"I disagree as to Turner Gill. Turner is clearly a great man of character. He is a good role model. He was a fine player and has a fine NU background. He would love the job and work tirelessly. All this is good. But, when he was a position coach at NU he was, frankly, unimpressive. Poor technique plagued his players and little to no improvement was seen over time. As a head coach, I doubt that he would command the attention of recruits."
Good Grief!! Turner Gill was unimpressive as a position coach?? Go back and watch Tommie Frazier pass when he was a freshman with about a 44% passing completion rate, then watch his senior year with 56% and finish second in the Heisman voting (which he should have won). Same with Scott Frost from early in his first year to his senior and Eric Crouch won the Heisman for heavens sakes.
You do have a good point in that both Crouch and Frost improved. Yet both had poor mechanics throwing, both had poor field vision, both had limited ability to check off to secondary receivers --- and these skills did not improve with time. What did improve was running the option and both were very gifted, naturally for that purpose, and so both naturally improved and prospered. Perhpas I should clarify my point --- neither quarterback improved as passers, at least in terms of mechanics, delivery off of the wrong foot, staring down receivers, etc. They had modestly better passing numbers with time (largely due to better running games and better people around them providing better context to throw. Yet, I think it clear that at least then, Turner Gill did very little of impact in training these two men (Crouch and Frost) in terms of development as QB's in their passing game. Now it could be argued that he did not need to or that what not his emphasis at the time. But most coaches would not allow their HS QB's to retain the mechanics that either Crouch or Frost had --- much less a college coach. Therein lies my questioning Turner Gill.
That said, things may have changed and he has perhaps improved. And, he will likely not be the coach of the QB's were he to come here as a HC. But, if past performance is a predictor of future success (and admittedly, it is not always the case) I question the wisdom of giving Turner Gill serious consideration.
For that matter, i question Bo Pelini as well. Little experience. Several question marks there as well (different questions than with turner Gill). Lets get a certifiably successful HC who has been a HC already, who has successfully rebuilt a team already and is verifiably excellent. Give me Paul Johnson.
Johnson would be hired over Turner Gill by, I would think, 9/10 AD's. The question is whether he will be either considered or consider us.
