Not pleased with Shafer hire in light of Hackett

[RF2044]

My opinion only, but the main benefit about hiring in-house [versus conducting a national search for perhaps a better qualified HC] was the continuity it would have on the staff. In that regard, it made sense to hire Shafer to stabilize recruiting and keep as much the same as possible on the staff.

Losing Hackett undermines the benefit of hiring Shafer quickly, IMO.

And apologies if this sentiment has been expressed elsewhere--haven't had time to read the multitude of posts on the Hackett news.

 

[Marsh01]

My opinion only, but one of the most appealing things about hiring in-house [versus conducting a national search for our new HC] was the continuity it would have on the staff. In that regard, it made sense to hire Shafer to stabilize recruiting and keep as much the same as possible on the staff.

Losing Hackett undermines the benefit of hiring Shafer quickly, IMO.

And apologies if this sentiment has been expressed elsewhere--haven't had time to read the multitude of posts on the Hackett news.

I think he will be a better coach in the end than DM was. You had to make this move. Losing all 3 guys would have been armageddon IMO.

 

[VirginiaOrange]

My opinion only, but one of the most appealing things about hiring in-house [versus conducting a national search for our new HC] was the continuity it would have on the staff. In that regard, it made sense to hire Shafer to stabilize recruiting and keep as much the same as possible on the staff.

Losing Hackett undermines the benefit of hiring Shafer quickly, IMO.

And apologies if this sentiment has been expressed elsewhere--haven't had time to read the multitude of posts on the Hackett news.

Hackett was obviously less qualified for the job in the opinions of everyone at SU that matters - people who have access to daily interaction with both men, their players, their peers, etc.

Do we know that Hackett wanted the job?

Do we know if Marrone's opinion was sought out - and that he thought Shafer was the better choice (I understand that Marrone then took Hackett)?

Why can we assume Shafer stays when Hackett is hired - why isn't continuity on the defensive side important?

Perhaps hiring Hackett results in losing Shafer and undermines the benefit of hiring Hackett quickly.

Bottom line - the person that the powers that be thought was the best candidate and most qualified got the job - and the players on both sides of the ball who have voiced an opinion seem very excited and happy for Shafer.

 

[cliftonparksufan]

My opinion only, but the main benefit about hiring in-house [versus conducting a national search for perhaps a better qualified HC] was the continuity it would have on the staff. In that regard, it made sense to hire Shafer to stabilize recruiting and keep as much the same as possible on the staff.

Losing Hackett undermines the benefit of hiring Shafer quickly, IMO.

And apologies if this sentiment has been expressed elsewhere--haven't had time to read the multitude of posts on the Hackett news.

We won't know for a few years, but you might need to keep an open mind on what Shafer brings to the table. He is very highly regarded.

 

[RF2044]

Hackett was obviously less qualified for the job in the opinions of everyone at SU that matters - people who have access to daily interaction with both men, their players, their peers, etc.

Do we know that Hackett wanted the job?

Do we know if Marrone's opinion was sought out - and that he thought Shafer was the better choice (I understand that Marrone then took Hackett)?

Why can we assume Shafer stays when Hackett is hired - why isn't continuity on the defensive side important?

Perhaps hiring Hackett results in losing Shafer and undermines the benefit of hiring Hackett quickly.

Bottom line - the person that the powers that be thought was the best candidate and most qualified got the job - and the players on both sides of the ball who have voiced an opinion seem very excited and happy for Shafer.

Just to clarify [based upon how you seemed to interpret my post]--I'm not arguing Hackett versus Shafer. I'm talking about Shafer as a function of other, external candidates.

 

[SUinNYC]

My opinion only, but the main benefit about hiring in-house [versus conducting a national search for perhaps a better qualified HC] was the continuity it would have on the staff. In that regard, it made sense to hire Shafer to stabilize recruiting and keep as much the same as possible on the staff.

Losing Hackett undermines the benefit of hiring Shafer quickly, IMO.

And apologies if this sentiment has been expressed elsewhere--haven't had time to read the multitude of posts on the Hackett news.

My feelings exactly. I was very excited about the idea of keeping both Shafer and Hackett. I'm keeping an open mind about Shafer, but my optimism has been tempered a bit to say the least.

 

[phil77]

Very disappointed I thought they were a package deal.

