Monthly Archive for September, 2006

Another Bunting Article

OK, so I lied when I said I was taking a Bunting break. Actually, what I said was I was taking a break barring any new information which this most definitely qualifies. Caulton Tudor, who I am presently putting aside years of previously held animosity because he is so spot-on correct in his analysis of this situation, has posted on the ACC Now blog an interesting little story.

In 2000 Tudor wrote a column advocating FSU offensive coordinator and present Georgia head coach Mark Richt as the best candidate to fill the job at UNC. In short Tudor recounts how he was contacted by Richt’s agent to see if Tudor had any inside information on Richt’s canidacy. Tudor knew nothing because Dick Baddour had said nothing but the column apparently had an effect and Richt was interviewed by Baddour and UNC Chancellor James Moeser in Atlanta. According to Richt’s agent, Baddour pretty much had his mind made up on Bunting because of a small contingent of former UNC players and NFL coach Marty Schottenheimer(who apparently was somewhat a candidate except he wanted $2 million.) Bunting was hired and so was Richt at the University of Georgia where has been 56-12 in arguably the toughest football conference in the country. Tudor concludes by saying:

Did Carolina make a mistake? Absolutely, which is evident not only by Richt’s record at an SEC school, but the offensive vacuum, specifically at quarterback, created by Richt’s departure at FSU.

Hindsight supports but doesn’t change Richt’s overriding advantage in 2000. He was more qualified for a head coaching job in college, whereas Bunting was more qualified for a head coaching in the NFL. There’s a big difference in the job demands.

Did Baddour have reason to think he was making the right move? Yes. There was a small army of supporters pushing Bunting. Had Richt been hired, Baddour would have been the target of much second-guessing.

OK, this is new information for me. And it many ways it does not surprise me that Baddour sought to appease a handful alumni by hiring John Bunting than actually taking the best candidate available. This faux interview business is vaguely similar to the treatment Baddour gave Larry Brown after Roy Williams returned to Kansas. Baddour never had any intention of hiring Brown but gave him an interview and then hired Matt Doherty who simply was not ready for the job. It seems that he pulled the same stunt with Richt by interviewing him but really planning to hire Bunting anyway. And I disagree with with Tudor’s assessment that Baddour had “reason to think he was making the right move” Baddour made this move because he was getting alumni pressure since he botched the hiring of Frank Beamer. It was more of that “in the family” stuff that plays out like patronage for UNC alumni. In the span of six years UNC has hired two coaches to head the two major sports programs based on UNC affiliation first and qualifications second. In both cases it has not turned out so well.

Baddour was duty bound to find the best coach possible. In the year 2000 with FSU having been the best team in the ACC since it joined, one could logically assume that an offensive coordinator on Bobby Bowden’s staff who was tasked with the job of creating some of the most powerful offenses the ACC has ever seen might actually be a pretty good coach. In fact Charlie Ward won a Hesiman Trophy with Richt as the quaterbacks coach. Here is a guy who had previously been an assistant coach in NC at ECU which means he understands in-state recruiting and probably had a roledex full of contacts. Add to that the fact he had been at FSU and would bring tons of in-roads into recruiting hot bed Florida. On top of that Tudor describes his strongest traits as being his “organization, offensive insight, attention to detail and quarterback development.” He was an experienced college football coach and by all indications in 2000 he was a good coach period. The 56-12 record he has at Georgia may have been a little more difficult duplicate at UNC but I would have to think it would be better than the 25-39 record Bunting has now.

So, if I might take this moment to take my blame spotlight off of Bunting for the moment and place it squarely on Dick Baddour. So how is that decision to hire Bunting working out now, Dick.

Share This Post:
[Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Facebook] [MySpace] [Technorati] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!] [Email]

Elsewhere in College Football

Since UNC is off this week and I have exhausted myself of further need to discuss the John Bunting issue I thought it would be nice to take a look at what else is happening in college football and which games I will probably catch this weekend.

