HC Candidate/Rumors/Info Thread

bobongo

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,543
It wasn’t long ago that people were complaining about what we were trying to do offensively and screaming that there were better ways to play to our strength. Why wasn’t the portal used more productively? Why are we so badly mismanaging our personnel?
The response was that there was nothing we could do offensively to mask our OL issues and the portal is worthless in that regard because lines need to “gel” and we need four years, no five, no wait, maybe 6 years to get it right. We just had to take our lumps and we all knew it would take time.
Now we can scheme around this weakness and plug and play from the portal?
That’s great! I’m psyched!
If Deion could portal us at least 5 good, solid OL the first year, I could see it. This thing about needing 4-6 years is pure hogwash. But even he isn't going to be able to work that miracle.
And if scheming around the problem were that easy, the OL wouldn't much matter at all. Better scheming would help some, but it isn't going to fix it.
 

DuckGT

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
889
Put me in the Curt Cignetti camp. Solid P5 experience before becoming a HC. Turned IUP and Elon into winners while he was there, currently keeping the JMU machine moving, and is about to reach a bowl in their first FBS season. Winning is all that he does and that’s what we need.
 

lv20gt

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,580
i’m not sure that he’s as coveted as he is on here for other fanbases. i think nebraska and auburn have much higher expectations than a hypes up g5 coach having both been burned by them with their last hire. i could see auburn looking for a more sec hire

IMO O'Brien, Sanders, and Chadwell are all on a similar level in terms of desirability but different reasons. No, they aren't at the level of USC landing Riley, or LSU landing Kelly but few are. The coach level is only part of the equation, while the other is what direction the program wants to go in. Leipold at Kansas would be a great get for Nebraska but I'm not sure that he'd be a better get than us getting Chadwell or O'Brien.

Here are last year's P5 hires for Comparison (not including the two mentioned above)

Miami - Cristobal. Former Oregon HC, and at FIU before that with a stop at Saban's rehab inbetween

ND - Marcus Feldman - Promoted from within when Kelly left for LSU. No prior HC experience.

Oregon - Dan Lanning. UGA's DC last year and no HC experience.

Florida - Billy Napier. Very similar profile as Chadwell.

Oklahoma - Venables. Clemson Assistant with no HC experience

UVA - Tony Elliot - Clemson Assistant with no HC experience.

VT - Brent Pry - PSU assistant with no HC experience.

Duke- Mike Elko. Texas A&M DC with no HC experience.

TCU - Sonny Dukes - Extensive HC experience at Lousianna Tech, Cal, and most recently SMU.

TT - Joey McGuier - Baylor assistant with no HC experience.

Washington - Kalen Deboor. Some HC experience with two years at Fresno State and great success at NAIA Sioux Falls in the late 00s.

Washington State - Jake Dickert - no experience HC, promoted from within after being the interim the previous year when the former HC was fired for reasons related to vaccine requirements.

To me, all those *insert name* with no HC experience are very similar to O'Brien's situation except he has ties here, and a former somewhat successful stint as HC at PSU (during their hit hard by sanctions period). Sure, Venables is different because of the sheer volume of his DC experience at Oklahoma and Clemson, but for the rest, I would take O'Brien's resume over what they were.

Of the others, Napier, Deboor, Dukes, I all see as similar to Chadwell. in terms of having prior success.

The outliers are Cristobal, who Miami opened up the wallet for and we won't be getting something similar unless a donor decides to give Urban Meyer a blank check to come here, and the two promotions from within, which should we aren't going to have a similar candidate for because both were seen as continuing what their predecessor did which needless to say we aren't wanting.

IMO both O'Brien and Chadwell would be seen as phenomenal hires by those outside the program, and Deion is just a unique case that would have some people hyped and some people just expecting him to fall flat on his face.
 

lv20gt

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,580
The response was that there was nothing we could do offensively to mask our OL issues and the portal is worthless in that regard because lines need to “gel” and we need four years, no five, no wait, maybe 6 years to get it right. We just had to take our lumps and we all knew it would take time.


This is so disingenuous.

The people who were making the argument about it needing 4+ years were doing so talking about going from an OL coached exclusively to run the option which meant both the physical profile of the OL was different than what was needed in many cases, but also the coaching they received lacked things critical to the new offense. I know Johnson fans will get themselves in a tizzy over that statement because it sounds like an insult to him, but it's isn't and it's also true. So yes, it was going to take a complete overhaul of the line which wasn't going to be a one or two year thing because OL is the position where it is hardest for young players to make an instant impact and the need for 5 players makes it so one great recruit or transfer is going to have a smaller effect. And when this was happening the transfer portal wasn't nearly the tool it was now, which really only came about after the 2020 season.

