If Chan Gailey is not back next year....

33jacket

33jacket

Dodd-Like
Joined
Aug 17, 2002
Messages
3,323
considering all we lose on offense and defense-
lose Guyton, lewis, wheeler, roberson, jones, oliver, robertson
lose rhodes, mcmanus, tums, cox, choice

what would be the expected and reasonable win total or record next year for the new Head Coach?

Mind you we play FSU, @BC, home Miss st as our "rotational/ooc" games along with @uga, @clemson

If Chan comes back....would you have the same expected win total and results?

If Chan comes back, I would personally require him to win more than the new guy 1) based on history 2) b/c we won't be installing new systems and trying to get guys on the same page.

thoughts?
 
Without Gailey next year we will almost certainly take a step back, due to the coaching change and an unusually large group of seniors graduating (or using up their eligibility).

But yes, I would expect Gailey to do better next year than a new guy, in fact I would expect some improvement.

So.....if the new guy slips to a losing season and no bowl, does BO start the firing campaign anew?
 
GEETEELEE said:
Without Gailey next year we will almost certainly take a step back, due to the coaching change and an unusually large group of seniors graduating (or using up their eligibility).

But yes, I would expect Gailey to do better next year than a new guy, in fact I would expect some improvement.

So.....if the new guy slips to a losing season and no bowl, does BO start the firing campaign anew?
Click to expand...


If Chan does come back....I would not be shocked to see us have a losing season; we lose alot.

I guess my question is more along the lines of if you are DRad; where do you put the bar for Chan next year if he comes back vs the new coach. THAT is really my question.

If Chan is back, I would put his bar at 8-9 games again. He has been here long enough and enough time to build the program that less than that really isn't acceptable...especially considering 7 home games next year.

New guy I put the bar at 7 games; but recognize his goal is to move us past where Chan couldn't.
 
Quarterback play is the huge wildcard. In college football, very good QB play can cover up a lot of warts and inexperience. That being said, we know what Taylor is going to bring us. The only hope is that Nesbitt really develops and carries this young team. He has the physical ability to carry a team. I'm not sure if he will be ready to put all the pieces together by next season. If we don't get a lot better at QB, the season is going to be ugly no matter who the coach is.
 
Axe said:
Quarterback play is the huge wildcard. In college football, very good QB play can cover up a lot of warts and inexperience. That being said, we know what Taylor is going to bring us. The only hope is that Nesbitt really develops and carries this young team. He has the physical ability to carry a team. I'm not sure if he will be ready to put all the pieces together by next season. If we don't get a lot better at QB, the season is going to be ugly no matter who the coach is.
Click to expand...

Yup...agree 100% there. So maybe the answer to your scenario is will chan get our QB "there" better than a new coach. Based on history...chan hasn't really turned a light on in any QB....if the new coach can...then the new coach will have the better year.

Alot is predicated on that position...but I would still hold chan to winning 8-9 games and the new guy to 7
 
I would still hold chan to winning 8-9 games and the new guy to 7
Click to expand...

Yeah, I didn't say it very clearly, but that's what I meant, except I think 7 may be a little optimistic for a new guy.
 
Chan's expectations shouldn't change if he's back. We need to compete for the ACCCG, notice I didn't say get there, but we need to be relevant in the conference. We need to win 8-9 every year for it to be a decent year, and we need to be competitive with ugag if we don't beat them.

If we make a change, I would expect the new guy to have the team competitive in every game and inject some excitement in the program. Not as sure about record as you don't know how much he might change. It could be a pleasant surprise or we could go through some growing pains. But if you look at O'Brien at NCSU, it seems he's taken some lumps while he gets the team to understand what he wants, but is beginning to see results. The same with Butch Davis. I don't know why we couldn't see the same.
 
Quarterback and someone to step up as the playmaker at receiver is a huge issue for Chan or successor.

But, I think the real weakness next year is the defense.

We lose Avery and both safeties. Morgan will be a player but he doesn't shut down primary receivers. Outside of Guyton and PW this year the linebackers have been wishy-washy at best. Their physical ability to compete has not been clearly evident. And, Robo (and Adam Oliver) is gone.

Tenuda's weakness has always been accurate passing from a QB that can stretch the field. (I didn't think Glennon had it in him but he did.) Next year I don't see us stopping much on the edges or through the air(like we have this year-sic).
 
GEETEELEE said:
Yeah, I didn't say it very clearly, but that's what I meant, except I think 7 may be a little optimistic for a new guy.
Click to expand...

