That's an interesting take. I always felt Campbell underachieved until the arrival or Borges. Then again, I'm not an AU insider.
Al is an older guy that prior to AU was single. Supposedly in 2004 and 2005 he was a tape room warrior to such an extent that he would put NFL staffs to shame. Since then Al married and they have adopted 2 kids. Rumor is that Al has not been working so hard and has been spending more time with the family. If that is the case, I cannot give the man grief over it. I just wish him luck and thank him his time on the plains.
Any chance Muschamp is being off-loaded as well? :grin: Cause he was definitely holding Aub back. Deadweight in my opinion...
Apparently on Arkansas' short list. Of course every coach has been there so I am sure he will back out tomorrow.
I realize he's got to do what's right for the program, but Tubby's never really been known for loyalty to his assistance. That being said, if Borges wasn't working as hard as he should've been, then by all means he should go. He really didn't have much to work with on offense this year, but Burns is going to be a beast.
Remember, Campbell had 4 different OC's during his tenure, each of which had a different offense and each of which played different roles in his development as a QB : Mazzone (run oriented, two-back) Petrino (spread, read/react) Nall (heinz 57, charlie foxtrot) Borges (WCO, run variant) One of the key reasons Nall failed was because he tried to be the OC, QB (Ensminger), and OL coaches, all while trying to emulate Petrino's playcalling in a hybrid scheme. Too much responsibility in too short a period. The real problem was that Nall totally neglected the focus on the OL during the '03 season and Auburn was 0-2 before he figured it out. IMO, Borges benefitted from Nall returning as full-time to OL the following year. (And from one of the best backfields in CFB history). Borges fixed the playcalling, which subsequenbtly allowed Campbell to be a lot less predictable and, therefore, more successful. I think Borges was instrumental in Campbells success, but not necessarily his development.