Co-head coach

[BeauFoster]

I think we need to admit, we are at the point all people reach: The Peter Principal. No body likes it or to admit it, but it is what it is.

I think it’s sometimes possible to grow into a role, even if you start out “roughly”. I guess the question to ask…are we willing to let someone grow into being a successful head coach? And have we seen enough growth so far to believe it’s possible in this specific case?

For the first question, I’d say yes. It worked with Satt, so it’s possible. For the second, I can’t say with certainty. December will show me as much as the previous 2 years.

[MrCraig]

I think we need to admit, we are at the point all people reach: The Peter Principal. No body likes it or to admit it, but it is what it is.

I think it’s sometimes possible to grow into a role, even if you start out “roughly”. I guess the question to ask…are we willing to let someone grow into being a successful head coach? And have we seen enough growth so far to believe it’s possible in this specific case?

For the first question, I’d say yes. It worked with Satt, so it’s possible. For the second, I can’t say with certainty. December will show me as much as the previous 2 years.

I said it in another thread, I think you give Clark one more year with a new DC and new O-line coach. Next year most of the team will be guys Clark recruited. If the team continues trending downward, you cut bait.

[bcoach]

I think we need to admit, we are at the point all people reach: The Peter Principal. No body likes it or to admit it, but it is what it is.

I think it’s sometimes possible to grow into a role, even if you start out “roughly”. I guess the question to ask…are we willing to let someone grow into being a successful head coach? And have we seen enough growth so far to believe it’s possible in this specific case?

For the first question, I’d say yes. It worked with Satt, so it’s possible. For the second, I can’t say with certainty. December will show me as much as the previous 2 years.

I said it in another thread, I think you give Clark one more year with a new DC and new O-line coach. Next year most of the team will be guys Clark recruited. If the team continues trending downward, you cut bait.

My understanding is that it is not possible to replace the DC.

[MrCraig]

I think we need to admit, we are at the point all people reach: The Peter Principal. No body likes it or to admit it, but it is what it is.

I think it’s sometimes possible to grow into a role, even if you start out “roughly”. I guess the question to ask…are we willing to let someone grow into being a successful head coach? And have we seen enough growth so far to believe it’s possible in this specific case?

For the first question, I’d say yes. It worked with Satt, so it’s possible. For the second, I can’t say with certainty. December will show me as much as the previous 2 years.

I said it in another thread, I think you give Clark one more year with a new DC and new O-line coach. Next year most of the team will be guys Clark recruited. If the team continues trending downward, you cut bait.

My understanding is that it is not possible to replace the DC.

I don’t buy that. I don’t care who Jones is in a relationship with, the defense has gotten demonstrably worse every year he has been coordinator. I don’t care if Dale Jones is in a sister-wives situation with Sheri Everts and Yosef, one donor shouldn’t get to make coaching decisions.

[BambooRdApp]

If the reference above is that there are some influences such as boosters/donors, etc. ..I am not that close to program to know. If this is the case, then, IMO, the program does have issues. Although there are many differences between programs, however, Texas should be a perennial Top 10 program given the money invested in the program. However, outside influences believing they should have a prominent seat at the program has kept that program from being what they can be IMO. However, the athletics dept or someone associated with the university allows them to have that influence. If this is the case for us, that is sad. I would hope the AD and HC are not restricted due to these influences.
If this is the case, I hope HC is the most successful coach in App. St. history as he doesn't seem like much of an A$$ kisser. ..and that makes me happy if he can get under their (donors) skin a little bit...

[bcoach]

I think we need to admit, we are at the point all people reach: The Peter Principal. No body likes it or to admit it, but it is what it is.

I think it’s sometimes possible to grow into a role, even if you start out “roughly”. I guess the question to ask…are we willing to let someone grow into being a successful head coach? And have we seen enough growth so far to believe it’s possible in this specific case?

For the first question, I’d say yes. It worked with Satt, so it’s possible. For the second, I can’t say with certainty. December will show me as much as the previous 2 years.

I said it in another thread, I think you give Clark one more year with a new DC and new O-line coach. Next year most of the team will be guys Clark recruited. If the team continues trending downward, you cut bait.

My understanding is that it is not possible to replace the DC.

I don’t buy that. I don’t care who Jones is in a relationship with, the defense has gotten demonstrably worse every year he has been coordinator. I don’t care if Dale Jones is in a sister-wives situation with Sheri Everts and Yosef, one donor shouldn’t get to make coaching decisions.

Well my opinion is that no donor or group of donors should should be able to make coaching decisions. That is not what I keep hearing and reading on here though. It is also not what happened in the BB department a few yrs ago.

[NewApp]

bcoach said: "Well my opinion is that no donor or group of donors should should be able to make coaching decisions."

Totally agree. If donors decided, the decision would go to the highest bidder (donor) it would seem.

[WVAPPeer]

"Hell man, you don't have to have a million dollars to do nothing"

[AppAlum1]

If I were a GM...I would make a co-head coach for offense and defense.
I would judge them on their own merit based on offense and defense stats.
Fire one without causing the other problems that is doing his job.