 

[sufandu]

Even though I wanted to keep Hackett, I don't know if making him HC would have been the right move. As recently as halfway through this season people were questioning his qualifications for OC. How would he handle all of the administrative aspects of the job? Would he be capable of filling open assistant coach positions with quality guys? There's a lot more than just running the offense he would have been responsible for. Along those same lines he wouldn't be able to devote as much time and energy to just the offense. Would he find an OC that meshed with his philosophy? Promoting NH to HC would not have been a slam dunk move.

 

[Marsh01]

Curious as to how people would feel if Hackett were hired as the HC and DM took Shafer with him to Buffalo?

 

[Chip]

It's certainly not ideal. But I'm still going to let it play out. One of the biggest benefits of Shafer is that he's been here since day 1 of the Marrone rebuild project. I think that's going to be very helpful. He knows the challenges, and everything that Marrone learned on the job (quite a bit), Shafer learned as well.

I'm sure he has some of his own ideas to add as well. He's high energy, and his style on defense makes me thing he's going to want the same style on offense.

This OC hire is going to be a first key test.

Deflating mostly in the sense of what we were building on offense. Learning a new offense, new terminology, etc. makes this more of an uphill climb. But I'm hopeful that the new OC will have strength in numbers to work with. Plenty of QBs (assuming ZA stays), RBs, WRs. Right side of OL is in good shape. I can't speak to the talent of everyone we have coming back, those we've never seen play, can just be optimistic that we can develop them. It's better than coming in and realizing you don't have the #'s at all at those key positions.

 

[IthacaBarrel]

What part of Hacketts resume says he is ready to be a HC? Then go look at Shafer's.. People are getting carried away here. In addition, internal hire is fine I am sure Gross looked outside the program. I haven't seen a realistic name mentioned who I could not put Shafer's resume up against, Diaco at ND, he can recruit, he can coach, my 6 year old could recruit at ND, Charlie Weiss recruited well at ND how is he doing at Kansas. Please

Hackett IMO< doesn't have the resume yet, he has 2/3 of a season off being a good OC under Marrone's discretion.. BFD. Shafer defense has ouperformed the offense over the past 4 years and with the losses on offense next year, you are going to need that defense, a defense that is build on almost all of Shafer's guys, funny how that worked out...

 

[Van111]

My opinion only, but the main benefit about hiring in-house [versus conducting a national search for perhaps a better qualified HC] was the continuity it would have on the staff. In that regard, it made sense to hire Shafer to stabilize recruiting and keep as much the same as possible on the staff.

Losing Hackett undermines the benefit of hiring Shafer quickly, IMO.

And apologies if this sentiment has been expressed elsewhere--haven't had time to read the multitude of posts on the Hackett news.

I totally agree. I think there are so many ongoing post of passion, but my gut says we are making a mistake.

 

[Chip]

Curious as to how people would feel if Hackett were hired as the HC and DM took Shafer with him to Buffalo?

It's a tough call. On one hand, I think it's easier for players to learn a new defense than it is to learn a new offense.

But on the other hand, Hackett trying to juggle being a HC, OC, really manage this entire program at such an inexperienced level, could have really been a disaster. No way to know, especially now.

 

[CusefanATL]

What part of Hacketts resume says he is ready to be a HC? Then go look at Shafer's.. People are getting carried away here. In addition, internal hire is fine I am sure Gross looked outside the program. I haven't seen a realistic name mentioned who I could not put Shafer's resume up against, Diaco at ND, he can recruit, he can coach, my 6 year old could recruit at ND, Charlie Weiss recruited well at ND how is he doing at Kansas. Please

Hackett IMO< doesn't have the resume yet, he has 2/3 of a season off being a good OC under Marrone's discretion.. BFD. Shafer defense has ouperformed the offense over the past 4 years and with the losses on offense next year, you are going to need that defense, a defense that is build on almost all of Shafer's guys, funny how that worked out...

Butch Davis reached out to us.
Jim Tressel was in reach.

Those are 2 recruiters and big names.

I still think I like the Shafer hire though.

 

[Aweart23]

What part of Hacketts resume says he is ready to be a HC? Then go look at Shafer's.. People are getting carried away here. In addition, internal hire is fine I am sure Gross looked outside the program. I haven't seen a realistic name mentioned who I could not put Shafer's resume up against, Diaco at ND, he can recruit, he can coach, my 6 year old could recruit at ND, Charlie Weiss recruited well at ND how is he doing at Kansas. Please

Hackett IMO< doesn't have the resume yet, he has 2/3 of a season off being a good OC under Marrone's discretion.. BFD. Shafer defense has ouperformed the offense over the past 4 years and with the losses on offense next year, you are going to need that defense, a defense that is build on almost all of Shafer's guys, funny how that worked out...

