FB: New Coach? - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: FB: New Coach? (/thread-25532.html)

---

RE: FB: New Coach? - StanUSwagU - 03-27-2025

In my opinion, we need someone who:

(1) Will Be able to Attract Recruits/Transfers (and lots of them)
(2) Will Attract other great Position Coaches
(3) Will Excite the Fan Base
(4) Will Attract NIL investment
(5) Is a Proven Winner
(6) Starred in the NFL as a Player


If our Stanford Administration, can promise to :

(1) 100 % committ to NIL & The Transfer Portal
(2) Modernize & Modify its Admissions to be in line with NotreDames Admissions
(3) Have an NIL Collective for Football, whose value is Top20 in the Nation
(4) Pay Top Dollar for the Coaching Staff



Why wouldn't we reach out to someone like:

(1) Steve Young
(2) Drew Brees
(3) Tedy Bruschi


I guarantee if we were able to land any of these 3 men, Stanford Football's fortunes will be headed in the upward direction !
These 3 men know & will be able to attract great position coaches.

In much the same way Coach DeionSanders Energized & Turned around a moribund Colorado Program (a 1-11 Team) in 2 years !

---

RE: FB: New Coach? - msqueri - 03-27-2025

You guarantee somebody who has never coached would turn the program around? Deion Sanders had been an awesome FCS coach. Plus there is only one Deion Sanders. The guys you mentioned are nothing on the zeitgeist/swagger/PR meter compared to Prime. 

I don’t think we can meet all your criteria but hopefully we meet several of them. Based on your criteria I think Eddie George would be ideal. He’s not atop my list but he’s on it.

---

RE: FB: New Coach? - StanUSwagU - 03-27-2025

(03-27-2025, 08:31 AM)msqueri Wrote:  You guarantee somebody who has never coached would turn the program around? Deion Sanders had been an awesome FCS coach. Plus there is only one Deion Sanders. The guys you mentioned are nothing on the zeitgeist/swagger/PR meter compared to Prime. 

I don’t think we can meet all your criteria but hopefully we meet several of them. Based on your criteria I think Eddie George would be ideal. He’s not atop my list but he’s on it.

Hi Matt,

1. Thank for your reply (and thanks during Football Season for your Awesome game breakdown analyses)

2. I know TedyBruschi & DrewBrees have coached (at the high school level); SteveYoung I am not sure.

3. But I get your point.

4. I think for a Program like Stanford, having a HeadCoach who is a HouseholdName & who is Charismatic, is ESSENTIAL to getting Recruits,Transfers, NIL Investors. & Great Position Coaches, ....'To Believe & Take A Leap of Faith Chance on a Program that is to put it mildly, ...Struggling & hasn't shown that it is willing to make Fundamental Changes to its 'Football Infrastructure & Environment'

5. Yes, those 3 guys dont have the MONUMENTAL Swagger of Coach DeionSanders, but on this sliding scale they are still Very High, (much higher than TT or WaltHarris. no disrespect to those 2 men)

6. I fear 2 things when I hear some of the chatter here & other places about (a) The hire of a Head Football Coach at Stanford University (b) The lack of willingness to modify our Admissions to be in line with NotreDames

• One, in the NEW LANDSCAPE of 'BIG TIME $$$$$ COLLEGIATE ATHLETICS & FOOTBALL and NIL & TransferPortal ' we are expecting to operate like the 'little engine that Couldn't and expecting to get different results than what "little engines that Couldnt" get ...which as someone said 'is the definition of Insanity'.

• Two, even if we by some Miracle found the 'little coach from the little school, who somehow went under the radar' ...and 'who magically could somehow Attract 4star QBs & 4star OL & 4star DL to 'take a leap of faith to come to Stanford (which is unlikely at Stanford for a 'coach who didn't star in the NFL') ....lets say that 'little coach did turn the program around to get the program to be a perennial 8-4 program....why would this Coach stay at Stanford ??

[In effect without Stanford Changing the Environment & Fundamental Support for Football & Modifying its Admissions to be in line with NotreDames, HeadCoaches who become '8-4 successful' at Stanford, will just leave & move on to a University they consider to have a better Infrastructure, & AdmissionsEnvironment, ...and we will just be in a 'perpetual revolving door of Coaches coming & moving onto greener pastures'....all this in the exceedingly unlikely chance that a "little engine that couldnt" coach from a small school, at a University (Stanford) that can't align its admissions with NotreDame, to compete for what few 'academic 4&5 star football players there are', that isn't even Top20-Top35 in NIL Football actually could ever get to 8-4 in this new NIL Power4 Football Landscape]

---

RE: FB: New Coach? - PVTree - 03-27-2025

I would be happy with hiring Kingsbury. He's a known name, would bring some splash and, most importantly, I think he's shown to be capable to be a good coach.