Thats the dumbest suggestion ever. Ever heard of the battle of Canae? The Roman legions were generaled by two equal consuls. None survived Hannibal. You would find the same disaster awaits a football team with no one in charge.

[AppSt12]

I think we need to admit, we are at the point all people reach: The Peter Principal. No body likes it or to admit it, but it is what it is.

I think it’s sometimes possible to grow into a role, even if you start out “roughly”. I guess the question to ask…are we willing to let someone grow into being a successful head coach? And have we seen enough growth so far to believe it’s possible in this specific case?

For the first question, I’d say yes. It worked with Satt, so it’s possible. For the second, I can’t say with certainty. December will show me as much as the previous 2 years.

The difference is....Satt had to navigate the move to FBS. He redshirted tons of players in his 1st year (last FCS season). He had an all fcs roster. Then went 7-5, 11-2, 10-3, 9-4, 11-2 with 3 conference titles and a 4-0 bowl record.

Clark was handed a team with 22 seniors (18 in the 2 deep) and another veteran team in year 2. He has 0 conference titles, i think 5-13 vs teams we are 7 point +/- favorites and beat a 4 win team in a bowl and then slaughtered in another. And now 4-5 vs fbs teams this year. It gets worse each year....how much time can we give?

[Rekdiver]

I think we need to admit, we are at the point all people reach: The Peter Principal. No body likes it or to admit it, but it is what it is.

I think it’s sometimes possible to grow into a role, even if you start out “roughly”. I guess the question to ask…are we willing to let someone grow into being a successful head coach? And have we seen enough growth so far to believe it’s possible in this specific case?

For the first question, I’d say yes. It worked with Satt, so it’s possible. For the second, I can’t say with certainty. December will show me as much as the previous 2 years.

The difference is....Satt had to navigate the move to FBS. He redshirted tons of players in his 1st year (last FCS season). He had an all fcs roster. Then went 7-5, 11-2, 10-3, 9-4, 11-2 with 3 conference titles and a 4-0 bowl record.

Clark was handed a team with 22 seniors (18 in the 2 deep) and another veteran team in year 2. He has 0 conference titles, i think 5-13 vs teams we are 7 point +/- favorites and beat a 4 win team in a bowl and then slaughtered in another. And now 4-5 vs fbs teams this year. It gets worse each year....how much time can we give?

Pretty easy answer…..until we can afford to make a change.

[MrCraig]

If I were a GM...I would make a co-head coach for offense and defense.
I would judge them on their own merit based on offense and defense stats.
Fire one without causing the other problems that is doing his job.

Thats the dumbest suggestion ever. Ever heard of the battle of Canae? The Roman legions were generaled by two equal consuls. None survived Hannibal. You would find the same disaster awaits a football team with no one in charge.

I completely and wholeheartedly disagree with this. In fact, this is the most ridiculous answer on this absurdly asinine post. All of the players and coaches would survive a co-head coach situation. They would just lose a lot of games.

[AppSt94]

I think we need to admit, we are at the point all people reach: The Peter Principal. No body likes it or to admit it, but it is what it is.

I think it’s sometimes possible to grow into a role, even if you start out “roughly”. I guess the question to ask…are we willing to let someone grow into being a successful head coach? And have we seen enough growth so far to believe it’s possible in this specific case?

For the first question, I’d say yes. It worked with Satt, so it’s possible. For the second, I can’t say with certainty. December will show me as much as the previous 2 years.

I said it in another thread, I think you give Clark one more year with a new DC and new O-line coach. Next year most of the team will be guys Clark recruited. If the team continues trending downward, you cut bait.

My understanding is that it is not possible to replace the DC.

I don’t buy that. I don’t care who Jones is in a relationship with, the defense has gotten demonstrably worse every year he has been coordinator. I don’t care if Dale Jones is in a sister-wives situation with Sheri Everts and Yosef, one donor shouldn’t get to make coaching decisions.

Thae statistics would show otherwise.

[AppinATL]

bcoach said: "Well my opinion is that no donor or group of donors should should be able to make coaching decisions."

Totally agree. If donors decided, the decision would go to the highest bidder (donor) it would seem.

Its cracking me up that the rabble on here is so against donors making coaching decisions in a thread where they themselves sre making coaching decisions.

[AppDub]

I think it’s sometimes possible to grow into a role, even if you start out “roughly”. I guess the question to ask…are we willing to let someone grow into being a successful head coach? And have we seen enough growth so far to believe it’s possible in this specific case?

For the first question, I’d say yes. It worked with Satt, so it’s possible. For the second, I can’t say with certainty. December will show me as much as the previous 2 years.

I said it in another thread, I think you give Clark one more year with a new DC and new O-line coach. Next year most of the team will be guys Clark recruited. If the team continues trending downward, you cut bait.

My understanding is that it is not possible to replace the DC.

I don’t buy that. I don’t care who Jones is in a relationship with, the defense has gotten demonstrably worse every year he has been coordinator. I don’t care if Dale Jones is in a sister-wives situation with Sheri Everts and Yosef, one donor shouldn’t get to make coaching decisions.

Thae statistics would show otherwise.

