This is a bottom tier PAC job ... if I was Lake I'd take the interview for the experience but I'd wait and target either the UCLA or ASU jobs when they come available
Those are big jobs for a guy who doesn't even call the defensive plays. I don't think he would be a bad hire necessarily, but he doesn't have the resume. That's what the perception will be and they will hire some moderately successful coach from another program.
Lake would be a good, but risky hire for Cal. He has the right demeanor to be a head coach. And he can recruit.
Cheap, too. This is a move in surprised more programs don't pursue -- take a flier on an obvious stud of a coach who is on his way to a being a "legitimate" head coach candidate in a few years.
Save a ton of money and, if you get the right guy, huge competitive advantage to get him first.
Instead programs pay huge salaries for retreads and has beens.
You mean like the Sark hire?
Lake has actually developed guys that weren't 4 and 5 stars. He's also probably not an alcoholic.
Here's a question I always wonder about regarding these coaching vacancies--
How much does your average athletic director really know about the nuances of running a football program, and how do they evaluate candidates? The notion that Lake can develop players and recruit effectively, while Sark cannot seems obvious to us given we follow these things closely, but how obvious would that be to average Joe AD?
And if you have an AD without a football background (Cohen?), how the fuck do they evaluate football coaches when they have them in for interviews?
Kind of rambling here but I guess I'm mostly curious what the hell actually happens in these interviews. How does a P12 program interview someone like Pat Hill and think that's actually a good idea?
This is a bottom tier PAC job ... if I was Lake I'd take the interview for the experience but I'd wait and target either the UCLA or ASU jobs when they come available
Those are big jobs for a guy who doesn't even call the defensive plays. I don't think he would be a bad hire necessarily, but he doesn't have the resume. That's what the perception will be and they will hire some moderately successful coach from another program.
Lake is going to have to go away to an FCS or mid-major if he wants to climb the head coaching ladder. His resume is too weak at this point. No way he gets a P5 head job. He'll get his name thrown out there and probably an interview as a collegiate nod to the Rooney Rule.
Quite honestly, Tosh 2.0 can make a stronger case for a head job than Lake (sans coffee cup fiasco) at this point.
This is a bottom tier PAC job ... if I was Lake I'd take the interview for the experience but I'd wait and target either the UCLA or ASU jobs when they come available
Those are big jobs for a guy who doesn't even call the defensive plays. I don't think he would be a bad hire necessarily, but he doesn't have the resume. That's what the perception will be and they will hire some moderately successful coach from another program.
Lake is going to have to go away to an FCS or mid-major if he wants to climb the head coaching ladder. His resume is too weak at this point. No way he gets a P5 head job. He'll get his name thrown out there and probably an interview as a collegiate nod to the Rooney Rule.
Quite honestly, Tosh 2.0 can make a stronger case for a head job than Lake (sans coffee cup fiasco) at this point.
Lake would be a good, but risky hire for Cal. He has the right demeanor to be a head coach. And he can recruit.
Cheap, too. This is a move in surprised more programs don't pursue -- take a flier on an obvious stud of a coach who is on his way to a being a "legitimate" head coach candidate in a few years.
Save a ton of money and, if you get the right guy, huge competitive advantage to get him first.
Instead programs pay huge salaries for retreads and has beens.
You mean like the Sark hire?
Lake has actually developed guys that weren't 4 and 5 stars. He's also probably not an alcoholic.
Here's a question I always wonder about regarding these coaching vacancies--
How much does your average athletic director really know about the nuances of running a football program, and how do they evaluate candidates? The notion that Lake can develop players and recruit effectively, while Sark cannot seems obvious to us given we follow these things closely, but how obvious would that be to average Joe AD?
And if you have an AD without a football background (Cohen?), how the fuck do they evaluate football coaches when they have them in for interviews?
Kind of rambling here but I guess I'm mostly curious what the hell actually happens in these interviews. How does a P12 program interview someone like Pat Hill and think that's actually a good idea?
Lake would be a good, but risky hire for Cal. He has the right demeanor to be a head coach. And he can recruit.
Cheap, too. This is a move in surprised more programs don't pursue -- take a flier on an obvious stud of a coach who is on his way to a being a "legitimate" head coach candidate in a few years.
Save a ton of money and, if you get the right guy, huge competitive advantage to get him first.
Instead programs pay huge salaries for retreads and has beens.
You mean like the Sark hire?
Lake has actually developed guys that weren't 4 and 5 stars. He's also probably not an alcoholic.
Here's a question I always wonder about regarding these coaching vacancies--
How much does your average athletic director really know about the nuances of running a football program, and how do they evaluate candidates? The notion that Lake can develop players and recruit effectively, while Sark cannot seems obvious to us given we follow these things closely, but how obvious would that be to average Joe AD?
And if you have an AD without a football background (Cohen?), how the fuck do they evaluate football coaches when they have them in for interviews?
Kind of rambling here but I guess I'm mostly curious what the hell actually happens in these interviews. How does a P12 program interview someone like Pat Hill and think that's actually a good idea?
Lake would be a good, but risky hire for Cal. He has the right demeanor to be a head coach. And he can recruit.
Cheap, too. This is a move in surprised more programs don't pursue -- take a flier on an obvious stud of a coach who is on his way to a being a "legitimate" head coach candidate in a few years.
Save a ton of money and, if you get the right guy, huge competitive advantage to get him first.
Instead programs pay huge salaries for retreads and has beens.
You mean like the Sark hire?
Lake has actually developed guys that weren't 4 and 5 stars. He's also probably not an alcoholic.
Here's a question I always wonder about regarding these coaching vacancies--
How much does your average athletic director really know about the nuances of running a football program, and how do they evaluate candidates? The notion that Lake can develop players and recruit effectively, while Sark cannot seems obvious to us given we follow these things closely, but how obvious would that be to average Joe AD?
And if you have an AD without a football background (Cohen?), how the fuck do they evaluate football coaches when they have them in for interviews?
Kind of rambling here but I guess I'm mostly curious what the hell actually happens in these interviews. How does a P12 program interview someone like Pat Hill and think that's actually a good idea?
Comments
When Pete is ready to hang it up he better be the fucking AD.
How much does your average athletic director really know about the nuances of running a football program, and how do they evaluate candidates? The notion that Lake can develop players and recruit effectively, while Sark cannot seems obvious to us given we follow these things closely, but how obvious would that be to average Joe AD?
And if you have an AD without a football background (Cohen?), how the fuck do they evaluate football coaches when they have them in for interviews?
Kind of rambling here but I guess I'm mostly curious what the hell actually happens in these interviews. How does a P12 program interview someone like Pat Hill and think that's actually a good idea?
Quite honestly, Tosh 2.0 can make a stronger case for a head job than Lake (sans coffee cup fiasco) at this point.
Todd Turner
Mark Emmert
Scott Woodward