Auburn Football: Why Gene Chizik Should Be Given Another Season
In the case of the Auburn Tigers football program, it's amazing how quickly the so-recently mighty have fallen.
Less than two years ago, the Tigers, led by future NFL star Cam Newton, were the best team in college football and recorded an undefeated 14-0 season en route to a BCS National Championship.
Now, after the Tigers' embarrassing loss at the hands of the University of Arkansas on Saturday, head coach Gene Chizik's job security has been called into question.
After the game, NBC Sports' John Taylor had this to say about Chizik's future with the program:
Unfortunately for everyone associated with the school — and Chizik’s long-term viability with the Tigers — the program has officially careened out of control and off the cliff, landing in a fiery heap right where they currently reside in the SEC West: at the bottom.
Now, this isn't to suggest that the blame for the Tigers' lackluster performance in 2012 shouldn't fall on Chizik. As is the case with all storied college football programs, even the shortest string of losing seasons, more often than not, will put the team's coach on the hot seat, and Chizik is no different.
The 24-7 loss to a mediocre-at-best Arkansas team was a serious blow to the 2010 Home Depot Coach of the Year winner's chances at remaining with the Tigers beyond this season, and unless Auburn has a resurgence during the second half of its schedule, there's a good chance he'll be out of work this time next year.
However, this is only Chizik's fourth year with the Tigers, and seeing as his teams have never finished worse than 8-5, firing him after his first losing season would seem like a knee-jerk reaction.
Yes, it's true that he's never enjoyed a tremendous amount of success without Cam Newton behind center, but a national championship speaks for itself, and that achievement alone should buy Chizik another year to try and right this sinking ship.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?