts;
3) the internet is full of dumb posts;
4) dumb posts can never be made smart, regardless of how hard you try;
5) dumb posts are generally best left alone

then maybe the Internet isn’t for you.

This is excellent.
 

DaCat

All-Conference
May 29, 2001
25,682
2,085
113
Yes, we need to score a **** ton of points, no matter how long we control the ball. That's the object of the game. Score as many points as you can and keep the other guy from doing the same. Don't care how we do it, but we need to score.

I think a ball-control, grind-it-out offense has its place, especially in a close game or when we jump out to a lead. However, if you go down a couple scores, it can work against you. I'm a big believer that a good, balanced offense that puts up points is essential in today's college game, especially in the big games when you face a team like dOSU who you can only hope to outscore because they will score on any defense, no matter how good.
 

EvanstonCat

Senior
May 29, 2001
50,776
775
73
I think a ball-control, grind-it-out offense has its place, especially in a close game or when we jump out to a lead. However, if you go down a couple scores, it can work against you. I'm a big believer that a good, balanced offense that puts up points is essential in today's college game, especially in the big games when you face a team like dOSU who you can only hope to outscore because they will score on any defense, no matter how good.

We are violently agreeing, but I'll add that Bama and Auburn can't hold elite offenses below 40 points. No one should believe that they can win on D alone in today's game. You have to have an explosive Offense or you're just going to get boatraced these days by these high powered O's. Complementary offense hooey. A real complementary offense is one that dominates as much as a dominant D. See dOSU.
 

hdhntr1

All-Conference
Sep 5, 2006
37,939
1,344
113
McCall had a good, long run here. I think (as I've said before many times) that he coached his best season last year going through multiple changes to the offense (due to injuries) and yet still getting the job done in most of the tight games.

But it was clearly time for a change; the offense reached the nadir this past season, and even if you don't care for statistics, we should never have an offense that's even in the discussion for worst in FBS given the talent we bring on...

Regardless, I'm glad this year ended with a win against the Illini, and I trust Fitz to bring on somebody he's comfortable with who will have a chance to bring their own philosophy to the offense and make appropriate changes to get players being more productive.
While we bring in reasonable talent and it has been improving, on O especially it tends to fall to the bottom of the BIG. This year we had a perfect storm that made things look even worse. As you say, with the injuries, McCall did a solid job last year. But at this point it is reasonable to move on
 

hdhntr1

All-Conference
Sep 5, 2006
37,939
1,344
113
There personal pissing matches are idiotic. They become nauseating when the point-counterpoints spill over two pages. Now we have an argument over how the argument got started. A meta argument!

If you cannot understand that:
1) a post you consider to be dumb is not a personal affront to you;
2) you are not obligated to reply to dumb posts;
3) the internet is full of dumb posts;
4) dumb posts can never be made smart, regardless of how hard you try;
5) dumb posts are generally best left alone

then maybe the Internet isn’t for you.
Are there any other kind of posts on the internet other than dumb ones?
 

hdhntr1

All-Conference
Sep 5, 2006
37,939
1,344
113
Excuse me, but that's the Corbi speak that got us into this damned mess of a situation in the first place.

Yes, we need to score a **** ton of points, no matter how long we control the ball. That's the object of the game. Score as many points as you can and keep the other guy from doing the same. Don't care how we do it, but we need to score.
The goal is to just score more than the opponent. But that does not necessarily mean you have to always score a lot of points. While you cannot win with D only, it puts you in pretty good position. And if your dynamic O puts the D in bad position, you still lose. An upgrade from where we are is reasonable but going for that "put up tons of points" O probably works more against the way the team will tend to be structured under Fitz. As far as beating OSU regularly, not likely to happen. Even Mich has won against them only once in the last 15 tries.
 

evanston09

Freshman
Nov 6, 2009
1,268
99
36
The goal is to just score more than the opponent. But that does not necessarily mean you have to always score a lot of points. While you cannot win with D only, it puts you in pretty good position. And if your dynamic O puts the D in bad position, you still lose. An upgrade from where we are is reasonable but going for that "put up tons of points" O probably works more against the way the team will tend to be structured under Fitz. As far as beating OSU regularly, not likely to happen. Even Mich has won against them only once in the last 15 tries.

yeah, but isn’t the most common criticism of Michigan that they are trying to run an antiquated offensive scheme in an era of high scoring offenses?
 

Gocatsgo2003

All-Conference
Mar 30, 2006
47,096
3,443
78
yeah, but isn’t the most common criticism of Michigan that they are trying to run an antiquated offensive scheme in an era of high scoring offenses?

Used to be. Josh Gattis was brought in from Bama to (theoretically) transition to a more modern spread offense.
 

Hungry Jack

All-Conference
Nov 17, 2008
38,070
4,054
67
Probably none of us expect an Oklahoma level of offense, but with many of the people in the M*A*S*H unit recovering, a lot of "college of hard knocks" lessons learned, a fresh start and a slightly more forgiving schedule, I'm expecting, at minimum, to be where we were 2016-2018. That might not sound like much, but let's get the patient off the operating table before we start having him running marathons.
Seriously. If Illinois can average 28 points a game, we can too.
 

TheC

All-Conference
May 29, 2001
19,242
1,337
62
We are violently agreeing, but I'll add that Bama and Auburn can't hold elite offenses below 40 points. No one should believe that they can win on D alone in today's game. You have to have an explosive Offense or you're just going to get boatraced these days by these high powered O's. Complementary offense hooey. A real complementary offense is one that dominates as much as a dominant D. See dOSU.
But one thing those teams have that we don't are explosive play makers. At least 3 TDs in that game were not the ordinary variety (2 pick 6's and KOR TD).
 

TheC

All-Conference
May 29, 2001
19,242
1,337
62
Used to be. Josh Gattis was brought in from Bama to (theoretically) transition to a more modern spread offense.
And, after some growing pains early in the season, it worked for them. They didn't lose to OSU because of their offense.
 

catsattackfor3

Freshman
Mar 2, 2011
2,629
53
0
I know I am in the minority, but I hope the new OC brings an entirely new offense. I think NU would do well running the triple option. The Wing T is another choice, although unproven in D1 football. If we ran the same triple option as the service academies we would quickly become the pesky purple pain-in-the-*** of the Big Ten.

Apparently. If we were Illinois with our defense, we'd be in the B1G championship game again this year.

With any semblance of Offense we may have won 2-3 more but that is about it
 
Last edited:

TheC

All-Conference
May 29, 2001
19,242
1,337
62
Between the two of us? I'm the moron who can spell.
You can always tell the person losing the argument because they start to go after grammar and spelling.

(That's a classic retort in these back and forths, right?)
 

stpaulcat

Senior
May 29, 2001
35,333
899
113
You can always tell the person losing the argument because they start to go after grammar and spelling.

(That's a classic retort in these back and forths, right?)

Morans inherently can't spell. But somehow, they can type, given a reason to be upset about something.