DCC: Question about timing
I have seen topics about who would coach the bowl game and who the new DC might be, but one topic that I have not seen addressed is the timing of our hiring a new DC. Given that our last two coaching changes didn't really follow the usual time able (DB's "process" of firing RR and Hackett having to wait until the end of the NFL season with Harbaugh), our prior experience with hiring coordinators and position coaches is probably not applicable. So, what is the usual timing of hiring a new coordinator when one leaves at the end of a season? I suspect that for recruiting purposes, it is important to get the new coordinator in place ASAP, so that he can reassure current commits, lock down those who are potential commits and perhaps even bring over a few new kids that he knows from his prior job (looking at you, Pruitt).
So, for those way more knowledgeable than me on the topic, what is the norm? And, is there anything unique about our situation (or those who we might be considering) that would take us out of the nor with respect to timing?
December 3rd, 2015 at 10:22 AM ^
Whenever Jim wants it to be.
December 3rd, 2015 at 10:27 AM ^
That if we go for a college guy, we would want to make that hire ASAP for recruting purposes. If we are going after an NFL guy, we would have to wait until January when the NFL season is over. There is nothing stopping any NCAA coach from leaving now for another job. Ultimately, you just want the best coach available though.
And the more I have thought about this situation, I think Harbaugh has known for awhile that Durkin was leaving. I'm guessing there was a falling out there, so I'm sure Harbaugh has known for awhile who he would like to target to be the next DC. The longer we wait, the more likely it's an NFL guy.
December 3rd, 2015 at 10:31 AM ^
December 3rd, 2015 at 10:35 AM ^
because we are in wild conspiracy theory season now. Yest I read what I assume to be well adjusted people saying Durkin had a gentlemen's agreement with Harbaugh that he'd only be here 1 year ...as if he could tell the future and controlled the coaching decisions of ADs across the nation.
So Durkin must have been SOOOO elite Jim was willing to have him on staff for only 10 months per their "gentleman's agreement".
The board has been wacky the past 24 hrs.
December 3rd, 2015 at 1:25 PM ^
There is a difference between Harbaugh and Durkin having an understanding that Durkin would listen and persue head coaching opportunities if the presented themselves this year, and them having some pre-determined one-year deal and he's out the door.
Harbaugh isn't stupid, he knew that Durkin would be in line for a head coaching job at some point, especially if he did well here. He probably assumed it would take 2-3 years, but nobody could predict the number and timing of so many openings this year.
December 3rd, 2015 at 10:32 AM ^
I cannot imagine leaving the job open for another 6+ weeks for an NFL guy when we are in the heart of recruiting season and 80% of the remaining 2016 UM board is targeting defensive players. By mid January you will have the UA AA game done with and all those announcements along with all the guys commiting in Dec, so you would only be left with guys who will announce on NSD. And those guys will have nearly no relationship with their future DC.
I just dont see us going down that route - even if the DC is not the primary recruiter it still matters to defensive players and leaving a void for 1.5 months when this class is going to compromise nearly half the 2 deep of the 2017 defense would seem very strange.
December 3rd, 2015 at 11:33 AM ^
I think this is right. If I'm a defensive prospect, I want to know what my DC's overall defensive philosophy is and what his preferences are. Is he a 4-3 or 3-4 guy? Does he like to blitz? Does he like zone or man? And what sort of players does he like, and will he keep the other defensive position coaches? Etc., etc.
The only time this would be wrong would be if you had a head coach like RichRod who could tell recruits "we run a 3-3-5 base, etc.". Harbaugh doesn't seem likely to take that approach.
December 3rd, 2015 at 10:32 AM ^
I also had the thought that there was a falling out and that Harbaugh has known about Durkin leaving for a while, but the one thing that makes me think that this is not the case is the Harbaugh had Durkin out recruiting as late as Monday. If Harbaugh knew that Durkin was gone, I can't see him doing this.
December 3rd, 2015 at 11:29 AM ^
I thought about that a different way. If I'm Harbaugh, even though I know Durkin is leaving, he's still technically on Michigan's staff and still on the payroll. And recruiting still needs to take place. You get what you can out of him until he is officially gone. Where things maybe went a little sideways is what was communicated to the recruits. I say that based on Dontavious Jackson's tweets.
