re: Some oppose hiring O simply because they think it makes LSU look weak.

quote:

---

Actually, no he's not. He's coaching games. I'm talking about everything else that comes during the off season. Coordinating recruiting locations for coaches, weight programs, academic programs, keeping players out of trouble, financials, staff changes (not just coaching staff), and all the other things a coach of a major program is responsible for. How does he balance the responsibilities, what's his take on how the FB Operations building should run? What does he do with his budget?

---

this. and the one time he was tasked with those responsibilities he failed horribly. if you fire les miles you need to bring in a proven replacement. coach o needs to go prove himself at a lower tier job if he wants a full time elite position.

quote:

---

The question is not whether O can do all the things necessary to win games. To some folks, it's about maintaining the illusion that LSU is stil "relevant," or "a player," or "elite." To them, O is a cause for hand wringing because he's not "a big name."

---

This makes me believe you really have no clue what you are talking about. I have not seen anyone saying they don't want O because of "appearance", and i have seen more coach o threads than i care to.

What you mean to say is that they don't want O because LSU IS an elite football program, and with other viable candidates out there O would be settling. Those candidates have WAY better HC resumes than O. People can pretend O is so great, but bottom line is his record is 19-27. Even if he won out he has a losing record. Compare that to any other coach on the shortlist.

So, while O could possibly succeed as HC going forward, we just fired a guy, paid him money to leave, only to make our d line coach with a losing record as HC our new HC. Do you understand that would be what's called "foolish"? Why is it foolish? Not because it looks bad, although it does, but because that means we blew it with at least 5 other coaches.