It all began last night actually with Auburn beating South Carolina 24-17 in Columbia. That is actually a nice effort for the Gamecocks against a defense most people thought was inpenatrable after the LSU game. Of course it also helps the Auburn had the ball for the entire third quarter. That’s right, USC did not run a single play on offense in the third quarter. Auburn received the kick off to start the half and then went on an eight minute plus scoring drive for a field goal, recovered an onside kick and then scored a touchdown to end the quarter following a six minute plus drive. Call me crazy but it is hard to win a game when your offense is only on the field for three quarters. Also, the buzz on the onside kick is that Auburn “stole a page from the Old Ball Coach Steve Spurrier.” Which means I have to ask. If Spurrier has a distinct reputation for pulling all sorts of suprise plays and everyone else starts doing it doesn’t it make Spurrier more ordinary. I still think Spurrier is a great X ’s and O’s coach but I think the luster has worn off the “whole tricky old ball coach” routine.

#23 Rutgers at South Florida, Friday, September 29th

This is a common opponent game for UNC. My biggest question here will be how well the South Florida offense plays against a Rutgers defense that has been good although not against great competition.(UNC unfortunately included in that company) Since UNC is so weak on defense it will be interesting to see if the SF offense is something that is going to run roughshot over Tar Heel defenders or perhaps they will be able to handle it. A look at SF’s run defense will also be enlightening. Since the UNC coaches should have a free evening I am really hoping they are watching this one ahead of the Oct. 14 meeting with the Bulls in Chapel Hill.

#1 Ohio State at #13 Iowa, Saturday, September 30th

This is the ABC Saturday Night Game of the Week so I am being forced to care about it. Not really but it is an interesting matchup. It always pays to tune in and watch the #1 team in the country on the road against a ranked opponent because the opportunity for an upset is present. And since the regular season is essentially the playoff, a loss for OSU could spell elmination from the national title race. So I will give it a look and I always tend to pull for the underdog. Sorry Buckeyes.

And that’s it. Wow, what a shame after having all of the great football two weeks ago now we have only two games featuring ranked teams playing each other: OSU-Iowa and GT-VT. The Rutgers-SF game is not even one I would look at were it not for the UNC implications. Well at least baseball has some interesting division/wild card races to watch.

Share This Post:
[Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Facebook] [MySpace] [Technorati] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!] [Email]

Oh, That Sweet, Sweet Roundball…

Two weeks until the start of practice.  Six weeks until UNC takes the floor in a meaningful game.  Given the woes over at Kenan it cannot come soon enough.  Tar Heel Blue has a few articles up this week including player profiles by Adam Lucas on Reyshawn Terry and Wes Miller as well as commentary from Woody Durham on UNC’s preseason rating by various magazines.

Share This Post:
[Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Facebook] [MySpace] [Technorati] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!] [Email]

ACC Football Week #5: Preview

Wow! Time flies when you are trying to force a coach out the door. Four ACC teams have a bye this week: NC State, Maryland, Florida State and North Carolina. All three could probably use the rest though UNC’s case this is technically the second straight bye week for them since no one in their right mind can call what they did at Clemson last week actually playing a game. We are also absent a Thursday night game for the ACC which will be the last such occasion into the forseeable future.

Saturday, September 30th
Virginia at Duke, 12:00 PM, Raycom/Lincoln Financial Network

This is going to be a bad game. And I do not mean the Clemson-UNC kind I mean the kind where two football teams stumble around the field like some drunk guy at a bar looking for his car keys which his friends have hidden from him so he won’t go out and kill himself. UVa has no offense. None, zilch, zero. So far this season UVa is averaging 10.5 points a game and has accumulated a total of 841 yards of total offense in four games. That averages out to something line 210 yards of offense per game. And just when you think that is absymal you look at Duke which as scored only 13 points and that was all against Wake Forest in the second week. But at least the Devils’ offense is moving into the mid-200 yard range per game at 238 yard per game. No way around how ugly this game will be and since I have pretty much strapped myself to the “Duke Will Not Win This Season” train I am duty bound to call for a UVa win. Virginia 5 Duke 3.

Maine at Boston College, 1:00 PM

Maine is one of those schools that as soon as you see it on a scoreboard you automatically assume they are toast against whoever they might be playing. This is being a tad judgmental since the Black Bears are 2-1 and then I realized after seeing they beat Shaw 62-12 that they are a I-AA school and this game is not against UNC so yes Maine will be toast. The Eagles had serious damage done to their pride last week in Raleigh so I expect this one will be over by halftime. BC 41 Maine 10.

