Has Bajakian Gotten A Free Pass?

[7th Cir. Cat]

Stpaulcat asked some really good questions in another thread that I think deserve their own post.

In short, the question was whether Fitz deserves blame for both the terrible defense and the mediocre offense. What I found interesting was the use of the term mediocre, because I think we've given Bajakian a free pass by saying that his offense has been mediocre. To me, this is largely because of how terrible JON has been. In our 4 conference games the most points we've scored is 21. We've scored 7 points twice.

In other words WE ARE AVERAGING 14 POINTS A GAME!!! Would love to hear the board's thoughts, but I think that's pretty bad. I don't think Bajakian should be on the hot seat, but I do think that both defense AND offense need to have a hard look in the offseason. The QB room still seems like a problem and that's perhaps the most important position in all of sports. Maybe it's unfair to judge the QBs because the O-line has been so awful, but again, at some point there needs to be accountability across the board on defense AND offense.

 

[hdhntr1]

Stpaulcat asked some really good questions in another thread that I think deserve their own post.

In short, the question was whether Fitz deserves blame for both the terrible defense and the mediocre offense. What I found interesting was the use of the term mediocre, because I think we've given Bajakian a free pass by saying that his offense has been mediocre. I think this is largely because of how terrible JON has been. In our 4 conference games the most points we've scored is 21. We've scored 7 points twice.

In other words WE ARE AVERAGING 14 POINTS A GAME!!! Would love to hear the board's thoughts, but I think that's pretty bad. I don't think Bajakian should be on the hot seat, but I do think that both defense AND offense need to have a hard look in the offseason. The QB room still seems like a problem and that's perhaps the most important position in all of sports. Maybe it's unfair to judge the QBs because the O-line has been so awful, but again, at some point there needs to be accountability across the board on defense and offense.

It is reasonable to ask. You are right that our struggles on O have largely been overlooked as in our first three losses, the game was lost before the O even set foot on the field. To be fair, he has sort of been handicapped by losing 95% of our O production and by losses on OL (and poor play), losses at RB (including a couple departures) , poor QB play and departure of top 4 receivers. Makes it tougher to judge

 

[zeek55]

Stpaulcat asked some really good questions in another thread that I think deserve their own post.

In short, the question was whether Fitz deserves blame for both the terrible defense and the mediocre offense. What I found interesting was the use of the term mediocre, because I think we've given Bajakian a free pass by saying that his offense has been mediocre. I think this is largely because of how terrible JON has been. In our 4 conference games the most points we've scored is 21. We've scored 7 points twice.

In other words WE ARE AVERAGING 14 POINTS A GAME!!! Would love to hear the board's thoughts, but I think that's pretty bad. I don't think Bajakian should be on the hot seat, but I do think that both defense AND offense need to have a hard look in the offseason. The QB room still seems like a problem and that's perhaps the most important position in all of sports. Maybe it's unfair to judge the QBs because the O-line has been so awful, but again, at some point there needs to be accountability across the board on defense and offense.

The problems on our team right now are almost entirely personnel related.

We're probably playing about as well as the team can play at this point. Above a Rutgers level opponent, but well below a Michigan level opponent. That's the potential of this team right now.

No amount of coaching/play calling can make our offense work beyond the inherent limitations of having one solid receiver, a couple others of various talent levels, a shaky OL to be mild, and a statuesque QB who at times is inaccurate. And of course, we're missing Porter who was going to do a lot of the heavy lifting.

Given all that, the offense is doing about what you'd expect it to do.

I'd say the same is true about the defense as well; past 2 games, the defense has looked fine schematically. Michigan just wore us down and executed efficiently to extend long drives. Could perhaps say tackling was an issue, but our guys were there and Michigan wasn't ripping off 50 yard plays regularly with none of our guys in sight or our guys taking bad angles/blowing coverages badly.

Beyond the coaches needing to recruit better and develop better; the gameday results are pretty much cooked based on what you have at the moment.

Bajakian's offenses have been fine in my opinion; just don't see how anybody could produce more with what we have at the moment.

 

[techtim72]

The problems on our team right now are almost entirely personnel related.

We're probably playing about as well as the team can play at this point. Above a Rutgers level opponent, but well below a Michigan level opponent. That's the potential of this team right now.

No amount of coaching/play calling can make our offense work beyond the inherent limitations of having one solid receiver, a couple others of various talent levels, a shaky OL to be mild, and a statuesque QB who at times is inaccurate. And of course, we're missing Porter who was going to do a lot of the heavy lifting.

Given all that, the offense is doing about what you'd expect it to do.

