Future Coach Kelly won't retain coaches Gray, Plfugrad

by jtlight on Jan 1, 2009 4:59 PM PST in Football Comment 33 comments

According to Moseley, defensive line coach Michael Gray, and receivers coach Robin Pflugrad won't be retained when we takes over as head coach.

This is from Bellotti himself, who has given this OK to Kelly. However, the tenure of coach Aliotti remains "solid." There are said to be others close to Kelly that would take over those positions.

This will most likely come as a surprise to many, considering there were no rumblings concerning these position coaches.

Personally, I don't think many fans, myself included, can really critique this move. The coaching positions are far enough down the ladder that their impact won't be incredible, especially if Kelly already has candidates in mind.

But this means two important things. First, Kelly is starting to have a say in the make up of the coaching staff. That this is happening earlier rather than later is good, getting his feet wet while Bellotti is still around. Second, these are moves on both offense and defense. While I am a full Bellotti supporter, he has at times neglected the defense. I am glad that early on, Kelly is taking an active interest.

What should also be of note for many fans is the standing of Aliotti, though I have heard that Kelly and Aliotti have worked very well together.

While this won't quell the everpresent outrage against the defensive coordinator, this is another step forward to Bellotti moving on to the AD position.

0 recs | Comment 33 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Interesting, indeed.

I agree we really can’t critique much here until replacements are announced. Hard to argue with Bellotti’s support for Kelly. The man needs to build his program, starting with staff who fit his plans on both sides of the ball.

I’m not changing my stance that Aliotti has run his course. My one-man campaign for Justin Wilcox will go on! However, if the change with Gray is intended as means of improving Oregon’s D, then it’s at least a step in the right direction.

From what we’ve seen from Kelly in two seasons, there seems little reason to doubt the guy.

Any chance we lose Pflu Jr. to a transfer? I think he’s potentially a solid possession receiver in the Pac-10, but also recognize that his skills are more suited for a pro-style offense. It would be a shame to lose him just the same.

The ATQer formerly known as Seattle Quacker...oh yeah, I hate the wings.

by JConant on Jan 1, 2009 5:28 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

I can't remember the last time

I saw a ball thrown Pflu’s way.

by grimc on Jan 1, 2009 5:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Seems to suggest

that the switch is going to happen sooner rather than later, with this kind of news being aired. I’d be surprised if Bellotti is still coach after next season; not very surprised if he calls it quits this Spring.

by grimc on Jan 1, 2009 5:38 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

agreed

The torch is about to be passed. All the signs suggest it.

If you can't get your Dick Enright, get your Dick Harter

by Old Ducker on Jan 1, 2009 5:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Incoming Aliotti-haters rant

the worst thing that will come out of all this is continuing to listen to the anti-Aliotti crowd everytime our defense gets points scored on it. The roar has become deafening, almost to the point where I wonder if people will ever give him a pat on the back ever. Are we really at the point that if we shut someone out, do we say “well, that was ok, but we really shouldn’t have given up 20 yards to the running back for the game or (insert other quip here)” and I think some people are at that point.

Barely anyone has given credit to Aliotti for his schemes and play calling during the Holiday Bowl. At some point, you can’t just point the finger at Aliotti and say “he’s the one that is blowing all the plays!” without looking at execution by the players. Several of the plays that failed in the Holiday Bowl (and in later games of season) had nothing to do with scheme and everything to do with players messing up. If anything, I give Aliotti credit for realizing the weaknesses of his defense and adjusting things to help mitigate it as best as he could through out the season. At a certain point, players need to cover tight ends and not get confused by play action. Oregon defenses haven’t always had that issue and you can’t just lay it on the feet of Aliotti.

I think the philosophy of scoring in Pac-10 football has changed just as the spread offense has changed the landscape of college football as a whole. We are past the time of 14-6 games where if you hold an offense to 250 yards, you are doing awesome. I think college football is at a point where if you give up 20-25 points and under 400 yards of total offense, that is the new baseline.

