you and i have totally different ideas of what that problem is. So, what is it that you think Champ gets, that is the problem?  Is it the legendary lack of depth left on the UF campus by that awful evil man Urban Meyer?

My thought is that the biggest dysfunction lies in his dogged insistence in running a dinosaur offense that requires near perfection and leaves razor-thin margin for error.  And Champ has, very recently, spoken out in criticizing faster tempos of play (typically run by teams that are winning a whole lot more games than we are), saying he totally didn't get it and completely disagreed with it.  To me this shows he's very likely not only wrong, but wrongheaded.

But i really do want to hear how it is you think he gets it, because i'd love to think his tenure here was still salvageable, i really would.

It takes context, but sure, I'll explain.

Take the last game against Vandy, which is also a team that beat ugaly, by the way. UF had the ball bounce off the hands of two players who, had they caught those passes like they normally would, UF wins the game.  Obviously, I am talking about Burton and Hargreaves.  Is that Muschamp's fault?  I would assert no, at least not in the sense that it's a football fundamentals issue.

In my view, Muschamp identified the correct issue that the problems reside in the players' competitive edge, not in their effort.  Last year, under Muschamp, the players had the mental strength to make plays in the face of adversity; this year, they do not.  So, did Muschamp suddenly become incapable of leading a team?

To answer that, ask yourself the same questions about Urban Meyer and/or Steve Spurrier. Look at their erratic records, even 5 to 6 years after leading a program.

Here's where I think Muschamp has had major problems. First, he doesn't appear to be able to control himself as a figurehead, reacting too emotionally when he needs to maintain his composure the most.  Second, his offense (and probably his coordinator) doesn't really match his vision of what he'd like for it to be.  Unless you are arguing Alabama and Stanford have dinosaur offensive systems, then you are not really accurate when stating that Muschamp has an unworkable mindset as a head coach.

Others have noted where Coach Boom has significant advantages, including in recruiting.  I know from personal experience that our top assistants (who are also top recruiters) really like being on staff.  Therefore, the question is as follows -- since no new coach can change the losses we've already had, can Muschamp fix the major problems areas I mentioned above for future development or not?  If I were AD and believed the answer to be no, he's incapable of addressing these issues, then I would let him go.  If I thought these 3 years have given Muschamp the opportunity to get better, then now is the worst possible time to let him go (i.e., we train him then he has success elsewhere).

 By the way, I didn't see Zook as having the mental capacity to understand the issues, nor did I believe Zook could make an objective self-assessment about why the program wasn't as successful as it needed to be.  I do see Muschamp as doing these two things very well.  That's why I wouldn't dump him now unless we could get a slam dunk superstar, e.g., Sumlin.  Short of this, we give Muschamp time to make the corrections he says he is going to make.