TNT, I understand your point of view but I don't think ADs around the country are hired with the intent to fire all of the coaches that currently work at the universities. If Delaney is already in place it should take the heat off the new AD since he wouldn't be responsible for the hire.
-
Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts access private forums and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!
An email I sent to Royce Engstrom today re:Mick Delaney
- Thread starter BWahlberg
- Start date
GrizBacker04
Well-known member
BWahlberg said:
All depends on how much power the AD is or isn't given. Which, with the current state of things, might not be more than just a sounding board for Engstrom/Board of Regents (which would be terrible). More often than not, the AD is "the search committee" when hiring a big-time coaching position, such as football or basketball. Colorado State's new AD did that for both football and basketball. And while yes, there are search committees, player feedback, etc., the final decision rests with the athletic director. When Bobby was hired at UNLV, the search committee consisted essentially of the AD. There was feedback from those who talked to Bobby and the other finalist, but at the end of the day, it was the AD's pick. Search committees are more for Olympic Sports and such. The money-making positions, in UM's case football and men's/women's basketball, will probably be made by the AD, with some feedback. A losing women's golf coach won't get an AD fired -- a losing or mediocre football team will.
And I certainly think one of the questions during the AD interview process will and should be "what type of football coach would you hire...who do you know...who are your contacts...etc." Because that is what drives UM athletics and brings in a ton of money. I would certainly hope that the finalists for the AD position do have some people in mind, or how they would go about making the hiring, since that is one of the attractive things about UM's job right now. How many times does a new AD get to go not only to a very successful athletics program, but also get to hire a new head coach for a very successful football program? That one decision will make or break the new AD's tenure at UM. Wrong hire, he is run out of town in 3-5 years.
In regards for the other coaches, there always is a question of job security when a new AD is hired. Now, Tinkle and Selvig are proven winners, so there really is no worry there. And if Pflugrad was still the head coach (all things being equal and not the craziness going on) he would be fine as well. But the new AD will, be it after next season or in two (if Delaney is extended) have to make the decision on who will be the next Griz football coach.
GrizBacker04
Well-known member
BWahlberg said:
But that coach, whoever it is, needs to keep Montana the juggernaut that it is. Because if it is not, then it is no longer a path to bigger/better things. It is Montana State! HA! Well, you know what I mean. That is what is so amazing about the success that the program has had. This run has featured 6 head coaches (counting Delaney) and while there have been minor bumps, the train has moved down the tracks pretty smoothly.
grizfan47 said:
I agree, AD's are not all that responsible for the "hires" any more anyway (anywhere) they just take the heat.
I would think given the heat that program is taking the LAST thing he would want to do is be responsible for the hire in reality or perception. The AD job is a lose - lose most places these days.
Win/loss record aside I think Mic has what it takes to get thing moving the right way. The interim needs to go.
I'm not sure that any individual in the University system has a 5-7 year contract, so I don't see the new AD getting one.
As for the debate on which is more important, getting a new AD or extending Coach Delaney's contract to 18 months I could argue effectively both ways and have gone over it both ways. In my opinion at this time the more important consideration would be to extend Coach Delaney's contract. In my final analysis I simply do not accept the concept that a new AD will want to hire his own guy for this position. First, the search for a new AD is now only a month old. No one is certain at this time exactly how long it will take for a new AD to be hired but a reasonable estimate is that the earliest this will take place will be 6 months from now. By the time a new AD, whether it is an internal hire or from the outside, gets fully ensconsed in the job the football program will be well into recruiting for the 2013 season. A known commodity at head coach at that time is crucial.
The second issue is that I would think that a new AD, particularly one from the oustide, would actually appreciate not having to face the hiring of a new football coach as one of his first duties, especially here. He/She is going to have enough to worry about without that issue.
Finally, the new AD will not have any say in the contracts of either Wayne Tinkle or Robin Selvig as both of their contracts were renewed earlier this year. From what I have been told virtually all the other coaches at the University have contracts in place. A number of those will still be in effect when the new AD takes over and they will have very little to say about it. While we as fans might put a higher emphasis on the football program, an AD does not have this luxury. By necessity they have to review all hires/fires on an equal basis.
I am not downplaying the role of the AD here, but as I alluded to earlier he/she is going to have enough to worry about upon taking the job.