So what is different now? Our OLmen have been recruited for a system much closer to whatever we are likely to be running next year so body type issue won't be as big a deal. Second the coaching they are getting, which is likely worse quality than what the previous OL was getting from Johnson, is likely more relevant for the next coach's system so it's less about building from the ground up and instead fixing bad behaviors is more achievable. All of this means it's more likely that getting one or two solid OL transfers from the portal can make a bigger difference, which is easier than it was 4 years ago before the rule changes.

It will still likely be 4-6 years before the OL could be seen as a strength. But a new coach, with good OL coaching and good portal work, could probably make it so the OL is a weakness we can at least work around within two years.
 

slugboy

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
11,471
I think some of our favorite topics around here are how much our coach should be fired (when we have a head coach), and who our next head coach should be (more popular when we’ve fired our head coach, but still popular any time our coach doesn’t have us in top-tier bowl games).

Again, none of us had Batt on the “who is the next AD?” bingo card. Likewise, we should consider the frontrunner for the next head coach as “someone who isn’t on our list at all”.

We haven’t considered many FCS coaches, but some of this year’s hottest coaches were FCS coaches recently.

Hiring an FCS coach isn’t a “they won’t cost a lot, let’s bargain shop” decision. Some of those coaches are really good coaches. On one hand, the competition is fiercer in P5; on the other hand, they’ve got more resources to use (even here).

Also, on bargain shopping—I think we’ve learned our lesson that sometimes you can save too much money. It costs us more to fire a bad coach than it does to hire a good one.

When we look at programs that are punching above their weight class, a lot of it is being consistent and being at least a little innovative.

Building a good staff is something we should have our eyes on, too. Syracuse is night-and-day better after adding the OC that UVA cut loose last year.

Another trend of this thread is that I see us rejecting a lot of candidates in posts here. I haven’t watched a single game that Deion Sanders has coached. If you haven’t seen what he’s done, how can you reject him?

I saw Chadwell called a “hyped coach”. He got Coastal Carolina into the top 10 and ended the year in the top 25 just two years ago. He was in the top 25 last year. There are other G5 coaches that are good coaches.

Key still has a shot, too. Last Thursday didn’t help, but he’s still got time to show what he can do. Mid-year repair jobs aren’t easy.

Instead of trashing a candidate (if they even are a candidate), why not go on YouTube and post a video here of one of their games and show what they’ve done, and break down some game film so we can figure out what they can do?
 

whitegoldsphinx

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
816
Instead of trashing a candidate (if they even are a candidate), why not go on YouTube and post a video here of one of their games and show what they’ve done, and break down some game film so we can figure out what they can do?
You mean, like do research to back a logical argument? Posting a quickie opinion based on what you're feeling at the moment is so much easier.
 

slugboy

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
11,471
Jeff Traylor-- UTSA leading C-USA--played a solid game against Texas
Here’s are the highlights against Texas (UTSA lost; Texas out-athleted them)



and against Western Kentucky (good team the last few years)


And a couple of articles on him. A couple of key points:
  • He tends to coach in Texas. Describes himself as “Texas through and through”
  • He is known for his relationships with Texas high schools, and “recruits Texas well”.
  • Plays a 3-4 defense.
  • Runs the ball a lot on offense.


A half-hour interview (sorry, ain’t got time to watch the entire thing)

UTSA gave him a 10 year contract and held onto him with a 7.5 million dollar buyout last year (down to $6 million this year).
 

takethepoints

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,084
This is so disingenuous.

The people who were making the argument about it needing 4+ years were doing so talking about going from an OL coached exclusively to run the option which meant both the physical profile of the OL was different than what was needed in many cases, but also the coaching they received lacked things critical to the new offense. I know Johnson fans will get themselves in a tizzy over that statement because it sounds like an insult to him, but it's isn't and it's also true. So yes, it was going to take a complete overhaul of the line which wasn't going to be a one or two year thing because OL is the position where it is hardest for young players to make an instant impact and the need for 5 players makes it so one great recruit or transfer is going to have a smaller effect. And when this was happening the transfer portal wasn't nearly the tool it was now, which really only came about after the 2020 season.

