As Boston College fans, we all know Mark Blaudschun. He's the beat writer for the Boston Globe who covers the Eagles when he isn't busy covering the fascinating world of Big East realignment and expansion. Criticism of Mark's work varies from person to person, but one of the consistent complaints levied against him is the allegation that he seems to be a mouth piece for the BC administration. His articles always walk the party lines and he never asks tough questions of GDF and his crew. We all remember his "BC is the unluckiest team in football?" post right?
Today's article from our boy Blaudschun is quite the doozy. In honor of one of the first blogs I ever read "Fire Joe Morgan", I am going to dissect this article line by line.
Blauds starts the article off with some basic facts, talking about how the Eagles' ended the season with a win, but it was also shadowed by the fact BC didn't make a bowl. Fair points, and nothing to be snarky with there. Then he goes into Bill McGovern being a possible replacement for the UMass job, which, as an aside, I hope he gets it. Not bad reporting, then Mark writes this:
"And yes, Spaziani will be back at BC because he deserves to continue a rebuilding project that is making progress."
Gene, is that you? Is Mark Blaudschun actually just a pseudonym for GDF? Why does Spaz deserve to be back? You better explain yourself. I'm sure Blauds has a great explanation, let's see here:
"The victory over Miami was satisfying because it ended the season on a positive note - the first time in three years the Eagles ended their season with a win - and that counts for something."
You have to be kidding right. This is your logic why "Spaz deserves to come back." His team won the last game of the season. Blauds, I don't know if you are aware of it, but in college football there are these fun little games that happen in December and January. They are called bowls, and BC has a long history of playing in these games. Think long and hard now, you might have missed it last year because your favorite team was playing Oklahoma in the Fiesta Bowl. Remember now? Those "bowl games" mark successful seasons, because in order to make it you have to win as many or more games than you lose. Even if you get blown out or lose in these "bowls"--which Spaz has a tendency to do-- you want to make these games. I think I can speak for the entire BC fanbase when I say I don't care about losing the last game of the season, we want to make bowl games.
Then Blauds gives his thoughts on Luke Kuechly:
"But he could also do what Stanford quarterback Andrew Luck did this season, come back simply because he wants to be a kid for another year and play football with his friends."
I can't speak for Luke, but let's use some more logic to come to a conclusion. You just talked about how BC is work in progress, a project if you will. Luke has two choices. He can either go to the holy grail of football--the NFL-- and be a first round draft pick, ensuring financial stability and his cementing his legacy in football. Or he can play for a BC football team that may or may not be good, loaded with "ifs", and a coach that thinks his team still "has a long way to go" (his words not mine). Luke seems like a bright boy, I'm pretty sure he will take care of his future instead of "playing football with his friends". Providing a financial future for yourself and your family seems a little more important that college friendships. But what do I know.
Then Blauds brings up our Offensive Coordinator mess.
"Offensively, there needs to be improvement. Whether that comes from more changes on the coaching staff, which took an early-season hit when coordinator Kevin Rogers took a medical leave of absence and was replaced by Dave Brock, or a reassignment of duties is uncertain. Presuming that Rogers will not be back, Spaziani has an opening to fill."
Sticking with that health story, huh? How's he doing by the way? Has anyone heard from him since the UCF game? Hope Kevin's back gets better soon. Sorry, I will respect his privacy.
And Mark you know and I know that Dave Brock will be the Offensive Coordinator next year.
"Spaziani sees Rettig developing. "I’ve always said he has made progress,’’ said Spaziani, who also probably will take a look at expanding the role of quarterback Josh Bordner, who provided a spark at times this season."
I'm not going to rip on Rettig, because he is just a kid and I still haven't given up on him. But did he really develop from his freshman year to this year?
2010: 138 YPG
2011: 164 YPG
That's development, I guess. But Spaz is right, Rettig did look improved at times but you know who stunted Rettig's growth? Spaz. Look at the Miami game. For most of the game, Rettig was hitting his targets and moving the ball at will and moving the ball in the red zone. He finally looked like the ACC QB we all hoped for this season. So what does Spaz/Brock do? They bring in Josh Bordner in two red zone situations, the Miami defense waits for the option run destroys it and BC is left without points. Then to top it all off, BC went into turtle mode for the final quarter, simply running the ball for a long string of three and outs and allowing Miami back into the game. Just imagine what Rettig would have looked like in that game if Jags -- or anyone else for that matter -- was coaching. He could have easily have thrown for 400 yards, and 4-5 TDs against that defense.
"BC is done for this season. It could have, and should have, won at least two more games, which would have meant playing in a bowl game for the 13th consecutive season."
Could have, should have, would have. But they didn't Mark. And instead of asking the critical questions about offensive game planning, or defensive struggles, you just laid there and let BC feed you excuses. What kind of quote is that? The Red Sox were one pitch away from making the playoffs, and look at what happened to them after the season ended. Maybe if Jonathan Papelbon struck out his final batter, the Sox would have won the World Series. But they didn't, they failed, just like Boston College did. You can't make an evaluation of a season and just give the team two free passes on game changing mistakes, can you?
"It didn’t happen. What happens in 2012 is unknown, but a root system is in place and must be nurtured.
If Kuechly comes back, if the waivers for the veterans are granted, if everyone stays healthy, it could be a much better year than people expect.
In any case, Spaziani deserves to be there to see if it blossoms."
This is just too perfect. It's like everything we despise about BC administration, BC beat writers and coaching staff all wrapped in one garbled quote. Blauds uses a GDF buzz word right off the bat "Root system". What does that even mean? This was a team that most people thought would win at least 6 games this season, and they didn't. And this is a a team that has declined in wins for the past four years. Yet somehow we have a system in place? I don't get it.
This entire article just sounds like the BC administration already has the excuse machine set for 2012. They force fed Mark a whole series of "if" to give them wiggle room if the team fails. So if BC loses Kuechly they won't win? Or if Harris and Momah don't return they won't win?. What about health? Like every other team in college football hasn't had to deal with their fair share of injuries. Virginia Tech lost Bruce Taylor, FSU lost E.J Manuel for the first part of the season, and you don't see their beat writers making excuses.
This whole post was just a giant waste of time. And it's clear to see that
a) the Globe is just writing to appease their BC contacts and
b) BC fans shouldn't bother reading this garbage.
If you want to be force fed BC administrations slant on BC Athletics, head on over to BCEagles.com and cut out the middle man. But if you want real analysis of all things BC, head over to one of the dozens of BC blogs or message boards that actually have the gumption to responsibly analyze and critique what's going on in Chestnut Hill.