Maybe he is judging by the stats from the first drives of each game only. Agree, statistically overall we look pretty decent on defense.

[AppSt94]

I said it in another thread, I think you give Clark one more year with a new DC and new O-line coach. Next year most of the team will be guys Clark recruited. If the team continues trending downward, you cut bait.

My understanding is that it is not possible to replace the DC.

I don’t buy that. I don’t care who Jones is in a relationship with, the defense has gotten demonstrably worse every year he has been coordinator. I don’t care if Dale Jones is in a sister-wives situation with Sheri Everts and Yosef, one donor shouldn’t get to make coaching decisions.

Thae statistics would show otherwise.

Maybe he is judging by the stats from the first drives of each game only. Agree, statistically overall we look pretty decent on defense.

Possibly. I don’t worry about the 15 plays on defense. Those first 15 plays by the offense are generally scripted and practiced that week. I wait to see how we adjust.

[appst89]

bcoach said: "Well my opinion is that no donor or group of donors should should be able to make coaching decisions."

Totally agree. If donors decided, the decision would go to the highest bidder (donor) it would seem.

Its cracking me up that the rabble on here is so against donors making coaching decisions in a thread where they themselves sre making coaching decisions.

There is a difference between a message board thread and a booster with a big checkbook and a bigger ego. Let me know when anyone here has a say in an actual coaching decision.

[311neers]

I think we need to admit, we are at the point all people reach: The Peter Principal. No body likes it or to admit it, but it is what it is.

I think it’s sometimes possible to grow into a role, even if you start out “roughly”. I guess the question to ask…are we willing to let someone grow into being a successful head coach? And have we seen enough growth so far to believe it’s possible in this specific case?

For the first question, I’d say yes. It worked with Satt, so it’s possible. For the second, I can’t say with certainty. December will show me as much as the previous 2 years.

The difference is....Satt had to navigate the move to FBS. He redshirted tons of players in his 1st year (last FCS season). He had an all fcs roster. Then went 7-5, 11-2, 10-3, 9-4, 11-2 with 3 conference titles and a 4-0 bowl record.

Clark was handed a team with 22 seniors (18 in the 2 deep) and another veteran team in year 2. He has 0 conference titles, i think 5-13 vs teams we are 7 point +/- favorites and beat a 4 win team in a bowl and then slaughtered in another. And now 4-5 vs fbs teams this year. It gets worse each year....how much time can we give?

One more year, December 2023. He needs 1 year with his coveted HS QB recruit and his recruits on the roster. No Drinkwitz to blame next year. We will know end of next year what's going on with the program. If he improves off this year, we keep him. If he doesn't improve that'll be 4 years of regression and we will all step up to pay the buyout. If we can't afford a $3M or $1M (can't recall which one it is) buyout then we are SOL.

[spacemonkey]

If I were a GM...I would make a co-head coach for offense and defense.
I would judge them on their own merit based on offense and defense stats.
Fire one without causing the other problems that is doing his job.

Thats the dumbest suggestion ever. Ever heard of the battle of Canae? The Roman legions were generaled by two equal consuls. None survived Hannibal. You would find the same disaster awaits a football team with no one in charge.

I completely and wholeheartedly disagree with this. In fact, this is the most ridiculous answer on this absurdly asinine post. All of the players and coaches would survive a co-head coach situation. They would just lose a lot of games.

You guys almost hurt my feelings..."dumbest ever"...."ever"!!!! Someone come to my defense and post a past post that releives me from "dumbest ever"

[AppSt94]

I think we need to admit, we are at the point all people reach: The Peter Principal. No body likes it or to admit it, but it is what it is.

I think it’s sometimes possible to grow into a role, even if you start out “roughly”. I guess the question to ask…are we willing to let someone grow into being a successful head coach? And have we seen enough growth so far to believe it’s possible in this specific case?

For the first question, I’d say yes. It worked with Satt, so it’s possible. For the second, I can’t say with certainty. December will show me as much as the previous 2 years.

The difference is....Satt had to navigate the move to FBS. He redshirted tons of players in his 1st year (last FCS season). He had an all fcs roster. Then went 7-5, 11-2, 10-3, 9-4, 11-2 with 3 conference titles and a 4-0 bowl record.

Clark was handed a team with 22 seniors (18 in the 2 deep) and another veteran team in year 2. He has 0 conference titles, i think 5-13 vs teams we are 7 point +/- favorites and beat a 4 win team in a bowl and then slaughtered in another. And now 4-5 vs fbs teams this year. It gets worse each year....how much time can we give?

One more year, December 2023. He needs 1 year with his coveted HS QB recruit and his recruits on the roster. No Drinkwitz to blame next year. We will know end of next year what's going on with the program. If he improves off this year, we keep him. If he doesn't improve that'll be 4 years of regression and we will all step up to pay the buyout. If we can't afford a $3M or $1M (can't recall which one it is) buyout then we are SOL.

Unless he loses this team completely, which he hasn’t, he likely gets at least 2024. The portal issue isn’t likely to be fixed by the next recruiting cycle. Everts is aware of how it hamstrings us and is working on getting it solved. She owns it and knows that it is something that is a huge obstacle.