Rich Olson Has Got to Go.

TucsonDevil · October 24th, 2009, 08:00 PM

There is absolutely no creativity to the offense. Yes, I realize Sullivan is a flawed (at best) QB, but the play calling is just awful. I felt the same about ASU last year, and the year before.

This game is just a major bummer.

green machine · October 25th, 2009, 12:06 AM

Dennis Erickson is calling plays this year.

HooverDam · October 25th, 2009, 10:08 AM

I agree Olsen needs to go. While ASUs line and QB play are far below average on the talent level and would make things difficult for anyone, ASU keeps trying the same crap over and over and it doesn't work. Its very:

Even if DE is calling the plays Olsen is still the O coordinator and needs to do a better job. He also needs to do a better job bringing in offensive talent and from my understanding he does very little recruiting.

In my fantasy world at the end of this season ASU would can Olsen. They'd promote Matt Lubick to offensive coordinator (he has experience as a WR coach) and start grooming him as DE's replacement. They'd move Grady Stretz from D-line to Secondary (he's been a secondary coach before) and somehow hire Jim Jeffcoat away from Houston and have him be the D-line coach.

Hopefully that would accomplish bringing some youth and new ideas to the offensive side of the ball. It would give ASU a great chance of getting Jackson Jeffcoat. It would also perhaps help ASUs recruiting in Texas w/ Jim Jeffcoats experience and perhaps connections there.

Anyway, like I said its a fantasy land scenario and won't happen, but dreamin' is free.

MaoTosiFanClub · October 25th, 2009, 04:23 PM

The offense is Erickson's show, Rich Olson really doesn't do much so nothing's really going to change by switching him out with Lubick. The talent (or lack thereof) is ASU's biggest issue offensively.

Mathew81 · October 25th, 2009, 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaoTosiFanClub

The offense is Erickson's show, Rich Olson really doesn't do much so nothing's really going to change by switching him out with Lubick. The talent (or lack thereof) is ASU's biggest issue offensively.

That's why he needs to go. They need to bring in someone who can maybe bring a little variety to the offense and can be at least an adequate recruiter. Olson brings nothing to the table.

HooverDam · October 25th, 2009, 05:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaoTosiFanClub

The offense is Erickson's show, Rich Olson really doesn't do much so nothing's really going to change by switching him out with Lubick. The talent (or lack thereof) is ASU's biggest issue offensively.

Did you even read what I wrote? Its like you see Ive posted about ASU and get super excited to refute me without bothering to read. If I posted "ASUs colors and gold and maroon" would you come in and say "actually ASUs colors are maroon and gold"?

MaoTosiFanClub · October 25th, 2009, 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HooverDam

Did you even read what I wrote? Its like you see Ive posted about ASU and get super excited to refute me without bothering to read. If I posted "ASUs colors and gold and maroon" would you come in and say "actually ASUs colors are maroon and gold"?

Calm down. You stated a situation that puts Lubick in Olson's position is a dream scenario. And I simply stated that this is Erickson's show so that coaching position is rather meaningless and that the talent is the problem.
If you say things I believe aren't true I'm going to argue them - that's what these things are for.

HooverDam · October 25th, 2009, 05:48 PM

You didnt' demonstrate in anyway that you read and understood what I posted. Its obvious ASUs offensive talent is lacking and guys like Olsen and Gregg Smith are a part of that. They haven't brought in good enough talent.

We all knew ASUs offense would be poor but we also all knew ASU would stink in hoops during Sendeks first year. I think the difference though is at least we knew we had good recruits coming in w/ Sendek, right now ASUs offensive recruiting has been OK but not great. Recruitings been awful on the O-line though. And Sendek at least had a gameplan that made sense (take the air out of the ball, play stingy D) that kept his untalented team close. Finally his team played hard. I cant really say any of those things about this ASU offense.

If Lubick (or anyone whos not in the AARP) were hired as OC I assume Erickson would give them play calling duties and maybe it would freshen things up. Olsens offense has been maddening since he arrived, whether it was drawing up slow developing plays when Rudy was under pressure, to running a North-South runner like Nance on sweeps, it just doesn't make sense. Its time to move to some younger coaches with energy, new ideas, ability to recruit and who can maybe relate to their players

MaoTosiFanClub · October 25th, 2009, 06:16 PM

That's where we differ I guess. from what I understand the playcalling, scheme, and recruiting approach comes straight from Dennis Erickson. So if it's decided by Lisa Love and the boosters that those things need to be overhauled it means that somebody basically has to take a lot of control away from Erickson.

