Factors to consider when evaluating other head coaches

[buffaholic]

Since Bohn seems to be going after a current head coach, here are a few things Bohn should ask to avoid the Hawkins mistake again:

1. has candidate turned a program around, over a period of time - by coaching his guys up and recruiting increasingly better players?
2. you can eliminate the concern that he is just using some other coach's players (Fresno State) but has done this with his guys.
3. you can eliminate that he's not the lucky recipient of a really hot assistant coach (Hawkins with Peterson)
4. you can establish that he is a football guru, usually means he was a coordinator at one point (this can be tricky)

(none of these factors necessarily eliminates a guy, but you want to understand these items if you are comparing coaches)

Any coach ought to be able to discuss at length the pro's and con's of the various spread offenses, why the NFL isn't using it, why people don't seem to slow down Oregon (however Stanford did). This is a huge issue confronting our conference. What is the strategy to defend it? What is your offensive philosophy and how do you know it will work at this level? Is it a prayer or is their evidence to support your opinions?

What will your assistant coaches look like (more than a few of us howled when EB was announced as the plan)? How risky are they?

We've discussed in the past how important is experience in the region for recruiting (CO, CA, TX)? Helpful, but assistant coaches really have this responsibility. See Jim Mora's staff. How much background did Mora have? Harbaugh?

Yes, there are recruiting superstars out there, but staffs who've turned a program around are very likely to have good eyes for talent and the ability to sell their program/system to recruits. Assuming again, that they improved a program measurably over a period of time. I think Embree is a good recruiter, but it didn't matter much as nobody was going to buy into what he was selling in the end. Results talk louder than words.

 

[CUFan]

Do we think Bohn performed a thorough review of Boyle? Obviously to some degree he got lucky (Boyle is an absolute home run for CU), but did he do a thorough evaluation? If so, I have hope this time around.

 

[BuffUp]

Do we think Bohn performed a thorough review of Boyle? Obviously to some degree he got lucky (Boyle is an absolute home run for CU), but did he do a thorough evaluation? If so, I have hope this time around.

They really need to lock him down with some $ - before we lose that "home run"

 

[J.R. Ewing]

5. - Need to make sure he's increased excellence and not just coasting on the fumes of the guy before him (think Neuheisel's 95 and 96 seasons)

 

[dply]

They really need to lock him down with some $ - before we lose that "home run"

:lol:

 

[SECOBuffsFan]

This has got to be a big name, proven winner coach. I think Bohn has Tedford on his short list.

 

[buffaholic]

5. - Need to make sure he's increased excellence and not just coasting on the fumes of the guy before him (think Neuheisel's 95 and 96 seasons)

I think #1, #2 and #3 pretty much cover the situation you describe in item #5.

 

[buffaholic]

Do we think Bohn performed a thorough review of Boyle? Obviously to some degree he got lucky (Boyle is an absolute home run for CU), but did he do a thorough evaluation? If so, I have hope this time around.

Yes - I think someone did this. They had 3 great candidates and frankly, all of them could have been very good. Tad Boyle certainly passed all these tests (although some of these are less relevant in MBB). Boyle played and coached in successful systems. His system worked at UNC and he proved he could turn a program around. And of course, once you actually would interview that guy, you would feel pretty comfortable.

I don't think people did this with Hawkins. They were "convinced" - perhaps by Neinas, that Hawkins was so hot, they had to move fast and get him on a contract. There were plenty of concerns that the above test could have surfaced.

Note that some great coaches wouldn't have passed all of these tests. They are just things to be aware of. Did DeRuyter build the Fresno State success? No. So then lets look at his body of work as a DC. I was impressed with his body of work at AFA. At aTm, not as much. But at aTm, under an NFL guy, everyone was struggling to adapt to the new wave of offense hitting the Big 12 and not too many people have slowed it down yet.

Bottom line, dig deep enough to get some discussion points. Who on our side is the guy asking those questions from a football scenario?

 

[Highlander27]

Well, no Urban Meyer to UF or Kevin Sumlin to A&M for Buffaholic. He knows better.

As important as it is to build a program from the ground up, isn't it just as important to show coachability with the group you inheret? For instance Fresno State offensive stars had a great cast. No arguing that. While they could have left what they did last year alone, they switched offenses from the pro style they ran to a spread FLAWLESSLY, retaining similar or better statistics, in fact they had more balance as 3 WR's caught over 50 balls. However that same offensive unit which did well the previous year statistically, also went 4-9 had had one of the worst defenses in their conference. This year Fresno switched from a 4-3 to DeRuyter's 3-4 which historically has provided bounty's to the team that have hired him, and the team went 9-3 and won a conference championship sharing it with Boise St. It was the best season they've had since 1999. The locals in the valley all say the same thing... they couldn't be more impressed with how the defense performed this year and it gave us a chance to win. Moving forward, look at CU's problem... they are many... offense... defense... special teams. Fact is if you have a good defense, and a solid running game, you will have a chance in games. You will not win giving up 40-70 pts to teams in a league that features high scoring. The team that can keep the score down wins... look at the Pac 12 championship game... Stanford & UCLA... both teams are known for defense vs their high power offense. That is the way the conference is going. People are following the SEC model to play Oregon and other high flying teams. In fact, that is exactly what Jim McElwain said about Fresno's defense when CSU got ready to play them in Oct:

http://www.fresnobee.com/2012/10/06/3019381/fresno-state-defense-has-an-sec.html

You can try to rob a coach of credit but the fact is, good coaches are fast tracked and can work with what they are given and produce. That's what we did not have under Hawkins or Embree. Like a klutz, they continued to force their systems on players which did not fit instead of adapting. That's how you get the standings we've had the past few years. DeRuyter strikes me as a guy who has confidence in his attacking 3-4 defense (proven over a decade at numerous locations) and a guy who understands that you need to score points and has adopted the spread for the offensive parts of his team.

Add in that the guy has roots in Cali where he was born, Texas where he coached, and Colorado where played, graduated and coached for the Air Force academy, the guy has a very good lay of the land for what we need IMO. I think that there are three pretty solid mid-level HC's out there in DeRuyter, Doerern, & Andersen. We'll see who interviews the best and presents the best case to be the coach to turn around the University of Colorado.