paul johnson
- Thread starter toe meets leather
- Start date
BarrelORum
Mediocre Poster
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2002
- Messages
- 16,266
[ QUOTE ]
Well since you restarted a locked thread, I follow Navy up here in Maryland. Johnson is an option coach and always was. The fact that Navy threw the ball more ten years ago when he was the OC means nothing. They were still an option team.
As I stated before on other posts, in my opinion Johnson would win at Tech. But would he win more often? I doubt it. Navy hasn't beaten ND in 40 years and Johnson has had two stints with them.
The biggest issue against him is that you can say goodby to the top athletes coming to Tech. And in my opinion, after he's gone, we'd be a shell of a program and fighting out of a hole like Duke is today.
Regardless we have a winner already: Chan.
[/ QUOTE ]
Paul Johnson was NOT always a wishbone triple option coach. He didn't ever run that offense until he got to GSU. At Navy the level of athletes is a lot lower than it is at GT therefore he finds more success running the wishbone because that's what undermanned teams DO!!! If he had the level of athletes the ACC can provide, I highly doubt he runs the wishbone.
I saw something on the Hive where someone was trying to say that it is easier to recruit athletes at Navy. This is a fargin joke. They all get full rides anyway and he literally had to convince some of the better caliber kids to give up the remaining 1% of their lives to be dedicated at football.
Paul Johnson has been a winner EVERYWHERE he has been. He's a no nonsense disciplinary coach who is highly regarded in coaching circles. He's coming off a ten win season at NAVY, and he's 2-2 so far with his two losses to Maryland (Yeah, that WOULD be Friedgen) and Stanford losing both games by 3 points. TheMaryland game he should have won.
If you think he would run the triple option at Tech you're smoking crack. The guy is a football mind and knows what systems to implement to be successful. I can guarantee you he is not going to run the option. But if you want to harp on this completely unsubstantial point to say that we will lose all athletes, just so you can prop CG up and give us reason to not go exploring new coaches, please go right ahead... it's been going on for over 3 years now, what's 6 more games going to matter.
Well since you restarted a locked thread, I follow Navy up here in Maryland. Johnson is an option coach and always was. The fact that Navy threw the ball more ten years ago when he was the OC means nothing. They were still an option team.
As I stated before on other posts, in my opinion Johnson would win at Tech. But would he win more often? I doubt it. Navy hasn't beaten ND in 40 years and Johnson has had two stints with them.
The biggest issue against him is that you can say goodby to the top athletes coming to Tech. And in my opinion, after he's gone, we'd be a shell of a program and fighting out of a hole like Duke is today.
Regardless we have a winner already: Chan.
[/ QUOTE ]
Paul Johnson was NOT always a wishbone triple option coach. He didn't ever run that offense until he got to GSU. At Navy the level of athletes is a lot lower than it is at GT therefore he finds more success running the wishbone because that's what undermanned teams DO!!! If he had the level of athletes the ACC can provide, I highly doubt he runs the wishbone.
I saw something on the Hive where someone was trying to say that it is easier to recruit athletes at Navy. This is a fargin joke. They all get full rides anyway and he literally had to convince some of the better caliber kids to give up the remaining 1% of their lives to be dedicated at football.
Paul Johnson has been a winner EVERYWHERE he has been. He's a no nonsense disciplinary coach who is highly regarded in coaching circles. He's coming off a ten win season at NAVY, and he's 2-2 so far with his two losses to Maryland (Yeah, that WOULD be Friedgen) and Stanford losing both games by 3 points. TheMaryland game he should have won.
If you think he would run the triple option at Tech you're smoking crack. The guy is a football mind and knows what systems to implement to be successful. I can guarantee you he is not going to run the option. But if you want to harp on this completely unsubstantial point to say that we will lose all athletes, just so you can prop CG up and give us reason to not go exploring new coaches, please go right ahead... it's been going on for over 3 years now, what's 6 more games going to matter.
pocket_watch
Dodd-Like
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2005
- Messages
- 2,953
[ QUOTE ]
I saw something on the Hive where someone was trying to say that it is easier to recruit athletes at Navy. This is a fargin joke. They all get full rides anyway and he literally had to convince some of the better caliber kids to give up the remaining 1% of their lives to be dedicated at football.
