Auburn Football: Retaining Gene Chizik Would Be Costly Mistake for Program
Keeping Gene Chizik around isn't bringing the Auburn Tigers any closer to returning to their former glory and it's only delaying the inevitable, sort of like slowly peeling off a Band-Aid.
Rip the sucker off, deal with the temporary sting, and get on with your day.
As reported by multiple sources, including Sporting News, university president Jay Gogue has already begun looking into replacing Chizik when the season comes to its merciful end:
Gene Chizik fired? Auburn president discussing his possible removal, report says bit.ly/TO58EY— Sporting News (@sportingnews) November 8, 2012
According to the report, Gogue has talked to board members at the school to form a committee so that they can replace the head coach “within days after the end of the season should the decision be made that Chizik will not be retained.”
Whether Chizik is let go now or in two weeks, it's going to cost Auburn the same amount of money.
What Should Auburn Do?
But with only two games left in the season, send the message to the team and the fans that a winless season in the SEC—let's be honest, there's no way that the Tigers are going to beat Alabama on November 24 in Tuscaloosa—is completely and totally unacceptable.
What Gene Chizik is doing simply isn't working anymore, and the collateral damage felt by removing him now would be minimal, as B/R's lead college football writer Adam Kramer notes:
If Chizik is indeed out, this is a truly troubling development for leather jackets and their presence in college football.— Adam Kramer (@KegsnEggs) November 8, 2012
Auburn's is a storied program, and there won't be a shortage of incredibly qualified candidates who are foaming at the mouth for a chance to turn things around at Jordan-Hare Stadium.
The Tigers need a fresh start and a new voice; there's a new chapter of Auburn football waiting to be written.
It's time for them to turn the page and start writing.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?