I'd say the same is true about the defense as well; past 2 games, the defense has looked fine schematically. Michigan just wore us down and executed efficiently to extend long drives. Could perhaps say tackling was an issue, but our guys were there and Michigan wasn't ripping off 50 yard plays regularly with none of our guys in sight or our guys taking bad angles/blowing coverages badly.

Beyond the coaches needing to recruit better and develop better; the gameday results are pretty much cooked based on what you have at the moment.

Bajakian's offenses have been fine in my opinion; just don't see how anybody could produce more with what we have at the moment.

Agreed. Add in that our current capabilities do not allow room for special team mistakes.

 

[hdhntr1]

The problems on our team right now are almost entirely personnel related.

We're probably playing about as well as the team can play at this point. Above a Rutgers level opponent, but well below a Michigan level opponent. That's the potential of this team right now.

No amount of coaching/play calling can make our offense work beyond the inherent limitations of having one solid receiver, a couple others of various talent levels, a shaky OL to be mild, and a statuesque QB who at times is inaccurate. And of course, we're missing Porter who was going to do a lot of the heavy lifting.

Given all that, the offense is doing about what you'd expect it to do.

I'd say the same is true about the defense as well; past 2 games, the defense has looked fine schematically. Michigan just wore us down and executed efficiently to extend long drives. Could perhaps say tackling was an issue, but our guys were there and Michigan wasn't ripping off 50 yard plays regularly with none of our guys in sight or our guys taking bad angles/blowing coverages badly.

Beyond the coaches needing to recruit better and develop better; the gameday results are pretty much cooked based on what you have at the moment.

Bajakian's offenses have been fine in my opinion; just don't see how anybody could produce more with what we have at the moment.

Such are the trials of a developmental program. When you have a lot of uper class guys that have played a while you make a splash but when they move on there is a let down. A lot of our developed talent moved on after last year and guys we have replacing them haven't got up to speed yet. Plus enough injuries to fill a starting lineup

 

[7th Cir. Cat]

The problems on our team right now are almost entirely personnel related.

We're probably playing about as well as the team can play at this point. Above a Rutgers level opponent, but well below a Michigan level opponent. That's the potential of this team right now.

No amount of coaching/play calling can make our offense work beyond the inherent limitations of having one solid receiver, a couple others of various talent levels, a shaky OL to be mild, and a statuesque QB who at times is inaccurate. And of course, we're missing Porter who was going to do a lot of the heavy lifting.

Given all that, the offense is doing about what you'd expect it to do.

I'd say the same is true about the defense as well; past 2 games, the defense has looked fine schematically. Michigan just wore us down and executed efficiently to extend long drives. Could perhaps say tackling was an issue, but our guys were there and Michigan wasn't ripping off 50 yard plays regularly with none of our guys in sight or our guys taking bad angles/blowing coverages badly.

Beyond the coaches needing to recruit better and develop better; the gameday results are pretty much cooked based on what you have at the moment.

Bajakian's offenses have been fine in my opinion; just don't see how anybody could produce more with what we have at the moment.

Everything you said makes sense. And I was with you up until this statement: "just don't see how anybody could produce more with what we have." This is where I take issue. Those Randy Walker teams didn't have anywhere near the same star level of talent (according to Rivals) but his 2000 team averaged 37 points per game! Scheme and coaching mean a lot in the colllege game. I'm not expecting Bajakian to achieve that level of production but 14 points per game is beyond problematic (to say the least).

 

[zeek55]

Such are the trials of a developmental program. When you have a lot of uper class guys that have played a while you make a splash but when they move on there is a let down. A lot of our developed talent moved on after last year and guys we have replacing them haven't got up to speed yet. Plus enough injuries to fill a starting lineup

Yeah, I think we saw our team play about as well as it could against Rutgers, and then it basically repeated the performance against Michigan and we saw what happened against a talent-laden Michigan team that looks really good this year.

I think as fans we have to take a step back sometimes and understand what we have at times. That's why it's worth appreciating the years where the program really shines and take years like these in stride.

I could fully understand folks being upset with JON (I know I was) the first 5 games, but since they reset the scheme; the defense has played about as well as it could against Rutgers/Michigan.

 

[zeek55]

Everything you said makes sense. And I was with you up until this statement: "just don't see how anybody could produce more with what we have." This is where I take issue. Those Randy Walker teams didn't have anywhere near the same star level of talent (according to Rivals) but his 2000 team averaged 37 points per game! Scheme and coaching mean a lot in the colllege game. I'm not expecting Bajakian to achieve that level of production but 14 points per game is beyond problematic (to say the least).

That's a bit different; there's been "star inflation" to the point where most Power 5 recruits are automatically 3 stars instead of a lot of 2s on Power 5 rosters. That wasn't the case 20 years ago before the recruiting business became a big business.

