re: What I’m hearing (coaching search)

quote:

---

Of course the media doesn’t give 2 shits about Auburn. But what’s up with Ole Miss’ reported interest and Florida’s open interest in Sumrall? Yes, everyone can be wrong on him. But it’s not like the media is trying to dupe Auburn into hiring a coach nobody else has any interest in. That said, it looks like we missed on Sumrall (for better or worse), so we better come up with another viable candidate who isn’t our own DC fast.

---

Cohen is playing 5D chess by ramping up Sumrall’s importance to avert everyone’s attention from DJ Durkin. Then bam, snags Durkin away from the other schools. Brilliant

quote:

---

God damn Auburn is a loser school. Fighting over G5 coaches instead of getting in the mix on big names.

---

Who would be your top 3 choices?

Dude. I didn’t say I wanted Durkin. Our ad is a moron

This coaching search has turned into the perfect representation of this season. Started off feeling optimistic, and dreaming about what could be. Slowly moved into the well that's concerning but no need to panic phase. Now the losses are piling up, and we are exploring new ways to lose. Anger is percolating, and will soon boil over into a rage if we fumble at the goal line again.


oh and some are still holding out hope that just like an improbably Iron Bowl victory, we'll back our way into a victory on the coaching search front despite showing our arse for the last 50 yards

quote:

---

It’s not about Sumrall. It’s about losing our top candidate to a school I consider a lateral move, and about our AD botching this AGAIN.

---

Remove Florida from the equation.

You willing to pay Sumerall $10m a year?

I’d rather not overpay a guy just because Florida wants him. He’s far from a slam dunk.

Wouldn't shock me.

I mean if Auburn is gonna just accept not wanting to try and be the best I’m sure that there are a lot of rich people that could save some money with support.

If I was some rich frick funding all this I’d be wondering where my ROI is?

My point was Auburn, with all the booster and fan support, recruiting footprint, history, should be able to take almost any coach they want.

Maybe I’m delusional lol. Probably so.

quote:

---

My point was Auburn, with all the booster and fan support, recruiting footprint, history, should be able to take almost any coach they want. Maybe I’m delusional lol. Probably so.

---

Ok so who do you want?

quote:

---

Remove Florida from the equation.

You willing to pay Sumerall $10m a year?

I’d rather not overpay a guy just because Florida wants him. He’s far from a slam dunk.

---

Finding a winning coach is already hard enough. You put in so much effort into analysis and research, and you conclude that Sumrall is your clear #1 guy. No, that doesn't guarantee that he will succeed, but if he is your #1 guy then your research has clearly concluded that he is the most likely to succeed...otherwise he shouldn't be your #1 guy in the first place.

So why would defaulting to the cheaper "back-up" plan be more likely to succeed? This implies that you believe that you have multiple coaches lined up who will all produce similar winning results. But this is an absurd thought from the start, because if it was possible to predict with this much certainty then you wouldn't see so many failed coaches hired every single year. The reality is that doing all your homework and landing your clear #1 guy could still fail miserably, so what makes you think that you can guarantee that your #2 or #3 options are going to be even close to the guy you had at #1?

This was the same logic used on Freeze as well, by the way. "Well, he's not Kiffin, but he is going to be a lot cheaper and will probably only produce marginally worse results". But as we saw, he wasn't even close to Kiffin, and even the $6M we were paying him was too much money given how bad he was. Three years ago there was a lot of spinning about how Kiffin was going to cost more money than what he was "worth", and how Freeze was going to come in on a discount which would give us more flexibility to hire assistants and pay players. Yes - he came in at a discount because nobody else wanted him. Why would hiring a coach that none of your rivals want be a likely path to success?

Even if you get Durkin for $5-6M and he actually succeeds, you will VERY QUICKLY have to bump him up to $10+M anyway (just like you saw Mizzou do with Drinkwitz). And bumping him up to $10+M won't guarantee that he will continue winning either, as we already saw with Malzahn. The money angle is already a losing proposition from the beginning.

The other part to this: you may feel that Sumrall isn't "worth" $10M, but another SEC school clearly does. Who else would hire Durkin for $5-6M today to be their HC? Answer: nobody, given that we know that he really hasn't been a candidate in any opening apart from our own. So why would Durkin at ~$5-6M be a better "deal" than Sumrall for $9-10M? At least with the latter you are "overpaying" for a guy that is in demand and that your SEC rivals also believe is worth overpaying for. Paying Durkin $6M is a gamble on a coach that nobody else in this conference wants leading their program, which should give you pause.