[DC 86]

The Oregon route implies they wanted to find a coach capable of building a winner focused on the skills of the players.   The USC route implies they wanted a big name to sell more tickets, pacify alums that remember better times decades ago, and get a bit of media attention in a market that really no longer cares about college football.

I think Lanning is a very promising hire but there's no head coaching track record to draw conclusions from.

Riley is 55-10 with four conference championships in five seasons and three playoff appearances. He's coached two transfers to Voldemort trophies. He has a third transfer QB also starting in the NFL. He's had 25 players drafted (14 in the first three rounds.) It's ridiculous to dismiss him as just a "big name to sell more tickets" and to say that hiring him isn't about "building a winner focused on the skills of the players" given that's exactly what he's already done at one of the biggest programs in the country.

---

I am still somewhat surprised that Oregon hasn’t taken the next step and just dumped oodles of money on a coach they want to keep.  Of course, it is possible that they didn’t really want to keep Kelley and his NCAA sanctions, Taggert who flamed out at FSU, or Crystobal whose recruiting was excellent but who underperformed on the field.  I think If they wanted to get a forever coach, they could have picked Wilcox, but my guess is that, contra OutsiderFan, they weren’t sold on his coaching abilities.  I wonder if they will come to regret that.

BC

I think prioritizing the hiring of a "forever coach" is a recipe for mediocrity. The optimal strategy is always to hire the best head coach you can and hope that you can keep him if he's successful.

There's no evidence that Wilcox is an above average coach, much less an elite coach. He may be an excellent coach but it's unprovable. But in any case I suspect that Oregon was more concerned about his recruiting abilities than his actual coaching abilities. Any program that aspires to compete at the highest levels of the sport is recognizing that recruiting is the priority. Nobody questions Dan Mullen's Xs&Os but substandard recruiting did him in.

[DC 86]

The Oregon route implies they wanted to find a coach capable of building a winner focused on the skills of the players.   The USC route implies they wanted a big name to sell more tickets, pacify alums that remember better times decades ago, and get a bit of media attention in a market that really no longer cares about college football.

I think Lanning is a very promising hire but there's no head coaching track record to draw conclusions from.

Riley is 55-10 with four conference championships in five seasons and three playoff appearances. He's coached two transfers to Voldemort trophies. He has a third transfer QB also starting in the NFL. He's had 25 players drafted (14 in the first three rounds.) It's ridiculous to dismiss him as just a "big name to sell more tickets" and to say that hiring him isn't about "building a winner focused on the skills of the players" given that's exactly what he's already done at one of the biggest programs in the country.

---

I am still somewhat surprised that Oregon hasn’t taken the next step and just dumped oodles of money on a coach they want to keep.  Of course, it is possible that they didn’t really want to keep Kelley and his NCAA sanctions, Taggert who flamed out at FSU, or Crystobal whose recruiting was excellent but who underperformed on the field.  I think If they wanted to get a forever coach, they could have picked Wilcox, but my guess is that, contra OutsiderFan, they weren’t sold on his coaching abilities.  I wonder if they will come to regret that.

BC

I think prioritizing the hiring of a "forever coach" is a recipe for mediocrity. The optimal strategy is always to hire the best head coach you can and hope that you can keep him if he's successful.

There's no evidence that Wilcox is an above average coach, much less an elite coach. He may be an excellent coach but it's unprovable. But in any case I suspect that Oregon was more concerned about his recruiting abilities than his actual coaching abilities. Any program that aspires to compete at the highest levels of the sport is recognizing that recruiting is the priority. Nobody questions Dan Mullen's Xs&Os but substandard recruiting did him in.