a need came up.
I am sure folks in Gainesville felt the same.
Seems like a classy guy. I wish him well except if he and ND cross paths.
I'll believe it when official
The Texas athletic department has had some legal issues in recent years and could be characterized as risk averse at this point. An assistant with a show cause and penalties in place is probably a non-starter for Texas. In addition, he is apparently a bit of a loose cannon and that won't play well here. See the article linked on him engaging Kentucky fans on Facebook. That won't be tolerated by Texas.
Forde: I'm told there's 1stumbling block keeping Strong-Texas from happening. May get resolved, but not yet. Offer is there, not formally accepted.
Jurich big, big check?
less talent and resources.
You are way off, imho.
Country this year and 70th last year with possibly the best QB in the land (Kelly's schedule was 44th at Cincy).
I tend to think he's going to be very good, but could have used a little more ripening.
Would have won without Bridgewater? Did he make Brudgewater? Can he be Texas's bridge over troubled water?
I do find it funny that some UL fans aren't sad to see him go.
He's a solid hire. Some significant risk, of course, given that he's been a head coach at one school, in a shitty conference, and played craptastic schedules with only 4 top 25 teams in them for the last couple years (I think I read 4?). Rumors are that he's not huge on glad-handing alums, which makes Texas a weird landing place.
But he's got connections across Florida, some name recognition, a decent track record, and I'm sure his players will like him. He's a good coach. He'll probably have the #1 draft pick in this year's draft.
He's not at all the hire this board would be happy with if it happened. Tier 1 hire? Not quite.
1) Coached under high profile coaches.
2) Coached at multiple big time programs at their peaks.
3) Coordinated successfully on his side of the ball.
4) Posted a winning record as a head coach.
5) Won bowl games, including a BCS bowl.
His type of hire is definitely better than Weis and Boob. It is probably equal with Kelly to Notre Dame though I would give a coach like Strong a higher probability of success than Kelly given that he has put up with the meat grinder of schools like ND and Florida. He knows what it is like to have a fan base with high expectations.
than I was with the last five (including O'Leary).
Jurich had always said he'd pay whatever it took to keep Strong. Well, now we'll see if he puts Louisville's money where his mouth is.
There is no basis whatsoever to suggest that their process generated different results than that of ND. A decent hire, but a hire they clearly could've made at any time.
He is a good coach, but hasn't proven anything beyond that. He was undoubtedly "low hanging fruit" within the lingo of this board.
for Charlie Stonk's 1/4 of a Big East title. Great job search, Patterson.
Which other coaches actually turned the job down behind the scenes. Mora was supposedly offered the job.
There was a lot of talk about Jimbo Fisher, and I have to believe his interest would have been gauged before Strong's. I wonder if Malzahn's interest was also explored.
coaches than Strong were still in-season (Malzahn, Fisher, etc).
If Texas's choice was Charlie Strong at $5 million/yr, no reason they could not have done this days after Mack's firing. This reeks desperation.
That is why I think they interviewed either one or both of those guys recently, or were told by their representatives that they weren't interested.
It will never come out, but I bet Strong was not in their top 3-4 choices. It worked out pretty good for Pete Carroll at Southern Cal though.
in other jobs, for the moment. We can read between the lines; good openings at their level exist only in the NFL and Texas.
The only legit prospect who did not affirm his loyalty to his current employer and/or get a raise from Texas rumors was James Franklin. Even Saban got a raise from Texas rumors.
if I were Swarbrick, Franklin would be on my very short list to be the next HC.
How that stacks up against 23 years of blaming player execution at low- or no-tier schools is anybody's guess.
respective resumes. The point is regarding the process. Charlie Strong is more or less a target of equivalent desirability and attainability as Brian Kelly. Just as Brian Kelly was always a lock to come to Notre Dame if/when we decided to call him, Charlie Strong was "low hanging fruit" in a very similar way. Despite all of their Texan bluster, they ended up with almost precisely the same results that we did four years ago.
settle for its "low-hanging fruit".
any level trumps being an assistant for 15-20 years at 2 or 3 major programs. Take your feelings for Kelly out of the equation, and you have to hire a coach. Coach A has been a head coach at a Div II school, a MAC school and a Big East school for 20 years combined. Coach B was a position coach in the SEC, then a coordinator in the Big 10, then a coordinator in the Big 12 over the same 20 years. As an AD, you hire the assistant coach and he loses 60% of his games for three years, and you fire him. Then the President fires you for not hiring the 20 year head coach. It's a crap shoot. But HC experience should count for a lot. Running a small to medium size company is usually tougher and teaches more overall lessons than getting a big paycheck as an employee of a big company.
