Who do you want as head coach?

[bigbird 60,549]

1 hour ago, metafour said:

Why? I see absolutely nothing in Elliot's resume that I'd take over Billy Napier even looking past the fact that Napier is actually in his 3rd season as a HC.

Both would be great, I just prefer Elliot. I think his proven success as a dominant OC and learning 10 years under Dabo is a bit better than the 3 years as a HC. That's not to say those 3 years aren't worth a lot. Napier, to me, is similar to Matt Campbell, although I would put Napier higher due to his time with Saban.

https://clemsontigers.com/coaches/tony-elliott/

You can't deny what he has done isn't impressive.

[Mike4AU 1,739]

20 hours ago, DAG said:

I don’t believe the Campbell due to the fact he has a sizable buyout we would have to pay to get him here. 

As of June 2020 his buyout was $6 million.  His contract was extended to 2025.  

[wcware 1,365]

I’m sticking with James Franklin. I don’t know why, seems about as good as anyone else. I just pray with whoever the new coach is, that we have a culture change and give them full control win, lose, or draw

[JBiGGiE 2,488]

2 hours ago, wcware said:

I’m sticking with James Franklin. I don’t know why, seems about as good as anyone else. I just pray with whoever the new coach is, that we have a culture change and give them full control win, lose, or draw

James Franklin is the head coach of the premier football school in his home state in a very winnable division of the Big Ten. Why on earth would he leave that to come fix the mess we have down in Auburn, AL? Because our money going to buy out his $35.4 Million contract? After buying out Auburn's $30-35 Million coach and staff?

Unless Auburn's been hiding an oil tycoon on its donor list, I don't see this fantasy ever playing out.

[AUwent 3,754]

20 minutes ago, JBiGGiE said:

James Franklin is the head coach of the premier football school in his home state in a very winnable division of the Big Ten. Why on earth would he leave that to come fix the mess we have down in Auburn, AL? Because our money going to buy out his $35.4 Million contract? After buying out Auburn's $30-35 Million coach and staff?

Unless Auburn's been hiding an oil tycoon on its donor list, I don't see this fantasy ever playing out.

It would’ve been nice if we had hired him from Vandy in 2012...

[WarEagleTW2 6]

I know this is a “what’s he smoking?” suggestion, but how about doubling Sean McVey’s salary and get someone with NFL ties to bring in advisors to recruit NFL talent here and create a pipeline to the NFL through Auburn. 

[DAG 33,990]

If money is really a huge issue than I think we are either going to have to be fine with a successful coordinator from a big school or a successful power 5 coach. 

[gr82be 14,433]

2 minutes ago, DAG said:

If money is really a huge issue than I think we are either going to have to be fine with a successful coordinator from a big school or a successful power 5 coach. 

And if that's the case it's just a short trip up 280 to Birmingham. 

[Amwest20 139]

IF and only IF Gus Malzahn gets fired,  I gotta go with Fleck as my current preference.  2nd choice is Steele.  Either way I want Steele to stay.  

[aubaseball 2,624]

2 hours ago, Amwest20 said:

Either way I want Steele to stay.  

No. No and triple no.   And you can’t be serious about him as Head Coach.   That would be the ultimate Auburn being Auburn.  

[atl-tiger 655]

Did I just see Sean McVay and Kevin Steele on this same page? 

[leglessdan 1,934]

2 hours ago, Amwest20 said:

IF and only IF Gus Malzahn gets fired,  I gotta go with Fleck as my current preference.  2nd choice is Steele.  Either way I want Steele to stay.  

I think Fleck is waiting on Harbaugh to get canned from Michigan. Just a hunch

[MadtownTiger 363]

I'm curious what other people's expectations are for the next few years.

New staff or old staff, we're not going to supplant uat and UGA any time soon, so what goals can we realistically reach?

How long until we're at least competitive on NSD as well as go .500 or better against out two main rivals?

WDE!

[wcware 1,365]

11 hours ago, JBiGGiE said:

James Franklin is the head coach of the premier football school in his home state in a very winnable division of the Big Ten. Why on earth would he leave that to come fix the mess we have down in Auburn, AL? Because our money going to buy out his $35.4 Million contract? After buying out Auburn's $30-35 Million coach and staff?