We had some good QBs and RBs back in Walk's era including some who would be starting right now.

I fully understand the frustration with the offense, but with our current group of personnel, I just don't see where the production comes from against solid defensive teams, especially those that beat us at the line.

 

[Hungry Jack]

Jake has gotten a bit of a pass, given that his predecessor produced generally better results. Looking back 10 years, we can see that it sure helps to have an experienced and capable QB:

PPG (Rank) primary QBs

21: 19.7 (117)
20: 24.7 (93) Ramsey
19: 16.3 (126) Hunter/Aiden
18: 24.2 (100) CT
17: 29.2 (57) CT
16: 27.0 (87) CT
15: 19.5 (114) Thorson first year
14: 23.0 (101) TS / ZO
13: 26.1 (83) TS / KC
12: 31.7 (43) TS/KC

 

[Williesfan]

You cannot expect to win scoring an abysmal 14 points a game. To say Coach Jake is mediocre is complimentary. He should have as much fire under his *** as Coach JON.

 

[hdhntr1]

Everything you said makes sense. And I was with you up until this statement: "just don't see how anybody could produce more with what we have." This is where I take issue. Those Randy Walker teams didn't have anywhere near the same star level of talent (according to Rivals) but his 2000 team averaged 37 points per game! Scheme and coaching mean a lot in the colllege game. I'm not expecting Bajakian to achieve that level of production but 14 points per game is beyond problematic (to say the least).

Take a look at the RW era OL guys that made it to NFL. First were the Fab Five recuited by Barnett that were instrumental in the 2000 team. Then there were guys like Essex and Strief. Patton was a pretty good OL coach. The take a look at the RB position. He was an O minded coach and had a lot of experience with RB and that was foundation of his teams.

Rivals rating system has changed over the years and the three star of today was often a 2 star back then. Hard to compare them.

 

[loyolacat]

Those Randy Walker teams didn't have anywhere near the same star level of talent (according to Rivals) but his 2000 team averaged 37 points per game! Scheme and coaching mean a lot in the colllege game. I'm not expecting Bajakian to achieve that level of production but 14 points per game is beyond problematic (to say the least).

agree scheme matters...question is with two new coordinators...have they established or settled on their scheme and do they have the players to carry out the scheme ?

 

[hdhntr1]

Jake has gotten a bit of a pass, given that his predecessor produced generally better results. Looking back 10 years, we can see that it sure helps to have an experienced and capable QB:

PPG (Rank) primary QBs

21: 19.7 (117)
20: 24.7 (93) Ramsey
19: 16.3 (126) Hunter/Aiden
18: 24.2 (100) CT
17: 29.2 (57) CT
16: 27.0 (87) CT
15: 19.5 (114) Thorson first year
14: 23.0 (101) TS / ZO
13: 26.1 (83) TS / KC
12: 31.7 (43) TS/KC

And some better guys on OL, plus a solid RB. We really don't have much in any of these areas this year. A decent OL ofr two but not a solid OL. RB by committee and a mix of QBs.

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

The problems on our team right now are almost entirely personnel related.

We're probably playing about as well as the team can play at this point. Above a Rutgers level opponent, but well below a Michigan level opponent. That's the potential of this team right now.

No amount of coaching/play calling can make our offense work beyond the inherent limitations of having one solid receiver, a couple others of various talent levels, a shaky OL to be mild, and a statuesque QB who at times is inaccurate. And of course, we're missing Porter who was going to do a lot of the heavy lifting.

Given all that, the offense is doing about what you'd expect it to do.

I'd say the same is true about the defense as well; past 2 games, the defense has looked fine schematically. Michigan just wore us down and executed efficiently to extend long drives. Could perhaps say tackling was an issue, but our guys were there and Michigan wasn't ripping off 50 yard plays regularly with none of our guys in sight or our guys taking bad angles/blowing coverages badly.

Beyond the coaches needing to recruit better and develop better; the gameday results are pretty much cooked based on what you have at the moment.

Bajakian's offenses have been fine in my opinion; just don't see how anybody could produce more with what we have at the moment.

What do you mean? We have been told over and over “don’t blame this on the players; this is on the Coaches”. These vocal board members have told us so in most threads. Must be true.

 

[CatManTrue]

What do you mean? We have been told over and over “don’t blame this on the players; this is on the Coaches”. These vocal board members have told us so in most threads. Must be true.

Injuries have clearly taken a toll on our offense. I think Bajakian has called some nice plays and is one of the better ones on our roster.

 

[Harris_Island]

Bajakian has the benefit of being compared to McCall's worst season.