Liberty at Wake Forest, 3:30 PM

I forsee the headline of this game as “Baptists Bludgeon Baptists” And Wake Forest has a chance to move to 5-0 on the season and all without their starting QB and RB. I mean who, outside of Jim Grobe, thought this kind of start was possible for the Demon Deacons? This kind of stuff really messes with my sense of reality as though the reclassification of the planet Pluto as some kind of asteroid wasn’t enough to shake my foundations now I have Wake Forest on the verge of being 5-0 in football. I mean what’s next Miami, Florida State, and Virginia Tech making it through a whole season without having a player arrested? Anyway, Wake should win and if they are indeed the real deal, they should win big. WF 42 Liberty 7.

#24 Georgia Tech at #11 Virginia Tech, 3:30 PM, ABC Regional

“Tech” Bowl 2006! This also has huge ramifications for the divisional race thought VT still has BC, Clemson, and Miami to deal with while GT only sees the latter two teams in the trio. Part of me really wants to pick Georgia Tech here. VT will be missing a pair of defensive starters and the VT offense is quite inept at moving the ball sometimes. GT showed the ability to shutdown a potent offense against Notre Dame and since VT is not a great offensive team the Yellow Jackets could be in a prime position to steal this game if they (a) do not give up points on special teams and (b) scores some points on offense themselves. Yeah, cutting edge analysis, I know. Frank Beamer has been very successful in getting points off special teams by blocking punts or returning one for a touchdown. These are points you cannot give up if you want to beat the Hokies. On offense QB Reggie Ball seems to have a problem getting the ball to Calvin Johnson. Here you have a receiver who is NFL ready and a head taller than the DBs that cover him and he has less than five catches per game. Granted all the defenses they play probably key on him but also consider the Notre Dame game. (Yes I keep harping on that game but simply because it showed us a lot about Georgia Tech) The Jackets scored a total of 10 points on a defense which in the subsequent weeks has surrendered 21, 47, 37 points to three opponents who did not have a wide receiver the same caliber as Calvin Johnson. And I would surmise that the Hokie defense, even minus the latest two lawbreakers, is still a heck of a lot better defense than Notre Dame. So I just cannot get past certain logical limitations which say that VT will get at least one TD from special teams, one TD and two field goals from it’s offense and hold GT’s offense mostly in check. VT 20 GT 7.

Houston at Miami, 6:00 PM

At first glance you see that Houston is 4-0 and you think: “This could be a problematic game for Miami.” Then you see that Houston barely beat a Rice team who was ripped to shreds by Texas and Florida State so the idea kind of loses it’s luster. This is an important game for Larry Coker who got smacked at Louisville and knows they are in the process of distributing pitchforks and torches to the angry mob. If you thought the reaction of Tar Heel nation was severe following the Clemson game it will be a tea party compared to the manner in which Hurricane nation will react if Miami gets upset here. I do not think they will. In fact they may very well find their offense which will not bode well for UNC the next week, not that UNC had a prayer anyway. Miami 38 Houston 13.

Lousiana Tech at #18 Clemson, 7:00 PM

One question: Can Clemson beat the Bulldogs worse than they beat UNC. The following over/unders are in play:

Points scored: 52(Over)
Points allowed: 7(Over)
Points scored by the end of the 3rd quarter: 52(Under)
Margin of Victory: 45(Under)

Clemson 55 Lousiana Tech 14

NC State vs BYE

Nothing like an extra weekend to bask in the glory of miracle win and the optimism surrounding a new QB. NC State gets the short week as they play FSU next Thursday. Nothing like a little extra time to prepare for a big game.

#19 Florida State vs BYE

The fact the schedule makers are smart enough to give these teams a bye prior a Thursday game reeks of common sense I am unaccustomed to seeing from college athletics. FSU is still looking for a running game.

