Not our best showing but improvement over the Lafayette game in OL and DL play. Despite a warm afternoon and spending long stretches of time on the field, the defensive goal line stand was the difference. Have to clean up the penalties resulting from mental mistakes. A “W” is a “W”…..I say we give Princeton a run for the money next Friday as we continue to improve. We bring our A game and make it two in a row.
I've been surprised by the play calling, not as aggressive or imaginative 2 games in as it was last year. Not pounding it in when you're within 1 yard of the end zone? I would love to see more use of those TEs. Maybe that's a function of the O line play, and what the coaches have seen there. QBs did not have a lot of time to throw, and the push for the running game was inconsistent, at best. But the team did progress from last week. Going to have really step it up for league play this week!
Agree on play calling on offense-at the 1 pound it in with a heavy formation-remember the days when we lined up Wiley at tailback with one of our great LBs in the backfield as lead blocker and the QB lining up and taking the ball in a direct snap from center?
Apart from the awful punting performance, what we need is to improve our pass game. Our WRs are not getting separation and when they do Goodwin is not hitting them. Canty spoiled us; he would have gone for 200 yards yesterday.
Not a bad showing from the Lions yesterday but last time I checked I led them to score 30 against this team and didn't let up a single point. By default, this makes me a better coach than Poppe.
We have guys open, but don't get them the ball. We also do miss Stagg, Canty and Libman. Our TE is a weapon in pass game, and was out yesterday. Scheme is solid because we do have open guys. Can't continue to complete 44% of our passes and hope to survive the Ivy schedule.
Play calling is fine, overall. Only thing I'd prefer to see different next game is going forward or off tackle with a run from 1 yard line. Instead of passing or going wide.
Chase is still very rusty. If he isn’t 100%, or if he has lingering symptoms from the blow to the head that he suffered yesterday, then I would go with Sanchez, who is an excellent passer and much bigger and stronger than last year as far as I could tell from the stands.
The D saved us. Glad we got the W, but we definitely have some focus correction areas. I’d say the highest priority is improving offensive line play. We can (and certainly) should clean up special teams and mix it up more on defense, but none of that will matter if we can give our QBs more than two seconds in the pocket.
Plus Jake is pretty 'shakuy' in his spelling, not a good-looking headline. Get your editing together, Jake, and also try to do better if you can in letting us know who's not playing and why (Johnson, Daugherty).
It seems like the offense is generally more effective when the plays are quick to develop. Quick 7-8 yard passes, frequently to a TE, swing passes to a RB or run plays that develop quickly. The RPO scheme always seems slow to develop and might require the QB to do too many things and make too many decisions.
I may be wrong here but it's just my general impression. Too much time dancing around in the backfield seems ineffective. Quicker developing plays get the offense rolling. Anyone agree or disagree?
Funny how quick people are to crown Poppe when he hasn’t even lived through the wars Fabish did. Fabish took the heat year after year, eating losses while building the culture and roster from scratch. Everyone laughed at Columbia until his guys started swinging back. Now suddenly it’s all Poppe this, Poppe that. Newsflash: without Fabish laying the bricks, there’s no house for Poppe to live in. Respect the man who bled for this program when nobody else would.
I actually wrote to Peter Pilling about this. Told him straight up—bring Mark Fabish back. The man deserved better than to be shoved aside after putting in the work to give Columbia a backbone. Everyone loves the results now, but no one wants to admit who set the table. Poppe’s fine, but Fabish earned the right to finish what he started. If the AD had any guts, he’d make that call.
You don't even understand how a program is run. Poppe runs the program and builds his staff. Pilling signs off on the staff that Poppe brings in. Pilling doesn't hire staff or give a rats ass about your email.
Lmao you sound like you just learned how college sports works yesterday. ADs are literally the ones pulling the strings—coaches don’t move a muscle without admin backing. To say Pilling “doesn’t give a rat’s ass” just shows how little you know. Fabish put in a decade building this thing from dust, and you want to erase him like he never mattered? That’s clown behavior. Keep pretending you’ve got insider knowledge while the rest of us actually remember how this program got here.