December 3rd, 2015 at 11:51 AM ^
If you know that Durkin is about to accept a job - within our conference - do you really want him out talking to recruits? There is so much potential for (a) Durkin to try to poach and sell himself instead of Michigan; or (b) a Dontavious Jackson situation; that it wouldn't pay, just to "get what you can get out of" Durkin. If I knew that he was leaving to go to another school, I would keep him as far away from our recruits as possible.
December 3rd, 2015 at 3:29 PM ^
I know that is the standard practice, and usually I agree, but Harbaugh is a different animal. Assuming Durkin already knew he had the position but was required to keep quiet about it until final contractual agreements could be worked out, he couldn't tell a recruit he was leaving. There's too great a chance the recruit would take to Twitter with the news. In essence, Durkin would almost be forced to sell Michigan or his personal relationship and couldn't talk about the new job or it would jeprodize his new position. In that scenario, Michigan gets the bigger benefit.
December 3rd, 2015 at 7:21 PM ^
December 3rd, 2015 at 1:22 PM ^
Why is it hard to believe that Durkin would be out recruiting if he knew he wanted the Maryland job, and Harbaugh knew about it? The reports were that Maryland didn't offer until Richt and Mullen turned them down, which didn't happen until early in the week. Durkin himself probably didn't know if he had the job until it was leaked and then announced. Do you think he's going to sit around and wait to hear, during prime recruiting season? What happens if he doesn't get the Maryland job? He wouldn't be able to keep coaching here if he sat around waiting for another job.
December 3rd, 2015 at 10:33 AM ^
There are possible big benefits to either college or pro. I'm guessing that most recruits would be possibly more excited about playing for a DC that has NFL ties and or experience.
December 3rd, 2015 at 10:32 AM ^
What makes you think Harbaugh knew or that there was a falling out? (not dis-believing you, just wondering where you are getting this from)
December 3rd, 2015 at 10:43 AM ^
That said that recruits knew in advance that this was happening. Besides that, it's really just a gut feeling. The early timing of this, and doing it the week of the Ohio St game just gives me the vibe that this was known for awhile. Just feels like Harbaugh knew, and already knows who he wants to replace Durkin.
December 3rd, 2015 at 10:47 AM ^
December 3rd, 2015 at 11:11 AM ^
Hmm. I'm not sure how that can be the case when D. Jackson, the LB we're recruiting from Texas, tweeted at a reporter after the OSU game saying he was sitting right next to Durkin and that the reporter was lying about him leaving. Unless you're saying some recruits knew in advance and others didn't, I don't see how that can be the case.
December 3rd, 2015 at 11:24 AM ^
Rumors as far out as a month ago were saying that Michigan was going to offer a recruiting position to Devin Bush Sr, the dad of a big recruit. That would essentially be Partridge's job, so maybe this was known for awhile.
December 3rd, 2015 at 12:12 PM ^
That still doesn't explain what you were saying about recruits already knowing Durkin was gone. From what I can tell, they didn't.
December 3rd, 2015 at 11:49 AM ^
December 3rd, 2015 at 1:32 PM ^
If Jackson called out a reporter immediately for reporting Durkin was gone, why didn't he tweet something about Durkin lying to him after he left? I'd think if he felt disrespected, lied to, whatever, he'd have been on Twitter saying so.
For all we know, Durkin kept him in the loop about being up for the Maryland job, but that it wasn't a done deal. Doesn't have to be anything shady going on.
December 3rd, 2015 at 11:25 AM ^
Harbaugh (and everyone else) knew that Durkin's about action, not patience; that he planned on being a head coach soon; that he'd been a top DC at 2 schools over 3-4 years; that the success of this year's defense makes him a hot candidate; and that the absurd number of openings means he'd likely get better offers now than next year.
It's lame for Michigan to lose him after one year; given who he is and what he's accomplished, but it doesn't take a falling out for any of these things to happen.