Unless Auburn's been hiding an oil tycoon on its donor list, I don't see this fantasy ever playing out.

Nobody asked you anyway. I just want to say my crazy name too. Geesh

[Amwest20 139]

11 hours ago, WarEagleTW2 said:

I know this is a “what’s he smoking?” suggestion, but how about doubling Sean McVey’s salary and get someone with NFL ties to bring in advisors to recruit NFL talent here and create a pipeline to the NFL through Auburn. 

I just done a genuine LOL, but there’s an element of brilliance to it.  

[metafour 4,969]

2 hours ago, bigbird said:

Both would be great, I just prefer Elliot. I think his proven success as a dominant OC and learning 10 years under Dabo is a bit better than the 3 years as a HC. That's not to say those 3 years aren't worth a lot. Napier, to me, is similar to Matt Campbell, although I would put Napier higher due to his time with Saban.

https://clemsontigers.com/coaches/tony-elliott/

You can't deny what he has done isn't impressive.

But this is actually his first season at Clemson as the sole OC - the title was shared in prior years with Jeff Scott who just left to take the South Florida HC job. And the way that normally works is that the WR coach (Jeff Scott) would handle most of the actual passing offense (which is the "bigger" role realistically). This might also be reflected in the fact that Scott ultimately got a HC gig before Elliott, which also begs another question: if his counterpart left for the USF job, is Elliott really that much more "qualified" than Scott was to get the Auburn job, which is significantly bigger? I can't imagine that one extra year at Clemson as the "sole" OC gives Elliott that much of a boost over Scott.

To me, the reason why I'd never take Elliott over Napier is simple: Napier's resume is much deeper and more complete, and ultimately the goal here is to check off as many boxes as possible. While they both have time spent under Swinney, Napier also has 5 seasons under Saban, and he was also AHC at Colorado State for a year, and OC at Arizona State for a season. Unlike Elliot, he's never "shared" the OC title with anyone else. The biggest differentiator of course is that Napier is in his 3rd season as HC and doing extremely well. That type of experience can't be replicated, and it at least shows SOME competence for actually running a program, even if its at a mid-major. 

Basically; I think that everything that you can say as a "plus" for Elliott is also a "plus" for Napier, but Napier also has other "pluses" that Elliott can't match at this point - the most significant being actual HC experience. After Chizik and Malzahn fiasco's, I think you'd be taking a pretty astronomical risk making a guy like Elliott the HC with zero experience and a few seasons as "co-OC" at Clemson. He obviously looks like a promising coach, but his next step looks more realistic to be a stop at a program USF (like his former counterpart) as opposed to an Auburn-level job.

[McLoofus 35,182]

16 minutes ago, metafour said:

the way that normally works is that the WR coach (Jeff Scott) would handle most of the actual passing offense (which is the "bigger" role realistically)

If accurate, I wonder if that somewhat explains why good offense has been a constant under Dabo.

[aubiefifty 16,803]

16 hours ago, WarEagleTW2 said:

I know this is a “what’s he smoking?” suggestion, but how about doubling Sean McVey’s salary and get someone with NFL ties to bring in advisors to recruit NFL talent here and create a pipeline to the NFL through Auburn. 

you say that like what he is smoking is a bad thing.........grins

[metafour 4,969]

18 minutes ago, McLoofus said:

If accurate, I wonder if that somewhat explains why good offense has been a constant under Dabo.

The constant is definitely Dabo as we've seen that the offense didn't collapse after Morrias left (in fact it got even better lol). Generally speaking; if a WR and RB coach are carrying "co-OC" titles, it is expected that the WR coach is handling the pass offense. I don't know enough about Clemson's configuration to guess in terms of who was actually calling plays or if that was a shared duty as well. In this case Elliott himself played WR but is coaching RB's so I'm sure he is competent in that aspect, on top of being under Dabo this entire time.

[bigbird 60,549]

37 minutes ago, metafour said:

But this is actually his first season at Clemson as the sole OC - the title was shared in prior years with Jeff Scott who just left to take the South Florida HC job. And the way that normally works is that the WR coach (Jeff Scott) would handle most of the actual passing offense (which is the "bigger" role realistically). This might also be reflected in the fact that Scott ultimately got a HC gig before Elliott, which also begs another question: if his counterpart left for the USF job, is Elliott really that much more "qualified" than Scott was to get the Auburn job, which is significantly bigger? I can't imagine that one extra year at Clemson as the "sole" OC gives Elliott that much of a boost over Scott.

