(12-01-2018 02:38 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: (12-01-2018 02:51 AM)AllTideUp Wrote: 1. Why do you voluntarily take a lower buyout if you have no desire to fulfill the contract? If you don't want to do it anymore then just take your money and go home. You're going to have to give me some semblance of a rational explanation there.
You voluntarily take a lower buyout because you have no leverage renewing after losing seasons. You're renewing anyway because with only 3 years left on the contract you're going to have to explain to recruits exactly who it is going to be coaching that last year. You also take a lower buyout if you're not really interested in coaching elsewhere. In his retirement presser in his own words he was "taking a break" to, among things, follow his daughter's career now that she just became a professional opera singer. To say nothing of time with his wife.
Well, I get that he had no leverage, but leverage is something you're worried about if you want to continue coaching. If you're ready to spend more time with your family then that's wonderful, but what was the point of moving forward with a long term plan when your priorities are elsewhere?
Instead of taking a lower buyout, he should have either retired last year or announced that he would be coaching one more season. That makes more sense on a lot of levels...he gets more money, doesn't have to worry about the recruiting game, and gives his program plenty of time to move ahead with a replacement plan.
He stated in one of those articles that he would know when the time was right because it "wouldn't be fun anymore." So in March and throughout the entire season he thought it was fun, but suddenly decided 3 days after the season was over that it was no longer any fun. That doesn't make any sense.
(12-01-2018 02:38 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: (12-01-2018 02:51 AM)AllTideUp Wrote: 2. Why do you sign an extension in March? Because frankly the given reason makes no sense. Signing Day was long gone. You're telling me that as recently as March, Paul Johnson had absolutely no idea he would only coach one more season? That makes no sense. How much recruiting did he have time to do since March? That and there's the abundantly obvious question...triple option offense doesn't depend on high caliber players. Who exactly were they worried about impressing?
As he said in the 2nd linked article, while signing the extension he was unsure about how much longer he wanted to keep coaching. He said in the presser had Bobinski still been here he would have already retired.
I get that he didn't work well with Bobinski, but it doesn't make sense he had no idea he would only coach one more season as recently as March. Signing Day was over and he wouldn't even stick around long enough for the subsequent early signing period.
BTW, if it's a matter of recruits being uncertain who is going to coach them then the time to take care of that was much earlier. You'd think the recruits would have wanted to know what his future was back during the previous December because at the end of 2017 he only had 3 seasons left on the deal.
The question is how hard did he recruit in that interim period? Did he push as hard as he normally would? If so then that raises question about his intentions. If he mailed it in a little bit then you know he was getting read to leave.
(12-01-2018 02:38 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: (12-01-2018 02:51 AM)AllTideUp Wrote: 3. Typically, when a coach is ready to retire, these things are settled before the season is over. There's a goodbye tour, a nice warm sendoff maybe...because you sure as heck know what you're going to do before the final game is played. It's notable that Johnson retires within a few days of the last game. It's almost as if some discussions had to occur that may or may not have been dependent on the season's record and/or the result against Georgia.
Not necessarily. There was no farewell tour for Bill Snyder up in the Little Apple either. There was no farewell tour for Cremins in hoops. Plenty of coaches think they have more in the tank until, at the end of a brutal season, they just don't. If farewell tours is more your thing I recommend MLB.
Sometimes, even the greats get pushed out. It happened to Bobby Bowden and it's happened to plenty of others who weren't so great.
(12-01-2018 02:38 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: (12-01-2018 02:51 AM)AllTideUp Wrote: 4. I never said Paul Johnson would certainly fulfill the contract. I did not contradict your assertion that he openly speculated about retiring. What I said is that you don't sign an extension and then immediately leave if you never had any intention whatsoever of serving out the contract.
He didn't immediately leave. He coached an additional season ... one that saw him star out hideously at 1-3 with self-inflicted losses to USF and Pitt. The second of those two proved decisive in keeping him out of the ACC CG. In addition he's never looked more inept against the inbreds. When Chan Gailey had his blood letting against the leg humpers his team just flat gave up in the middle of the game. They weren't giving up and the score coulda been just as bad.
Immediately, perhaps hyperbole, but in the sense that he never came close to working the full 5 seasons.
But again, the combination of the season's performance as well as the timing of the announcement makes me think his role with the program was reviewed after the season was over.
(12-01-2018 02:38 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: (12-01-2018 02:51 AM)AllTideUp Wrote: 5. Why would you interview a guy like Ken Whisenhunt? This is the question you danced around. I'm not a GT administrator and won't proclaim to know whether the guy definitely gets hired, but he's not your "top candidate" as reported by Adam Rittenberg if you have no issue with Paul Johnson's philosophy. Rittenberg went on to report that Clemson OC Tony Elliott is in the mix. If GT wants to continue with the option that has allegedly served them so well then there aren't many guys that run that system and the first thing you do is start talking to guys that have the same pedigree as Paul Johnson. You don't start talking to prominent NFL guys with essentially no college background within 2 days of your coach retiring.
He is an alumni. He is a letter winner. He was looked at last time because at the time he was HC of the Cardinals, headed for a Super Bowl apperance, and a rising coaching star in the NFL. He has since had a hideous stretch with the Titans full of futility. That takes a lot of luster off. But you still interview him as a common courtesy because, again, he's an alumni and letter winner. If Saban retired and Julio Jones wanted the job would he get it? No. Would he be extended the common courtesy of an interview since he was an alumni and letter winner? Yes. It's the polite way to say "not now, but maybe later."
No, Julio Jones would absolutely not receive an interview. You don't bother interviewing people that aren't qualified or that you don't have any intention of hiring under certain circumstances. That's an absolute waste of time.
I'm sure there's a ton of GT alumni out there. How many of them are receiving interviews?
To your earlier point, what motivation does the media have to create a narrative? To pull something out of their arse? Why would the national media care who the GT coach is? Why would they report on 2 separate candidates unless they had good sources?
More to the point, Whisenhunt may have been looked at last time, but let's be real here. No coach is leaving an NFL head coaching gig for a college job unless it's for a very good reason. That was wishful thinking on the part of GT administration. It would have been an absolute downgrade to leave the Cardinals for a program like GT in those circumstances. That's not a knock, just being honest.
If they can get Whisenhunt this time then they should absolutely pull the trigger. NFL success or the lack thereof doesn't necessarily prove a guy's worth.
Also, Tony Elliott is not a GT alum and he's definitely not an option guy.