As for the debate on which is more important, getting a new AD or extending Coach Delaney's contract to 18 months I could argue effectively both ways and have gone over it both ways. In my opinion at this time the more important consideration would be to extend Coach Delaney's contract. In my final analysis I simply do not accept the concept that a new AD will want to hire his own guy for this position. First, the search for a new AD is now only a month old. No one is certain at this time exactly how long it will take for a new AD to be hired but a reasonable estimate is that the earliest this will take place will be 6 months from now. By the time a new AD, whether it is an internal hire or from the outside, gets fully ensconsed in the job the football program will be well into recruiting for the 2013 season. A known commodity at head coach at that time is crucial.
The second issue is that I would think that a new AD, particularly one from the oustide, would actually appreciate not having to face the hiring of a new football coach as one of his first duties, especially here. He/She is going to have enough to worry about without that issue.
Finally, the new AD will not have any say in the contracts of either Wayne Tinkle or Robin Selvig as both of their contracts were renewed earlier this year. From what I have been told virtually all the other coaches at the University have contracts in place. A number of those will still be in effect when the new AD takes over and they will have very little to say about it. While we as fans might put a higher emphasis on the football program, an AD does not have this luxury. By necessity they have to review all hires/fires on an equal basis.
I am not downplaying the role of the AD here, but as I alluded to earlier he/she is going to have enough to worry about upon taking the job.
GrizBacker04
Well-known member
And one other thought -- what does an extra year really give you? It is not that much more stability than what is already there with Delaney coaching through the end of the year. Won't help much in recruiting, other than the fact that this will be brought up next year with recruits and whether or not Delaney will be back or if there will be a new head coach.
And what if Delaney is a flop as a head coach? He may be a great guy with a great relationship with his players...and he is obviously a great position coach. But it is a lot different being the head guy than an assistant. Now I think that Delaney will do just fine - in the realm of a conference championship and playoff run. However, he is an unknown as a head coach at this level.
And what if Delaney is a flop as a head coach? He may be a great guy with a great relationship with his players...and he is obviously a great position coach. But it is a lot different being the head guy than an assistant. Now I think that Delaney will do just fine - in the realm of a conference championship and playoff run. However, he is an unknown as a head coach at this level.
Gaeilge1 said:
I don't either. And that's why we won't get anybody with AD experience.
AllWeatherFan said:
There few Universities period that offer that kind of contract for the AD. But the salary offered here would preclude getting much of anybody with a lot of "experience".
The Budget itself is an intresting creature:
http://www2.indystar.com/NCAA_financial_reports/revenue_stat/show" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
GrizBacker04 said:
An extra year for Delaney and removal of the interim label would be very positive for the program--maybe even huge. It would allow the assistant coaches to not have to seriously consider jumping for the first offer they get as the season comes to a close, and make it more likely that the most of the staff would remain at UM. It would allow the coaches to recruit more effectively. Competitors would not be able to use the fact that the assistants (as well as head coach) recruiting them will probably not even be around after the season. Any new head coach brought in from the outside would likely hire most of his own staff, and there would probably be few holdovers from the existing staff. In addition, competitors would not be able to point out to skill players that the current offensive system would probably change if/when a new head coach was selected.
Committing to extending an interim head coach before bringing in a new AD is simply putting the cart before the horse. At most universities the AD is always above any coach on the organizational chart.
I think Brint took too literally the comment that an AD would want to bring in his "own guy." To my mind that doesn't mean that he comes to Missoula with "his guy" already pre-ordained. I suspect it will be difficult enough to bring a truly competent AD into Missoula to sort things out. To further complicate the process you're going to tie him to a short -term interim coach who only delays the implementation of his own plans?... That's a recipe for futility.
Does anyone not realize what a friggin mess Engstrom created when he fired his AD and Head Football coach in one ill-considered move :?: I thought so. This whole depressing situation was totally avoidable :!:
Remove one leg on your chair you can get by. Remove two and you're on your ass. That's our UM athletics as of this moment. Neither Main Hall nor much of GrizNation seem to have the stomach for doing the hard work when the status quo is soooo much easier... Lemmings
I think Brint took too literally the comment that an AD would want to bring in his "own guy." To my mind that doesn't mean that he comes to Missoula with "his guy" already pre-ordained. I suspect it will be difficult enough to bring a truly competent AD into Missoula to sort things out. To further complicate the process you're going to tie him to a short -term interim coach who only delays the implementation of his own plans?... That's a recipe for futility.
Does anyone not realize what a friggin mess Engstrom created when he fired his AD and Head Football coach in one ill-considered move :?: I thought so. This whole depressing situation was totally avoidable :!:
Remove one leg on your chair you can get by. Remove two and you're on your ass. That's our UM athletics as of this moment. Neither Main Hall nor much of GrizNation seem to have the stomach for doing the hard work when the status quo is soooo much easier... Lemmings
Giving a one-year extension for a 70 year old head coach, does not prevent a new AD from bringing in his/her "own guy". Also, at the FCS level, I don't believe new AD's are hired to bring in their own guy. And, as already pointed out, the new AD probably isn't going to make the decision regarding a new head coach.