[/ QUOTE ]
I saw this too, but didn't think I read it right. From personal experience I can tell you that life at Annapolis is no joke.
I didn't have a ton of offers, but the USNA was one of them.
When one of the Admirals visited to go over "expectations" at Annapolis, Ga. Tech in comparison was a walk in the park. I wanted to be at Tech anyway, but man did that visit make it easy to decide.
I have great respect for anyone that goes, or has completed one of the service acadamies. For those that have also excelled in athletics there have really done something.
based on this, Paul Johnson can recruit and coach with just about anyone, in my book.
I saw something on the Hive where someone was trying to say that it is easier to recruit athletes at Navy. This is a fargin joke. They all get full rides anyway and he literally had to convince some of the better caliber kids to give up the remaining 1% of their lives to be dedicated at football.
[/ QUOTE ]
I saw this too, but didn't think I read it right. From personal experience I can tell you that life at Annapolis is no joke.
I didn't have a ton of offers, but the USNA was one of them.
When one of the Admirals visited to go over "expectations" at Annapolis, Ga. Tech in comparison was a walk in the park. I wanted to be at Tech anyway, but man did that visit make it easy to decide.
I have great respect for anyone that goes, or has completed one of the service acadamies. For those that have also excelled in athletics there have really done something.
based on this, Paul Johnson can recruit and coach with just about anyone, in my book.
GEETEELEE
We suck this much.
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2002
- Messages
- 37,519
[ QUOTE ]
You bet there are excellent coaches who would love to have the Tech job.
[/ QUOTE ]
No question of that at all. There are probably twice as many "mediocre" coaches with excellent track records who would also love to come to Tech. How do you tell the difference?
You bet there are excellent coaches who would love to have the Tech job.
[/ QUOTE ]
No question of that at all. There are probably twice as many "mediocre" coaches with excellent track records who would also love to come to Tech. How do you tell the difference?
GTYellowJacket12
Flats Noob
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2005
- Messages
- 830
[ QUOTE ]
There are probably twice as many "mediocre" coaches with excellent track records who would also love to come to Tech. How do you tell the difference?
[/ QUOTE ]
That's the million dollar question, everyone's got a criteria and there isn't going to be a consensus, you just have to look at the splinter groups for the various candidates (Paul Johnson, Randy Walker, Randy Edsal etc etc) and find out which leads the way.
There are probably twice as many "mediocre" coaches with excellent track records who would also love to come to Tech. How do you tell the difference?
[/ QUOTE ]
That's the million dollar question, everyone's got a criteria and there isn't going to be a consensus, you just have to look at the splinter groups for the various candidates (Paul Johnson, Randy Walker, Randy Edsal etc etc) and find out which leads the way.
crazyjacket
Varsity Lurker
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2004
- Messages
- 45
NCJacket I agree with your assesment. You are correct the fans do not get paid to evaluate head coaching talent. The AD who is paid over $500,000 dollar per year has that responsibility. I would also suggest the pressure to win is greater at the "football" schools than at Tech. At Tech win one or two more than you lose, win 8 games occasionally, beat Ga. once every 5 to 6 years and you can stay as long as you choose. Sounds like a great job to me.
pocket_watch
Dodd-Like
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2005
- Messages
- 2,953
[ QUOTE ]
No question of that at all. There are probably twice as many "mediocre" coaches with excellent track records who would also love to come to Tech. How do you tell the difference?
[/ QUOTE ]
First of all, we are discussing opinions here, not facts, and I don't want to argue that your opinion is wrong. I just happen to believe my opinion is accurate under the following condition:
That Tech's athletic board has or is spending the time to develop and continually update the model of what type of coach is best suited to run this program. This "bionic man" approach needs to consider all of the characteristics of the person. From this model, I trust that a search committee already has a list of prospects that fit the mold we have made.
