Coaching Changes

Staying with the theme of "Coaching Changes" here.

I was just debating one of my colleagues here at work about coaching changes in major college football. He is a Notre Dame fan, so he’s happy. We also have a Kansas State fan here, so he’s down right delusional. My Notre Dame friend says everyone on this forum is out of their MINDS to want to get rid of Mark Richt. His point? “He’s coaching the 5th ranked team in the nation. The man is going to have a record of 21-6 over the last two seasons, and that’s AFTER Georgia loses to Alabama and whoever they play in a bowl game. You guys need to give him a better contract extension, not FIRE the guy!!”

So I ignored him. He obviously isn’t interested in improving the fortunes of OUR team. (My KSU friend just sits there with a silly grin on his face – he’s living in paradise this season, at least until their bowl game.)

Looking at our choices for a new head coach for next year, here is a list of “potential-value-added” candidates. My criteria are:

1. Needs to have a decent track record. Good number of years head coaching, good record. (I don’t know enough about assistants to comment.)
2. We should be able to offer him an attractive amount of money, and hopefully SAVE some money in the process.
3. PREFERABLY be a “young” guy, though that’s not all that critical given the revolving door nature of MOST college football coaching jobs.
4. Can’t be a crackpot. This isn’t necessarily ALL that important, but hopefully he won’t need to be kept in a straight jacket – it just doesn’t look professional on the sidelines.

Here are my candidates, saving best for last:
1. Mark Hudspeth – Louisiana Lafayette – 9 years experience, .734 lifetime, .636 at current job. Only making $400,000/yr! Only 44 years old. Not a lunatic that I’m aware.
2. Bronco Mendenhall – Brigham Young – 8 years exp., .720 lifetime, .720 current job, only making $850,000/yr. Only 45 years old. Elevator presumably goes all the way to the top.
3. Bret Bielema – I’m not kidding – Wisconsin – 7 years exp., .753 lifetime, .753 current job, only making $1.6 million/yr, only 41 years old! Hasn’t been committed that I know of.
4. Troy Calhoun – Air Force – 6 years exp., .613 lifetime and current (at Air Force!!), only making $800,000/year, only 45 years old, seems to have both oars in the water.
5. And now for my number one choice to replace Mark Richt after this season – Chris Petersen – Boise State – 7 years exp., .910 lifetime and current!!!!!, only 47 years old, only making $1.5 million/year!!!!, has never even stepped foot in a rubber room.

I know there are other candidates among the assistant coaching ranks, but I’m going for proven track records in order to avoid the unknown. Comments?

CMR will be at UGA until he's ready to move on......bank it.

Thriller, believe CMR will be at UGA for awhile as Wlayton stated. Also, not a big fan on any of those coaches. Peterson, would probably be the best off that list, but every year it seems they lose to a Neveada or something like that. Things change when you have to game plan for more than 4 games a year. If we are going to get anyone, I say go for Kirby, or let CTG grow into that role.

GO DAWGS

AllDawgs5 wrote: Thriller, believe CMR will be at UGA for awhile as Wlayton stated. Also, not a big fan on any of those coaches. Peterson, would probably be the best off that list, but every year it seems they lose to a Neveada or something like that. Things change when you have to game plan for more than 4 games a year. If we are going to get anyone, I say go for Kirby, or let CTG grow into that role.

GO DAWGS

Agree. How do you feel about Patterson?....Defensive minded coach which would be perfect for the SEC. Just tough to come into the SEC from the outside....imo, coaching experience in the SEC is important, hence KS. Always thought Patterson was a smart coach though.

I like Patterson, but to me he is kind of like Peterson. Those guys made a living playing the role of underdog. They took bad programs and flipped them. I know this is going to sound a little crazy but things change when you change the role of always being the underdog in a big game to being the favorite.

I am a little different when it comes to outside coaches in the SEC. I agree that it is hard to make the transition, but to me, I think coaches that come into this league with a gimmick offense will have success early, but it will only last for a number of years. Max at 5 to me. What I have seen, in order to stay in this league, pro-style offense is a must and you have to hang your hat on the defensive side. I give examples as this, Urban at uf. Really had some great teams. Believe he was smart enough to figure out that his run was over in the SEC. Houston Nutt, was always trying to come up with some gimmick offense. Had some success but lack of defense focus got him ousted. Gene Chisek with Gus Malzahn, Hal Mumme, or whatever his name was. Can go back as long as I can remember. Teams that have had success on longer than a bottle rocket, have a great defense, and an offense that is for the most part pro-style. Even Spurrier realized he had to change.

To me, Kirby Smart has the best understanding of that.

GO DAWGS

AllDawgs5 wrote: I like Patterson, but to me he is kind of like Peterson. Those guys made a living playing the role of underdog. They took bad programs and flipped them. I know this is going to sound a little crazy but things change when you change the role of always being the underdog in a big game to being the favorite.

I am a little different when it comes to outside coaches in the SEC. I agree that it is hard to make the transition, but to me, I think coaches that come into this league with a gimmick offense will have success early, but it will only last for a number of years. Max at 5 to me. What I have seen, in order to stay in this league, pro-style offense is a must and you have to hang your hat on the defensive side. I give examples as this, Urban at uf. Really had some great teams. Believe he was smart enough to figure out that his run was over in the SEC. Houston Nutt, was always trying to come up with some gimmick offense. Had some success but lack of defense focus got him ousted. Gene Chisek with Gus Malzahn, Hal Mumme, or whatever his name was. Can go back as long as I can remember. Teams that have had success on longer than a bottle rocket, have a great defense, and an offense that is for the most part pro-style. Even Spurrier realized he had to change.

To me, Kirby Smart has the best understanding of that.

GO DAWGS[/quote

This post is an absolute.