Potential Head Coach Hires

[dressedcheeseside]

They were AA class. Donnie set all kinds of national records passing at Burlington Cummings HS. He got caught up in the BL debacle.

And we’re reminded of it every time Luginbill shows his ugly mug on ESPN.

 

[vamosjackets]

There really isn’t a slam dunk option right now. A lot of intriguing candidates, but none of them really jump out at me as an obvious choice.

I wonder if there are any dark horse candidates that none of us realize are in the mix. Or maybe it’s just Ken.

There is one slam dunk option right now (pun?), and one obvious choice. If you put the candidates on paper and didn't know anything about offensive systems, just what they've actually accomplished, one candidate would be several notches above the others and we would all be extremely excited to get such an accomplished coach who is also still young and early in his career.

There are a couple of significant signs pointing to this possibly being who we're really after. But, you know, sometimes things make too much sense to be true.

 

[vamosjackets]

The last few times we tried to go with academic exceptions we got bitten in the *** big time. I think that’s why CPJ went full bore towards the opposite end of the spectrum. I think that’s the way to go with maybe a few exceptions mixed in. either way we’re still going to need twice or three times the recruiting budget.

Getting our *** landed on academic probation has really scared the administration. It doesn’t matter whose fault it was. I highly doubt they’re going to loosen entrance requirements for SA’s anytime soon.

CPJ earned the trust of the admin on exceptions. The second half of his tenure he had free reign, he could recruit anybody he wanted as far as the admin was concerned. Now, that didn't really change anything because CPJ also knew that he couldn't recruit anybody he wanted because they had to be able to do the work (he said this many times regarding recruiting). But, it speaks at least somewhat to the wisdom of the admin to trust a coach who had proven himself wise to the academic piece.

 

[g0lftime]

What's the chances Roof would've got the job had he made it another year here? Anybody pondered this?

Roof was a HC at Duke. He was a big flop. He may be a decent DC but not so much as a HC.

 

[g0lftime]

Nah, I want to catch him one time without that bye week he politics for every year, and send him off with a proper butt-kicking.

They also try to schedule a TO team like army or navy to help prepare for us.

 

[wesgt123]

Roof was a HC at Duke. He was a big flop. He may be a decent DC but not so much as a HC.

A decent DC? That’s a stretch

 

[Madison Grant]

We both go after smart kids. The big difference is they have more an easier majors. Believe it or not, all smart kids or not interested in stem. Another big difference is the prestige factor is heavily weighted in their favor. Another huge factor is their recruiting budget dwarfs ours. Add that all up and we have a much tougher row to hoe.

I'm trying to pinpoint the purpose behind your reply. Are you just trying to win a rhetorical debate or are you making excuses for why we can't, can't, can't? Or both?

During a transition is not a time to troll out all the well-worn and known reasons for 'can't'. It's time to look at what our potential is. I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, but it seems like you're saying we can't ever, ever do better than 50th or so recruiting, so we have to stick with a gimmick, try to make chicken salad with chicken ish, and that is forever. Don't dare believe that can ever change. I don't agree with you.

I think you may be fundamentally misunderstanding what Stanford's doing, and our ability to copy it. Stop looking for the reasons we can't and ask if we can. Stanford is not a factory. They're not even Notre Dame. So properly define them in terms of football first instead of getting bogged down in the minutiae of academics. We're fundamentally talking football here, with academic considerations here, not vice versa.

What Stanford is doing with recruiting is not Bama, or USC, from their perspective. Go look at their classes. They are signing 1-2 5 stars, a half dozen 4 stars, and the rest of their class looks like ours most years. The difference on the football field is they have that '1-8' that we don't . And, in my opinion, that's the difference between what they are and them maxing their potential versus what we are and accepting less. It has less to do with academic prestige and variety of majors than you think. It's more about football prestige than you think. If Georgia Tech is winning 10-11 games and putting guys in the draft, you can find your Bryce Love or Christian McCaffrey and sell him on our degrees. Paul Johnson and Chan Gailey weren't interested in doing that. They were convinced they could X and O people with less. I think Geoff Collins or Tony Elliot would go in that living room and win some of those battles.