---

RE: FB: New Coach? - martyup - 03-27-2025

I find it miraculous that StanUSwagU just made two posts without mentioning Notre Dame or Duke.

---

RE: FB: New Coach? - StanUSwagU - 03-27-2025

(03-27-2025, 10:51 AM)martyup Wrote:  I find it miraculous that StanUSwagU just made two posts without mentioning Notre Dame or Duke.

Hi Martyup,

1. Whats up my man ...hope all is well. (love your takes & sense of humor on this board).

2. If you read my last post a little more closely, I might have disappointed you ...as I did mention NotreDame (as a reference point). :o)

3. But again, to close, appreciate your takes, insights, animated gifs, & sense of humor on this board.

---

RE: FB: New Coach? - fullmetal - 03-27-2025

(03-27-2025, 06:31 AM)StanUSwagU Wrote:  (1) Will Be able to Attract Recruits/Transfers (and lots of them)
(2) Will Attract other great Position Coaches
(3) Will Excite the Fan Base
(4) Will Attract NIL investment
(5) Is a Proven Winner

This is all we need, tbh, though #3 will naturally follow if the rest of the qualities result in winning, as I would expect.  Winning generates excitement generates donations.

If I could add another requirement, it would be that the coach and staff hold themselves to a high behavioral standard.  No NCAA violations, no moral turpitude, no stupid things (h/t Casey Jacobsen).  Hold players to the same standard.

---

RE: FB: New Coach? - Leftcoast - 03-27-2025

(03-27-2025, 10:51 AM)martyup Wrote:  I find it miraculous that StanUSwagU just made two posts without mentioning Notre Dame or Duke.

Read again!  

It's getting harder to win without playing the game everyone else plays.  I get the fascination with ND and Duke but I'm not sure we should be them despite being a big football fan.  Maybe there is a third way but it's not obvious.  Tough, tough situation for the incoming AD.

---

RE: FB: New Coach? - Giants - 03-27-2025

Feldman and Mandel at The Athletic are suggesting that Ken Niutmatalolo or Jeff Monken are names to keep an eye on.  Both have experience reviving moribund programs at institutions with rigorous academic standards.

---

RE: FB: New Coach? - chrisk - 03-27-2025

Luck would be making a brobdingnagian mistake if he tries to hire a full time coach before an athletic director is hired.
Maybe he can get a package deal like Lynch and Shanahan, but making a permanent hire first would be a recipe for disaster. I doubt Levin would sign off on principle, but also this is a time when Stanford is in perilous financial straits.

See this message from president of USC.

https://www.president.usc.edu/2025/03/24/update-on-uscs-financial-planning-and-resilience-efforts/


USC is working with an endowment a fraction of Stanford's but Stanford is not immmune from the sudden uncertainty of Federal funding.

---

RE: FB: New Coach? - jacket3ree - 03-27-2025

Kingsbury is certainly charismatic, young (45), has oodles of college and NFL experience, and seems to be a sharp offensive mind. My question is this: with Luck as the GM, does Stanford have different selection criteria than it used to have? Are many of the organizational traits you'd like in head coach including recruiting and raising money completely under Luck, so you concentrate on an X or O guy with the charisma to still be an important part of the duel-headed public face of the program?

2011 Houston play caller: averaged 50 ppg and 600 ypg
2012 Texas A&M OC: Voldemort QB, lead SEC in rushing, passing, total and scoring offense. Only NCAA offense ranked in top 15 in all categories
2013-18 Texas Tech HC: Aggregate record 35-40 (19-35 B12), best finish was his first year at 8-5 then consistently mediocre, never had a winning conference record, but Mahomes
2019-22 Arizona Cardinals HC: 28-37-1  Why did they hire a 0.467 coach and expect better? His NFL win percentage is 0.432 with a single winning season (2021) where he lost the wild card game to the Rams 11-34

Seems like a better OC than HC. Does that work with the new paradigm?

Coach Niumatalolo is a good coach and great human being. We had sandwiches and coke next to each other during my son's Induction Day picnic. My son was not present. :) He seemed genuinely interested in everything related to the Yard, and he sure didn't need to be slumming with Plebe parents in hundred degree heat. But I watched him greet not only football players coming off the busses but "regular" Plebes too. I was a Paul Johnson fan and my son was trying out for Sprint Football, so at least we had some talking points.  Not sure what happened at Annapolis other than I think they tired of his voice and how they handled COVID didn't help. No contact practices then getting destroyed by Air Force was probably what did it. And he stopped beating Army.

Coach Monken is a superstar. His resurrection of West Point Football was singular. He'd be foolish to leave before they erect his statue, but I wouldn't mind him in Palo Alto if only to get him off the banks of the Hudson.