By the way, this needs to be an ongoing thing, even in the best of times. No one can predict when a coach will leave on his own decision.
I think I am agreeing with you by saying if we wait until we don't have a coach to start looking, we are in deep trouble.
No question of that at all. There are probably twice as many "mediocre" coaches with excellent track records who would also love to come to Tech. How do you tell the difference?
[/ QUOTE ]
First of all, we are discussing opinions here, not facts, and I don't want to argue that your opinion is wrong. I just happen to believe my opinion is accurate under the following condition:
That Tech's athletic board has or is spending the time to develop and continually update the model of what type of coach is best suited to run this program. This "bionic man" approach needs to consider all of the characteristics of the person. From this model, I trust that a search committee already has a list of prospects that fit the mold we have made.
By the way, this needs to be an ongoing thing, even in the best of times. No one can predict when a coach will leave on his own decision.
I think I am agreeing with you by saying if we wait until we don't have a coach to start looking, we are in deep trouble.
GTCrew
Patrick Henry
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2002
- Messages
- 49,873
Apparently you don\'t know crap about
the service academies.
I have been told by people who went there that every student plays a sport. They all are demanding timewise. Yet the FB players get perks that the other students, despite putting in similar time, don't get.
The advantage Navy has is they have the old SEC style 200 player teams. The disadvantage, and it is huge to an 18 year old, is the five year committment. Add that to the playing time and it is more than half their life to date. Pretty scary.
Is it easier than GT? No way. GT is smack in the middle of a football hotbed and a major city. But to act like he is beating Duke with rec-league players is silly.
the service academies.
I have been told by people who went there that every student plays a sport. They all are demanding timewise. Yet the FB players get perks that the other students, despite putting in similar time, don't get.
The advantage Navy has is they have the old SEC style 200 player teams. The disadvantage, and it is huge to an 18 year old, is the five year committment. Add that to the playing time and it is more than half their life to date. Pretty scary.
Is it easier than GT? No way. GT is smack in the middle of a football hotbed and a major city. But to act like he is beating Duke with rec-league players is silly.
midatlantech
Dodd-Like
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2003
- Messages
- 6,707
Re: Apparently you don\'t know crap about
Yes, this is true. I thought the post on the Hive did not say it was easy to recruit to Navy, but more on the lines of it's easier to find a diamond in the rough because the quantity is so large.
I was just at the Air Force practices a summer ago, and I can assure you that the 250 person football squad is a real number (Air Force JV beat the snot out of Nebraska JV that year and every county in Nebraska sends in a player annually). Everyone at the academies is required to participate in some form of athletics. And yes, the football players do in fact have some benefits when it comes to the serving line, etc.
Yes, this is true. I thought the post on the Hive did not say it was easy to recruit to Navy, but more on the lines of it's easier to find a diamond in the rough because the quantity is so large.
I was just at the Air Force practices a summer ago, and I can assure you that the 250 person football squad is a real number (Air Force JV beat the snot out of Nebraska JV that year and every county in Nebraska sends in a player annually). Everyone at the academies is required to participate in some form of athletics. And yes, the football players do in fact have some benefits when it comes to the serving line, etc.
midatlantech
Dodd-Like
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2003
- Messages
- 6,707
Look, if Tech were ever in need of a new head coach, then I think we should look very strongly at Paul Johnson. He'd be a natural fit.
And I thought that Johnson was the OC for Navy years ago, that they ran the option heavily, and that his training was from an option coach (the guy at Air Force?). I guess I could have been wrong.
But, I had lunch just a few months ago with a big supporter of Navy football and out of his mouth he said almost verbatim "We went out and got Johnson because his excellence in the option package was well suited and proven before for Navy".