Now beyond that, you have to coach them up or you are going down the B L path potentially. I think a guy like KW, with his NFL reputation in terms of personality, has a much bigger chance of blowing up the ship B L style. But that is just an opinion.

So let's look at what we have on Stanford and what we can sell. We are in the CFB hotbed of the Southeast. People are leaving California by the millions and coming to ATL by the millions. The Bay area has become particularly toxic, regardless of your politics. So we aren't without our momentum if we'll use it.

 

[vamosjackets]

Great article by Ken: https://www.ajc.com/sports/college/...stay-recruiting-trail/5FCQcO4ji1HfmWgri2XXTP/

I'm glad somebody put a spotlight on this. It's unusual in a good way and displays a culture of character at GT under CPJ.

 

[AlabamaBuzz]

Great article by Ken: https://www.ajc.com/sports/college/...stay-recruiting-trail/5FCQcO4ji1HfmWgri2XXTP/

I'm glad somebody put a spotlight on this. It's unusual in a good way and displays a culture of character at GT under CPJ.

Whether there are any "hidden messages" in this or not, what I do see is that CPJ would say, "I have a job. You guys have a job. Let's do our job until we don't have a job." That is the kind of man he is, and that is his expectation of his assistants, and I believe he hired assistants that would have acted this way no matter what, because that is who they are as well.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

I keep hearing the BOR controls curriculum?

The BOR definitely has and has used the power to keep calculus in the curriculum.

 

[stech81]

Great article by Ken: https://www.ajc.com/sports/college/...stay-recruiting-trail/5FCQcO4ji1HfmWgri2XXTP/

I'm glad somebody put a spotlight on this. It's unusual in a good way and displays a culture of character at GT under CPJ.

I don't think he would have a problem finding a job but I hope we keep him

 

[MikeJackets1967]

I don't think he would have a problem finding a job but I hope we keep him

Appalachian State should hire Paul as head coach

 

[vamosjackets]

I don't think he would have a problem finding a job but I hope we keep him

Agree. But, it's not just Andy Mac continuing to recruit for GT, it's all the assistants. There are lots of tweets out there by recruits about the great in-home visits they're having and pics with different members of the GT staff.

 

[stech81]

Agree. But, it's not just Andy Mac continuing to recruit for GT, it's all the assistants. There are lots of tweets out there by recruits about the great in-home visits they're having and pics with different members of the GT staff.

You know he could make a pretty good head with the right CO. IMO he does know Tech

 

[Techster]

I'm trying to pinpoint the purpose behind your reply. Are you just trying to win a rhetorical debate or are you making excuses for why we can't, can't, can't? Or both?

During a transition is not a time to troll out all the well-worn and known reasons for 'can't'. It's time to look at what our potential is. I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, but it seems like you're saying we can't ever, ever do better than 50th or so recruiting, so we have to stick with a gimmick, try to make chicken salad with chicken ish, and that is forever. Don't dare believe that can ever change. I don't agree with you.

I think you may be fundamentally misunderstanding what Stanford's doing, and our ability to copy it. Stop looking for the reasons we can't and ask if we can. Stanford is not a factory. They're not even Notre Dame. So properly define them in terms of football first instead of getting bogged down in the minutiae of academics. We're fundamentally talking football here, with academic considerations here, not vice versa.

What Stanford is doing with recruiting is not Bama, or USC, from their perspective. Go look at their classes. They are signing 1-2 5 stars, a half dozen 4 stars, and the rest of their class looks like ours most years. The difference on the football field is they have that '1-8' that we don't . And, in my opinion, that's the difference between what they are and them maxing their potential versus what we are and accepting less. It has less to do with academic prestige and variety of majors than you think. It's more about football prestige than you think. If Georgia Tech is winning 10-11 games and putting guys in the draft, you can find your Bryce Love or Christian McCaffrey and sell him on our degrees. Paul Johnson and Chan Gailey weren't interested in doing that. They were convinced they could X and O people with less. I think Geoff Collins or Tony Elliot would go in that living room and win some of those battles.