O'Neil is being compared to Hank's best season. That's a tough way to start.

They both need to do better to get us to a bowl game.

 

[Hungry Jack]

What do you mean? We have been told over and over “don’t blame this on the players; this is on the Coaches”. These vocal board members have told us so in most threads. Must be true.

Opinions are like gopher holes in a Minnesota cornfield.

 

[hdhntr1]

Everything you said makes sense. And I was with you up until this statement: "just don't see how anybody could produce more with what we have." This is where I take issue. Those Randy Walker teams didn't have anywhere near the same star level of talent (according to Rivals) but his 2000 team averaged 37 points per game! Scheme and coaching mean a lot in the colllege game. I'm not expecting Bajakian to achieve that level of production but 14 points per game is beyond problematic (to say the least).

And those RW teams only made a splash when they had a lot of mature talent at the same time. Next year we will have a couple of top RBs and QB have a year of development plus probably better overall OL but this year we are pretty short at key positions

 

[Aging Booster]

The problems on our team right now are almost entirely personnel related.

We're probably playing about as well as the team can play at this point. Above a Rutgers level opponent, but well below a Michigan level opponent. That's the potential of this team right now.

No amount of coaching/play calling can make our offense work beyond the inherent limitations of having one solid receiver, a couple others of various talent levels, a shaky OL to be mild, and a statuesque QB who at times is inaccurate. And of course, we're missing Porter who was going to do a lot of the heavy lifting.

Given all that, the offense is doing about what you'd expect it to do.

I'd say the same is true about the defense as well; past 2 games, the defense has looked fine schematically. Michigan just wore us down and executed efficiently to extend long drives. Could perhaps say tackling was an issue, but our guys were there and Michigan wasn't ripping off 50 yard plays regularly with none of our guys in sight or our guys taking bad angles/blowing coverages badly.

Beyond the coaches needing to recruit better and develop better; the gameday results are pretty much cooked based on what you have at the moment.

Bajakian's offenses have been fine in my opinion; just don't see how anybody could produce more with what we have at the moment.

Our offense should be better than it is, and you are right that our WR and OL are not performing well this year. We have seemingly improved recruiting in both areas and have hired a new OL coach as well. I truly expected more from both groups this year. Our OL-men are not really young and WRs can usually play early, even as frosh and sophomores. I am frustrated and confused. I do believe however, that the coaches will figure something out, be it improved development, transfers, or other changes.

 

[Aging Booster]

That's a bit different; there's been "star inflation" to the point where most Power 5 recruits are automatically 3 stars instead of a lot of 2s on Power 5 rosters. That wasn't the case 20 years ago before the recruiting business became a big business.

We had some good QBs and RBs back in Walk's era including some who would be starting right now.

I fully understand the frustration with the offense, but with our current group of personnel, I just don't see where the production comes from against solid defensive teams, especially those that beat us at the line.

Forget the start ratings. Our recent OL and WR recruits have generally had very good offer sheets. We were not the only power five team recruiting these guys - some other strong programs saw what our coaches saw.

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

Forget the start ratings. Our recent OL and WR recruits have generally had very good offer sheets. We were not the only power five team recruiting these guys - some other strong programs saw what our coaches saw.

Out top 4 WR’s have been out.

 

[hdhntr1]

Yeah, I think we saw our team play about as well as it could against Rutgers, and then it basically repeated the performance against Michigan and we saw what happened against a talent-laden Michigan team that looks really good this year.

I think as fans we have to take a step back sometimes and understand what we have at times. That's why it's worth appreciating the years where the program really shines and take years like these in stride.

I could fully understand folks being upset with JON (I know I was) the first 5 games, but since they reset the scheme; the defense has played about as well as it could against Rutgers/Michigan.

One or two less missteps and it would have been a 35-7 game.

 

[hdhntr1]

Our offense should be better than it is, and you are right that our WR and OL are not performing well this year. We have seemingly improved recruiting in both areas and have hired a new OL coach as well. I truly expected more from both groups this year. Our OL-men are not really young and WRs can usually play early, even as frosh and sophomores. I am frustrated and confused. I do believe however, that the coaches will figure something out, be it improved development, transfers, or other changes.

Sorry but we are already on our 3rd QB. Plus we are trying to replace the top 4 WRs of last year and then we have our top two WR of this year go down to injury, Going in without our top RB as well and injuries on the OL and I don't know how you expect us to have much more of an O

 

[Fanaticat98]

Out top 4 WR’s have been out.

Not to mention Bajakian’s first 2 years we’ve had our top returning WR leave “early” (transfer) - Skowronek and McGowan, on top of normal grad losses. Where would our offense be if we didn’t have Robinson transfer in this year?