December 6th, 2015 at 2:14 PM ^
Those guys knew each other before and have worked together in the past, so everybody knew what they were in for, so I highly doubt there was any kind of falling out in that short of time.
More likely when Harbaugh was hired he had some idea it was for something other than long term, though perhaps not 10 months, but Harbaugh is an ambtious guy, so I'm going to guess he has some understanding of the environment this year and the rationale for Durkin to make a move.
I'm much more inclined to think that Harbaugh has been aware of this at some point prior to when we were made aware that Durkin had interviewed and that he is moving on it.
In terms of timing, he has to be talking to candidates and moving forward and there is the hiring and the announcement of the hire, which can be two different dates. They will get their hire ASAP to get the best candidate available, but for an NCAA option, they won't likely announce until after that team's season has ended post-bowl or BCS, depending.
I think if you tell recruits "we have an A-list hire, wait a few weeks, you will be pleased", it would stablize recruiting enough.
If there is no hire in that timeframe, that kind of points toward there being an NFL option/options in play, right?
December 3rd, 2015 at 10:40 AM ^
I don't know about the "falling out", but I simply don't subscribe to coaches that leave before the end of the season, including bowl games. I also don't go along with how coaches can breach their employment contracts with impunity and not have consequences beyond a contractual damage clause.
I'm not that naive that I don't appreciate that college football is a business, but I've always thought it is a double standard to require a player that changes programs to wait a year before they are allowed to play, yet coaches are not similarly constrained. Perhaps a good quid pro quo would be to allow a player to change programs and play immediately should his position or head coach depart for another position.
December 3rd, 2015 at 10:45 AM ^
Recruits suppose to commit and be loyalty but college coaches take jobs as soon as present itself... Crazy how much Criticism we take
— AlⓂ️ightyReem (@_KareemWalker) December 2, 2015
December 3rd, 2015 at 11:01 AM ^
Does anyone know why KW is so bothered by the Durkin issue, was he the primary recruiter as I thought Tyrone was. At least it is not like THE ohio and right after NSD?
December 3rd, 2015 at 11:06 AM ^
I think he's just talking about the coaching carosel that's taking place right now and all of the media attention it has gotten. It's leading every sportscenter and a lot of coaches around the country or moving.
I don't think this is specifically about Durkin.
December 3rd, 2015 at 12:28 PM ^
Only KW knows exactly what led to the tweet, but the fact it came out yesterday p.m. could point to Durkin's leaving as being at least the final straw.
Regardless, my guess is that he caught a lot of on-line grief for de-committing from OSU then sees coaches "de-committing" with a nice cash pile to catch their fall. He's calling a foul and he makes a good point.
December 3rd, 2015 at 11:01 AM ^
Either push signing day until March 1, after all the colleges and NFL teams have filled out their coaching staffs, or get rid of signing day completely. Or put in a clause that allows recruits to back out of their commitment if the head coach or their primary recruiter leaves.
I'd even go a step further and allow the enrolled players to transfer and play immediately if either the head coach leaves or 25% of the coaching staff leaves within a 6 month period.
December 3rd, 2015 at 11:04 AM ^
It should just be anybody in your line of command, from your position coach to the coordinator on your side of the ball to the head coach.
December 3rd, 2015 at 11:21 AM ^
College football offseasons would turn into NFL-style free agency at that point. For example, Bowling Green's entire roster could be gutted by the likes of Indiana, Illinois and other talent starved Power 5 teams if they only lose their head coach and the coordinators. It might suck for the players, but it also sucks for the schools that are paying for their free ride.
I know college kids can't unionize, but there needs to be a way for the administrations, NCAA and the players to come up with a situation that's fair for all.
December 3rd, 2015 at 11:38 AM ^
Also, coaches should need to sit out a year between schools before they regain their coaching eligibility.
December 3rd, 2015 at 11:17 AM ^
is concerning. Is he going to make it past admissions?
Or do people always talk like that on the twitters?
December 3rd, 2015 at 10:56 AM ^
It is not a double standard. It is down right a damn contradiction, disguised very loosely by hypocrisy. If you are established in the coaching fraternity that runs from Div II to the NFL, no matter what shit you pull you will be employed the next season. I will just use one example because it says more than any of the others that may have went on to win Super Bowls. Tressel was hired to assist in instant replay, thereby receiving a pay check and given his severance pay by OSU because he was a winner. Further needn't be said.
