A comparative look at Shula and Chizik

We_are_Bama

Suspended
Dec 11, 2008
3,816
1,007
187
As much grief as the barners gave us during the Shula years, I think it is safe to say that at no point in time were things ever as bad under Shula as they are presently under Chizik. Case in point. Mike Shula came in and took over in the month of June, a mere three months before the season began. He started right as the sanctions began to kick in. He won 4 games in his first season. As bad as 2003 was, he still managed two SEC wins in that dismal year. He then went 6-6 the following season after losing his entire starting backfield. Things were better in 2004 than in 2003, but still, it was a pretty dismal season. Yet, he still managed some SEC wins. He had 10 wins in his third season, and I really think that if Prothro and JB Clausner had not gotten hurt, we would, at the very least have been in Atlanta that year. His final year saw a drop off, but again, it never got as bad as it is at *U right now. Shula went 26-23 in four seasons hampered by debilitating probation and non stop key injuries, and yet at no point in time did he go winless in the SEC or get off to a 1-6 start. As a matter of fact, the most games Shula ever lost consecutively was three. I would take our 2003 team at it's lowest point over the 2012 *U team any day. And that's saying something.
 

TRU

All-SEC
Oct 3, 2000
1,490
219
187
Tampa, FL
I agree, but I think that Dumbose is a more appropriate comparator to Cheez. Especially Dumbose's last season. Both are likely to finish up with only 3 wins. But even Dumbose in his last year managed to get some SEC wins.
 

Chukker Veteran

Hall of Fame
Feb 6, 2001
11,041
6,392
287
Shula might have done better if we had bought Tebow for him. :)

Kinda hard to compare him to Cheezit since Cheezit's school found him a good quarterback for sale.
 

Bruce014

1st Team
Aug 29, 2012
767
106
67
Alabama
I agree it's a better comparison between Chizik and Dubose.
Shula inherited a dreadful situation, and while he is really and truly a great guy, he didn't have the coaching ability we needed.

I heard my Auburn coworkers say more than once that if we kept Shula around they would've started pulling for us, and not because he kept losing to Auburn, but because he was going to wind up being an 8-4 or 9-3 coach year in and year out, and that's how they think things should be, and not for us, but for everybody.

Again, I think they were projecting what they want for their own program onto us.
 

4Q Basket Case

FB|BB Moderator
Staff member
Nov 8, 2004
10,632
16,150
337
Tuscaloosa
I agree it's a better comparison between Chizik and Dubose.
Shula inherited a dreadful situation, and while he is really and truly a great guy, he didn't have the coaching ability we needed.

I heard my Auburn coworkers say more than once that if we kept Shula around they would've started pulling for us, and not because he kept losing to Auburn, but because he was going to wind up being an 8-4 or 9-3 coach year in and year out, and that's how they think things should be, and not for us, but for everybody.

Again, I think they were projecting what they want for their own program onto us.
Without question Shula projected a good public image. And his wife led the league in looks. But there are some quite knowledgeable posters here who would vehemently argue that the public image bore little resemblance to the true man.
 

BigEasyTider

FB | REC Moderator
Nov 27, 2007
10,029
0
0
As mentioned above, the only real comparison to Chizik is DuBose, and the similarities between the two are such that it is almost scary.
 

Ole Man Dan

Hall of Fame
Apr 21, 2008
9,186
3,729
187
Gadsden, Al.
Why do the comparison.
Mike Shula didn't have a stellar record at Alabama...
HOWEVER
When no one seemingly wanted to coach Alabama, Mike Shula answered the call.
Mike Shula took the job coaching a team that was on probation, and suffering from sanctions.
Mike was young and inexperienced and made rookie mistakes.
A lot of the games we lost under Shula, were close games. I won't make excuses.
Ex. A multi-overtime loss to Arkansas. (That one hurt)
Mike's biggest problem was self induced. Discipline suffered...
Mike allowed some players to skip strength and conditioning...
Soon others decided that if some didn't they didn't have to also. (I fault him for that)
Shula learned the hard way that you can't be their buddy, you are the boss...
Another drawback Shula suffered from were some assistant coaches that didn't measure up.
(My opinion)
Kind of hard to hire the very best assistants when you are on a 5 yr. probation.
Result is we took it on the chin.
The dismissal process was a bitter pill for Shula.

CHIZIK
Was a looser hired because he could be easily controlled by Pat Dye and Bobby Lowder.
Chizik had the highs of Auburn throwing around money and hiring pretty good coaches
for their bought and paid for season with Scam Newton. THEN...
Auburn fell apart. Gus Malzone got out while the getting was good.
Auburn hired a replacement for Gus, who was on the brink of being fired in the Pro's...
Now even the dumbest Auburn fans know why Chizik was 5-19 when he was bought...
S.N.A.S.S.
 
Last edited:

snake plissken

1st Team
Apr 13, 2011
579
40
47
Birmingham
The offensive coordinators are what made Chizik, Dubose, and Curry. Without Mahlzon, Charlie Stubbs, and Homer Smith, none of the above would have a SEC Championship. Also, I believe the downfall of Tennessee is when they lost Cutcliff. That is when the Fulmer years started to go down hill. Another example is FL State. Bobby Bowdens run ended after he lost Marc Richt.

I've always said you can make an average coach look superior by surrounding him with top notch coordinators.
 

Florida Tom

All-American
Aug 15, 2011
4,449
0
0
Tampa, FL
Why do the comparison.
Mike Shula didn't have a stellar record at Alabama...
HOWEVER
When no one seemingly wanted to coach Alabama, Mike Shula answered the call.
Mike Shula took the job coaching a team that was on probation, and suffering from sanctions.
Mike was young and inexperienced and made rookie mistakes.
A lot of the games we lost under Shula, were close games. I won't make excuses.
Ex. A multi-overtime loss to Arkansas. (That one hurt)
Mike's biggest problem was self induced. Discipline suffered...
Mike allowed some players to skip strength and conditioning...
Soon others decided that if some didn't they didn't have to also. (I fault him for that)
Shula learned the hard way that you can't be their buddy, you are the boss...
Another drawback Shula suffered from were some assistant coaches that didn't measure up.
(My opinion)
Kind of hard to hire the very best assistants when you are on a 5 yr. probation.
Result is we took it on the chin.
The dismissal process was a bitter pill for Shula.

CHIZIK
Was a looser hired because he could be easily controlled by Pat Dye and Bobby Lowder.
Chizik had the highs of Auburn throwing around money and hiring pretty good coaches
for their bought and paid for season with Scam Newton. THEN...
Auburn fell apart. Gus Malzone got out while the getting was good.
Auburn hired a replacement for Gus, who was on the brink of being fired in the Pro's...
Now even the dumbest Auburn fans know why Chizik was 5-19 when he was bought...
S.N.A.S.S.
Thats the most rationale assessment I have seen on here. You naild it, some only have selectitive memories.
 

GA Bamafan

1st Team
Oct 24, 2004
623
13
142
70
Pell City, AL
Some still harbor ill will toward Shula. I think he walked into a very tough situation with a overall lack of experience and his first head coaching job. I had always hoped he would go at the college game again in a different situation and take the opportunity to learn. I still believe he would have made a good coach if he made the decision to do it.

As for Chezik, there is a lot we do not know about what is going on in Auburn; but in the end at a less demanding program he did not show success. Chezik brought with him the experience of a head coach and was unable to keep it together.
 

New Posts

|

Latest threads