And I disagree with your position.
I think becoming a coach at a program like Notre Dame with a grand total of seven years of D1 coaching experience at any level is a significant risk.
I doubt I'd be able to take an executive position at IBM after two decades running my uncle's gas stations.
There are multiple criteria that could indicate success but do not guarantee it:
- Head coach at smaller schools and/or lower divisions (Tressel, Meyer, Schnellenberger)
- Head coach of larger schools but with undistinguished records (Saban pre-LSU, Chizik)
- Pedigreed D1A assistants (Strong?)
- NFL head coaches (Carroll)
- Well-regarded NFL assistants (O'Brien?)
Take the names as "examples it's possible", not a statement about which approach is better. My only point is that there is more than one way to skin this particular cat.
employees with 9 business units, each bigger than most large companies. Your Uncle's gas station would have 100,000x less people and complexity.
In college, the bump in complexity isn't in the same stratosphere. Maybe a few more analysts, but they make the job easier, not harder. More demands for sure, but not a huge jump in organizational complexity. The core of running a team isn't dramatically different.
it's the inability to keep the stockholders happy that causes most CEO's to meet their demise.
When the stockholders are focused on short term earnings as an indicator long term potential.
Not saying that's the case here mind you
I'm guessing he didn't get much of any. He might have been personally scrutinized by the stockholders, but he likely never had to deal with the stockholders himself. That was handled by Holtz and Meyer.
Meanwhile, Kelly directly handled all of the scrutiny that he managed. I grant that the scrutiny was not as great, but at least he had experience to fall back on and build upon.
I'll take the guy who has been scrutinized (to a significantly lesser degree than a head coach) as a position coach at Notre Dame and a coordinator at Florida -- and probably more important, has watched the head coach deal with the scrutiny at those places 24/7/365 -- than a guy who has never seen it.
Now when I say that, I'm not saying Strong over Kelly (although I might in a different conversation). I'm offering a very narrow answer to a very narrow question.
I tend to think they're a wash. There is certainly value having experience at a major program as an assistant. There is value having head coaching experience at lesser programs. I don't think one is more valuable than the other, necessarily. I think other things would be the deciding factor.
Like maybe Steve Jobs? Or a software company like Bill Gates?
You would think that after the success of Jim Tressel, Chip Kelly, Gus Malzahn and Brian Kelly that this qualification to coach at an elite program would be taken down a peg or two on the priority list.
At least most ADs that make hiring decisions don't share your perspective. To use your analogy, guys that have elite program experience tend to get hired to run gas stations and guys from the gas stations get promoted up into the executive suite of elite programs.
A large multi-national is infinitely more complex than a small company.
Colleges all are dealing with the same number of players and coaches. Big time coaches get more resources and more demands, but we're not talking about a giant leap in the complexity of the football organization nor one that requires a different type of leadership in kind.
Many high school programs have even more players and assistant coaches than are permitted at the college level. Does anybody remember Gerry Faust (and what the Moeller program looked like in the last 70's)?
You're (1) vastly underestimating the challenge of the increased demands, expectations and scrutiny, and (2) completely ignoring the increased competency of the opposing coaches as you move up the food chain.
Is "What, specifically, Is different between Cincinnat an ND and what does that mean in terms of what you need in a coach to win?"
There are certainly differences, but the bulk of it (practices, weight programs) is the same and Kelly was very good at that 70% (guesstimate). So that's a good base or core. Combine that with a demonstrated ability to outperform with less talent and you've got a possible candidate.
Then You list:
Increased coaching acumen
Are any of these killers for Kelly? Can you realistically exect him to manage them? How does that profile compare to other candidates?
Its a difference, but its not IBM/gas station enormous.
I think he got beat by every team he played that had more talent. The majority of teams he played had equal or less talent.
And I think he's right. If you want to change the subject, please say so.
But I would think that the everyday responsibilities of the CEO of IBM would be VASTLY different than the operator of a gas station.