---

RE: FB: New Coach? - Goose - 03-27-2025

(03-27-2025, 01:55 PM)branner Wrote:  Having Saban and Belichick in the same conference would elevate the entire conference and change the landscape of college sports.

Do you think we could therefore get the rest of our ACC colleagues to subsidize our effort to make that happen :-)?

---

RE: FB: New Coach? - Spiny_Norman - 03-27-2025

Who among the current assistants would you like a new coach (even an interim coach) to retain? Let's assume that none of them are tapped to be the head guy.

---

RE: FB: New Coach? - martyup - 03-27-2025

(03-27-2025, 11:24 AM)StanUSwagU Wrote:  

(03-27-2025, 10:51 AM)martyup Wrote:  I find it miraculous that StanUSwagU just made two posts without mentioning Notre Dame or Duke.

Hi Martyup,

1.  Whats up my man ...hope all is well.  (love your takes & sense of humor on this board).

2.  If you read my last post a little more closely, I might have disappointed you ...as I did mention NotreDame (as a reference point).    :o)

3.  But again, to close, appreciate your takes, insights, animated gifs, & sense of humor on this board.

---

RE: FB: New Coach? - PVTree - 03-27-2025

(03-27-2025, 12:44 PM)chrisk Wrote:  Luck would be making a brobdingnagian mistake if he tries to hire a full time coach before an athletic director is hired.
Maybe he can get a package deal like Lynch and Shanahan, but making a permanent hire first would be a recipe for disaster.  I doubt Levin would sign off on principle, but also this is a time when Stanford is in perilous financial straits.

See this message from president of USC.

https://www.president.usc.edu/2025/03/24/update-on-uscs-financial-planning-and-resilience-efforts/


USC is working with an endowment a fraction of Stanford's but Stanford is not immmune from the sudden uncertainty of Federal funding.

A mistake to hire the football coach before an AD is named? 

How so? The football program reports to AL, not the AD.

---

RE: FB: New Coach? - msqueri - 03-27-2025

(03-27-2025, 02:31 PM)Spiny_Norman Wrote:  Who among the current assistants would you like a new coach (even an interim coach) to retain? Let's assume that none of them are tapped to be the head guy.

Done deal and real no-brainer that April is the interim coach. No other option, really. I suspect he will keep just about everybody for continuity and then the real drama comes after the season when we have to decide what to do next. The one assistant I would not want to retain for 2025 is Thompson. The big immediate question is what the heck to do about offensive coordinator. Real nightmare for a creep to make himself indispensable as head coach, offensive coordinator, and quarterbacks coach.

I think the answer to your question depends a lot on what happens this fall. If we win nine games I'd want everybody back. If we win zero I'd probably want nobody back. Moreover, there is probably a level of success at which April gets to keep the job for another year but it's not clear what that level is. 

All that being said, I felt like the two coaches who had proven the most through two years of Taylor were D'Onofrio and Gregory.....and we let both of them go. I suppose if I had to name who I like most among the remaining, maybe Kolodziej, Williams, and Osborne? 

My bottom line is the permanent coach needs to have the authority, presumably in close consultation with Luck, to hire his own staff. Maybe a guy or two stay on for 2026 but I'm not so worried about that. Main thing is getting the head coach hire right and empowering the new regime. Again, all tentative/to be determined based on how 2025 goes. Maybe April shocks the world!

---

For what it's worth, I am actually somewhat nervous the Niumatalolo idea could gain steam. A well-respected San Jose State coach will always be a candidate for the Stanford job. Just too easy of an association to make and convenient for all involved. I don't love him. He inherited a very respectable Navy program from Paul Johnson (#52 three year median) and in a gigantic sample, 15 years, basically treaded water with a median of #61, with a disastrous end of tenure that ended his time there (three year median of #97 to finish). It's too early to judge at San Jose State but so far he is treading water there too. I think he's an ok coach but I'd like to do better than ok. There are coaches out there at the Group of Five level who do well and I'd look to those guys first. I probably would favor either Monken or Calhoun over Niumatalolo if we were to go the service academy route.

If we really wanted to explore the successful at difficult places to win thing, Clawson deserves some thought. He fits my ideal of succeeding at multiple schools in multiple contexts - Fordham, Richmond, Bowling Green, Wake Forest - but has faded from the scene because he failed the last two years at Wake in the face of this new environment in college football. This could be a buy low/reclamation opportunity for a coach who before the last two years would have been very, very high on my list of the most ideal coaches for Stanford. Two years is not a long track record of failure and one could maybe make the case Stanford is easier/more institutionally supported to compete in this landscape going forward than Wake was from 2023-2024. Clawson is only 57. The idea of giving him a year to recharge and orient to how he can compete in this landscape, with the support of a very high-profile AD, is not one I hate.