The cries for Fabish’s return just keep getting louder. At some point it’s going to be impossible for the powers that be to ignore. How long can they really deny it before the moment becomes too overwhelming? A role in “Success Through Well-Being” would be the perfect fit—let him pour back into the program he helped build. Columbia football owes him that much.
Everyone knows how we got here. The point is that it's Poppe's time and you're undermining him with the Fabish brown nosing. He's not coming back ever. He's not getting a shout out at halftime or a special mention in the program.
Can we stop being absurd? If the platters were so enamored with the great Mr. Fabish, he likely would have been retained. Secondly, if he the great molder of men, and so adroit at recognizing talent, he would have been scooped up immediately after being let go. Even his old buddy at Penn did not want him. He was protected by a certain person, who tried desperately to craft the perfect scenario for him. Sorry, it did not work out. Now let’s move on. If we truly support our Alma Mater, we will make this the last reference to a former head coach.
Easy to write him off when you clearly never played under him. I did, and the lessons Fabish drilled into us daily still stick with me now. It wasn’t about headlines or politics—it was about shaping men who could compete and carry themselves with pride. You can keep dismissing him from the outside, but those of us who actually went through it know exactly what he gave this program.
If you loved him so much, why did not speak up and make it known to the Athletic Director? Did you really think he was going to be retained after the debacles against Princeton and Brown? By the way, do you think the current players do not feel the same way towards their coach?
I never got into a game at Columbia, but I’ll never forget how Coach Fabish treated me when I went down with an injury. Most coaches would’ve written me off as a wasted roster spot. Not him. He checked in, made sure I was taken care of, and treated me with the same respect he gave the starters. That kind of compassion is rare in this business. Say what you want about wins and losses, but I know what kind of man he is, and I’ll always respect him for it.
I don’t get the obsession with Fabish. Nice guy? Sure. But he had years to prove himself and couldn’t win. Period. This is Division I football, not a charity case. Poppe comes in, same program, same resources, and instantly delivers results. That tells you all you need to know. Respect Fabish as a person if you want, but let’s stop pretending he was some savior. Columbia finally has a coach who knows how to win—why waste time wishing for the guy who couldn’t?
I question the bona fides of the “Fabish” boosters; in fact, I think it is somebody’s idea of either a sad joke or a good way to undermine Jon. In other words, this material is not the work product of somebody who cares about Columbia football. If I were Jake, I would strike these discordant notes from the blog.
Look, I get why people respect Fabish. He cared about his players, he worked hard, and he did help lay some groundwork. Nobody’s denying that. But at the end of the day, results matter. He had his chance, and the wins just weren’t there. Poppe has taken the same program and pushed it further than Fabish ever could. So yes—tip your cap to Fabish for what he did, but stop acting like he’s the answer now. The program needs to keep building forward, not backward.
Enough already with the Fabish worship. The guy had YEARS and couldn’t win a damn thing. Stop rewriting history like he’s some unsung hero—he was a losing coach, plain and simple. Poppe shows up and immediately flips the program around, which proves Fabish was the problem all along. You Fabish diehards sound pathetic clinging to the past. If you actually cared about Columbia football, you’d stop dragging us backwards and start backing the coach who’s finally delivering results.
You know, if you think about it, maybe he was simply a victim. Maybe if Al Bagnoli had been straight up about his desire to continue coaching, before the eve of the season, things might have worked out differently? Quite possibly Fabish was the victim of resentment meant for someone else. It is rare for a first year coach to be fired after just a single season, regardless of how disastrous the season. There was something about the last minute resignation that did not smell right - even if there no machinations. Maybe, Mr. Piling felt duped and powerless and thought Fabish was in on the scheme? Oliver Stone anyone?
I don’t understand the hostility on both sides. The truth is there have been good points made on both sides.
