Friday, January 16, 2009

Logan leaves

BC confirmed the Logan rumor. I thought he did a great job and enjoyed my two brief encounters with the man. As much as I would have loved for him to stay, I think it is more important that our head coach puts his own staff in place.


Once the full staff is in place, I'll analyze what each member brings to the table.

Labels:

12 Comments:

At 5:22 PM, Blogger BCMike said...

Losing Logan is the worst part of this whole clusterf*ck.

 
At 5:39 PM, Blogger Big Jack Krack said...

During the past two years we have had significant injuries to starters and contributors, and we were still pretty successful.

Like those times, someone will get the chance to step up for Logan, perhaps (or join the staff from the outside) - and lead our offense to great things in 09.

Let's focus on the returning players for awhile - they are what it's all about. We can hope that Spaziani assembles a top-notch staff, with many holdovers and a few promotions.

 
At 6:05 PM, Blogger AlbanyEagle said...

Hey, I wish the best to Logan. He was great for us and we had a good offense...when we had Matt Ryan.

While I'm sure he knows his stuff, I'd be more concerned for the team as a whole if it were the other way around - - Logan promoted to HC and Spaz leaving. The 2008 offense did not produce. At least some of the problem (NOT all, off course) has to have been Logan's play calling.

 
At 6:08 PM, Blogger Eagle1 said...

Sniff . . . sniff . . . sniff. Oh, ineffective dive option that we ran 60 times per game this year!! How I will miss you!!! We were just getting to know each other!!!

Are we really losing much here? With the exception of the occasional trick play, which I loved, I think that I missed all of the heralded Logan guru-ness. Also, it seems clear that his Southern background did absolutely nothing to help with the recruiting situation. Nice guy, I'm sure, but not a tremendous loss, as far as I'm concerned.

 
At 6:26 PM, Blogger Brian said...

Logan was a good coordinator. I agree with ATL ... tough to see him go but important for the new HC to do his own thing.

Then again, the OC bar was set fairly low with Dana Bible.

It will be interesting to see what Spaz does here considering all the young talent on the offensive side of the ball was recruited for the Jags/Logan system (Haden, Harris, Davis, Tuggle, Anderson, etc.)

 
At 8:09 PM, Blogger About Five said...

From all the DC's in the ACC, thanks Gene you are our favorite AD.

 
At 8:45 PM, Blogger BlockParty said...

Eagle in Atlanta-- A Boston College sports blog capturing the highs and lows of being a BC fan living 1,000 miles from Chestnut Hill.



Can we have a high again some time soon?

 
At 9:19 PM, Blogger Lenny Sienko said...

My question is: "Does this mean an entirely new offensive system for next season?"

I have a really good idea of what Spaz's defensive philosophy has been over the years. I have no idea of what he professes on offense. Will he have his own system? Will allow the OC to install the OC's playbook?

Will we stay with the zone-blocking?

What is a Spaz offense? Does anyone who has heard him over the years have a hint for us?

 
At 9:22 PM, Blogger Lenny Sienko said...

Logan did have a great comment.

IIRC he referred to his new condo on the res as a "million dollar dorm room". [grin]

 
At 12:22 AM, Blogger eagleboston said...

I think Logan was a decent OC but to call him "great" is a major stretch. He barely got the ball to All-ACC tight end Ryan Purvis this season and he failed to get enough carries to the all-time best freshman rusher in BC history. I would say there were at least 50 offenses more wide open than BC's and I believe a change at this position will be beneficial for BC. I think many BC fans got sucked into the Cult of Jags and Logan was Jag's Karl Rove.

Here's hoping Spaz brings in an OC that will get the rock to the playmakers and get the ball in the endzone.

 
At 10:37 AM, Blogger Eagle0407 said...

I am pretty indifferent to Logan leaving, mainly because I think its difficult to judge him based on the talent we had the last two years. His first year, we had Ryan but the O-line was lousy, we had no running game, and the wideouts were unreliable. This year we had all of the other parts but no QB. We ran different offenses each year. It's hard to tell what the completed puzzle would look like, never having had all the pieces. So I have no idea exactly what we're losing. With our current roster we might fare better with someone a little more committed to the running game.

 
At 12:35 PM, Blogger Christopher said...

I feel like many others here - i thank Logan for his two years and some of the things he did, but am not too upset at this loss. He was certainly a good OC, and if we downgrade there I will be upset, but I think many (including myself) were too quick to praise him and his ingenuity. In all honesty he inherited a legend qb and a pretty decent all around offense, especially passing wise (callender was as good as it gets catching out of the backfield). He did well with good stuff.

This year I was a little more disappointed. I understand the difficulties and the injuries, but it was little things that made me question him. We failed to get purvis the ball until the bowl game when he was our best receiver. We had NO good runs for 3rd and 1 or 2 - we would go into the shotgun (thereby making it 3rd and 6 basically) and run a dive. We definitely should have done far more screens with the playmakers we had at rb and the inexperience at qb.

Don't get me wrong, I think logan did ok. i just think (and hope) we will be just fine without him and think maybe we all took a shine to him so quickly because he followed the most conservative and mundane OC ever in Dana Bible

 

Post a Comment

<< Home