Maryland vs BYE

Maryland concluded their OOC schedule 3-1 with a very bad loss at West Virgnina and three fairly unimpressive wins at home against lightweight competition. So the bye week comes at a good spot for the Terps who need to figure out a few things on offense before seeing the ACC portion which, with the exception of UVa and Duke is not very kind.

UNC vs BYE

UNC 47 BYE 44. But only because the players are not giving a good effort, the coaching staff was also suprised by how aggressive the offense for Bye was and did not prepare for their rare Flex Bone Wish Split End Option Set.

Share This Post:
[Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Facebook] [MySpace] [Technorati] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!] [Email]

The John Bunting Watch Roundup

Over the past five days we have seen a flurry of media activity as well as a high level of message board chatter all pointing to John Bunting’s potential ouster at UNC. Since this is also a bye week for the Tar Heels it really drove the focus of the media and this blogger since there was no upcoming game to draw a bead on. So here are links to all of the major articles on the Bunting situation since the 52-7 thrashing in Death Valley.

N&O: Bunting Failing the Heels
N&O: Clock Ticks for Bunting
N&O: Stay or Go
N&O: Don’t Discount Bunting
ACC Now: Bunting Ignoring Job Talk
ACC Now: Bunting to UNC Fans: Hang in There
N&R: Tar Heel Coach Gets Vote of Confidence
N&R Sports Extra: Fickle Fate of Football Coaches
WSJ: WOEFUL: Baddour Says Tar Heels Will Rebound
Wilmington Star: Carolina’s Futility Tells Ugly Tale
David Glenn: Bunting’s Biggest Problem
Charlotte Observer: Bunting’s Critics Get Louder
ESPN.com: OK to Root Against Your Team?
EDSBS: Buys and Sells: Week Four
Vandermint Auditorium: John Bunting and the 2001 Coaching Class

Barring any new events in the Bunting saga I am going to make it a point to go Bunting-free for the next few days and focus on other college football happenings as well as talking about basketball which is just a scant two weeks away.

Share This Post:
[Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Facebook] [MySpace] [Technorati] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!] [Email]

Dennis Rogers Supports Bunting

For reasons that pass understanding someone over at the News and Observer allowed Dennis Rogers to wander over into the sports section and pen a heartfelt missive expressing his affection for John Bunting.

The hyenas are closing in on a wounded John Bunting. Demands that he be fired as the head football coach at Carolina have grown from dark mutterings to full-throated howls.

That’s what happens when you lose. Although Bunting has not thrown an interception, missed a tackle or fumbled the ball, he is getting the blame and possibly his walking papers.

That’s a shame. I’ve been a Carolina fan for a long time, and Bunting, more than any coach I’ve seen yet, represents what I want for my university.

First of all, can we please stop with the whole “It’s not his fault because the players are the ones of the field” routine. Bunting is ultimately responsible for the team he fields. Yes there will be games where the players do not show up but over the last six years there have been way too many trouncings to assume that Bunting is not a fault for either bad coaching or not identifying players with good character, work ethic, and talent. People act like this season is the first bad season UNC has had under Bunting and Saturday was some kind of rare blowout we have never seen happen to a Bunting team during his tenure. It’s not so please step outside the bubble and join the rest of us in the sixth year of this nightmare.

And yes, I think we call can agree that Bunting has some admirable qualities about him. His handling a team discipline is commendable and a refreshing change from the Miami’s of the world. Yes, if we were living in a perfect utopia we could all sit around and say winning does not matter. In a perfect world we could celebrate that despite fielding teams that get routinely smack around the football field Bunting is a great ambassador for the school and a builder of men’s character. Wait, did I just wander into a Coach K commercial? This is not the reality we live in. Bunting is getting paid a handsome sum of money to do these things but mainly he is getting paid to win football games. So spare me the usual mantra about loving a coach only when he wins because the last I checked that was the point. And losing like UNC lost Saturday does not represent the university it makes it a laughingstock.

