re: Freeze fired official/coaching search thread

quote:

---

go after his OC if you can't get him.

---

quote:

---

Missing the forest for the trees man.

You don't write a candidate off bc they might happen to fall into one of these "archetypes" that have these low success rates. The success rate is low period and you'd have no candidates left. Maybe saying it a second time will help it click for you.

---

The problem is that placing Durkin in the same bucket as Kiffin as "bad first job hires" is a giant stretch:

1) Kiffin's first college HC job was at Tennessee, where he actually succeeded. He inherited a team that won 5-games in Fulmer's final season, and they went 7-6 in his lone season as the HC. He wasn't fired by Tennessee, he willingly left to take the USC job. People forget, but in his lone season at Tennessee he lost by just 2-points to #1 Alabama and 10-points to #1 Florida.

2) He then "failed" at USC and was ultimately fired, however, they got hit with NCAA sanctions for the Reggie Bush stuff basically as soon as he took the job. He also had a 10-win season at USC and had an overall record of 28-15 with zero seasons under .500. Sure, USC has a much higher floor than Maryland does, but when Kiffin was fired he had 4 full seasons as a HC (and was 5 games into his 5th NCAA season ) and he had produced zero losing seasons. To argue that Durkin's level of failure is comparable to Kiffin's is a pretty big leap in logic.

3) Kiffin's "rehab tour" post-firing at USC was a 3-year stint at a terrible FAU program where he won 2 conference championships in 3 seasons on the job. This cemented his status as someone who can clearly act as a head coach. DJ Durkin taking over a talented roster at Auburn for 3 games is ultimately not going to prove anything, and to pretend that this 3 game stretch at Auburn is comparable to Kiffin's 3 years at FAU is very silly.

So Kiffin's alleged failure was never even close to Durkin's failure, and he had a far longer and more impactful head coaching stint following that failure prior to Ole Miss making him their HC.

If you take out Kiffin, what other noteworthy example is there of someone failing once as a HC, and then succeeding at a bigger school at stop #2 without a legitimate layover in between wherein they actually did succeed? The successful layover is important because it gives credence to the idea that something new was learned and that the coach in question was able to understand and fix whatever led to their firing the first time. Durkin simply does not have this, and therefore you are flying blind and taking a huge leap of faith to assume that his record at Maryland simply isn't reflective of his actual ability as a HC. Acting as an interim HC for just 3 games doesn't signal anything, because we have seen plenty of cases where teams that fire their HC get a new temporary rush of energy that leads to temporary better play (eg: UCLA earlier this season).

quote:

---

False. Part of the reason his name is being brought up is because of his performance against OU, TAM, and UGA - with ZERO offense.

---

False.

Pretend that Durkin was the DC at 4-6 Texas A&M and had put up good good defensive performances against a few teams. You are telling me that he would magically be getting hype by Auburn fans as the HC? GTFO LOL. Auburn fans barely know the names of ~4-5 DC's in the country. The only reason why Durkin's name is mentioned at all is because he is coaching this very team (ie: PROXIMITY BIAS).

By the way - there WAS offense against UGA for the 1st half of football. Durkin's defense didn't do anything in the 2nd half as they conceded 17 points. How is that the fault of the offense? The defense wasn't "tired" considering that the offense held the ball for nearly the entire 1st half. The offense fell apart in the 2nd half, but so did the defense.

Also, him putting up a few great defenses performances despite zero offense isn't as rare or special as you seem to think it is. Kentucky held Texas to just 13 points at the end of regulation earlier this season despite having zero offense.

quote:

---

You don't write a candidate off bc they might happen to fall into one of these "archetypes" that have these low success rates

---

You need to learn what an archetype is. The coaches you mentioned have nothing in common outside of most of them coaching at Bama at some point, and Lanning didn't even do that (though he was a GA for a year).

Durkin isn't an archetype of anything, unless you are saying being a failed coach is an archetype, which would be the broadest archetype of all time. You don't go out of your way to hire failed coaches when you have hired a string of them.

It's as Meta is saying, if Durkin was doing the same thing he is here with a 4-6 Kentucky or A&M team, we wouldn't be hearing his name mentioned by anyone at all for our head coaching position.

quote:

---

Many people don't recognize those names

---

People dont know Matt Patricia?

Come on...

quote:

---

Faulkner didn’t create a tough culture at GT …. Key did that.

---

I was strictly referring to the offense, not the culture, etc. If you can't get Key but like the offense then have your HC go after Faulkner unless he doesn't call the plays.

This isn't rocket science. This is like hiring for your company. You know your culture, you know your company style. You know what types fit & what types don't. You don't hire on nepotism. (Whoops we did that) but you hire what fits. Except someone hired that weirdo Kenny who hangs around the water cooler. The dude you hire has to get along with your big money people. Just like you have to get along with your CEOs/VPs etc. You don't have to be up their asses but you have to get along. Unless you are the best Football Coach & only win. We know that isn't in existence so you have to hire someone that fits. Now if you like an offense style or D style then go out and hire one of those types.