--Dominic

Autzen Stadium is where great teams go to die." - J. Brady McCullough, The Michigan Daily.

by dvieira on Jan 1, 2009 6:58 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Incoming Aliotti-haters-haters rant

True, Aliotti probably gets less credit when he deserves it. And I’d agree that we’re past the time of low-scoring, low-yardage games. But isn’t that an argument against Aliotti’s bend-and-break phiilosophy? It’s just as easily said that times have changed to a point where Aliotti’s schemes actually look average—but still not good.

Yes, sometimes it’s the players’ fault. Sometimes, like this year with the underachieving “D-Boys” you have to lay it on someone else besides NA. But consider this: How many Duck offensive coordinators went on to head coach or were recruited away? Now, how many times has Aliotti been in the thick of hiring rumors?

by grimc on Jan 1, 2009 7:23 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

How many Duck offensive coordinators went on to head coach or were recruited away? Now, how many times has Aliotti been in the thick of hiring rumors?

I don’t know how many times schools came looking for Aliotti as a coaching replacement. I also don’t think this is representative of how good / bad a coach is. Sure, good coaches come from those ranks but some coaches are just better off being what they are. Being a defensive coordinator is a different animal than being a head coach. Sometimes awesome coordinators make the worst head coaches in the world. That fact is something that very much concerns me about Kelly taking the reigns

--Dominic

Autzen Stadium is where great teams go to die." - J. Brady McCullough, The Michigan Daily.

by dvieira on Jan 1, 2009 7:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't disagree

The move from coordinator to head coach isn’t guaranteed to be natural, but that becomes evident after the hire. To not even be involved in rumors says something. I think the last time (and I could be completely wrong) that Aliotti was rumored to be up for another job was for Illinois after the Year of Joey. It’s not a perfect indicator by any means, but there’s something in the fact that a number of OCs attracted enough attention to move on, while St. Nick (Patron Saint of Long Receptions) hasn’t got more than a sniff in almost a decade.

I worry that Kelly might struggle with HC, too. Personality-wise, he’s definitely not a Bellotti. MB is calm, even-tempered. Kelly is a yeller. Experience-wise, obviously even NA would have an edge. But I try to push these doubts to the back of my mind. Copious amounts of alcohol and blind denial help.

by grimc on Jan 1, 2009 7:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Alotti has earned his rep

Year upon year of sub-par defenses both at Oregon and at UCLA. However if Chip feels with new assistants, Aliotti can do the job, then I’m cool with that until it’s shown where the actual problem lies. Perhaps that’s Chip’s end game anyway…prove that the problem is at the top so that Bellotti has no other option but to say “so long” to his old pal.

If you can't get your Dick Enright, get your Dick Harter

by Old Ducker on Jan 1, 2009 7:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

The only rep he has earned is a bad one in my mind. He is not terrible and here are the statistics to back it up. He is obviously not #1 every year. Some years are very lopsided and I think that is why most people think he absolutely sucks. One facet of the game just looks awful when over a long period, it just isn’t that bad.

I guess it depends on what your definition of “par” is. To me, I’m fairly ok with the numbers below, especially when those combine with the offensive numbers and you have a really good Oregon Football team. Could they be better? Oh for sure but we aren’t running CK out of town for having only a 6th rated passing attack this year.

Average since 2003

Rushing D – 5th
Passing D – 5th

2003
Passing Defense – 7th
Rushing Defense – 4th

2004
Passing Defense – 4th
Rushing Defense – 4th

2005
Passing Defense – 1st
Rushing Defense – 4th

2006
Passing Defense – 1st
Rushing Defense – 9th

2007
Passing Defense – 7th
Rushing Defense – 5th

2008
Passing Defense – 10th
Rushing Defense – 2nd

--Dominic

Autzen Stadium is where great teams go to die." - J. Brady McCullough, The Michigan Daily.

by dvieira on Jan 1, 2009 7:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I would add one more thing...

This was the first year under Bellotti where the defense averaged over 25 ppg (28.0), and Oregon had over 9 or more wins. In fact, that 25 ppg has been the dividing line for the past. It greatly defined a good or bad year.

