Buy/Sell...
- Thread starter dawgstudent
- Start date
considering this:
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcon.../stories/111908dnspoutbrownsider.3e1970e.html</p>
If the guy is going to hang around possibly for several years then why would you name so soon? I realize it is to keep Muschamp there until the inevitable happens but you have to wonder how much more marketable it makes the guy. He can now go on an interview as the named future Texas head coach. I would say any question in his legitimacy is gone at this point. This could actually make him leave sooner because the larger programs would definitely, in future openings, consider him a viable candidate if they didn't already. They may even throw more money at him now.
edit to add: i haven't read much on the matter and don't know if there was some sort of contract involved in this "naming." the contract could mitigate him leaving i guess.
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcon.../stories/111908dnspoutbrownsider.3e1970e.html</p>
source: </a><a href="http://collegesportsblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2008/11/when-will-texas-coach-mack-brown-call-it.html">http://collegesportsblog....h-mack-brown-call-it.html
If the guy is going to hang around possibly for several years then why would you name so soon? I realize it is to keep Muschamp there until the inevitable happens but you have to wonder how much more marketable it makes the guy. He can now go on an interview as the named future Texas head coach. I would say any question in his legitimacy is gone at this point. This could actually make him leave sooner because the larger programs would definitely, in future openings, consider him a viable candidate if they didn't already. They may even throw more money at him now.
edit to add: i haven't read much on the matter and don't know if there was some sort of contract involved in this "naming." the contract could mitigate him leaving i guess.
For a number of reasons....
A) Mack is young by college coaching standards and presumably in good health. I think he is 57. He could coach for another 7-10 years easy. Why would you do this if you are Texas. I understand you want to lock in a potentially great young coach and it may be that he meshes really well with the UT higher-ups, but a lot can happen in 7-10 years, i.e., Major Applewhite could go coach at, I dunno, Mississippi State for 7 years - turn them into a annual SECCG contender and be lauded as the hottest young wizard/MIRACLE WORKER of a coach in the nation (emphasized because that is what everyone would think if he won at State, right?). Naturally, being a Texas alum, he would jump at UT after Brown retires. Yet they are going to go ahead and name Muschamp and give him 900k a year to be the coach-in-waiting? That is puzzling.
B) Why would you do this if you are Muschamp, other than the obvious hike in pay? I wonder if there is some clause in his contract that forfeits a portion of his 500k raise if he chooses to take another job. What if LSU or UGA decide in 4-5 years that they are tired of the way things are going and want to hire a young coach with SEC ties? Of course he wouldn't want to stay at Texas as a coordinator with schools like that calling.
A) Mack is young by college coaching standards and presumably in good health. I think he is 57. He could coach for another 7-10 years easy. Why would you do this if you are Texas. I understand you want to lock in a potentially great young coach and it may be that he meshes really well with the UT higher-ups, but a lot can happen in 7-10 years, i.e., Major Applewhite could go coach at, I dunno, Mississippi State for 7 years - turn them into a annual SECCG contender and be lauded as the hottest young wizard/MIRACLE WORKER of a coach in the nation (emphasized because that is what everyone would think if he won at State, right?). Naturally, being a Texas alum, he would jump at UT after Brown retires. Yet they are going to go ahead and name Muschamp and give him 900k a year to be the coach-in-waiting? That is puzzling.
B) Why would you do this if you are Muschamp, other than the obvious hike in pay? I wonder if there is some clause in his contract that forfeits a portion of his 500k raise if he chooses to take another job. What if LSU or UGA decide in 4-5 years that they are tired of the way things are going and want to hire a young coach with SEC ties? Of course he wouldn't want to stay at Texas as a coordinator with schools like that calling.
As DerHntr pointed out, it's not like Mack Brown is that old. I could easily see him coaching another 5 years. Then what if the defense has a down year? Texas fans will start questioning the hire and some won't be as much on board as they would've this year. There is too much time for something to go wrong/change.
UT: Will, we want to name you the coach-in-waiting for UT.
WM: Is that like a lady-in-waiting? I don't think I am down with that, besides, a shitload of schools are going to want me to coach them.
UT: We will give you 900k a year and it really doesn't mean anything - just a fancy, if not gay, title and it makes us feel all warm and fuzzy.
WM: Where do I sign? Can we call it something else than a 17'ing coach-in-waiting though?
UT: No.
WM: Ok, where do I sign?
WM: Is that like a lady-in-waiting? I don't think I am down with that, besides, a shitload of schools are going to want me to coach them.
UT: We will give you 900k a year and it really doesn't mean anything - just a fancy, if not gay, title and it makes us feel all warm and fuzzy.
WM: Where do I sign? Can we call it something else than a 17'ing coach-in-waiting though?