That might be the best move going forward (Arizona did this with Sonny Dykes three years ago and it is obviously paying huge dividends) but it's going to require a big change from the past approach and would possibly piss off Erickson as he'd essentially be a figurehead.

Not sure I'd want Lubick in that position either. He's seemingly much too valuable on the recruiting trail rather than spending his days and night scheming and dissecting film trying to break down opponents. Somebody from outside of the program is probably the right approach.

Mathew81 · October 25th, 2009, 10:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaoTosiFanClub

That's where we differ I guess. from what I understand the playcalling, scheme, and recruiting approach comes straight from Dennis Erickson.

While DE obviously runs the show, he can't do everything or else he wouldn't need assistants. There isn't enough time in a practice for DE to personally tell every player what they're doing right or wrong. And he can't go out and recruit every player on his own either.

Olson brings nothing to the table in that he doesn't coach much and he doesn't recruit. Those are his only two jobs and he does neither.

MaoTosiFanClub · October 26th, 2009, 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mathew81

While DE obviously runs the show, he can't do everything or else he wouldn't need assistants. There isn't enough time in a practice for DE to personally tell every player what they're doing right or wrong. And he can't go out and recruit every player on his own either.

Olson brings nothing to the table in that he doesn't coach much and he doesn't recruit. Those are his only two jobs and he does neither.

That's what you seem to be missing - Olson is doing exactly what Erickson is telling him to do. I suppose you could bring in somebody new but as long as his job description equals that of Rich Olson you'll see limited if any impact on the field. Now if you replace Olson with a guy with fresh and innovative ideas to overhaul the entire offense like Arizona did with Dykes from recruiting to scheming you are essentially making DE a figure head coach and spending a lot of dime to bring said guy and his people in.

And if you get to that point - Does Erickson have the clout in Tempe let alone does ASU have the coin to pay him $1.5mil a year to essentially delegate everything? Switching up OC's sounds like a good idea on paper and probably would end up being an upgrade once completed but there's a lot of moving parts and financial considerations to ponder before getting there. It's not the simple coach swap you guys are making it out to be be.

Mathew81 · October 26th, 2009, 11:47 AM

Erickson hasn't always called the plays, in fact it's pretty new for him to do as a head coach. If they did bring in a new OC, they could take over the play calling and DE could go back to just being the head coach. I don't see how the OC doing the job he's supposed to would make DE a "figurehead." And it doesn't have to be a known, well-established OC that costs a lot of $$. Give the job to someone who's ready to make the jump from position coach to coordinator. What's the worse that can happen? Lose games and have a crappy offense? That's already happening.

Just about anyone would be better than Olson at this point.

HooverDam · October 26th, 2009, 01:38 PM

Out of curiosity does this mean Mike Stoops is just a figurehead too?

MaoTosiFanClub · October 26th, 2009, 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HooverDam

Out of curiosity does this mean Mike Stoops is just a figurehead too?

No, Mike Stoops runs the defense. His brother Mark is the defensive coordinator but is really just a quality control and details guy. Scheme, recruiting, play calling, coaching, and player development on that side of the ball is Mike Stoops.

A similar scenario is at play at ASU but insert Erickson for Mike Stoops and Olson for Mark. It's really not a difficult concept to grasp. The difference is of course that most Arizona fans would realize that calling out Mark Stoops for defensive ineffectiveness would be absurd.

Other examples would be USC's defense and Pete Carroll, Jeff Tedford and the Cal offense, Chip Kelly and the Oregon offense, etc. The coordinators on those units have very little actual responsibilities compared to someone like Sonny Dykes, Nick Holt, or Nick Aliotti who oversee every aspect of their sides of the ball with only veto power from the HC.

Gaddabout · October 26th, 2009, 04:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaoTosiFanClub

Calm down. You stated a situation that puts Lubick in Olson's position is a dream scenario. And I simply stated that this is Erickson's show so that coaching position is rather meaningless and that the talent is the problem.

Actually, Erickson doesn't coach the QBs, Olson does, and it's the No. 1 problem with ASU's offense. No. 2 is the fact that Olson doesn't recruit, but it's a lesser issue considering ZERO progress is made among the QBs they do have. In fact they all seem to take a step backwards under his tutelage.