Marcus Freeman / Mike Archer

Barry Switzer and Tom Osborne too, total hacks.

Bobby Williams, baw.

Marcus Freeman is the sexiest hire in the world who has done very little to actually garner the implied value. Cincy D was better this year without him. His former HC, with another DC(1st year) went into ND and beat them. Besides some recruiting prowess what has Freeman done to garner all the attention???

Bob Davie was a similar hire by the Irish.

In fairness, they raised the academic standards when Holtz left (possibly part of the reason he left). Guys like Tim Brown and Jerome Bettis wouldnt be able to get into ND after that. Im not sure if theyve loosened them up since then, but ND seems to be at a huge disadvantage in recruiting, similar to Vanderbilt- although ND's is partly made up by the nationwide draw and catholic school connections. But Im sure Kelly had the same frustrations as Holtz and wants to see what he can do with more favorable recruiting circumstances. id love to hear him speak about that aspect of the job change.

History says it is a risk. But I understand why they did it.

Kelly left ND because he believes he can never get enough talent there to beat Alabama, Georgia, Clemson, etc when those teams are at their best.

ND has (at the moment) what appears to be a good recruiting class (in terms of ranking). Many are attributing that to Freeman.

Thus, if getting talent is the perceived problem, then keeping the guy who they think can get the talent is a reasonable solution.

However, as we ALL know, getting talent is just one, albeit very important, piece of the puzzle. You still have to get that talent to perform/execute. There is a coach currently hanging out on the beach in Destin who could do one...but not the other.

The game has changed since the 90s so much.

Dabo
Riley
Day
Smart
Fickell
Fisher

All of them found success going from coordinator straight to a HC.

quote:

---

Dabo

---

Hadn't even been a coordinator before getting the interim job at Clemson.

quote:

---

This is a grand slam hire.

---

Perhaps. It’s about more than Xs and Os and simple recruiting. You have to make the right recruiting evaluations. You have to properly manage the roster. You have to deal with the everyday headaches assistants don’t have to handle. It’s about handing moms and dads calling to complain. It’s about booster functions and other stuff too.

Three are plenty of examples of assistants succeeding right away as head coaches. And there are just as many examples of assistants flopping as first-time head coaches. It’s riskier, especially at a big-time program like Notre Dame.

Not saying it won’t work. Just saying Notre Dame should probably go another 2 or 3 years before we determine whether Freeman is a home run or a strikeout or somewhere in between.

quote:

---

Everything I hear about M Freeman is that he will be successful. But I can’t help but think about Mike Archer and the similar circumstances …

---

How is this any different from Bob Stoops handing the keys to Lincoln Riley? Freeman, like Riley, boosted the team's recruiting immediately and improved the side of the ball he was on. Freeman was around a great offense at Cincinnati, I doubt he lets Rees slack on his duties.

LSU fans may get mad at me for saying this, but ND benefited from this just as much as LSU did. That entire staff is still intact and that's an incredible thing.