From what I can tell the main points for bringing back Fabish are. Fabish recruited all the players that won us an Ivy. I don’t see what is controversial about this, this is just true. Fabish motivated players to play hard. I graduated many years ago so can’t speak from a players side but I will say it is hard to take a losing team and make them win so arguably true
Against Fabish coming back. Fabish had a rough year one going 3-7. Again this is true one of the worst seasons since the 2019 season. Poppe had a lot of success his first year and hopefully will continue to be successful. As an avid fan I am hoping for many wins we will see.
Although clearly there are some trolls on both sides I do think this is an interesting discussion no reason to silence one side. Be an adult and look at things objectively all trolls aside I do think there are valid arguments on both sides. Jake I personally would love to hear your analysis on Fabish vs Poppe and any chance of bringing back Fabish.
Not gonna lie this team looks a little lost right now. Offense struggled to move, defense let up big plays every now and again, and special teams were a huge weakness most of the game. This team needs some senior leadership to step up to take up the spark plug roles formerly filled by guys like Marcus Lenz, Raleigh Erwin, and Aidan Shinfeld. Until then, consider this team's days numbered.
It seems like the offense is generally more effective when the plays are quick to develop. Quick 7-8 yard passes, frequently to a TE, swing passes to a RB or run plays that develop quickly. The RPO scheme always seems slow to develop and might require the QB to do too many things and make too many decisions.
I may be wrong here but it's just my general impression. Too much time dancing around in the backfield seems ineffective. Quicker developing plays get the offense rolling. Anyone agree or disagree?
We lost some great players from last year’s team—so what did you expect? Of course there are growing pains, moving forward without some truly excellent players, but we have lots of young talent who will hit their stride at some point during the season.
Didn't anyone notice that Paul Ferraro is back as a special consultant? A tremendous defensive coach . He tutored Stovall and is directly responsible for our defensive improvements. Stovall is doing a fine job with the defense in the last few years too! I do hope that he reads this because our D could be even better . Have to mix up the 3-4 with a 4-3 MORE OFTEN. Other teams exploit the 3-4 by running it down our throats too often. I understand the bend but do't break philosophy BUT where does CONSISTENT pressure on the QB come from in the 3-4? Keep the offense guessing which D it is? Also, Seitu, who is a very good OC , has to mix in the Hurry Up offense AT TIMES. Thank God that Bagnoli and Fabish's Hurry Up and Wait offense is gone.
Oh here we go again—pretend the defense just magically figured it out because Ferraro strolled back in as a “consultant.” Give me a break. Stovall’s been grinding with those guys for years, and half the foundation he’s working with was brought in under Fabish. And spare me the cheap shot about Fabish’s offense—he didn’t get a fair chance to finish building it. Funny how folks love to rewrite history as soon as someone new shows up. You want to give credit? Start by acknowledging the guy you’re so desperate to erase.
It seems like the offense is generally more effective when the plays are quick to develop. Quick 7-8 yard passes, frequently to a TE, swing passes to a RB or run plays that develop quickly. The RPO scheme always seems slow to develop and might require the QB to do too many things and make too many decisions.
I may be wrong here but it's just my general impression. Too much time dancing around in the backfield seems ineffective. Quicker developing plays get the offense rolling. Anyone agree or disagree?
63 comments:
Not a good showing-missed tackles, dropped passes, poor play calling
Not our best showing but improvement over the Lafayette game in OL and DL play.
Despite a warm afternoon and spending long stretches of time on the field, the defensive goal line stand was the difference. Have to clean up the penalties resulting from mental mistakes. A “W” is a “W”…..I say we give Princeton a run for the money next Friday as we continue to improve. We bring our A game and make it two in a row.
I've been surprised by the play calling, not as aggressive or imaginative 2 games in as it was last year. Not pounding it in when you're within 1 yard of the end zone? I would love to see more use of those TEs.
Maybe that's a function of the O line play, and what the coaches have seen there. QBs did not have a lot of time to throw, and the push for the running game was inconsistent, at best.
But the team did progress from last week. Going to have really step it up for league play this week!
Agree on play calling on offense-at the 1 pound it in with a heavy formation-remember the days when we lined up Wiley at tailback with one of our great LBs in the backfield as lead blocker and the QB lining up and taking the ball in a direct snap from center?