UT: No.
WM: Ok, where do I sign?
Historically, the more successful Texas football coaches have been succeeded by one of their assistants.
Dana X. Bible was succeeded by an assistant.
Darrell Royal was succeeded by an assistant.
So it stands to reason that an assistant would follow Mack Brown as head coach, so why not Muschamp?</p>
Dana X. Bible was succeeded by an assistant.
Darrell Royal was succeeded by an assistant.
So it stands to reason that an assistant would follow Mack Brown as head coach, so why not Muschamp?</p>
Bottom line is, they were wanting to keep Muschamp, just like FSU was wanting to keep Fisher. You hear those two coaches names in every job search now, so those schools knew that it was only a matter of time before they lost them.
Fisher has the same clause, he got a huge pay raise, plus if he's not the coach by 2011 then he's free to go elsewhere and gets a huge bonus. But, if he leaves for another job before 2011, he owes FSU 3 mil.
I think FSU and Texas think it's worth going through 2 or 3 possible down years when these guys become head coaches (assuming they flop) in order to keep them now, because they are such good coordinators.
Fisher has the same clause, he got a huge pay raise, plus if he's not the coach by 2011 then he's free to go elsewhere and gets a huge bonus. But, if he leaves for another job before 2011, he owes FSU 3 mil.
I think FSU and Texas think it's worth going through 2 or 3 possible down years when these guys become head coaches (assuming they flop) in order to keep them now, because they are such good coordinators.
Something had to have been going on with Muschamp behind the scenes. This all happened way to fast especially considering the there is a committee of about ten alum (cigar boys for BizZax) who are responsible for the hiring and firing of all UT coaches. The committees suggestions (regarding a football hire) then go to DeLoss who tells Darrell Royal the committee's suggestion. If Darrell disagree's, back to square one.
The point, this is a long process and was long for the hiring of Mack. The committee for hiring Mack was divided between Mack and Gary Barnett. Darrell met with both Mack and Gary. Tom Hicks was pushing hard for Barnett. After meeting with both, Darrell said Mack is the guy.</p>
Now about when Mack is going to hang it up? I dont know. What I do know is when DeLoss's grandson, who is at UT on the golf team, graduates, he will most likely retire. DeLoss has built this athletic program to be a monster. I can then see Mack taking over the role of AD and Director of Football operations. DeLoss and Mack have a great relationship and are very close. Mack would be a dream AD for any school.
Texas under DeLoss, has never really "hired within the family". DeLoss doesn't really give a **** about that. He gives a **** about going around the country, finding the best coach and offering them the most money.
The pressure at Texas to win is to big to go with the "hire within the family" theme. Obviously, the powers that be must see something they really like in Muschamp. When I get more info I will let you know.</p>
The point, this is a long process and was long for the hiring of Mack. The committee for hiring Mack was divided between Mack and Gary Barnett. Darrell met with both Mack and Gary. Tom Hicks was pushing hard for Barnett. After meeting with both, Darrell said Mack is the guy.</p>
Now about when Mack is going to hang it up? I dont know. What I do know is when DeLoss's grandson, who is at UT on the golf team, graduates, he will most likely retire. DeLoss has built this athletic program to be a monster. I can then see Mack taking over the role of AD and Director of Football operations. DeLoss and Mack have a great relationship and are very close. Mack would be a dream AD for any school.
Texas under DeLoss, has never really "hired within the family". DeLoss doesn't really give a **** about that. He gives a **** about going around the country, finding the best coach and offering them the most money.
The pressure at Texas to win is to big to go with the "hire within the family" theme. Obviously, the powers that be must see something they really like in Muschamp. When I get more info I will let you know.</p>
This is all about Texas keeping Muschamp as DC. If throwing him that bone is enough to keep him around, then they figured it's worth it. If, when the time comes, he doesn't still look like an attractive head coaching candidate, they can always just hire someone else anyway.
Never understood the fascination with Muschamp. Texas could get anyone they wanted, why pick an assistant? Is he that amazingly valuable? They could steal anyone's proven head coach away.
McMeat said:
DeLoss is 71. Does anyone think he will be around in 8 years? I have heard the same story here in Austin, so I would tend to believe these are the reasons why Muschamp was sewn up to work with Mac a couple of more years, then have Mac move into the AD office. The fans around here are kinda spilt on whether they are happy with this or not but the players themselves are very happy with this decision.
dc in the country in my opinion. i would put bud foster, ron english, tom bradley, and even ellis johnson ahead of him. he is brent venables john chavis level. Texas is one of the top five coaching positions in the country; they can get whomever they want. Of course, not wrapping up a dc has not worked for LSU but that was more of using co-dc's rather than going out and getting a pellini replacement.