But, with the amount of plays run by the defense this year, that totally changed. They had to defend more than just about any other team, and in terms of what could be called “defensive efficiency,” were about average. They had good games, and bad games, for sure, but did some things very well, and some things poorly.

Also, to respond to a point above. You really HAVE TO give the coaching staff credit for the changes made after USC and BSU. They changed the gameplan after USC, which opened up underneath and gave up more yards, sure, but we have to realize, we did not have a free safety. TJ Ward was absolutely terrible. He has some of the worst pass coverage skills I’ve seen for a starting free safety. Now, I love what he does, but free safety is probably the most important defensive position on the field. We totally and completely underestimated the loss of Harper going into this season, and early on, I think the coaching staff did also. The changes made after USC really changed the way our defense played, and allowed us to be successful.

--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog

by jtlight on Jan 1, 2009 9:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

hmmmm...

interesting move. I hope chip can find some new assistants that recruit as well as he does.

"It was like some sort of crazy torture in the movies. How do people do that so long without taking a breath? I think my ears are still ringing."
-Adrian Peterson, describing Autzen

by dougall5505 on Jan 1, 2009 7:04 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Here's how I see it...

I don’t hate Aliotti. I don’t even think he’s a bad coordinator. I didn’t form my opinion this season because Boise State made us look bad. I’ve remained consistent on those points throughout the season.

I do think we’ve seen what NA is capable of. Like Michael Scott’s breath, it’s good, not great.

Ultimately a defense is judged by how many points it gives up. Here’s how the Ducks have stacked up nationally the past few years and the resulting W/L record:

2008 #77, 28.0 ppg (10-3)
2007 #40, 23.6 ppg (9-4)
2006 #89, 26.5 ppg (7-6)
2005 #38, 23.2 ppg (10-2)
2004 #62, 25.6 ppg (5-6)
2003 #70, 26.8 ppg (8-5)

I fully agree with Dom’s assertion that the game has changed. Oregon just proved that you can give up four TDs a game and be a top-15, maybe even a top-10 team.

But… The goal of the program is not to be top-15 caliber. It’s to bring a national title to Eugene. Bellotti has said that publicly. Therein lies the issue, at least from my perspective. I’m pretty jacked about the Ducks having 9- and 10-win seasons. But we all know the program, top to bottom, is striving for more. To run the table, or to come close enough to get a good whiff of the crystal trophy you need to shave 6 or 7 points off the per game average the Ducks posted this year. You probably can’t rank 69th nationally for 3rd down defense.

Aliotti has done it before, in 2005-06. But that year has been more the exception than the rule.

Does NA deserve credit for making adjustments this year? Absolutely. Tons of credit. Should he get the blame for players blowing assignments or being undisciplined? Yes, not all of it, but a fair portion. He determines the scheme, he coaches the scheme, he designs the drills to be run day after day after day to ensure the players make the right reads and reactions in the scheme and he is ultimately responsible for the team’s performance on the defensive side of the ball.

If we’re willing to live with a nationally sub-par defense more years than not, isn’t that putting unfair pressure on the offense? Most games Oregon scores enough points to overcome a mediocre defense (and I fully agree that some of that is caused by Oregon’s offensive style), but what happens when the offense doesn’t click? What happens when we run into USC’s defense, or Cal’s, or Mother Nature, or injuries, or downright bad luck that results in untimely turnovers? Either you have a good defense that bails you out in one of those rare 14-13 games and you win a Pac-10 title, or it doesn’t and you go 10-3 and enjoy a nice consolation prize in the Holiday Bowl.

Good guy, I’m sure. Even a pretty fair D-1 coordinator. Nick has run his course. The Oregon program is in a good place right now. What’s next? Try to maintain our status as the best of the “9 dwarfs” or try to take it to the next level. I hope it’s the later, and while I’d be absolutely fine with being wrong here, it’s my belief it won’t happen with Aliotti as the defensive coordinator.