To me, the reason why I'd never take Elliott over Napier is simple: Napier's resume is much deeper and more complete, and ultimately the goal here is to check off as many boxes as possible. While they both have time spent under Swinney, Napier also has 5 seasons under Saban, and he was also AHC at Colorado State for a year, and OC at Arizona State for a season. Unlike Elliot, he's never "shared" the OC title with anyone else. The biggest differentiator of course is that Napier is in his 3rd season as HC and doing extremely well. That type of experience can't be replicated, and it at least shows SOME competence for actually running a program, even if its at a mid-major. 

Basically; I think that everything that you can say as a "plus" for Elliott is also a "plus" for Napier, but Napier also has other "pluses" that Elliott can't match at this point - the most significant being actual HC experience. After Chizik and Malzahn fiasco's, I think you'd be taking a pretty astronomical risk making a guy like Elliott the HC with zero experience and a few seasons as "co-OC" at Clemson. He obviously looks like a promising coach, but his next step looks more realistic to be a stop at a program USF (like his former counterpart) as opposed to an Auburn-level job.

While I agree Napier is an attractive candidate for all the reasons you listed, I think Tony Elliot has a hire ceiling.  Him being rumored for NFL jobs says a lot of what people in the industry think of his abilities and potential. Ido like Napier too though.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.greenvilleonline.com/amp/4448758002

[metafour 4,969]

13 minutes ago, bigbird said:

While I agree Napier is an attractive candidate for all the reasons you listed, I think Tony Elliot has a hire ceiling.  Him being rumored for NFL jobs says a lot of what people in the industry think of his abilities and potential. Ido like Napier too though.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.greenvilleonline.com/amp/4448758002

I mean, that article is a bit of a fallacy because theoretically had Napier never left Clemson, how are we certain that that article wouldn't be written about HIM? When you move around to further your career/gain new experience, you don't get the opportunity to entrench yourself in one place to get these glowing reviews of endorsement. That also looks like a local newspaper writing about a Clemson coach so there's a bit of bias naturally built in there as well - for example claiming that Elliott is "probably better than Rhule and Joe Brady already" (which obviously can't be proven and is impossible to even compare). The article does state that even Elliott himself believed that he was only a token-interview for the Panthers, so we can't even conclude that he has actual "NFL interest". 

[bigbird 60,549]

2 minutes ago, metafour said:

I mean, that article is a bit of a fallacy because theoretically had Napier never left Clemson, how are we certain that that article wouldn't be written about HIM? When you move around to further your career/gain new experience, you don't get the opportunity to entrench yourself in one place to get these glowing reviews of endorsement. That also looks like a local newspaper writing about a Clemson coach so there's a bit of bias naturally built in there as well - for example claiming that Elliott is "probably better than Rhule and Joe Brady already" (which obviously can't be proven and is impossible to even compare). The article does state that even Elliott himself believed that he was only a token-interview for the Panthers, so we can't even conclude that he has actual "NFL interest". 

Fair enough.

[Gowebb11 9,328]

43 minutes ago, bigbird said:

While I agree Napier is an attractive candidate for all the reasons you listed, I think Tony Elliot has a hire ceiling.  Him being rumored for NFL jobs says a lot of what people in the industry think of his abilities and potential. Ido like Napier too though.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.greenvilleonline.com/amp/4448758002

I appreciate your support of Elliot. I knew little about him but researched him after your recommendation and his resume is indeed eye catching. I hope he’s on our short list for sure. 

[DAG 33,990]

I think the major difference that gives Elliot a bit of a benefit of a doubt is he learned and saw first hand how to build a dominant program from one of the best. With that said, nothing can honestly take the precedent over true head coaching experience for multiple years. Either way , I would be open to both guys.

[auburn4ever 1,266]

My top 3. James Franklin, Mario Cristabol, Billy Napier. After those, I'd go for Urban Meyer, Bob Stoops, PJ Fleck.