And the high school analogy doesn't quite hold either, as most football coaches at any level of college (and at GVSU I think as well) are full-time, paid positions. So I think the day-to-day activities of a head football coach are only going to go up gradually as the program being managed is higher up the food chain.
I'm also not sure how much being on staff of a major program as an assistant prepares somebody to lead an elite program better than somebody who has actually been running a program, even at a lower level. I don't think much of the "increased demands, expectations and scrutiny" get passed down to the assistant (unless you want to count more Internet message board comments on their abilities as part of that). I'd much rather have a guy who's "been there, done that", than somebody who's "been there, watched that".
in the day-to-day responsibilities of the gas station guy and the IBM guy.
I continue to think that despite the similarities in X's and O's, you and SEE vastly underestimate the differences with respect to just about every other aspect of the respective coaching positions. I suppose the IBM/gas station analogy isn't perfect, but what analogy is. Given what I perceive to be the vast differences in other areas, I think it's apt, despite its imperfections.
Feel free to respond to my response to your earlier assertion that the Jobs and Gates of the world did or could have gone straight from the garage to running IBM.
Or, if you'd rather, tell me why you think so many head coaches flame out at the next (higher) level if the commonalities of the jobs at various levels are so dominant.
Lastly, I'd prefer the guy who's been there, done that to the guy who's been there, seen that. If we're talking about the same "there" and "that."
But we're not.
Assign each % as to relative impact. Then check which ones are non negotiable. Then, Next to each show demonstrated capability, concerns and likely potential.
I suspect you will find that much of a college coach's job is program design and management, Which is why Saban preaches process
Fans only see the tip of the spear, not the making of the, uh hum, shaft.
Neither had the experience of working for a major corporation before creating and building their companies into dominant forces. They were self-taught, much like Kelly was in going from GVSU to CMU to UC to ND.
You're correct that they wouldn't have been suited going straight from the garage to the executive suite of IBM. I didn't really mean that in my post, although upon re-reading it that's what I said.
The point being, there are multiple paths, not a single path, that can work.
As far as flame outs vs successful coaches go, I think there are other factors at work than you and I are even talking about here that have major impacts.
Look at the NFL. There seems neither rhyme nor reason why guys like Harbaugh, Carroll, Kelly have been successful in the NFL, whereas Spurrier, Saban, Holtz were not, at least based on their resumes. Likewise, I'm not sure Bob Stoops, Jimbo Fisher or Mark Richt all had superior resumes to Bob Davie, but three of them were hugely successful and another was a huge failure (of course, we had to get 'that' guy).
The learnings he brought from his failure to sustain initial success at Apple, followed by his time in the wilderness at NeXT, seasoned him to be a better big-company leader the second time around.
Maybe we can fire BK and bring him back in 2019.
I also agree that the process is fraught with uncertainty.
I've said repeatedly in the past there there would be some real level of uncertainty even with Saban, although much smaller than everybody else, in my opinion.
One of the jays posters (I can never keep them straight) had what I thought was a pretty good list earlier today or last night. But at the end, he basically said (if I recall correctly) that Strong's current resume was essentially equivalent to Kelly's coming out of Cincinnati.
While Kelly produced an undefeated regular season at Cincinnati (something I don't take lightly, even at UC), Strong has a BCS bowl victory, which somewhat balances that.
But where we continue to disagree is that I think Kelly prior to ND had no equivalent to Strong's exposure at ND, Florida and even USC. Strong worked alongside and got to learn from Holtz and Meyer every day, including but not limited to watching how they handled the intense scrutiny.
I'm of the opinion that Kelly's complete lack of exposure to that has hindered him in a number of ways over the past four seasons. He may figure it out, but he may not. In either event, it would have been preferable in my mind if he had participated in the prep/lead up to a national championship game before 2012 (as I believe he did at Florida).
First of all, are those small garage-based computer companies competing against and beating (and let's talk about how we'll define that) IBM and other industry giants?
Second, however we choose to define a successful garage-based computer company, how many of the guys running those companies end up turning them into an Apple or Microsoft, or get hired to run IBM? The analogy, as presented, doesn't allow you to project Steve Jobs from CEO of Apple, the international giant, to head of IBM; it requires you to project Steve Jobs from head of company still based in his garage to head of IBM.