So what is different now? Our OLmen have been recruited for a system much closer to whatever we are likely to be running next year so body type issue won't be as big a deal. Second the coaching they are getting, which is likely worse quality than what the previous OL was getting from Johnson, is likely more relevant for the next coach's system so it's less about building from the ground up and instead fixing bad behaviors is more achievable. All of this means it's more likely that getting one or two solid OL transfers from the portal can make a bigger difference, which is easier than it was 4 years ago before the rule changes.

It will still likely be 4-6 years before the OL could be seen as a strength. But a new coach, with good OL coaching and good portal work, could probably make it so the OL is a weakness we can at least work around within two years.
1. I agree that the OL that Collins inherited was not recruited for his idea of what an OL should do. This does not mean that they were complete stiffs; most of the performance issues in 2019 were due to not being able to put the same 5 on the field for more then a game or two. But … they weren't optional for a pro spread (or whatever it was we were trying to run).

2. The answer to this was to "recruit length"; i.e. big OLs with long arms and height. And high ratings too! We can see how well that has worked by sitting in the stands and looking. Turning to the portal has been similarly fruitless. By now we should be seeing results in the form of an OL that a) has played together for at least 2 years and b) is at least average in performance. That we don't see either one is a result of head coaching that chased recruiting ratings instead of players who fit what we wanted to do (that we didn't know what that was was obvious by year 2). I don't blame Key; he was doing what the boss wanted. It is obvious that hasn't worked. Our highest rated recruits look slightly below average, to be frank.

3. How well our OL fits any coach we hire is due to the coach. When Paul took over he got an OL that was definitely not what he was looking for. And he proceeded to win 9 games when expert opinion said we'd be lucky to win 3. Why? Well, because the O wouldn't work in a P5 conference and the OL wasn't suited to his offense. I agree that if we hire coach that knows how to win and build a program (*cough* Chadwell *cough*) then the OL performance will improve because they will know what they are doing and why.
 

Root4GT

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,964
1. I agree that the OL that Collins inherited was not recruited for his idea of what an OL should do. This does not mean that they were complete stiffs; most of the performance issues in 2019 were due to not being able to put the same 5 on the field for more then a game or two. But … they weren't optional for a pro spread (or whatever it was we were trying to run).

2. The answer to this was to "recruit length"; i.e. big OLs with long arms and height. And high ratings too! We can see how well that has worked by sitting in the stands and looking. Turning to the portal has been similarly fruitless. By now we should be seeing results in the form of an OL that a) has played together for at least 2 years and b) is at least average in performance. That we don't see either one is a result of head coaching that chased recruiting ratings instead of players who fit what we wanted to do (that we didn't know what that was was obvious by year 2). I don't blame Key; he was doing what the boss wanted. It is obvious that hasn't worked. Our highest rated recruits look slightly below average, to be frank.

3. How well our OL fits any coach we hire is due to the coach. When Paul took over he got an OL that was definitely not what he was looking for. And he proceeded to win 9 games when expert opinion said we'd be lucky to win 3. Why? Well, because the O wouldn't work in a P5 conference and the OL wasn't suited to his offense. I agree that if we hire coach that knows how to win and build a program (*cough* Chadwell *cough*) then the OL performance will improve because they will know what they are doing and why.
There is no way Key didn't sign off on any O Line recruit. Thinking that was the case is silly. The guys recruited the first 2 years less Williams have not worked out at all. Clearly there is a talent issue on the O line. We also have a talent issue with our receivers. Getting separation is difficult. McCullum seems to be the one who can create separation.
 

Longestday

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
2,856
It’s hard to win. I am realistic given changes to APR, our school, and our finances. I doubt we are going to hire a coach and be on our way to constant 10 win seasons that beats UGA on a regular basis. Give me a coach that can identify talent (coaches and students), make in game successful changes, keep us in games, get us to a bowl on a consistent basis, give us great years every 3 to 4 year. Secondly, I would like an offense I find interesting.
 

CEB

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,534
This is so disingenuous.

The people who were making the argument about it needing 4+ years were doing so talking about going from an OL coached exclusively to run the option which meant both the physical profile of the OL was different than what was needed in many cases, but also the coaching they received lacked things critical to the new offense. I know Johnson fans will get themselves in a tizzy over that statement because it sounds like an insult to him, but it's isn't and it's also true. So yes, it was going to take a complete overhaul of the line which wasn't going to be a one or two year thing because OL is the position where it is hardest for young players to make an instant impact and the need for 5 players makes it so one great recruit or transfer is going to have a smaller effect. And when this was happening the transfer portal wasn't nearly the tool it was now, which really only came about after the 2020 season.