IB you are on fire today...the voice of reason...

 

[sufandu]

Butch Davis reached out to us.
Jim Tressel was in reach.

I like when the NCAA isn't investigating us. I bet the GD is too.

 

[CusefanATL]

I like when the NCAA isn't investigating us. I bet the GD is too.

Im pretty sure Butch is clean. UNC academic fraud has been going on for close to 30 years if I remember the story correctly.

 

[sufandu]

Im pretty sure Butch is clean. UNC academic fraud has been going on for close to 30 years if I remember the story correctly.

I'll take your word for it. I don't know the details.

 

[RMH44]

I think he will be a better coach in the end than DM was. You had to make this move. Losing all 3 guys would have been armageddon IMO.

I agree. SS is one smart dude. It hurts that DM poached Hack...but let's see what SS has up his sleeve. It will be the first big decision of his tenure.

I also think too many on this board are underestimating his recruiting abilities.

 

[Marsh01]

I also think too many on this board are underestimating his recruiting abilities.

As do I

 

[RF2044]

I agree. SS is one smart dude. It hurts that DM poached Hack...but let's see what SS has up his sleeve. It will be the first big decision of his tenure.

I also think too many on this board are underestimating his recruiting abilities.

I hope you're right.

 

[IthacaBarrel]

Butch Davis reached out to us.
Jim Tressel was in reach.

Butch Davis was willing to take the FIU job, of course he reached out to us, his name is synonomous with cheating and his record wasn't even that good at UNC, his time has passed and like I said, he had some of the biggest scumbags in the game recruiting for him at UNC, he is a ing cheater. I would hire Petrino before I hired Davis as least he wins ball games and just cheats on his wife, etc etc

Tressel- You would need to go through such a legal process to get him in as HC, is it really worth it? Time is of the essense.

Scott Shafer has earned his shot, he has paid his dues, worked hard, done well at Cuse, set up roots, has a resume full of success minus Michigan where he was lied to and treated like . Shafer was the right choice with the hand they were dealt

Like I said, next...I know you said you liked the hire just making my point

 

[sufandu]

I also think too many on this board are underestimating his recruiting abilities.

I'm no recruitnik or anything, but I don't get this. We went from a positively weak d-line to a stout one in one year through JUCO's and some young guys developing. It's not like DM just found these guys for SS and said, "Hey, I've got a present for you. Have fun." I'm sure he had some hand in recruiting them.

 

[RF2044]

What part of Hacketts resume says he is ready to be a HC? Then go look at Shafer's.. People are getting carried away here. In addition, internal hire is fine I am sure Gross looked outside the program. I haven't seen a realistic name mentioned who I could not put Shafer's resume up against, Diaco at ND, he can recruit, he can coach, my 6 year old could recruit at ND, Charlie Weiss recruited well at ND how is he doing at Kansas. Please

Hackett IMO< doesn't have the resume yet, he has 2/3 of a season off being a good OC under Marrone's discretion.. BFD. Shafer defense has ouperformed the offense over the past 4 years and with the losses on offense next year, you are going to need that defense, a defense that is build on almost all of Shafer's guys, funny how that worked out...

No argument on that front. Hackett was too green--kid has a bright future, but I doubt that he's ready to run an entire program. Again, not saying that he won't be eventually, but that is a gamble a program like ours can't afford to take right now.

But just to be clear, the point of this post wasn't to debate Shafer versus Hackett--it was Shafer versus external candidates. Now, if the guy makes a good hire at OC, keeps the rest of the staff together, and proves to be a good recruiter who can sustain the momentum Marrone started, I'll happily admit that my concerns are unfounded. He's got a lot to prove, IMO.

 

[RMH44]

I hope you're right.

RF...what choice do have now but hope SS is the right guy for the job? Until proven otherwise, he has my support.

The unknown always manifests uncertainty and fear in all of us. Unfortunately, in this situation there is nothing we can do but wait...the situation is completely beyond our control.

Like SS said in his introductory press conference four years ago ...he advices his players to only worry about what they can control. It's an axiom I've always used and preached to my family and staff I've managed. So, for now, I'm going to take a deep breath, relax and let it all play out. With fingers crossed, of course.