Or when we lined up Des Werthman as a tailback in short yardage—never will forget how he wiped out a poor Brown DB who tired to tackle him..
Apart from the awful punting performance, what we need is to improve our pass game. Our WRs are not getting separation and when they do Goodwin is not hitting them. Canty spoiled us; he would have gone for 200 yards yesterday.
An ugly win, but a win is a win. The team has a lot to practice before Saturday against a team that soundly beat Lafayette on the road.
Not a bad showing from the Lions yesterday but last time I checked I led them to score 30 against this team and didn't let up a single point. By default, this makes me a better coach than Poppe.
Give me my job back.
We have guys open, but don't get them the ball. We also do miss Stagg, Canty and Libman. Our TE is a weapon in pass game, and was out yesterday. Scheme is solid because we do have open guys. Can't continue to complete 44% of our passes and hope to survive the Ivy schedule.
Play calling is fine, overall. Only thing I'd prefer to see different next game is going forward or off tackle with a run from 1 yard line. Instead of passing or going wide.
Anyone have an update on the quarterback?
Chase is still very rusty. If he isn’t 100%, or if he has lingering symptoms from the blow to the head that he suffered yesterday, then I would go with Sanchez, who is an excellent passer and much bigger and stronger than last year as far as I could tell from the stands.
How about having OL live up to preseason hype?
Looks to me like Sanchez lost weight.
And qb, and dl and specialists. We missed a PAT yesterday. Those have to be 100%.
The D saved us. Glad we got the W, but we definitely have some focus correction areas. I’d say the highest priority is improving offensive line play. We can (and certainly) should clean up special teams and mix it up more on defense, but none of that will matter if we can give our QBs more than two seconds in the pocket.
*None of that will matter if we can’t give our QBs more than two seconds in the pocket.
We really gotta focus on blocking better (and legally).
He did make 38 in a row, a school record
Plus Jake is pretty 'shakuy' in his spelling, not a good-looking headline. Get your editing together, Jake, and also try to do better if you can in letting us know who's not playing and why (Johnson, Daugherty).
Maybe he can make you a sandwich while he's at it.
Jake has a day job
It seems like the offense is generally more effective when the plays are quick to develop. Quick 7-8 yard passes, frequently to a TE, swing passes to a RB or run plays that develop quickly. The RPO scheme always seems slow to develop and might require the QB to do too many things and make too many decisions.
I may be wrong here but it's just my general impression. Too much time dancing around in the backfield seems ineffective. Quicker developing plays get the offense rolling. Anyone agree or disagree?
Is this actually Mark Fabish?
Funny how quick people are to crown Poppe when he hasn’t even lived through the wars Fabish did. Fabish took the heat year after year, eating losses while building the culture and roster from scratch. Everyone laughed at Columbia until his guys started swinging back. Now suddenly it’s all Poppe this, Poppe that. Newsflash: without Fabish laying the bricks, there’s no house for Poppe to live in. Respect the man who bled for this program when nobody else would.
Fu(k off, loser.
I’m Mark Fabish
I actually wrote to Peter Pilling about this. Told him straight up—bring Mark Fabish back. The man deserved better than to be shoved aside after putting in the work to give Columbia a backbone. Everyone loves the results now, but no one wants to admit who set the table. Poppe’s fine, but Fabish earned the right to finish what he started. If the AD had any guts, he’d make that call.
You don't even understand how a program is run. Poppe runs the program and builds his staff. Pilling signs off on the staff that Poppe brings in. Pilling doesn't hire staff or give a rats ass about your email.
Also an email is never telling somebody "straight up".
Lmao you sound like you just learned how college sports works yesterday. ADs are literally the ones pulling the strings—coaches don’t move a muscle without admin backing. To say Pilling “doesn’t give a rat’s ass” just shows how little you know. Fabish put in a decade building this thing from dust, and you want to erase him like he never mattered? That’s clown behavior. Keep pretending you’ve got insider knowledge while the rest of us actually remember how this program got here.