Since I cannot bring myself to directly quote anymore of it I will tell you the rest of the article offers us some nice sentimentality about Bunting taking his players on the Old Well Walk and preaching the value of feeling connected to the campus as an extension of your passions for the school you represent. Again, this is all fine and dandy, heck I was in Chapel Hill last week and although I am not a graduate of that campus of the UNC system I think Chapel Hill is a special place. But excuse me if I think that Bunting is not getting paid a million dollars to be Charles Kurault. I would bet my left arm that Roy Williams has more passion and love for UNC in his pinkie than most of the fan base has in their whole body and he actually does us the service of winning games and championships at the same time. The two are not mutually exclusive nor can you reasonable expect people to ignore futility on the field because a coach loves the school and has a special understanding of what it means to be a UNC graduate.

So if the N&O editors can do me a favor and keep Dennis Rogers in the “Local/State” section pontificating on the subtleties of Southern culture and Eastern NC BBQ I would greatly appreciate it.

Share This Post:
[Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Facebook] [MySpace] [Technorati] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!] [Email]

Steve Logan on UNC

First let me say I like Steve Logan on 620 the Bull and have great respect for his opinion on football matters. That being said I also think he is wrong in his analysis of the Bunting situation. Logan spent a lot of time yesterday placing the blame for UNC’s loss at Clemson on the players and stating that UNC’s problems are mainly related to player effort and not the coaches. While I do not necessarily disagree with that assessment I think it is a little short sighted. The Clemson game and the present season are not being played within a time bubble. They are explicitly connected to the five seasons before this one. The game itself was the 64th under Bunting and it constituted the 12th 30+ point loss in his tenure. If this was the first or second time UNC had been blown out in this fashion perhaps Tar Heel Nation would respond a little differently. Yes, the players might be to blame for this game but can we reasonably conclude that the players are to blame in the other 11 blowout losses? Were the players at fault in giving up 42 points to Furman or last season when UNC lost 69-14 to Lousiville?

The fact of the matter is this game and this season constitute part of a pattern of losses under Bunting and while it is easy to absolve the coach and blame the players, if it keeps happening season after season then the coach ultimately gets the blame for failing to bring in and motivate the right players. At some point you have to take a step back and see that the team performance or the win-loss record are not up to par. It becomes painfully obvious after so many seasons that the program is simply not trending upward but seems to be floundering. When the seasons pile up and this kind of medicore football product is continually produced with different classes of players there is on inescapable conclusion and that is the one constant in the whole equation, the head coach, must be ultimately at fault for the situation.

Share This Post:
[Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Facebook] [MySpace] [Technorati] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!] [Email]

And What is Bunting’s Most Daunting Problem?

According to David Glenn it is the attrition of personnel for various reasons, some of them not so good.

Bunting basically has a hole in the middle of his program. He has lost so many players via attrition, for so many different reasons, that he finds himself playing catch-up in terms of personnel on an annual basis. There are basically two ways to build a winning program in the new ACC: (1) consistently recruit significantly better talent than everyone else, a la Florida State or Miami, and/or (2) consistently recruit “good enough” talent, then retain it, develop it and coach it up on game day, a la Boston College and Georgia Tech. (Virginia Tech and Clemson are combining #1 and #2 pretty well right now.) Under Bunting, the Tar Heels have accomplished neither goal.

Glenn goes on to point out that UNC has lost an astonishing 35 players from 2003-2006 to everything from early graduation to felony arrest. Undoubtedly some of these players would be experienced starters in a team that is lacking experience in key areas.

First of all, David Glenn is a freak for his ability to come up with this kind of data and analyze it so perfectly. Secondly, as much as I focused on the results of Bunting’s tenure Glenn has provided some of the why and that is mishandling personnel both in terms of losing them and also by failing to identify players who would be prone to attriting earlier for whatever reasons.

At any rate that still falls on the Bunting to fix and I am not sure that he can fix it because it seems like he will be forever trying to play catch-up. Also, how long will it take Bunting to address these personnel issues? Probably longer than Tar Heel Nation has patience for at this point.