Now that's not to say that they didn't hire him for other qualities. But he is known as an option coach and it's pretty easy to assume that he would continue that in the ACC. Otherwise it'd be like asking George Welsh to run an east coast offense instead of his west coast.
He's been successful with one major style and schools would generally be recruiting that style. Accordingly one would expect him to run it at Tech. And if so, I think we'd win some games but I also think it COULD be the beginning of the end for getting top athletes because it isn't run in the NFL.
And I thought that Johnson was the OC for Navy years ago, that they ran the option heavily, and that his training was from an option coach (the guy at Air Force?). I guess I could have been wrong.
But, I had lunch just a few months ago with a big supporter of Navy football and out of his mouth he said almost verbatim "We went out and got Johnson because his excellence in the option package was well suited and proven before for Navy".
Now that's not to say that they didn't hire him for other qualities. But he is known as an option coach and it's pretty easy to assume that he would continue that in the ACC. Otherwise it'd be like asking George Welsh to run an east coast offense instead of his west coast.
He's been successful with one major style and schools would generally be recruiting that style. Accordingly one would expect him to run it at Tech. And if so, I think we'd win some games but I also think it COULD be the beginning of the end for getting top athletes because it isn't run in the NFL.
Bogey
Jolly Good Fellow
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2002
- Messages
- 1,510
I think it would be a hell of an extrapolation to project that he could go to a big league conference and succeed with an offense different than the one he is noted for. Maybe he could get it done eventually, but with our fickled fans, who knows if he would get the time, ala CG.
willstingyou
Varsity Lurker
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2005
- Messages
- 37
[ QUOTE ]
And if so, I think we'd win some games but I also think it COULD be the beginning of the end for getting top athletes because it isn't run in the NFL.
[/ QUOTE ]
I've heard this thrown around a lot whenever Johnson's name is brought up in regards to Tech and it strikes me as odd. I've always thought that part of the supposed "problem" with Tech right now is that the curriculum and academic guidelines prevents us from consistently getting the kind of athletes that schools like UGA and FSU get in bulk.
If you look at it, most schools who run "unconventional" offenses (the Academies, Texas Tech, Hawaii, Houston in the run-and-shoot days, BYU under Lavell Edwards, Northwestern, MAC schools) do so because for whatever reason (academics, in state competition with larger in-state schools, religious restrictions), they can't count on consistently recruiting elite athletes.
Now, I'm not saying Gailey should (or shouldn't) go and I'm not saying Paul Johnson would definitely do a better job, but maybe fans should consider that just might be the kind of coach we need.
And if so, I think we'd win some games but I also think it COULD be the beginning of the end for getting top athletes because it isn't run in the NFL.
[/ QUOTE ]
I've heard this thrown around a lot whenever Johnson's name is brought up in regards to Tech and it strikes me as odd. I've always thought that part of the supposed "problem" with Tech right now is that the curriculum and academic guidelines prevents us from consistently getting the kind of athletes that schools like UGA and FSU get in bulk.
If you look at it, most schools who run "unconventional" offenses (the Academies, Texas Tech, Hawaii, Houston in the run-and-shoot days, BYU under Lavell Edwards, Northwestern, MAC schools) do so because for whatever reason (academics, in state competition with larger in-state schools, religious restrictions), they can't count on consistently recruiting elite athletes.
Now, I'm not saying Gailey should (or shouldn't) go and I'm not saying Paul Johnson would definitely do a better job, but maybe fans should consider that just might be the kind of coach we need.
wreckingball
Varsity Lurker
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2005
- Messages
- 115
We humans spend an awful lot of energy trying to reverse entropy, and when it progresses (as it always will) on that which we produce via our efforts, we just hate that!!
midatlantech
Dodd-Like
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2003
- Messages
- 6,707
Personally I'm not ready to make that move and if you look around, few BCS conference members have shown a real interest either.
We are stronger than every school that you listed and still bring in outstanding NFL potential athletes. This is why I'd like to see Chan get a whole lot more time: Of any model that I've seen, his seems to have the most long term potential (under current conditions) without going to a gimmick.
There are other ways without going purely to the option of course. We could go the Duke/Stanford route of getting a pro quarterback and throwing it around.
We are stronger than every school that you listed and still bring in outstanding NFL potential athletes. This is why I'd like to see Chan get a whole lot more time: Of any model that I've seen, his seems to have the most long term potential (under current conditions) without going to a gimmick.
There are other ways without going purely to the option of course. We could go the Duke/Stanford route of getting a pro quarterback and throwing it around.
Our success during the O\'Leary/Friedgen...
...years could be attributed to the use of a "gimmick" offense. IMO, the biggest mistake that Chan has made and continues to make is his insistence on running a pro style offense against teams with bigger lines and more talent then us.
An offense like the triple option would be a great equalizer for us just like the Fridge's was.
...years could be attributed to the use of a "gimmick" offense. IMO, the biggest mistake that Chan has made and continues to make is his insistence on running a pro style offense against teams with bigger lines and more talent then us.
An offense like the triple option would be a great equalizer for us just like the Fridge's was.
willstingyou
Varsity Lurker
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2005
- Messages
- 37
[ QUOTE ]
Personally I'm not ready to make that move and if you look around, few BCS conference members have shown a real interest either.
[/ QUOTE ]
Outside of Vandy, Northwestern and Duke, few (if any other) BCS schools have to deal with the kind of restrictions Tech has to deal with in regards to recruiting. In theory, even schools like Baylor, Kentucky and Indiana can sign any athlete they want as long as he's cleared by the NCAA. Most BCS schools don't try unconventional strategies because they don't have to, in theory at least.
[ QUOTE ]
We are stronger than every school that you listed and still bring in outstanding NFL potential athletes. This is why I'd like to see Chan get a whole lot more time: Of any model that I've seen, his seems to have the most long term potential (under current conditions) without going to a gimmick.
[/ QUOTE ]
We can't play the same game as UGA, Miami, Virginia Tech and FSU if we can't get the same kind of athletes. Teas Tech is a top 10 team right now and will be bowl-eligible for the 10th straight season, a lot of that has to do with Mike Leach knowing he can't get the same athletes as Texas, Texas A&M and Oklahoma and devising an offensive system that takes full advantage of what talent he can get.
Personally I'm not ready to make that move and if you look around, few BCS conference members have shown a real interest either.
[/ QUOTE ]
Outside of Vandy, Northwestern and Duke, few (if any other) BCS schools have to deal with the kind of restrictions Tech has to deal with in regards to recruiting. In theory, even schools like Baylor, Kentucky and Indiana can sign any athlete they want as long as he's cleared by the NCAA. Most BCS schools don't try unconventional strategies because they don't have to, in theory at least.
[ QUOTE ]
We are stronger than every school that you listed and still bring in outstanding NFL potential athletes. This is why I'd like to see Chan get a whole lot more time: Of any model that I've seen, his seems to have the most long term potential (under current conditions) without going to a gimmick.
[/ QUOTE ]
We can't play the same game as UGA, Miami, Virginia Tech and FSU if we can't get the same kind of athletes. Teas Tech is a top 10 team right now and will be bowl-eligible for the 10th straight season, a lot of that has to do with Mike Leach knowing he can't get the same athletes as Texas, Texas A&M and Oklahoma and devising an offensive system that takes full advantage of what talent he can get.
JJacket
Declared dead for tax purposes.
- Joined
- May 20, 2003
- Messages
- 87,815
[ QUOTE ]
He's coming off a ten win season at NAVY
[/ QUOTE ]
Only one team that Navy played last year had a winning record (New Mexico). All were mediocre teams.
Is this gonna turn into one of those never ending lovefest where some poster tries daily to cram some coach down our throat?
He's coming off a ten win season at NAVY
[/ QUOTE ]
Only one team that Navy played last year had a winning record (New Mexico). All were mediocre teams.