Now beyond that, you have to coach them up or you are going down the B L path potentially. I think a guy like KW, with his NFL reputation in terms of personality, has a much bigger chance of blowing up the ship B L style. But that is just an opinion.

So let's look at what we have on Stanford and what we can sell. We are in the CFB hotbed of the Southeast. People are leaving California by the millions and coming to ATL by the millions. The Bay area has become particularly toxic, regardless of your politics. So we aren't without our momentum if we'll use it.

I think Stanford and GT BOTH have challenges 95% of other schools in P5 don't have to deal with. The difference between GT and Stanford, and I've said this MANY times, is Stanford's challenges are on the front end (getting kids accepted into school) while GT's challenges are more on the back end (keeping them APR eligible). I did some research a while and found that the lowest GPA Stanford accepted from a recruit was 3.3 GPA (after scouring available GPA data recruits provided). That recruit was Christian McCaffery btw. While I found GT accepted a recruit with a 2.9 GPA. Stanford's HC David Shaw (and this may be an extension of the school telling coaches that's what they want) requires his kids to have 2 AP classes on their transcript when they apply. I've never found GT to have that standard.

So it's a bit of the chicken or the egg conundrum here. Is it better to have it harder on the front end but easier to keep kids in school. I think this makes Stanford's pool a lot smaller than GT's.

Is it harder to try and keep kids APR eligible at a school with limited and harder majors, but have lower requirements for recruits? Our pool is larger than Stanford's because of this. Remember, we got Louis Young and St Amour because both were waiting on Stanford to accept them, but neither got accepted and chose us afterwards.

I think both schools have very real limitations that set us apart from the rest of P5. It's just a matter of opinion as to which you think has the harder route.

 

[MikeJackets1967]

You know he could make a pretty good head with the right CO. IMO

Andy Mac would be a good hire for Austin Peay since their head football coach Will Healy went to Charlotte

 

[AlabamaBuzz]

Appalachian State should hire Paul as head coach

If that happened, please don't schedule App State.

 

[vamosjackets]

You know he could make a pretty good head with the right CO. IMO he does know Tech

With the right coordinators, I don't disagree. That's the Dabo-model. A HC who is mostly a recruiter and organizer who is willing to take a relatively low salary so that he can pay upper-echelon coordinators. I like that model actually and think it is one that could make a lot of sense at GT.

 

[stech81]

There is one slam dunk option right now (pun?), and one obvious choice. If you put the candidates on paper and didn't know anything about offensive systems, just what they've actually accomplished, one candidate would be several notches above the others and we would all be extremely excited to get such an accomplished coach who is also still young and early in his career.

There are a couple of significant signs pointing to this possibly being who we're really after. But, you know, sometimes things make too much sense to be true.

?? and it is ?_________ fill in the blank

 

[Animal02]

I think Stanford and GT BOTH have challenges 95% of other schools in P5 don't have to deal with. The difference between GT and Stanford, and I've said this MANY times, is Stanford's challenges are on the front end (getting kids accepted into school) while GT's challenges are more on the back end (keeping them APR eligible). I did some research a while and found that the lowest GPA Stanford accepted from a recruit was 3.3 GPA (after scouring available GPA data recruits provided). That recruit was Christian McCaffery btw. While I found GT accepted a recruit with a 2.9 GPA. Stanford's HC David Shaw (and this may be an extension of the school telling coaches that's what they want) requires his kids to have 2 AP classes on their transcript when they apply. I've never found GT to have that standard.

So it's a bit of the chicken or the egg conundrum here. Is it better to have it harder on the front end but easier to keep kids in school. I think this makes Stanford's pool a lot smaller than GT's.

Is it harder to try and keep kids APR eligible at a school with limited and harder majors, but have lower requirements for recruits? Our pool is larger than Stanford's because of this. Remember, we got Louis Young and St Amour because both were waiting on Stanford to accept them, but neither got accepted and chose us afterwards.

I think both schools have very real limitations that set us apart from the rest of P5. It's just a matter of opinion as to which you think is the harder route.

While Stanford may limit their pool of canidates by admission.....they also widen it with their degree offerings.