Jobs obviously could have made the former transition, not the latter. While what Jobs did in his garage and later is all part of the package, saying that he could/would have gone directly from the garage to head of IBM would be like saying Lou Holtz could have gone from grad assistant at Iowa directly to head coach at Notre Dame.
Third, among the coaches you cite, Brian Kelly is unique in that he had absolutely no experience -- as a player, head coach or assistant coach -- at a school in a legitimate football conference (the Big East, and Cincinnati in particular, do not qualify) before taking his position as a head coach of an "IBM program."
Chip Kelly comes the closest in that his only qualifying experience is as the OC at Oregon. Tressel was an assistant at Ohio State, and Malzahn was an assistant at both Arkansas and Auburn.
So, to answer your question -- neither you, nor Jobs, nor Gates goes directly from the garage to IBM. The path Jobs or Gates would have taken from the garage to IBM would have involved numerous intermediary points, which is exactly the point of EK and many others.
guys who look good in their underwear for millions. All resumé, little productivity in four years.
Brian Kelly to the Russell/Champs Sports Bowl: "It's a disappointment". Charlie Strong apologists:"It's a qualification!"
People aren't parading his Russell bowl, they're trumpeting his previous bowl result. To wit, while I don't think he's "proven it" as Texas claimed they'd hire someone who had, I do think he's a very solid hire:
* He's got a BCS win, and not one of those "pansy" BCS wins against a team that didn't belong -- a win over Florida. That alone makes him more accomplished than the entirety of the ND program in the entirety of the BCS era.
* After his predecessor went 6-6, 5-7, 4-8 he went 7-6, 7-6 (but with a share of a conference championship), 11-2 (with a BCS win), and 12-1 (only loss to a team that also went 12-1, won a BCS game, and whose only loss was a controversial road loss to an SEC team that went 11-2).
* He's going to have developed a #1 overall draft choice at the most important position on the field
* Before getting a head job, he was an assistant under Jackie Sherrill, Steve Spurrier, Lou Holtz (at ND, and as a coordinator at USCe), and Urban Meyer (as a coordinator) at a diverse mix of elite and just-sub-elite programs.
Is he among the best 5 coaches in the country? Probably not. But with those credentials, and as the top available coach on the market, it doesn't seem a stretch that he'd get a top-tier job. And as far as the money goes, he's already making almost 4 at Louisville.
They're both below my ideal hire and both have risks, but if I had to choose between the two, I'd take Coach B.
Strong (after the loss to UCF)
You don't need 23 years to highlight execution.
Kelly had schools like Notre Dame, Florida, and South Carolina on his resume when we hired him
UK was in control of the UK-UL rivalry till he came to UL. Glad to see him go.
There will be SEC schools in the near future that will come after him.
* Won a BCS bowl last year
* Will be joining wide open ACC next year
* Employs one of the best ADs in the country
* Has relatively new, and quite competitive facilities
* Has sent two of its last three coaches into elite jobs (NFL, Texas)
* Will have the #1 overall draft pick this year to enhance its tradition
* Has no apparent academic standards
* Has a bit less pressure than many jobs due to being #2 sport on campus
* Has surprisingly deep pocketed boosters considering the previous bullet
... I'm not claiming it's a top job overall, but it's a pretty damn good first head coaching gig.
The return of Bobby P!
but I maintain that he would be lethal given another chance. One of the best offensive minds around, and his first run at UL produced a lot of NFL talent.
There is no chance. I think the story goes that Petrino was at Jurich's home for dinner and affirmed he wasn't going anywhere, even though he had already agreed to take the Falcons job.
he knows that his primary professional obligation is the stewardship of Louisville athletics.
Again, I'm not saying that Petrino will be hired or even a top five choice (Kirby Smart would be my go-to guy), but Jurich is probably the best AD in the country, and he knows not to let personal slights get in the way of professional obligations.
since 2001, and Strong has no recent ties to the area. In terms of relationships with high school coaches and familiarity with Texas high school football, Sumlin seems to be way ahead of Strong at this point. If Strong gets off to a fast start, this probably won't matter, but if he struggles early, it could accelerate the death spiral.
Forget the Florida and southeastern ties for a moment...he just relates well to his players and gets a ton of buy-in. That, in essence, is recruiting. He will do very well there in getting players to come play for their program.
very quickly. The Stronghorns should be fine. His inroads in Miami seem to me like a bonus on top of what he's bound to get from Texas because he's the coach of Texas.