Share This Post:
[Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Facebook] [MySpace] [Technorati] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!] [Email]

Tale of Two Coaches

“It was the best of times, it was the blurst of times? Stupid monkey!” -Montgomery Burns, The Simpsons

Remember a few weeks ago before the season even started and every day NC State’s Chuck Amato got a question about the hot seat? The Sunday before the season started the N&O devoted a huge article to examining Chuck Amato’s hot seat status. On the opening Thursday night ESPN showed coaches they thought was on the hot seat and Amato was among them. SI’s Stewart Mandel called Amato the worst coach in America and the N&O’s Grey Blackwell created another cartoon lampooning the coach as being in deep trouble. All signs were that Amato was walking the plank. A 1-2 start did not help things nor did a reccurence of Amato’s foot-in-mouth disease on the issue of non-qualifers. In fact Tom Sorenson at the Charlotte Observer served up an article calling for Amato’s head marking the first time the media had called for his ouster. So the media decided, on their own, to offer constant reasons for Amato’s departure while ignoring a contract extension, the support of prominent NC State blogs, a winning record, and accomplishments off the field.

Consider John Bunting at North Carolina who endured whispers about his future but saw nowhere near the attention Amato “enjoyed” on the issue. Bunting’s record was far worse than Amato’s despite a winning record against the same. The program itself was riddled with questions and appeared to be floundering. However, the media attention and the hot seat designations all fell on the coach in Raleigh while Bunting continued largely untouched by the media spotlight. That all changed on Saturday when NC State found a way to right their season by beating Boston College behind a first time starter at QB. UNC found another way to get the living pulp beat out of them losing 52-7 to Clemson. Almost in an instant or the media equivalent of an instant Amato was out of the woods and Bunting had been queued up as potentially the next ex-UNC football coach. The fans were angry, the media began actively considering the question and offering up scenarios for how much the buyout might cost.

Then it hit me. For reasons unbeknownst to the world in general the media manufactured(for the most part) a hot seat situation for Chuck Amato, whose program was enduring some questions but was in less danger than John Bunting whose program had needed only one series of bad games to set the fan base off. The question is why? Why did the media feel it necessary to put Amato on the chopping block while leaving Bunting largely unscathed from such consideration?

1. Amato’s Personality

Amato has a lightning rod of a personality. It is not uncommon for him to make…well…interesting statements to the press. There was also the whole red shoes and shades period. Amato is an excitable coach whose program had been successful for a period but slid into a few average years. In other words he was an easy mark to put on the hot seat because he was totally recognizable and the media knew it would lead to all kinds of hijinks when Amato was cornered. Bunting is like the quiet kid in the class who never draws attention to himself. Putting Bunting on the hot seat would have drawn very little reaction from him. Even this week we have seen how he calmly tosses out the same “we will get better just be patient” mantra he has for six years. If you start talking hot seat with Amato he basically flies into a tizzy and gives you all sorts of juicy soundbites. Why do you think the Buzz and the Bull replay Amato’s press conferences more than Bunting’s?

2. Expectations

When Amato came to NC State he came in talking huge dreams. National contender status was thrown about a bit and the idea was planted that NC State could be a perrenniel top 25 power and major bowl contender. Based on these expectations the donor money flowed in and NC State added the facilities to go along with the dream. For a few seasons it looked like those expectations would be met but following the Philip Rivers departure times got leaner in Raleigh. It almost seems like the media is hot seating Amato as kind of a “ha-ha you were wrong” move. There is no way to prove this but it is almost like the media is lording it over Amato that the program has not reached the point he promised it would reach. Why else would they constantly mention how average NC State has been since Rivers left or focus on the fact he had six defensive players drafted but only went 7-5 last season? Yes, these are real criticisms along with Amato’s game management and media skills but they do not seem to be any worse than Bunting’s tenure which has failed to produce wins or bowl appearances as well as decent pro prospects other than one that Bunting never played. Then again Bunting has never set a bar for success as high as Amato set his so there is really no story with Bunting wallowing in mediocrity. Amato’s initial success and subsequent slide created the circumstances the media could blow out of proportion in an effort to create a story.

