Bad News/Good News

[77GTFan]

Here is my assessment in the good and bad of this now 11 day search:

The Bad:
1. The way the Will Muschamp thing played out. DRad should have found out if he had Clough's support if he wanted WM before this name was leaked. Clough should not have been deterred by the anti-Muschamp crowd. This is reminiscent of Braine not getting O'Brien to GT. No need to have made WM more of an enemy of GT in the future.
2. There is a real generational issue here - do we favor a GenX new breed of coach like Muscahmp or Hatcher or go BabyBoomer and more traditional with Johnson or Tenuta? I am concerned that with Tenuta or Johnson at the helm the relationship with high school coaches will be far below what it would have been with Muschamp or Hatcher.
3. If we hire Johnson or Tenuta, I can't say we improved our coaching from Gailey. We will have ended the frustration of losing to the Dawgs 6 straight times with Chan and folks will be more likely to reup for the seat fee on season tickets next year. I would argfue that PJ is not a sure fire upgrade because like Gailey, he has won at Navy, but nothing overwhelming. He may have won more games, but strength of schedule has a lot to do with that.
4. We have been described as "financially strapped" by the media repeatedly. Not good PR. How stupid to think you can afford $4 million to buyout a coach but can't afford to match SMU for your new coach. 5. DRad should have "leaked" to media through a "source close to the program" information that would have helped us to avoid some of what has gone on.

The good:
1. Paul Johnson and John Tenuta are good football coaches. Given a chance, they may do well here.
2. If PJ says "no" and Tenuta is not a choice DRad and Search Committee wants to make, the timing may be right to go after Hatcher, or go back to square one and perhaps come up with better alternatives.

 

[BarrelORum]

I don't think the WM thing went down the way we were told. It is true that he was DRAD's first choice, but then after talking it over with Clough and others, he realized it was not in his best interest to hire Muschamp. He was never brought in front of the board at all.

I think DRad changed his opinion and was in full agreement that Muschamp would not be a good fit.

This flies in the face of the drama that we have all seen and experienced over the last few days, but I'm fairly certain this is what has happened. Sometimes the simplest answer is the correct answer.

Dems can say this is wrong, but I know I am right on this one. Clough didn't cut anyones legs from underneath them and DRAD is not pissed off about it. He's in full agreement on it.

I'm not going to use the phrase, "I got it from a source". I got it straight from people who were involved and the big money. So put your fears to rest on this one.

I think DRad probably made some initial representations to Muschamp to the point where when things changed, it was easy for him to blame the big money donors when he broke the news to WM.

 

[AlaGold]

Here is my assessment in the good and bad of this now 11 day search:

The Bad:
1. The way the Will Muschamp thing played out. DRad should have found out if he had Clough's support if he wanted WM before this name was leaked. Clough should not have been deterred by the anti-Muschamp crowd. This is reminiscent of Braine not getting O'Brien to GT. No need to have made WM more of an enemy of GT in the future.
2. There is a real generational issue here - do we favor a GenX new breed of coach like Muscahmp or Hatcher or go BabyBoomer and more traditional with Johnson or Tenuta? I am concerned that with Tenuta or Johnson at the helm the relationship with high school coaches will be far below what it would have been with Muschamp or Hatcher.
3. If we hire Johnson or Tenuta, I can't say we improved our coaching from Gailey. We will have ended the frustration of losing to the Dawgs 6 straight times with Chan and folks will be more likely to reup for the seat fee on season tickets next year. I would argfue that PJ is not a sure fire upgrade because like Gailey, he has won at Navy, but nothing overwhelming. He may have won more games, but strength of schedule has a lot to do with that.
4. We have been described as "financially strapped" by the media repeatedly. Not good PR. How stupid to think you can afford $4 million to buyout a coach but can't afford to match SMU for your new coach. 5. DRad should have "leaked" to media through a "source close to the program" information that would have helped us to avoid some of what has gone on.

The good:
1. Paul Johnson and John Tenuta are good football coaches. Given a chance, they may do well here.
2. If PJ says "no" and Tenuta is not a choice DRad and Search Committee wants to make, the timing may be right to go after Hatcher, or go back to square one and perhaps come up with better alternatives.

my head is starting to throb,
it will be SO interesting if we could see our record for the next 6 yrs now, my guess is not better than a 7-5 avg ,sobering

 

[Bogey]

I don't think the WM thing went down the way we were told. It is true that he was DRAD's first choice, but then after talking it over with Clough and others, he realized it was not in his best interest to hire Muschamp. He was never brought in front of the board at all.

I think DRad changed his opinion and was in full agreement that Muschamp would not be a good fit.

This flies in the face of the drama that we have all seen and experienced over the last few days, but I'm fairly certain this is what has happened. Sometimes the simplest answer is the correct answer.

Dems can say this is wrong, but I know I am right on this one. Clough didn't cut anyones legs from underneath them and DRAD is not pissed off about it. He's in full agreement on it.

I'm not going to use the phrase, "I got it from a source". I got it straight from people who were involved and the big money. So put your fears to rest on this one.