The cries for Fabish’s return just keep getting louder. At some point it’s going to be impossible for the powers that be to ignore. How long can they really deny it before the moment becomes too overwhelming? A role in “Success Through Well-Being” would be the perfect fit—let him pour back into the program he helped build. Columbia football owes him that much.
Everyone knows how we got here. The point is that it's Poppe's time and you're undermining him with the Fabish brown nosing. He's not coming back ever. He's not getting a shout out at halftime or a special mention in the program.
Can we stop being absurd? If the platters were so enamored with the great Mr. Fabish, he likely would have been retained. Secondly, if he the great molder of men, and so adroit at recognizing talent, he would have been scooped up immediately after being let go. Even his old buddy at Penn did not want him. He was protected by a certain person, who tried desperately to craft the perfect scenario for him. Sorry, it did not work out. Now let’s move on. If we truly support our Alma Mater, we will make this the last reference to a former head coach.
players
Easy to write him off when you clearly never played under him. I did, and the lessons Fabish drilled into us daily still stick with me now. It wasn’t about headlines or politics—it was about shaping men who could compete and carry themselves with pride. You can keep dismissing him from the outside, but those of us who actually went through it know exactly what he gave this program.
-Mitch 98
Hero’s get remembered but legends never die
Mitch Moyer 98?
If you loved him so much, why did not speak up and make it known to the Athletic Director? Did you really think he was going to be retained after the debacles against Princeton and Brown? By the way, do you think the current players do not feel the same way towards their coach?
I never got into a game at Columbia, but I’ll never forget how Coach Fabish treated me when I went down with an injury. Most coaches would’ve written me off as a wasted roster spot. Not him. He checked in, made sure I was taken care of, and treated me with the same respect he gave the starters. That kind of compassion is rare in this business. Say what you want about wins and losses, but I know what kind of man he is, and I’ll always respect him for it.
I don’t get the obsession with Fabish. Nice guy? Sure. But he had years to prove himself and couldn’t win. Period. This is Division I football, not a charity case. Poppe comes in, same program, same resources, and instantly delivers results. That tells you all you need to know. Respect Fabish as a person if you want, but let’s stop pretending he was some savior. Columbia finally has a coach who knows how to win—why waste time wishing for the guy who couldn’t?
I question the bona fides of the “Fabish” boosters; in fact, I think it is somebody’s idea of either a sad joke or a good way to undermine Jon. In other words, this material is not the work product of somebody who cares about Columbia football. If I were Jake, I would strike these discordant notes from the blog.
Look, I get why people respect Fabish. He cared about his players, he worked hard, and he did help lay some groundwork. Nobody’s denying that. But at the end of the day, results matter. He had his chance, and the wins just weren’t there. Poppe has taken the same program and pushed it further than Fabish ever could. So yes—tip your cap to Fabish for what he did, but stop acting like he’s the answer now. The program needs to keep building forward, not backward.
Enough already with the Fabish worship. The guy had YEARS and couldn’t win a damn thing. Stop rewriting history like he’s some unsung hero—he was a losing coach, plain and simple. Poppe shows up and immediately flips the program around, which proves Fabish was the problem all along. You Fabish diehards sound pathetic clinging to the past. If you actually cared about Columbia football, you’d stop dragging us backwards and start backing the coach who’s finally delivering results.
You know, if you think about it, maybe he was simply a victim. Maybe if Al Bagnoli had been straight up about his desire to continue coaching, before the eve of the season, things might have worked out differently? Quite possibly Fabish was the victim of resentment meant for someone else. It is rare for a first year coach to be fired after just a single season, regardless of how disastrous the season. There was something about the last minute resignation that did not smell right - even if there no machinations. Maybe, Mr. Piling felt duped and powerless and thought Fabish was in on the scheme? Oliver Stone anyone?
I don’t understand the hostility on both sides. The truth is there have been good points made on both sides.
From what I can tell the main points for bringing back Fabish are.
Fabish recruited all the players that won us an Ivy. I don’t see what is controversial about this, this is just true.
