GBRHouston
New member
You have to be willing to make gambles like this. It's what being a good HC is all about. You can't just hire a nobody and expect him to lead your team to the top.the problem is in the case of Muschamp especailly, he wasn't a great coordinator for the time they had him, then a year later they are scrambling for someone else. I'm fine if Strong comes here for a year and coaches the defense up to top 3 in our conference and then leaves. But he can just go elsewhere if we were to hire him, see no markable improvement and he leaves after a year. Not worth it imo unless he brings in the best defensive recruiting class we have ever had in his one year.But if you want great coordinators, that's a chance you have to be willing to take. You don't want to stop hiring talented people with the fear they might leave in a year.I for one am an advocate for this although, this got me thinking about Will Muschamp. Awesome DC at Texas, goes to be the HC at Florida, gets fired after a short tenure and then hops on to the Auburn staff as a DC for one year, not really improving their defense I might add, before bolting to SC. I do not want to hire Charlie Strong for a 1 year pit stop as a DC.I would be in favor of trying to get Charlie Strong as a DC. It's been said numerous times that he'd be an awesome DC.Folks--Banker won't be fired unless they can line up a quality DC to replace him first...and honestly, there aren't a lot of those on the market, and I don't think we can afford to risk promoting a position coach up.
Plus, would terminating Banker impact our recruitment? I haven't kept up on our recruiting...
Last edited by a moderator: