Chief Vol 13
Straight Shooter
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2017
- Messages
- 6,965
- Likes
- 3,848
I don't think we can afford to wait too long with him. Especially if Bill Snyder retires after this year.
You would have to do it right. No messing around. This would be a huge win for Currie if he could pull it off. You would have to be quiet... absolutely silent, you would have to be ninja fast, and you would have to come with a vault of gold and an army of lawyers. This is big name gro n man ish we are talking about. You will either get it right or it will fail.
I'm gonna support Jones as long as he's our coach. Just like I'll support Dormady even after a bad game, and Jumper in spite of imperfections and Larry Scott in spite of some flawed play calling, etc. etc.. They are all Vols, so I got their backs.
Won't stop me from talking about who might make good head coaches for the program, though. :good!:
Think there are more or less three tiers of "pay for excellence" here:
1. Pay Big for the Big Name, a coach who has won at least 1 and preferably multiple national titles or super bowls (Saban, Meyer, Gruden, C.Kelly, etc). (price tag $6M-$10M)
2. Pay for a proven to somewhat-proven head coach of a second tier Power 5 program (Mullen, Fuentes) or a proven OC/DC of a top-tier Power 5 program (Venables fits here). (price tag $4M-$6M)
3. Pay for someone who is unproven at the Power 5 level, like an up-and-coming Group of 5 or FCS coach, or a hot-shot OC/DC from the Group of 5 ranks. (price tag $3M-$4M).
From what everyone's been saying over the past year+, it sounds like at least a sizeable group of us are in Category 1. I'd guess most of the rest are in 2. Don't think there are many in 3.
So, you'd probably have a portion of VolNation reject Venables simply because he's not tier 1. Before even discussing his individual merits.
Probably the #1 argument against Venables would be that he's only proven as a Coordinator. Some make the leap to HMFIC well, others not at all well. And how well they did as an OC/DC doesn't seem to have a lot of bearing on their ability to handle the next level...which is a WHOLE new job.
Me personally, I think I'd rather see a guy who has already proven he can handle head coaching in a big program.
Think there are more or less three tiers of "pay for excellence" here:
1. Pay Big for the Big Name, a coach who has won at least 1 and preferably multiple national titles or super bowls (Saban, Meyer, Gruden, C.Kelly, etc). (price tag $6M-$10M)
2. Pay for a proven to somewhat-proven head coach of a second tier Power 5 program (Mullen, Fuentes) or a proven OC/DC of a top-tier Power 5 program (Venables fits here). (price tag $4M-$6M)
3. Pay for someone who is unproven at the Power 5 level, like an up-and-coming Group of 5 or FCS coach, or a hot-shot OC/DC from the Group of 5 ranks. (price tag $3M-$4M).
From what everyone's been saying over the past year+, it sounds like at least a sizeable group of us are in Category 1. I'd guess most of the rest are in 2. Don't think there are many in 3.
So, you'd probably have a portion of VolNation reject Venables simply because he's not tier 1. Before even discussing his individual merits.
Probably the #1 argument against Venables would be that he's only proven as a Coordinator. Some make the leap to HMFIC well, others not at all well. And how well they did as an OC/DC doesn't seem to have a lot of bearing on their ability to handle the next level...which is a WHOLE new job.
Me personally, I think I'd rather see a guy who has already proven he can handle head coaching in a big program.
NCAA troubles...sorry I should have been more specific.
What NCAA troubles? There wasn't a Bowl ban. There weren't wins taken off the table. Chip Kelly got a punishment and it's over. Plus is freaking easier to recruit here than Oregon. There is nothing that says he would be a liability here with NCAA for an issue that has been decided and served. He can't get in trouble for a past issue.