FCS Go!
Well-known member
Seems a bit early to call for an extension. I would rather see some on-field results first. Stability and continuity won't happen at UM until all the investigations are wrapped up and a new AD is in place. If it's late November and we are not close to a resolution on those matters then it may be time to consider offering an extension. Until then we can play wait and see.
FCS Go! said:
Why would or should the investigations by completed before, or linked to, naming a coach for the 2013 season? This decision doesn't need to made now, but lingering uncertainty regarding a head coach and the continuity of the staff will eventually hurt recruiting. Recruits who have been offered start to make decisions, or start leaning in a direction, as the season progresses. Some recruits verbal in the fall too.
FCS Go!
Well-known member
PR,
I just think that UM would get higher quality applicants if all the investigations were resolved and we had an AD in place. It seems like a candidate might pass on UM if there was still the possibility of NCAA sanctions, DOE/DOJ related action and/or a new AD still incoming. Why walk into that mess if you could stay at your current (presumably good) job or get a position that is basically as good elsewhere?
Again, as far as extending Delaney, I want to see something on the field and I'm not a big fan of the idea of hiring someone just to be a caretaker coach. Recruits are going to chose UM because of the program and the program's health not because some coach can tell them "I'll be here until the end of your red-shirt freshman season".
I just think that UM would get higher quality applicants if all the investigations were resolved and we had an AD in place. It seems like a candidate might pass on UM if there was still the possibility of NCAA sanctions, DOE/DOJ related action and/or a new AD still incoming. Why walk into that mess if you could stay at your current (presumably good) job or get a position that is basically as good elsewhere?
Again, as far as extending Delaney, I want to see something on the field and I'm not a big fan of the idea of hiring someone just to be a caretaker coach. Recruits are going to chose UM because of the program and the program's health not because some coach can tell them "I'll be here until the end of your red-shirt freshman season".
FCS Go! said:
I doubt that many coach candidates would be concerned about the DOJ investigation. It doesn't involve the football team. A prospective coach could probably find out that the ncaa investigation wouldn't be a big deal for him by asking a few questions. Don't think the ncaa investigation is a big deal. Football coaches are competitive and most aren't afraid to take on a challenge. While all of the stuff that has and is occurring at UM is a mess, the biggest question is whether JJ will be the qb in fall, and perhaps who the AD is. The AD is supposed to be in place before the season.
I agree that most recruits are interested in the program, but I also believe some recruits are interested in the head coach, particular assistants who recruited them, and what the offensive scheme will be. Certainly, competitors will try to use this uncertainty to their advantage. If UM loses a half a dozen top recruits, that will hurt. I know of a particular recruit who has been offered and would be positively influenced if Delaney were named the head coach. I suspect that recruits are already liking the new OC. Gregorak is very popular with players and presumably recruits. If I were a recruit, I'd want to know if those guys were going to be around when I arrived on campus.
argh! said:
arghomoto san: Let us dissect your most recent irrelevancy beginning with "...high ranking um officials..." (Who, your barber?) "...planned a long time ago." (Uhh, like when and what's a longtime ago? Ol' Royce has only been on the job less than two years - hardly your long time ago.) "...for good reason." (meaning what exactly? And what is the ominous revelation that would have us keep our collective breaths baited "for a year or so?"... Your discourse is long on vague portent that never gets around to delivering. Sort of like a bad B grade horror flick. (BTW, Charlie would like you to settle up your bar tab...)
GrizBacker04
Well-known member
PlayerRep said:
The extra year does not do anything you mentioned. Assistants, knowing that they possibly/probably would be gone the following year (2013) are still going to jump for a more stable job opportunity if presented one after the upcoming season. And nothing really will keep assistants from going to a more lucrative job offer. Recruiting will be the same as it is right now. Opposing coaches will still say to kids that the current coaching staff could be gone before you get the chance to play for them, since a majority of freshman don't make immediate impacts. So when they are ready to contribute as sophomores/juniors, the coaching staff could be different. Same with your "system" argument. Heck, if given an extra year, Delaney may want to revert back to more running and balanced offense, since he is more a traditional guy.
The extra year would be meaningless. It sure didn't hurt Ohio State in recruiting and such when Fickell was the interim coach for a year. And I think that is a fair comparison -- OSU one of the top FBS schools, UM clearly one of the top FCS schools.