7 is the bare minimum expectation period, and really in todays 12 game season its more like 8, but lower might be acceptable for a new coach given various mitigating factors.

Just because something isn't acceptable doesn't mean you fire the guy immediately, coaches get at minimum 4 year baring complete meltdown and teams giving up on the.
 
If Chan is not back, my expectations for the new coach - nothing. I think overall, a new coach should be given a pass on their first year. Now I don't expect him to come in and lose more than 7. Even an ill-prepared team can beat Duke, a D1aa school, and the Notre Dame of this year. Two wins outside of those should not be out of the question. That said, I return to my original comment - a new coach should get a free pass on their first season.

My eternal optimism would still be hoping for an undefeated season. I just wouldn't be overly dissappointed if we took a small step back with a new coach next year.

If Chan IS back (and that's a big if now), 8 wins is a must even with the loss of all of the seniors. We lost 17 after the 2005 season and look how we turned out. Most of our losses this year will be on defense and ST. Our O-line loses three, but Our WR, QB, and RB situation will remain roughly the same (with Choice and Grant both out).
 
33jacket said:
considering all we lose on offense and defense-
lose Guyton, lewis, wheeler, roberson, jones, oliver, robertson
lose rhodes, mcmanus, tums, cox, choice
Click to expand...

Let's not forget about Brooks and Bell. Also, Grant will be gone - though we'll still have a lot of depth at RB.

That said, we lost more in '05.
 
No way the new coach gets a pass on the 1st year

If all that is holding us back is Chan Gailey (according to many) then I would expect a new coach to win a minimum of 7 games. I can guarantee if Gailey is fired and we go backward then fan base will be just as divided as it is today.
 
If Paul Johnson were to take over with our slew of Runningbacks and Nesbitt, I think we could expect no worse than 7 or 8 wins. Our defense will be fine.
 
Re: No way the new coach gets a pass on the 1st year

83jacket said:
If all that is holding us back is Chan Gailey (according to many) then I would expect a new coach to win a minimum of 7 games. I can guarantee if Gailey is fired and we go backward then fan base will be just as divided as it is today.
Click to expand...
You can guarantee that, huh, almighty soothsayer? The only way that would be the case is if the remnant of Chan asskissers turn on the new coach.
 
Does not take a soothsayer........

to know the new coach will need to get things done in a hurry. After all according to many possibly you included the only thing holding the program back from ten wins and the ACC championship is Chan Gailey.
 
If Chan is reading any of these posts he might just be outright terrified into winning a few of these upcoming games just to avoid being lynched. :wow: I bet he's been out all weekend hitting every Home Depot and Office Depot in the Atlanta area trying to buy enough liquid adhesive, tape, rubber bands and nails to hold his injured players together for the final three season games.
 
Re: Does not take a soothsayer........

83jacket said:
to know the new coach will need to get things done in a hurry. After all according to many possibly you included the only thing holding the program back from ten wins and the ACC championship is Chan Gailey.
Click to expand...

Sorry man, but stupid comment. What we're saying is that as long as we want to win 7 a year, Chan is our guy. If we want a team that has the potential to win the big games and become a consistent factor in the league and get back to the top 25 we need a change.
 
Why is a stupid comment.........

nowhere did I advocate keeping gailey. IMO, if we make a change I expect it to be a change for the better. If we win less than 7 games, that is not moving forward. My expectations, if we make a change are to win at least 7 games year 1 and 9 games year 2. What are your expectations? The talent is on the roster, so if the new guy can't at least win 7 games with our schedule nest year, I am worried.
 
Re: Why is a stupid comment.........

83jacket said:
nowhere did I advocate keeping gailey. IMO, if we make a change I expect it to be a change for the better. If we win less than 7 games, that is not moving forward. My expectations, if we make a change are to win at least 7 games year 1 and 9 games year 2. What are your expectations?
Click to expand...
What's your expectation if Gailey stays?

The first year is a toss up due to all the changes that take place when you bring in a new staff. I'd like to think the transition can be smooth and we can at least continue to boring trend we're on. I would expect improvment though in years 2 and 3. My eventual expectation is that our program can be a factor in the ACC race every year, be ranked and make some noise nationally. I would think that would mean avg about 9, with some years that are better and a few that are worse. The difference from now would be that we would actually have a competent offense so that we would have a chance against some of the better teams in college football.

Just so I'm clear, my problem with Chan isn't so much the number, it's the fact that we're stagnant and the level we've settled on isn't where we should strive to be.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top