midnight orange
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2012
- Messages
- 3,056
- Likes
- 3,662
I agree with the post except that Dooley did have a resume and it wasn’t good. His hiring was a total head scratcher.I wasn’t upset at the hire, but I wasn’t jumping for joy. I was fully aware that Heupel’s record at UCF wouldn’t have sloped downward had Dillon Gabriel not been injured. I think they were 5-1 before he got hurt and then lost the next 5 or something like that.
I thought it was probably the absolute best hire we could make at that specific point in time. After Pruitt, I didn’t think anyone would touch us with a 10 foot pole.
At the same time, I wasn’t pumped up about it for the same reason… because Heupel was the best we could do.
Looking back on it, it was foolish. Bama moved mountains to hire Saban, but he was a mercenary at that point. All the fawning over Gruden (I’m as guilty as the next guy) was ridiculous.
Good coaches are good coaches. Look at UGA. Richt and Smart had no HC experience when they were hired. Auburn hired Malzahn from Tulsa (though he had the ties to the school from his time with Chizik). Urban had been at Utah when Florida hired him (and before they joined a P-5 conference).
It just shows that you don’t need to pull a USC/Lincoln Riley to come out on top. For boosters at schools like Texas and LSU, it’s about ego. They think it’s a win to steal a big name coach, but big name coaches come with egos and baggage from their previous success. They aren’t open to adapting to their new environment.
You are going to strike out occasionally with an up and comer. Butch is a prime example (Hamilton should’ve been canned the moment he even suggested Dooley over Sumlin or leaving Cutcliffe out because of staffing demands- Dooley had nothing on his resume to say he had what it took to coach here). Many traditional powers have made boneheaded moves like it (look at Bama pre-Saban) and come out on top. Hopefully it’s a lesson we’ve all learned.