So what is different now? Our OLmen have been recruited for a system much closer to whatever we are likely to be running next year so body type issue won't be as big a deal. Second the coaching they are getting, which is likely worse quality than what the previous OL was getting from Johnson, is likely more relevant for the next coach's system so it's less about building from the ground up and instead fixing bad behaviors is more achievable. All of this means it's more likely that getting one or two solid OL transfers from the portal can make a bigger difference, which is easier than it was 4 years ago before the rule changes.

It will still likely be 4-6 years before the OL could be seen as a strength. But a new coach, with good OL coaching and good portal work, could probably make it so the OL is a weakness we can at least work around within two years.
And my problem really is not at all with anything you state here. My problem is with the people who were using what you say above as an excuse for everything we have (and continue) to see. We did nothing to help ourselves during the 4-5 year period we needed to incubate those five OL studs.
We were told we couldn’t scheme around it, couldn’t develop recruits any faster and couldn’t “gel” portal talent, so that was the reality we were resolved to live...
We may indeed have a lot better body types at this point, I just find it funny that we can work around it and use the portal now...
Thankfully we have the opportunity to go get a staff that can actually make incremental improvement while we’re building our ideal
 

UgaBlows

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,792
1. I agree that the OL that Collins inherited was not recruited for his idea of what an OL should do. This does not mean that they were complete stiffs; most of the performance issues in 2019 were due to not being able to put the same 5 on the field for more then a game or two. But … they weren't optional for a pro spread (or whatever it was we were trying to run).

2. The answer to this was to "recruit length"; i.e. big OLs with long arms and height. And high ratings too! We can see how well that has worked by sitting in the stands and looking. Turning to the portal has been similarly fruitless. By now we should be seeing results in the form of an OL that a) has played together for at least 2 years and b) is at least average in performance. That we don't see either one is a result of head coaching that chased recruiting ratings instead of players who fit what we wanted to do (that we didn't know what that was was obvious by year 2). I don't blame Key; he was doing what the boss wanted. It is obvious that hasn't worked. Our highest rated recruits look slightly below average, to be frank.

3. How well our OL fits any coach we hire is due to the coach. When Paul took over he got an OL that was definitely not what he was looking for. And he proceeded to win 9 games when expert opinion said we'd be lucky to win 3. Why? Well, because the O wouldn't work in a P5 conference and the OL wasn't suited to his offense. I agree that if we hire coach that knows how to win and build a program (*cough* Chadwell *cough*) then the OL performance will improve because they will know what they are doing and why.
I believe that Chadwell can take our current OL and win with them in his offense, i’m not so sure that anyone else out there is capable of that.
 

Techwood Relict

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,394
retreads:
Billy O (think he might get a better offer)
Mullen
Gus

Young guns:
Chadwell
Jeff Lebby
Jim Leonhard
Brad White

Good older coords:
Todd Monken
Robert Anae
Brad White would be an interesting low profile guy. His defenses have been solid. Playing time at WF, so experience in the ACC.
 

bobongo

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,543

“The reason why we like to run the offense that we do, you don’t have to have the best linemen in the country to win games,” Chadwell said. “You don’t have to have the best receivers in the country to win games. Every job that I have had has been a rebuild. We’ve had to develop and recruit talent that fits your system."

“Part of the reason that we like to do the offense, is it gives you a chance to win games. We were probably the eighth most talented team out of ten in our league — and won the league this year. Part of that is because you get kids to buy into your scheme and your system, and they fit that. We can do a variety of different things. Recruiting is not hard for it, you just have to find the right guys that want to fit into what you do.”
 

Augusta_Jacket

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
8,093
Location
Augusta, Georgia

“The reason why we like to run the offense that we do, you don’t have to have the best linemen in the country to win games,” Chadwell said. “You don’t have to have the best receivers in the country to win games. Every job that I have had has been a rebuild. We’ve had to develop and recruit talent that fits your system."

“Part of the reason that we like to do the offense, is it gives you a chance to win games. We were probably the eighth most talented team out of ten in our league — and won the league this year. Part of that is because you get kids to buy into your scheme and your system, and they fit that. We can do a variety of different things. Recruiting is not hard for it, you just have to find the right guys that want to fit into what you do.”

Chadwell is extremely high on my list of preferred coaches for GT. I really like his system and the fact that he has rebuilt a program, even if it isn't a P5 program. My biggest fear is that he hasn't been plucked yet so I wonder why other programs needing a new HC haven't bitten on him. Other than CPJ, our G5 hires haven't really panned out here so far.
 
Top