 

[7th Cir. Cat]

Sorry but we are already on our 3rd QB. Plus we are trying to replace the top 4 WRs of last year and then we have our top two WR of this year go down to injury, Going in without our top RB as well and injuries on the OL and I don't know how you expect us to have much more of an O

But as the OC he has to own part of the issue with the QBs right? Hunter Johnson was a bust and didn't develop. Not saying that's completely on Bajakian (the overwhleming majority has to be on HJ's shoulders), but HJ didn't develop and you have to wonder why he beat out Marty for the starting spot. Recognizing who should play and start is part of being a successful coach. We have serious issues in the QB room, I think most of that is probably on the players, but my point is that the OC program/scheme/preparation should be given a critical look in the offseason as well and so should the type of QB we are recruiting (dual threat vs. pro-style). Everything should be on the table.

 

[Jaguar 88]

Everything you said makes sense. And I was with you up until this statement: "just don't see how anybody could produce more with what we have." This is where I take issue. Those Randy Walker teams didn't have anywhere near the same star level of talent (according to Rivals) but his 2000 team averaged 37 points per game! Scheme and coaching mean a lot in the colllege game. I'm not expecting Bajakian to achieve that level of production but 14 points per game is beyond problematic (to say the least).

Scheme can alleviate a certain degree of lack of overall talent. Being innovative in creating a scheme that can make up a deficiency talent wise, is paramount or the program will suffer in the short to medium term, if not longer. If Fitz went back to the Hankwitz' d playbook, can he dust off a copy of coach Walker's offensive playbook? I think we have some good skilled offensive talent, just playing behind a small line. If we could stay healthy, we could be a fun team to watch under the right scheme.

 

[NUCat320]

To answer, OP, yes, probably.

The difference is that JON’s track record is terrrrrrrible. His scheme is bad and his results were predictable. (Directionally, I don’t think anybody expected 56 points to Nebraska bad.)

Bajakian has a track record that he’s not a world beater, that he has developed QBs, and that he’ll use his personnel. He’s never had cover-your-eyes bad, which is all JON had ever had.

 

[7th Cir. Cat]

To answer, OP, yes, probably.

The difference is that JON’s track record is terrrrrrrible. His scheme is bad and his results were predictable. (Directionally, I don’t think anybody expected 56 points to Nebraska bad.)

Bajakian has a track record that he’s not a world beater, that he has developed QBs, and that he’ll use his personnel. He’s never had cover-your-eyes bad, which is all JON had ever had.

Agreed on track record being the difference. How long is Bajakian's contract? Did he get 3 year deal? 5 year deal? If next year is make or break for him, I wonder if we see anything different from him in terms of approach.

 

[torque-cat]

Everything you said makes sense. And I was with you up until this statement: "just don't see how anybody could produce more with what we have." This is where I take issue. Those Randy Walker teams didn't have anywhere near the same star level of talent (according to Rivals) but his 2000 team averaged 37 points per game! Scheme and coaching mean a lot in the colllege game. I'm not expecting Bajakian to achieve that level of production but 14 points per game is beyond problematic (to say the least).

That is the exception that proves the rule. You had to go back 20 years to find an overachieving team, which, by the way, had more talent than this one. Zak was a smart, tough QB, DA2 was perfect for the offense, we had Harris, Silva, Bentley and D'Mo and others on defense. A very talented team overall but also one that took college football by storm with a unique offense. But those kinds of schematic advantages don't last hence the team became more defensible over time and you don't catch lightning in a bottle with a creative scheme every season.

 

[EvanstonCat]

Damn I didn't realize we were this poor.

Of course Bajakian is getting a free pass. We are not getting markedly better under his watch. It's maddening. And without Hank, we're going to need to be a lot better than we have been under McCall, and under Bajakian now.

Makes Mike Dunbar look like a genius.

 

[7th Cir. Cat]

That is the exception that proves the rule. You had to go back 20 years to find an overachieving team, which, by the way, had more talent than this one. Zak was a smart, tough QB, DA2 was perfect for the offense, we had Harris, Silva, Bentley and D'Mo and others on defense. A very talented team overall but also one that took college football by storm with a unique offense. But those kinds of schematic advantages don't last hence the team became more defensible over time and you don't catch lightning in a bottle with a creative scheme every season.

Nope, I picked that team because it was one of my favorites. The 2005 team averaged 33 points per game. The 2007 team averaged 31 points per game. We have the ability to score (even without having Buckeye level talent at WR) when we have good schemes and coordinators. The 2000 team was not an outlier, we just changed philosophies and coordinators.