That belief doesn’t make me a hater, just a I-think-we’re-really-close-and-I’m-ready-for-a-changer.

The ATQer formerly known as Seattle Quacker...oh yeah, I hate the wings.

by JConant on Jan 1, 2009 10:50 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Completely agree

I’m anti-Aliotti, but I don’t consider myself a hater. My main argument has been that maybe 5-10 years ago, a defense designed to stop the run could completely shut teams down. But how many teams line it up nowadays and run it straight at you, especially in the Pac-10? More and more teams are moving towards some kind of spread-based offense.

All I want for Christmas is a new d-coordinator...

by travissimmo on Jan 1, 2009 11:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

While this isn't related to Aliotti specifically...

This does bring up an important question of where the strength of the team lies, and who should “carry the load.” At times, the offense has carried the load, but this season, I’d say the defense was much more consistent. Barring the USC game, where everyone played like crap, the offense was pretty much a non-entity in losses to Cal and BSU. The defense had its own failings against BSU, but not so much against Cal. They were put in horrible positions and carried that game.

I think as Duck fans, we will never have a top notch defense, a la USC, because we don’t have enough talent. A lot of talent goes to the offensive side of the ball. Look at people like Dante Rosario (who would have been stellar), Jeff Maehl, etc. When out talent is on the offensive side of the ball, and it does not or cannot perform, we will lose more games than we win.

And honestly, right now, that’s how it should be. The offense holds inherent advantages right now, and if they execute, there is often not much a defense can do. If Oregon executes, it will move the ball on almost any offense in the nation. USC is tough, but they may be one of the most physically talented defenses in college football history.

I also believe its totally unrealistic to expect an Oregon defense to handle that type of load. If you look at our defense right now, we do not have the talent to shut teams down. If you look at our defense this year, we had a terrible free safety, and linebackers that couldn’t cover passes very well. As a coordinator, what the hell do you do about this? You can scheme all you want, but if you don’t have a talent advantage right now, you will not consistently stop the offense. Every defense will be a gamble, or a chance.

Does Aliotti screw up a fair amount? Sure, but the plays that can be blamed on scheme are few and far between in comparison to the blame that he does get. And at the same time, what the hell about last year. That was a great defense in terms of points (against skewed due to added plays). The defense won the USC game, locked down ASU, and played a very good game against Cal. The defense didn’t fail that season, the offense did. When your best players don’t play, I don’t care what side of the ball they are on, you won’t win.

I guess I just think that with the talent we have, we would have to sacrifice a lot on offense to see decent returns on defense. If we get a good free safety and some linemen step up next year, we should have a very good defense. Unfortunately these days, to have a great defense, you can have no weaknesses, and that is not likely to happen anytime soon.

--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog

by jtlight on Jan 1, 2009 11:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Many good points.

You’re exactly right. The program under Mike B. has emphasized talent on the offensive side of the ball and that has proved very successful. There’s no plausible argument for changing that approach.

If I were to concede anything regarding Nick Aliotti it would be that he has directed more effective defense in the past than what we saw this year. Under the right circumstances, he can do this. My breaking point with him comes down to what I believe is a multi-year pattern of poor fundamentals, primarily at linebacker and to a lesser degree at the safety positions.

To Nick’s credit, adjustments were made in both areas this season via simplification and better application of T.J. Ward and Casey Matthews. Though I lack the formal data to back it up, it appeared that Nick got a little more aggressive with effective fourth quarter blitzes late in the season.

Aliotti is coming back. That appears to be set in stone. So I’ll resign myself to hoping the adjustments made as the 2008 season progressed will translate into improved overall performance in 2009. Combine even modest improvement on the D-side of the ball with another big offensive output and we might have a shot a something special next season.

The ATQer formerly known as Seattle Quacker...oh yeah, I hate the wings.

by JConant on Jan 2, 2009 11:24 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Though I'm not really anti-Aliotti...

I would like to see what Justin Wilcox could do as our DC. So if we could get him, I say do it. Bring some more youth to the program with Kelly stepping up.