Is this gonna turn into one of those never ending lovefest where some poster tries daily to cram some coach down our throat?
non-gineer
Jolly Good Fellow
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2003
- Messages
- 1,915
[ QUOTE ]
No but from that,I would have to think there is a VERY short list of those who would come and for a job that isn't open at this time.pocket we don't have a long list of
applicants GT is a very tough coaching job and a big risk even for a guy thats and up and comer thats had some success
early in his career.
[/ QUOTE ]
What a nutty argument. Of course no one is going to come to a job that isn't (yet) open. But to say that no one WOULD come if the job WERE open is insane. Are you saying that no one would go to UGA if the job were open, just because it isn't open NOW?
Furthermore, coaches go every year to schools that have been mired in mediocrity and make an impact, with both recruiting and on-the-field coaching. Tech's academics may make recruiting tougher, but other schools have other things going against them, such as location, reputation, losing tradition, etc. The right head coach can be successful almost anywhere.
No but from that,I would have to think there is a VERY short list of those who would come and for a job that isn't open at this time.pocket we don't have a long list of
applicants GT is a very tough coaching job and a big risk even for a guy thats and up and comer thats had some success
early in his career.
[/ QUOTE ]
What a nutty argument. Of course no one is going to come to a job that isn't (yet) open. But to say that no one WOULD come if the job WERE open is insane. Are you saying that no one would go to UGA if the job were open, just because it isn't open NOW?
Furthermore, coaches go every year to schools that have been mired in mediocrity and make an impact, with both recruiting and on-the-field coaching. Tech's academics may make recruiting tougher, but other schools have other things going against them, such as location, reputation, losing tradition, etc. The right head coach can be successful almost anywhere.
JOJATK
Flats Noob
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2002
- Messages
- 640
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No but from that,I would have to think there is a VERY short list of those who would come and for a job that isn't open at this time.pocket we don't have a long list of
applicants GT is a very tough coaching job and a big risk even for a guy thats and up and comer thats had some success
early in his career.
[/ QUOTE ]
What a nutty argument. Of course no one is going to come to a job that isn't (yet) open. But to say that no one WOULD come if the job WERE open is insane. Are you saying that no one would go to UGA if the job were open, just because it isn't open NOW?
Furthermore, coaches go every year to schools that have been mired in mediocrity and make an impact, with both recruiting and on-the-field coaching. Tech's academics may make recruiting tougher, but other schools have other things going against them, such as location, reputation, losing tradition, etc. The right head coach can be successful almost anywhere.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think there are a couple of points being made about coaching changes here:
1) Coaches are very leery now of talking to ADs and "boosters" and "representatives" of one school while that school has a current coach in place (see the egg on Auburn's face talking to Petrino while Tubberville STILL HAD THE JOB) as are ADs leery of being seen as dumb as those Auburn guys were in their timing
2) There certainly are coaches who would take the GT job in a heartbeat but it isn't such a no-brainer (no pun intended) to come here considering that there ARE some significant handicaps to recruiting and winning at GT. To be fair there are ALSO some great things about GT that are there to aid in recruiting and winning so it isn't all bad
As for Paul Johnson I can only say that I don't know enough about him one way or the other. I've seen some say that he's an "option" coach and others say that he only runs the offense most suited to the talents and abilities of the players (and the kinds of players he feels he can recruit). He's probably on a lot of short lists out there and perhaps even the one that Dave Braine keeps in his desk drawer (every AD keeps a list in his or her desk or somewhere he or she can get to easily just in case they lose a coach or have to fire one). I'm also certain that Dave Braine would not like to have to get rid of Coach Gailey because the best thing for GT would be to have success with the current staff (continuity).
But if it becomes clear to Dave Braine that Coach Gailey can't succeed here then I'm sure he'll pull the trigger. Of course I'm certain as well that what is clear to him and what is clear to me and what is clear to you and what is clear to anybody else can be quite different so we'll just all have to wait and see.
