BCSUPERFAN22 wrote: HJS wrote: hansen wrote: Mod34b wrote: HJS wrote: eagle9903 wrote: Mod34b wrote: Cadillac90 wrote: Mod34b wrote:
HJS wrote:I'm happy about that if it holds. Colorado, however, is still a risk to take Roman. I believe they were also considering DeRuyter. I have a feeling that BC will be the last of current vacancies to make their hire. I just hope that we are able to hire someone before then next wave of coaching searches start up (San Jose will have to replace DeRuyter and so will any head coach that gets plucked by NCS, Colo, Tenn, Ark and Auburn).
If you don't mind me asking (and I am sure this has been discussed elsewhere) why are you so high on Roman? He has never been a HC (always a #2) and 15 of his 17 years coaching are in the NFL? His 2 years at Stanford were with an incredible team already recruited/groomed/coached by others. What suggests Roman can a) recruit and b) deal with/Coach 18-22 year old college kids as a HC and c) select/hire/manage/fire the right assistants. Does not seem -- on the surface -- like the right choice for BC
Is there something more than getting a sliver of Jim Harbaugh's reflected glory and/or the publicity bump the hire might bring?
Read the article that HJS linked a page or so back on this thread. It might change your mind.
Thanks. I assume you meant this one: http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20 ... ?p=1&tc=pg
Impressive career and evident passion for football. 5-8 255 lbs -- i am laughing trying to imagine that?? Also seems to pass the character test with flying colors.
Might be a good choice, but I am leary of #2s becoming #1s -- as we know sometimes the weight of responsibility can be crushing. I'd prefer someone already successful as a HC in FBS or even FCS.
mike leach, chris petersen, gary patterson, charlie strong, les miles, mike gundy, bob stoops are counterexamples.
It's somewhat silly, really. Every great coach was never a head coach before he got his first job. You also can point out as many head coaches who sucked at a higher level as you can assistants who failed as head coaches.
Here's the thing half names prominently mentioned would be meh at best. Some would be all time greats. Which is which... I don't know. But, I think you can find that out through the interview process. For BC, I think it is critical to get someone who (a) is a very hard worker and (b) can recruit. I don't think the coach's current title should be a determining factor.
BTW... I will point out that while Spaz was a career assistant who got his first head coaching job at BC, it is important to note that he was TWENTY EFFING YEARS OLDER than all the similarly situated candidates that we are looking at. I'd also point out that before Spazoo, we hired Coughlin, Henning, TOB and Jags. 3 of them were first time head coaches. The only one with head coaching experience (which included TWO stints as an NFL head coach) turned out to be the worst... by far.
Thanks for the reply. Roman might be good, but he is a much riskier choice then others because he does not have solid FBS experience. He could be "so BC" - a semi diamond in the rough who loves to overcome low expectations. A passionate hard worker.
Being a hard worker can be great, but is he working too hard? Other coaches call him "grinder." - a back-handed compliment for sure. Is he a grinder who as risen to his pre-Peter-Principle Level?
Who knows. In Bates We Must Trust for sorting through all the intangibles
Considering the state of the program left by Spaziani, I think roman is too risky. We need a guy with lots of college coaching and recruiting experience. Hiring an nfl guy could turn into hennings 2.0. If that happened, who knows how long it could take to recover.
Outside of guys we aren't getting (Golden, O'Brien)... they are ALL risky picks. If you are hesitant about hiring an NFL assistant, then you are hesitant about hiring a college assistant (as neither have the experience of being the head man)... besides, Nards was almost fired a few years ago by Sparty and Diaco has a hot-cold personality. If you are focusing on head coaches only, have your eyes wide open as to what you are getting. For instance, names like McIntyre and Hazell could be complete flashes in the pan who we'd be hiring based upon 1 freaking season. Doeren and Campbell are very possibly coasting on the talent of their predecessor. Also, if you hire a head coach, you better be ready to be hiring their whole freaking staff. Just as we bemoan that no one on Don's staff coached any higher than the Ivies, we could be saying something similar about Doeren's or Hazell's future staff. BTW... the reason why I have always pimped Troy Calhoun is because I thought he was about the best safe hire we could realistically get.
This. Outside of someone totally unrealistic, there is going to be a certain amount of risk with everyone (even with Diereen and Hazell). The assistant route is difficult because none of us have any idea how the particular coach is in re: to organization and managing a staff. Obviously coaches who serve under successful HC's presumably are molded by said HC and will hopefully be able to transfer those intangible skills to a new organization. At the NFL, all we can really see are the success of the units these coaches run (Carmichael and Roman have obv had success). We get a bit more exposure at the college level because we have access to recruiting information which is arguably the most important aspect of college coaching (Diaco who has had a great deal of success recruiting in traditionally strong areas for BC).
I was high on Carmichael originally and still think he would be solid, but the more this process goes on, I am leaning more in the Diaco/Roman side. Gun to my head, I'd go Roman because of his ties to Harbaugh. There has been a great deal of success already with the Harbaugh tree (see Taggart and Shaw) and Roman has proven to be a versatile and successful offensive mind at both the college and NFL level (not to mention the type of offense he runs is very conducive to the kid that historically goes to BC, good OL and TE). Even with al that being said, there is a tremendous amount if risk in the fact that he hasn't recruited all that much.
Ask yourself this: Do BCS AQ schools usually go for battled-tested successful HCs or successful and promising OC/DC types (or any NFL OC with no FBS experince of note)?
ND? proven winner HC
UMiami ? - proven winner HC
In 2012, the following BCS AQ schools hired new head coaches.
UNC, AZ, ASu, tOSU, UCLA, TAMU, Wazzu, ILL, KS, MIss, PSU, Pitt, RU.
Who did they pick? Well the first ten listed picked a proven college HC to lead the charge. The last 3 took promising assistants.
BC should aim higher than a promising assistant, especially given what Spaz hath wrought.
Last edited by Mod34b on Fri Nov 30, 2012 1:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.