This is nothing but but pure conjecture, but I never felt like Chizik left on his own terms. I think he may have been encouraged to seek employment. Mack made some odd-for-Mack comments after that season and Chizik took a job that didn't strike me as the kind of job that someone with a clearly defined career path would have taken. It seemed more like the kind of job you take when it was really only the best of a bunch of bad options that are available at a time when you really have to choose one of them.
Chizik was good for us at the time, but I doubt he would have gotten the same offer. In a word, negatory, Little Beaver.
DC to look at the big picture rather than head for the big money 900 thousand a yr makes it a bit easier to wait.
WM and GC have 10 complete different personalities. Muschamp is fiery and gets on to the team as hard as anyone but something about his personality makes people want to work hard and impress him. It's the old Respected > Feared.
Here are the comparative NCAA stats (nationally) for the Horns' defense under, respectively, Gene Chizik (2006) and Will Muschamp (2008): (1) Total Defense - No. 22 (Chizik) and No. 58 (Muschamp). (2) Rushing Defense - No. 3 (Chizik) and No. 4 (Muschamp). (3) Passing Defense - No. 99 (Chizik) and No. 110 (Muschamp). (4) Scoring Defense - No. 26 yielding 18 points per game (Chizik) and No. 25 yielding 19 points per game (Muschamp). (5) Sacks - No. 10 (Chizik) and No. 2 (Muschamp). (6) Tackles for Loss - No. 13 (Chizik) and No. 24 (Muschamp). (7) Passing-Efficiency Defense - No. 75 (Chizik) and No. 59 (Muschamp). Summary: When you strip away the emotional issues, Chizik arguably did a better job as the Horns' Defensive Coordinator than is indicated by the conventional wisdom (as reflected by some of the posts on this thread). Hook 'em.
Burnt Orange Bevo - your point is well-taken; however, the comparative stats previously mentioned relate to the Horns' defense under Chizik in the 2006 football season. Here are the comparative stats for the Horns' defense in the 2005 (rather than 2006) and 2008 seasons under, respectively, Gene Chizik and Will Muschamp: (1) Total Defense - No. 10 (Chizik) and No. 58 (Muschamp). (2) Rushing Defense - No. 33 (Chizik) and No. 4 (Muschamp). (3) Passing Defense - No. 8 (Chizik) and No. 110 (Muschamp). (4) Scoring Defense - No. 8 (Chizik) and No. 25 (Muschamp). (5) Sacks - No. 39 (Chizik) and No. 2 (Muschamp). (6) Tackles for Loss - No. 29 (Chizik) and No. 24 (Muschamp). (7) Passing-Efficiency Defense - No. 4 (Chizik) and No. 59 (Muschamp). Summary: Chizik's defense with the 2005 MNC Horns would appear to have an overall advantage in comparison to the Horns' 2008 defense. Hook 'em.
Chiziks D didn't do what it promised. Mainly blitz and play Tampa two coverage. We didn't do either. It was an uneventful defense. All too many times the LB would come up close to the line and look like a 5 man front. We must have done that play 100 times during 05 and 06. Our LB's were still average, and the "want to" wasn't there either. Our pass rush this year is LIGHTYEARS better then in 06. Keep in mind too, The Chiz was working with a defense full of NFL players. The same can't be said about this year. Muschamp preached being "multiple" in our defensive approach. And we have been. Most sacks in the Big XII, and the least points allowed. And this is the best Division in college football. So all this brings me to answer your question. No.
No man means all he says, and yet very few say all they mean, for words are slippery and thought is viscous. - Henry B. Adams