Until then it is interesting to see who people focus on as coaching candidates and I've seen a shockingly small number of names mentioned by folks. I think I've seen Chris Hatcher, Paul Johnson, and maybe a couple of others discussed as realistic options. And when I say realistic I'm suggesting that it is unrealistic to suggest Bob Stoops as our next head coach because he's got a great gig at Oklahoma, not that we can't draw a big name coach. I wonder, though, if someone like Dan Hawkins (and I'm not suggesting he'd be right for this place) out at Boise State might be interested? Certainly there are lots of positives to GT such as the city of Atlanta, being in the ACC where you actually have a chance at a national championship and playing teams like UGA, Auburn, Miami, and VT and others. But there are also negatives like the academic requirements (the likes of which he has NOTHING to compare against at BSU). And would a guy who is a very big fish in a little pond want to leave that place? Depends on his personality.
It's interesting posers like that that I have fun talking about and wrestling with myself
[ QUOTE ]
No but from that,I would have to think there is a VERY short list of those who would come and for a job that isn't open at this time.pocket we don't have a long list of
applicants GT is a very tough coaching job and a big risk even for a guy thats and up and comer thats had some success
early in his career.
[/ QUOTE ]
What a nutty argument. Of course no one is going to come to a job that isn't (yet) open. But to say that no one WOULD come if the job WERE open is insane. Are you saying that no one would go to UGA if the job were open, just because it isn't open NOW?
Furthermore, coaches go every year to schools that have been mired in mediocrity and make an impact, with both recruiting and on-the-field coaching. Tech's academics may make recruiting tougher, but other schools have other things going against them, such as location, reputation, losing tradition, etc. The right head coach can be successful almost anywhere.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think there are a couple of points being made about coaching changes here:
1) Coaches are very leery now of talking to ADs and "boosters" and "representatives" of one school while that school has a current coach in place (see the egg on Auburn's face talking to Petrino while Tubberville STILL HAD THE JOB) as are ADs leery of being seen as dumb as those Auburn guys were in their timing
2) There certainly are coaches who would take the GT job in a heartbeat but it isn't such a no-brainer (no pun intended) to come here considering that there ARE some significant handicaps to recruiting and winning at GT. To be fair there are ALSO some great things about GT that are there to aid in recruiting and winning so it isn't all bad
As for Paul Johnson I can only say that I don't know enough about him one way or the other. I've seen some say that he's an "option" coach and others say that he only runs the offense most suited to the talents and abilities of the players (and the kinds of players he feels he can recruit). He's probably on a lot of short lists out there and perhaps even the one that Dave Braine keeps in his desk drawer (every AD keeps a list in his or her desk or somewhere he or she can get to easily just in case they lose a coach or have to fire one). I'm also certain that Dave Braine would not like to have to get rid of Coach Gailey because the best thing for GT would be to have success with the current staff (continuity).
But if it becomes clear to Dave Braine that Coach Gailey can't succeed here then I'm sure he'll pull the trigger. Of course I'm certain as well that what is clear to him and what is clear to me and what is clear to you and what is clear to anybody else can be quite different so we'll just all have to wait and see.
Until then it is interesting to see who people focus on as coaching candidates and I've seen a shockingly small number of names mentioned by folks. I think I've seen Chris Hatcher, Paul Johnson, and maybe a couple of others discussed as realistic options. And when I say realistic I'm suggesting that it is unrealistic to suggest Bob Stoops as our next head coach because he's got a great gig at Oklahoma, not that we can't draw a big name coach. I wonder, though, if someone like Dan Hawkins (and I'm not suggesting he'd be right for this place) out at Boise State might be interested? Certainly there are lots of positives to GT such as the city of Atlanta, being in the ACC where you actually have a chance at a national championship and playing teams like UGA, Auburn, Miami, and VT and others. But there are also negatives like the academic requirements (the likes of which he has NOTHING to compare against at BSU). And would a guy who is a very big fish in a little pond want to leave that place? Depends on his personality.
It's interesting posers like that that I have fun talking about and wrestling with myself