---

RE: FB: New Coach? - jacket3ree - 03-27-2025

Hey, treading Paul Johnson water at Navy (until he didn't) isn't bad. Like Niumatalolo, even Johnson stopped treading water at Tech after 11 years and started sinking. Like Shaw, it is just too much time in one spot these days.

I think Stanford is toxic right now, so it is going to rehab for someone, or 'here, we'll pay you a million bucks to lose tons of games for a year, take it or leave it.'

There are no guarantees.  Saban? Right. We'd get a 73 year old with no player superiority. It would be MSU or Miami Dolphin Saban, just nowhere near .500, and why would he leave the comfort of ESPN while making VRBO commercials even if LA would be closer if that's where VRBO has their commercials shot. He has zero interest in tarnishing his legacy and dragging Miss Terry away from their Florida mansion. My guess anyway.

Stanford's gonna party like it's 1939.

---

RE: FB: New Coach? - StanUSwagU - 03-27-2025

(03-27-2025, 05:04 PM)msqueri Wrote:  

(03-27-2025, 02:31 PM)Spiny_Norman Wrote:  Who among the current assistants would you like a new coach (even an interim coach) to retain? Let's assume that none of them are tapped to be the head guy.

Done deal and real no-brainer that April is the interim coach. No other option, really. I suspect he will keep just about everybody for continuity and then the real drama comes after the season when we have to decide what to do next. The one assistant I would not want to retain for 2025 is Thompson. The big immediate question is what the heck to do about offensive coordinator. Real nightmare for a creep to make himself indispensable as head coach, offensive coordinator, and quarterbacks coach.

I think the answer to your question depends a lot on what happens this fall. If we win nine games I'd want everybody back. If we win zero I'd probably want nobody back. Moreover, there is probably a level of success at which April gets to keep the job for another year but it's not clear what that level is. 

All that being said, I felt like the two coaches who had proven the most through two years of Taylor were D'Onofrio and Gregory.....and we let both of them go. I suppose if I had to name who I like most among the remaining, maybe Kolodziej, Williams, and Osborne? 

My bottom line is the permanent coach needs to have the authority, presumably in close consultation with Luck, to hire his own staff. Maybe a guy or two stay on for 2026 but I'm not so worried about that. Main thing is getting the head coach hire right and empowering the new regime. Again, all tentative/to be determined based on how 2025 goes. Maybe April shocks the world!

---

For what it's worth, I am actually somewhat nervous the Niumatalolo idea could gain steam. A well-respected San Jose State coach will always be a candidate for the Stanford job. Just too easy of an association to make and convenient for all involved. I don't love him. He inherited a very respectable Navy program from Paul Johnson (#52 three year median) and in a gigantic sample, 15 years, basically treaded water with a median of #61, with a disastrous end of tenure that ended his time there (three year median of #97 to finish). It's too early to judge at San Jose State but so far he is treading water there too. I think he's an ok coach but I'd like to do better than ok. There are coaches out there at the Group of Five level who do well and I'd look to those guys first. I probably would favor either Monken or Calhoun over Niumatalolo if we were to go the service academy route.

If we really wanted to explore the successful at difficult places to win thing, Clawson deserves some thought. He fits my ideal of succeeding at multiple schools in multiple contexts - Fordham, Richmond, Bowling Green, Wake Forest - but has faded from the scene because he failed the last two years at Wake in the face of this new environment in college football. This could be a buy low/reclamation opportunity for a coach who before the last two years would have been very, very high on my list of the most ideal coaches for Stanford. Two years is not a long track record of failure and one could maybe make the case Stanford is easier/more institutionally supported to compete in this landscape going forward than Wake was from 2023-2024. Clawson is only 57. The idea of giving him a year to recharge and orient to how he can compete in this landscape, with the support of a very high-profile AD, is not one I hate.

***************

Hi Matt.

It would be a long shot, but what would your feelings be if Stanford, reached out to KyleWhittingham (Utah) ..and he seemed to give an indication that if 'Admissions & NIL money could be a little more favorable at Stanford, & if he & all his staff in 'real dollars adjusted for the BayArea ' could make 10% more than they're making in SLC, . and.that he wouldn't mind a 'new challenge & change of scenery' since he has been at Utah for close to 20years.

Would this be a Head Coaching candidate Stanford should pursue ?

---

RE: FB: New Coach? - msqueri - 03-27-2025

I'd love to have Whittingham but he's several years into retirement watch, has been coaching at Utah for more than 30 years, and Utah is a far better program, so I don't view it as realistic. But I love the idea of trying to make an appealing pitch financially and otherwise to try to poach a proven coach. A few dozen I'd be thrilled to get, including not only Whittingham but pretty much any good Power Four coach.

---

RE: FB: New Coach? - chrisk - 03-27-2025

Where is the discussion of the AD hire?

---