December 3rd, 2015 at 11:11 AM ^
I also don't go along with how coaches can breach their employment contracts with impunity and not have consequences beyond a contractual damage clause.
1) If your contract has an out clause, and you use that out clause and pay the contractual damages... that is, by definition, the exact OPPOSITE of breaching a contract. It's very specifically FOLLOWING the contract.
2) Should the University be able to fire a coach?
If so -
3)How is that not the university breaching "their employment contracts with impunity and not have consequences beyond a contractual damage clause"?
December 3rd, 2015 at 12:23 PM ^
December 3rd, 2015 at 11:13 AM ^
Perhaps a good quid pro quo would be to allow a player to change programs and play immediately should his position or head coach depart for another position
I think players should be allowed to change programs and play immediately. No stipulations.
December 3rd, 2015 at 11:17 AM ^
December 3rd, 2015 at 12:26 PM ^
Not to mention coaches would now have to recruit other teams, or spend time shoring up their current players to keep them from getting recruited away. I agree the transfer rules are nonsense and hurt players, but there needs to be something to prevent full on free agency and active recruiting.
December 3rd, 2015 at 12:05 PM ^
"Perhaps a good quid pro quo would be to allow a player to change programs and play immediately should his position or head coach depart for another position." In college basketball, that was the Calipari clause. The NCAA closed the loophole after Calipari took the Kentucky job and gutted Memphis' recruiting class on the way out. A compromise would be to allow the incoming player to go to any school _other than_ the one where the coach is going.
December 3rd, 2015 at 10:49 AM ^
Recruiting Dead Period runs from December 14th to January 13th. Coaches can only have phone and written communication during this period. Ideally, you would hope to have a DC before then, but I don't think it would be a huge issue if most of the staff is intact. Most of the recruits left on our board are probably not going to decide until January anyway.
This is going to be an interesting year with the amount of coaching turnover nationally. I don't think Michigan is the only school that is going to have to deal with this. Actually, Michigan's coaching staff may be considered relatively stable compared to what is going on around the rest of the country if Durkin ends up being the only coach we lose. And it is probably better this happens now than have to be scrambling to fill positions late in the hiring cycle.
December 3rd, 2015 at 11:44 AM ^
If I am not mistaken, the dead period for FBS recruiting begins in about a week and a half, so if they are looking to get someone in here who can at least make a quick introduction to the current group of recruits, they will have to do it soon or let it slide until mid-January. As I recall, this was the one thing people were still wringing their hands over when Harbaugh was hired - that the hire took place during the dead period and it was weeks before he could contact anyone.
December 3rd, 2015 at 1:26 PM ^
I'm 100% sure there was no falling out. Even before coming to Michigan, Durkin was one of those coordinators that EVERYONE said would be a young energetic head coach in the near future. His time was coming. And with the D he put on the field this year, it just happened a little faster than we wanted. Better than going 6-6 and keeping him for another year IMO. He made a step up the latter. That means he did a good job for us. Simple as that.
December 3rd, 2015 at 10:27 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
December 3rd, 2015 at 10:33 AM ^
Shafer would be now. Because it's probably going to be Shafer.
December 3rd, 2015 at 10:29 AM ^
Could you announce the hire of an NFL guy but let him finish out the NFL season? Seems like there would not be any risk to the NFL team letting someone finish the season. He could then get started with some recruiting and at least provide some stability for the program.
December 3rd, 2015 at 10:32 AM ^
I've been surprised at how fast the moves have been this offseason but when there are so many vacancies I understand the desire to get ahead of other teams. For Michigan I figure it will depend on if they go for someone from the NFL or college, college they can do now but NFL will need to wait 5 weeks or more. The schools that have made moves already have known that they are replacing a coach so they have time to start the process, Michigan likely didn't find out until this weekend that they may need to look.
December 3rd, 2015 at 10:49 AM ^
December 3rd, 2015 at 10:34 AM ^