3. Fan Base

If the Herb Sendek fiasco taught the media anything it was that Wolfpack nation could be easily stirred up into a frenzy. Also there seems to be enough support for Amato that any talk of his dismissal would become a divisive issue. Once the fan base was good and worked up all anyone had to do was write any article calling Amato into question or in Sorenson’s case call for his job and the fans would flock to read whatever drivel had been written. Also consider that football matters more to NC State fans in general than it does to UNC fans. NC State is at a point where it is trying find itself athletically and there is a belief that NC State can be a football school more so than UNC which is steadfastly a basketball school. So calling for Bunting’s head in the preseason would have drawn little from the UNC fan base. Granted the frenzy is pretty hot now, my own blog stats show serious activity even before I posted my case against Bunting. I imagine it is nothing compared to what you would see from NC State fans if the calls for Amato’s ouster hit the fan like they did for Bunting. Apathy in the Tar Heel fan base is so prevalant that there are 12,000 empty seats at Kenan for the opener. There was simply no value in calling Bunting out in the preseason because the fan base simply would not have responded in the same way Wolfpack nation in reference to Amato.

4. Total Misread

And it is also possible that the media completely misread the situation at NC State to the point they were willing to hang Amato out even though he was in a better position than Bunting was in Chapel Hill. Of course the media still might end up being right. NC State still need to work some things out.  Also the media is playing the role of total hypocrite here since they picked NC State to finish 5th in their division and then springboard that into calls for Amato’s job. It is also obvious that no one thought Bunting was in any trouble at all or at the very least that trouble would be reserved for next season. The expectations were that both NC State and UNC would find the next to last slot in their respective division and when it was all over Amato would be facing a firing line and Bunting with a record of pure, unadulterated mediocrity would somehow survive. If I was a member of the media I would cop to one of the three reasons instead of admitting I missed the boat by such a wide margin.

5. It Was Easy

All of these aforementioned reasons point to one thing and that is in hot seating Amato the media decided to take an easy route and go after the more visible coach with the unpredictable mouth and temper as well as a strong but easily riled fan base. Putting Amato on the hot seat was a juicier story by far and had the greatest potential for coach/media shenanagins as well as a angry/divided fan base. The other dirty secret is that UNC fans, for the most part, want Bunting gone. A suggestion in the preseason that Bunting might be in trouble would have been met with a strong ho-hum from Tar Heel Nation. Bunting is too nice and calm to actually instigate a tirade in the direction of the media so there would be nothing but positive spin instead of excited utterances and an occasional foot flying into a mouth every other week. The point here is it defies intellectual honesty to believe that Amato was in deeper trouble than Bunting when the fact of the matter was neither one was in trouble unless they really hosed the season up.  Both fans bases were willing to wait because they liked what they heard from preseason practice. Now that actual games have been played and performances evaluated it can said that the hot seat for Bunting is very real and Amato should manage his way through to next season.

The bottom line here is that the whole hot seat controversy prior to the season is a wholly manufactured scheme designed to sell papers and create web traffic. Since most of the really crazy and devoted fan base plus a few balanced bloggers like myself are very willing to read most anything posted on a website which reference their favorite team it becomes real easy to entice a few thousand hits on a site by simply calling a coach out even without a single snap being played. What is happening now at UNC is the real deal since it is based on real game results from this season taken within the context of the last six seasons. Had Amato lost to BC in horrendus fashion Saturday night it would interesting to see which coach got more of the hot seat clamoring in the media. At any rate it is a sad testimony on the place sports journalism has reached that it feels a need to create these kinds of buzz words and special situations without fully considering the facts or allowing at least a few games to pass to see which way the season might be headed.

Then again all of these people have so little to actually talk about that hot seat talk makes for good filler even if it is not so much based in reality. Of course they are only giving the masses what they want to hear and that is some idea of where the next trainwreck might be so they be sure to go and watch.

And last I checked there was no intellectual honesty in that.

Share This Post:
[Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Facebook] [MySpace] [Technorati] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!] [Email]

The John Bunting Watch

So now it begins.