--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog

by jtlight on Jan 2, 2009 8:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

That is exactly how I feel. I don’t think we should fire Aliotti unless we get Wilcox

by bradLL99 on Jan 3, 2009 8:25 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

i read this story on scout.com

and in its version belotti talks about how he thinks the ducks will be in on 8 to 10 of the high school all star players playing over the weekend and that he thinks a couple might announce their commitment to oregon over the weekend

by phillyduck23 on Jan 2, 2009 12:48 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Here's the link.

Read the Scout.com story here

The ATQer formerly known as Seattle Quacker...oh yeah, I hate the wings.

by JConant on Jan 2, 2009 10:49 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

This is an interesting move

Based on Chip’s track record, we have to believe, unless proven otherwise, that the guys he brings in will be good for the program. However, I was very pleased with the play of the D-Line this year, so getting rid of Gray is a questionable move for the program to make. I was very underwhelmed by the WR’s this year, as they couldn’t seem to hang onto the ball (…and it wasn’t just J-Will), so moving on at that position seems to make sense, especially if it means Chip himself will get more time to work with a WR group that will need to step up next year replacing Scott and Williams

My HDTV is a JustinTV streamer who doesn't just use a webcam :(

by inroywetrust on Jan 2, 2009 6:18 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

NA's rep

Old Ducker,
Only rep a bad one? Perhaps you are not old enough to remember Gang green.

by underduck on Jan 2, 2009 10:46 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Terry Obee for Recievers Coach

i nominate Terry Obee for Recievers coach.

i talked to him last week and he was interested in becoming a recievers coach in the NCAA ranks.

he said he was interested in Oregon as well as Stanford and Cal (those last two are because of where he currently resides)

i think it would be cool to bring Terry back in to the Ducks system.

[IMG]http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y138/tj4eck/oregonsig.gif[/IMG]

by tj4eck on Jan 2, 2009 12:01 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Terry Obee GONNA SCORE!
OBEE SCORES A TOUCHDOWN! OBEE SCORES A TOUCHDOWN!

It's spelled ""S-H-U-Y-O-U-V-E-D-O-N-E-S-O-M-E-N-I-C-E-T-H-I-N-G-S-W-I-T-H-T-H-E-P-L-A-C-E"

by JShufelt on Jan 2, 2009 12:23 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Note to Chris Harper...

Son, you can be the next Terry Obee.

The ATQer formerly known as Seattle Quacker...oh yeah, I hate the wings.

by JConant on Jan 2, 2009 12:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Or...

Son, you can be the first Chris Harper.

Is a mancrush on LeGarrette Blount considered beastiality?

Addicted To Quack [dot] com; Where the Shufelts, butthols, and like half of the population of Chicago roam...

by qrsouther on Jan 4, 2009 4:26 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

love that play

thats a sweet call from the broadcaster

[IMG]http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y138/tj4eck/oregonsig.gif[/IMG]

by tj4eck on Jan 2, 2009 1:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

final top 25 finish?

I’m guessing, 13th?

by ochocokid on Jan 4, 2009 11:33 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

We need

A recruiting thread. Right now our class is rated pretty crappy by Rivals. Last time I looked it was 43rd.

If you can't get your Dick Enright, get your Dick Harter

by Old Ducker on Jan 4, 2009 9:48 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Though commits haven't been coming in early...

It doesn’t mean commits aren’t gonna come in. Watch for Tajh Boyd, Bryce Brown, and some of the other receivers who have batted eyes our way.

Is a mancrush on LeGarrette Blount considered beastiality?

Addicted To Quack [dot] com; Where the Shufelts, butthols, and like half of the population of Chicago roam...

by qrsouther on Jan 5, 2009 9:56 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Oregon is too far away

Bryce Brown committed to Clemson after the AA game. He liked Oregon and the coaches, but wants to be near family. He’s also going to try to persuade Boyd to come to Clemson.

If you can't get your Dick Enright, get your Dick Harter

by Old Ducker on Jan 5, 2009 2:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs