Yes, I envied Malzahn's offense over Al Borges' boring offense on that day in 2006. Let's look at some numbers concerning Borges and Malzahn;

Tommy Tuberville spent 10 years with Auburn. Houston Nutt spent 10 years with Arkansas.

Nutt won 59.6% of his games without Gus Malzahn.

Tuberville won 58% of his games without Al Borges.

I can't believe it, but when looking at wins and losses, Tommy Tuberville and Huston Nutt are equals when coaching without their best offensive coordinators (Nutt actually holds a slight edge). When Al Borges controlled the playcalling, Auburn won 82% of their games. When Arthur Gustav Malzahn III controlled the playcalling at Arkansas, they won 71.4% of their games.

Auburn did suffer diminishing returns form the offense while Borges was at Auburn. It's a valid argument. However, when considering where Auburn was before Borges arrived and after he left, it can be safe to assume that whatever caused the harm from 2004-2007 didn't involve Al Borges. Also, remember that Auburn put up better offensive number in 2005 than in 2004. It wasn't the loss of Williams and Brown which hurt Auburn – it was the loss of receivers such as Aromashodu, Obomanu, Mix and Taylor which hurt Borges' offense. The playcalling became less flashy after these guys all left for the NFL (remember those insanely awesome and unstoppable reverses Obomanu ran in 2005?).

But here's the thing about that boring playcalling – it won a lot of football games. Auburn went 11-2 in 2006 with less talent than in 2005. It was done with playcalling which matched up with the ability of the players.

That's why 2008 was a disaster. Auburn's playcalling was based on what Franklin wanted Auburn's ability to be, not what it was. Borges' playcalling was flashy when using flashy players. Borges' playcalling was boring with less flashy players. Auburn still won.

Here's the good news. When it comes to molding an offense based on the players available, Arthur Gustav Malzahn III is much more Al Borges than he is Tony Franklin. Gustav uses his players to their best abilities. When he had monster running backs like McFadden and Jones – he ran them up the middle. When given a midget named Fish – he invented the one of the most beautiful trick plays I've ever seen.

In an article I wrote last year, I mentioned that Tony Franklin's offense would supposedly pass to set up the run while Al Borges liked to "run to set up the pass". I then made a joke about how in 2003, Ensminger used a "run to set up the punt" strategy. I thought I was being funny with the "run to set up the punt" line since punting shouldn't be something an OC wants to do. Unfortunately, I overestimated Ensminger. When describing his strategy before the Alabama game, he mentioned that his gameplan was to "live to punt". Seriously.

Arthur Gustav Malzahn III has plenty of things going for him. First, his name is Arthur Gustav Malzahn III. That's amazing*. Second, unlike Chizik, he's left every team he's coached for in a better position than he found it – something even Al Borges can't claim.

It's a fact that Malzahn can be succeessful and it's a fact that the spread can be successful. Unfortunatly, I fear that this offseason will be filled with the same optimistic ideals we all had at this time last year. For example, we've all heard this one;

"The spread actually helps the running game because it forces the defense to spread their players all over the field. This gives running backs more holes to run through."

This is the kind of argument that sounds really good because it kinda makes sense and you want to believe it. However, there's something in the back of your mind thinking "No, that's not the way it works. I can't really explain why, but it just doesn't sound right."

Are you thinking that because your biased and set in your ways? Or is that the kind of thinking that saves people from making bad decisions?

How much different is that argument from this one;

"Taking out a subprime mortgage is a good idea. Buy the biggest and nicest house you can possibly get a loan for because equity in houses always increase. You'll be able to use your home as an ATM!"

Those arguments made sense to people just a couple years ago. House prices have always gone up. Why would they stop? People believed this argument because it kinda made sense - and people would rather err on the side that lets them live in a big house.

Is Auburn going to err on the offense that promises +40 points a game? We'll see. Tommy Tuberville made the same gamble and look at where he is today**.

We'll see how this turns out. In the meantime, War “Arthur Gustav Malzahn III” Eagle!

E-mail Mark at mark@theauburner.com
The sponsor has tickets to bowl games here.
Sugar Bowl equivalent tickets can be found here.

* Eugene Chizik is also an awesome name. According to Auburn.edu's "people finder", Gene Chizik's middle name starts with a "Z". Does anybody know what it stands for? Until I'm told otherwise, I'll assume it stands for "Zaphod". Eugene Zaphod Chizik.

** Laying out by a pool filled with cash and Foy ODK Sportsmanship Trophies - not bad.