I have been thinking this all along. We have no reason to believe that Clough and Drad are not on the same page. Drad probably did not fully appreciate the hate that we have for the leg humpers and once he learned how deep it was, he changed his opinion as any intelligent person would.

 

[mm42]

I don't think the WM thing went down the way we were told. It is true that he was DRAD's first choice, but then after talking it over with Clough and others, he realized it was not in his best interest to hire Muschamp. He was never brought in front of the board at all.

That would make perfect sense. How was Dan hired at GT? Search committee. He knows how the process works, and knows he owes his own job to it.

 

[33jacket]

I don't think the WM thing went down the way we were told. It is true that he was DRAD's first choice, but then after talking it over with Clough and others, he realized it was not in his best interest to hire Muschamp. He was never brought in front of the board at all.

I think DRad changed his opinion and was in full agreement that Muschamp would not be a good fit.

This flies in the face of the drama that we have all seen and experienced over the last few days, but I'm fairly certain this is what has happened. Sometimes the simplest answer is the correct answer.

Dems can say this is wrong, but I know I am right on this one. Clough didn't cut anyones legs from underneath them and DRAD is not pissed off about it. He's in full agreement on it.

I'm not going to use the phrase, "I got it from a source". I got it straight from people who were involved and the big money. So put your fears to rest on this one.

I think DRad probably made some initial representations to Muschamp to the point where when things changed, it was easy for him to blame the big money donors when he broke the news to WM.

BOR,
Dem never said it went to the board. He said exactly what you said (that it was pulled back before hitting the board), and what others like myself etc have been saying. That WM was shot down before it EVER went to the board by Clough influenced by a few donors.

Secondly, Clough did approve WM prior to him rejecting it. He did meet with Drad PRIOR to the board meeting (the night before) to tell Dan he didn't think it was a good idea.

If you call pulling WM the night before the board meeting pulling out the rug, ok, some may not. But the bottom line was Clough did prior say it was ok, then did rescind that based on donor input.

Whether that meeting with Dan was a bad disagreement between the two, or a cordial agreement and they both decided to move to the next choice I DONT' KNOW. But, the fact remains he approved WM, then pulled back on that the night before; and the fact is donors DID influence that decision.

From that point on...you can call it how you see fit.

 

[BarrelORum]

First, I never meant to infer that dems was the one who said it went to a board. I know he stated it did not. It was speculated that it might have. I stated it did not.

As far as the Clough shooting down WM, I'm pretty sure this is how it went.

Dan: Ok I'm ready to take WM to the board.

Clough: Ok, I think if we are going to do this we probably need to discuss what we can expect. Why don't you talk to some of the $$ guys ponying up the bucks for the Gailey buyout and lets get them onboard. It will make the sell that much easier.

Dan: Ok, I agree, will do.

The Dan starts to discuss this with the $ and afterwards talks to Clough again.

Dan: I don't think this is feasible.

Clough: I agree as I thought it may be a problem.

Dan: Ok, we both agree to bag this and lets focus on our other options.

Clough: Go for it.

That's my opinion of what happened and I'm fairly positive that's the exact Way it went down.

The only debunking of this that I'm offering is that Clough didn't pull out the rug from Dan in the waning minutes and I don't think Dan is pissed at Clough. I think this was a mutual decision.

 

[clapper]

Dan: Ok, we both agree to bag this and lets focus on our other options.

Clough: Go for it.

Dan: I'll get right on it. WHo should we bring in next?

Clough: We should probably keep our distance from Neuheisel.

Dan: Edsall is waffling.

Clough: You covered our ass by talking to Strong, right?

Dan: Yup. And we have Tenuta in our pocket. They already know him.

Clough: Warbucks said something about Paul Johnson.

Dan: He doesn't fit our profile.

Clough: No he doesn't. But Jon doesn't either. Let's low ball Johnson to make him back out. What about Hatcher?

Dan: He said he wanted Muschamp as our Defensive Coordinator.

Clough: Who does that leave us then?

Dan: Nobody else from our original list, but we could go with operation Curve Ball...

 

[beej67]

Dan: Have you had Juniors Grill recently?

Clough: Never go down there. One time I asked for a dressed cheese side, they didn't know what the hell I was talking about.

Dan: What's a dressed cheese side?

 

[Big Bubba Ray]

Dan: Have you had Juniors Grill recently?

Clough: Never go down there. One time I asked for a dressed cheese side, they didn't know what the hell I was talking about.

Dan: What's a dressed cheese side?

:laugher::laugher::laugher::laugher:

My sides are hurting!

BBR

 

[beej67]

Clough: Dude, Dan, you're wife's pretty hot.

Dan: (sigh) Not this again.

Clough: No seriously dude, we should do some swinging. Little wifeswapping evening, you know. All the young Gen Xers are doing it.

Dan: Who told you that?

Clough: Stingtalk.

Dan: Oh, right.

(pause)

Dan: Yeah, okay. But I get a raise.