Good news for him is that in a few years it will look like FCS in CUSAOriginally Posted by champion110
|
|
|
|
|
Good news for him is that in a few years it will look like FCS in CUSA
Just went to the UIW football webpage. This guy looks promising. Up and comer. Not a "Name". We don't need a Name. We need a coach.
So if he beats out future conference mate Sam Houston he gets the job?
……after seeing Louisiana/ULM last night, I agree with you…….ULM is very well coached and improving! Ask the tigers and Cajuns!
Helped that the teams the c-hawks just played had a lame-duck coach and a coach about to cash in his meal ticket.
Grimes would be a good choice, but I don't think he'd come. I think he's looking at a P5 job in the next couple of years.
We will probably end up with Kevin Sumlin…
Or Matt Wells.
If we go that route and Diaz isn't an option I think Fuente would be my preference.
I liked the Holtz hire because I wanted to see what Tech could become with some stability and someone who would stick around long enough to build the program and establish an identity. Now that that has failed I don’t see much hope for the program. Tech most likely will continue to be a program, much like the other G5’s, that is hit and miss and without consistency or identity. It will be good when it gets a good coach for a couple of years, mediocre when it has a long-term coach, and horrific when it gets a bad coach. Just have to hope to get lucky on the hire and then repeat…
But that is not who we are. We are not LSU. We should NEVER hire for stability. At our level stability means NOBODY wants your coach.
Tech is not at a level to hire for stability. We are at a level to hire for growth! You should want a coach to come in that will be hired away in 3-4 years because he has built a tremendous winning program at the university. Whoever is the Tech AD always needs to be on the lookout for the next big thing in coaching. That is who we should hire. Always building, always growing. You hire for 3-4 years, put a big buyout in the contract, rinse and repeat. Tech should never hire for stability. That is dumb.
Someone on Twitter mention Rattay, Sloan, and Matt Wells.
Rattay may or may not be ready, I don't really know.
Sloan's whole career is basically attached to Holtz, so it doesn't make sense to fire Holtz to hire Sloan.
Wells was great at Utah State, and actually had more wins that Texas Tech this year when he was fired then he had the two previous year. Any insight as to why he would be attached to our opening, or what kind of coach he would be?
Exactly! If our identity is air raid offense and opportunistic defense, then make sure every hire we make it built to facilitate that.
Good point. It’s just frustrating that when Tech finally gets good (Crowton, Dykes), they have to fall back into mediocrity (Bicknell, Dooley, Holtz). It seems hopeless that Tech will ever establish consistency as a winner. The best to hope for is 1 great season every 10 years or so. Yuck!
I’ve seen Sloan’s name come up, and for the life of me I can’t understand why. What in the world has Sloan done at Tech to even warrant an interview?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