John Bunting, with all the other problems he has, also fell prey to one of the classic football blunders. Never lose big going into a bye week. Losing big before a bye means you are stuck talking about how bad your team was and in this case fielding questions about your future about six days longer than you would if you had a game the next week. If UNC was scheduled to play this week, the subject would shift to talking about the next game and depending what happens in that game there is an opportunity to shift the conversation away from you employment status. No such luck for Bunting. The one factor that makes this whole situation more dire for Bunting is the fact the media has jumped into the mix and in at least one case, that of Caulton Tudor, has called for a change in Chapel Hill. Tudor is a veteran at the News and Observer and though I disagree with him 99 times out of 100, he is still very well respected. So if Tudor has called your number in a column then your survival chances just got really slim simply because Tudor does not need to write mindless drivel for the purpose of enflaming a fan base to stoke his own ego. Tudor’s opinion carries a lot of weight and reaches a lot readers. If this was simply a case of the message board fan base and a few bloggers screaming for Bunting’s head then the situation would be more manageable for the administration. This does not appear to be the case based on the emails and comments this blog has seen. It is more than just the message board crowd that is clamoring for a change. And If the media has turned it’s very big circulation of papers and web site hits against a coach it shapes the public opinion very much out of your favor.

As for Bunting himself, he has responded to the calls for his ouster by giving us most of the same comments we have heard before. We are being told that a good team is coming soon and fans just need to hang in there. On one hand, what else can he really say? It is not like we expect him to cop to six years of bad defense and medicority on the field. So in the absence of actuall results Bunting gives us plenty of platitudes which promise results. The issue is that promises have an expectation of fullfillment. This is the struggle Amato is facing in Raleigh because he made promises of national prominence that briefly appeared but have since vanished. In Bunting’s case the promises have not been nearly as grandiose but each and every year we are told this season will be better and even following another humiliating loss Bunting tells us how he knows he has good kids, good coaches, and a fabulous waterboy. Unfortunately what Bunting does not have is wins in the pocket and confidence from the fan base. Of course the question that is being bantered around is whether is it a player problem or a coaching problem. There are some, who admittedly are more knowledgeable than I am about football, saying it is clearly a player problem. We are told the players are inexperienced or lack the talent. There is some indication that they lack the effort and agressiveness. And while this things may be true I also think the UNC defenses are not properly prepared when they hit the field. And while experience is one thing you have to wait out, player intensity and player quality fall on the coaches to recruit and motivate. In my opinion a good coach can compensate for those factors to some extent and also get every ounce of effort and talent from an average player. So while some of this may fall on the players, I find it hard to believe that has been the case for six years and if so then poor recruiting and a failure to develop players is reason enough to consider a change.

Of course the other factor in this situation is a reluctance on the part of the administration to make a move of any sort simply because of the finances involved in buying out Bunting and his staff. Two different N&O articles, here and here, mention that the cost of dismissing Bunting and his entire staff could be upwards to $2 million in buyouts. This may impact the ability to put the kind of money on the table you need to attract a good replacement if Bunting is let go. The other financial consideration is how much money can the athletic department stand to lose if interest in UNC football wanes and the 12,000 empty seats at Kenan Stadium becomes 15 or 16,000? Football and basketball account for huge portions of the UNC athletic department revenue which essentially funds the other non-revenue sports. So the money issues may do more to decide Bunting’s future than disgruntled fans and stats on a sheet.

The bottom line is that the bell has been rung and really cannot be un-rung. I have racked my brains to try and remember any situation where a coach was in a similar situation and not only survived another year but went on to be successful. I am not aware of any coach who has reached a point where the fans and media were actively calling for his dismissal, his team was in the midst of a losing season which had been preceded by only one winning season in five years, and whose teams were in the habit of being humiliated on the field but managed to parlay it into a successful, winning future at that school. The problem here is there appears to be no upward trending for the program. There is little evidence that the program is moving forward and blowout losses like the one on Saturday are consistent occurences. There is an expectation of progress which states that after six years you are better off than they day you were hired. In Bunting’s case this was the expectation since by firing Carl Torbush it was presumed the program was not where it was supposed to be at. So Bunting was hired to move the program from the undesired position Torbush had it at and move it up to a different level. I think following Saturday’s loss we can safely assume that the program is pretty much in the same place as it was when Torbush was dismissed. So it is only logical to assume that if this present state was justification to show Torbush the door after three seasons, then the same justification can be applied to Bunting after six seasons on the job.

So begins the John Bunting Watch.

Share This Post:
[Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Facebook] [MySpace] [Technorati] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!] [Email]