Fabish motivated players to play hard. I graduated many years ago so can’t speak from a players side but I will say it is hard to take a losing team and make them win so arguably true
Against Fabish coming back.
Fabish had a rough year one going 3-7. Again this is true one of the worst seasons since the 2019 season.
Poppe had a lot of success his first year and hopefully will continue to be successful. As an avid fan I am hoping for many wins we will see.
Although clearly there are some trolls on both sides I do think this is an interesting discussion no reason to silence one side. Be an adult and look at things objectively all trolls aside I do think there are valid arguments on both sides. Jake I personally would love to hear your analysis on Fabish vs Poppe and any chance of bringing back Fabish.
Thanks for the honesty and thoughtfulness, I hope we can continue a productive dialogue. Something that is much needed in our great nation!
CC ‘73
Libman was a tiktoker not a good receiver.
This post. 100%. Let’s focus on the fantastic coach of ours who won an IL title IN HIS FIRST SEASON as HC at Columbia.
Right. I mean the kid’s been automatic. People shouldn’t be harping on a missed extra point.
Not gonna lie this team looks a little lost right now. Offense struggled to move, defense let up big plays every now and again, and special teams were a huge weakness most of the game. This team needs some senior leadership to step up to take up the spark plug roles formerly filled by guys like Marcus Lenz, Raleigh Erwin, and Aidan Shinfeld. Until then, consider this team's days numbered.
D gave up 10 points
Where is Raleigh Erwin?
It seems like the offense is generally more effective when the plays are quick to develop. Quick 7-8 yard passes, frequently to a TE, swing passes to a RB or run plays that develop quickly. The RPO scheme always seems slow to develop and might require the QB to do too many things and make too many decisions.
I may be wrong here but it's just my general impression. Too much time dancing around in the backfield seems ineffective. Quicker developing plays get the offense rolling. Anyone agree or disagree?
We lost some great players from last year’s team—so what did you expect? Of course there are growing pains, moving forward without some truly excellent players, but we have lots of young talent who will hit their stride at some point during the season.
This team will be just fine. The leadership is there. The passion and effort can’t be any more apparent.
Didn't anyone notice that Paul Ferraro is back as a special consultant? A tremendous defensive coach . He tutored Stovall and is directly responsible for our defensive improvements. Stovall is doing a fine job with the defense in the last few years too! I do hope that he reads this because our D could be even better . Have to mix up the 3-4 with a 4-3 MORE OFTEN. Other teams exploit the 3-4 by running it down our throats too often. I understand the bend but do't break philosophy BUT where does CONSISTENT pressure on the QB come from in the 3-4? Keep the offense guessing which D it is? Also, Seitu, who is a very good OC , has to mix in the Hurry Up offense AT TIMES. Thank God that Bagnoli and Fabish's Hurry Up and Wait offense is gone.
Agree about the hurry up O. Similar to the above comment about quick hitting plays, the offense seems to get rolling when it plays faster.
Oh here we go again—pretend the defense just magically figured it out because Ferraro strolled back in as a “consultant.” Give me a break. Stovall’s been grinding with those guys for years, and half the foundation he’s working with was brought in under Fabish. And spare me the cheap shot about Fabish’s offense—he didn’t get a fair chance to finish building it. Funny how folks love to rewrite history as soon as someone new shows up. You want to give credit? Start by acknowledging the guy you’re so desperate to erase.
It seems like the offense is generally more effective when the plays are quick to develop. Quick 7-8 yard passes, frequently to a TE, swing passes to a RB or run plays that develop quickly. The RPO scheme always seems slow to develop and might require the QB to do too many things and make too many decisions.
I may be wrong here but it's just my general impression. Too much time dancing around in the backfield seems ineffective. Quicker developing plays get the offense rolling. Anyone agree or disagree?
Wouldn’t call it dancing; more like running for your life!
Goodwin was holding the ball too long and spent too much time dancing around in the pocket.
Agree. We need more plays that develop quickly.
Any update on Goodwin?
Post a Comment