Coaching Carousel (Football)

Status
Not open for further replies.
#301      
mhuml32
1. The recruiting concerns are meaningless, Bielema has his coordinators pretty focused on other responsibilities.

2. Hauck’s retirement based on “where the sport is going” is a lot more concerning from a big-picture perspective of his motivation.

3. I want more clarity on whether he’s actually called defensive plays to decide how I feel. Being a “defensive guy” is meaningful for the head coach, but the DC has to actualize that philosophy. Bielema is always preaching play calling experience with his coordinators.

4. I’m interested in listening to his press conference.
 
#302      
illini0440
mhuml32 said:
1. The recruiting concerns are meaningless, Bielema has his coordinators pretty focused on other responsibilities.

2. Hauck’s retirement based on “where the sport is going” is a lot more concerning from a big-picture perspective of his motivation.

3. I want more clarity on whether he’s actually called defensive plays to decide how I feel. Being a “defensive guy” is meaningful for the head coach, but the DC has to actualize that philosophy. Bielema is always preaching play calling experience with his coordinators.

4. I’m interested in listening to his press conference.
Click to expand...
2. He had to retire to offset his buyout of remaining years.
3. He’s never held the primary play caller position but it was his defense and philosophy at Montana. He taught it to his coaches and coordinators and he’s obviously had his say in play calls as a HC.
 
#303      
ILLINIGRAD2014
ChiefGritty said:
If you can't comprehensively analyze the career and implications for our program of a coach pulled out of a hat in three google searches do you even post bro?


Montana does in fact run 3-3-5 with a lot of shifting before and after the snap to confuse offensive lines regarding what is coming at them, which is also what Mike MacDonald is doing with Chris Partridge in Seattle out of a somewhat different formation. There is a commonality of theory there. So I'm relatively comfortable that this isn't some 11th hour radical change of plan versus what BB was discussing in the signing day presser. Sacrificing size up front for more speed, more blitzing, and more complexity for offenses to worry about is that NFL trend that Bret is wanting to move towards, and Montana was doing that.

I think the question is whether Bobby Hauck, 61 year old who hasn't worked in P4/5 football since 2002, hasn't worked as a DC ever, and is on record as finding dealing with the modern college football player draining on his enjoyment of coaching, actually the guy to be the leader of a Big Ten defense, is he actually going to flourish as the chess wizard he and BB have conceived as his next act?

I'm reminded less of Tony Petersen than I am of the famous secret summit in Tampa of Josh Whitman and Lovie Smith, two guys who are both top talents in their fields, two immensely qualified people, but who hatched a plan that just was not realistic and which was fated not to survive contact with reality, with a prominent reason being that the coach being hired did not particularly need, like, or want the job he needed to do.

I just don't like the vibe with this one. I understand the theory, it *could* work, but I just have a bad feeling. It feels inconsistent with the principles that have brought Bielema so much success.
Click to expand...
It just feels like a panic hire. I know people will argue it's not and he was our guy. Just simply do not buy that for a second and no evidence would point to that. An unproven DC cost this team games the past few years and i don't see how hiring another unproven DC is the answer.
 
#304      
the juiceman cometh
illini0440 said:
2. He had to retire to offset his buyout of remaining years.
3. He’s never held the primary play caller position but it was his defense and philosophy at Montana. He taught it to his coaches and coordinators and he’s obviously had his say in play calls as a HC.
Click to expand...
On #2 - why did he have to make that comment though? Are you suggesting he was lying about that?

On #3 - that makes sense to a point, but I feel like the big picture view of defensive philosophy vs the in-the-moment chess match of "what is my opponent going to do now and how do I counter it" are not necessarily the same skill. He could well be very good at both, but we just don't know yet, which makes this seem like a high risk/high reward kind of hire to me. And that's fine in theory, but just not really where I thought the program was. I kinda thought we'd go solid and predictable with this one.
 
#306      
illini0440
the juiceman cometh said:
On #2 - why did he have to make that comment though? Are you suggesting he was lying about that?

On #3 - that makes sense to a point, but I feel like the big picture view of defensive philosophy vs the in-the-moment chess match of "what is my opponent going to do now and how do I counter it" are not necessarily the same skill. He could well be very good at both, but we just don't know yet, which makes this seem like a high risk/high reward kind of hire to me. And that's fine in theory, but just not really where I thought the program was. I kinda thought we'd go solid and predictable with this one.
Click to expand...
No. If you listen to his presser all his comments were about being a head coach. He said he never wanted to be a head coach again. You have to deal with NIL, agents etc. He wasn't lying about that. Bret deals with that here.
 
#307      
therealmiket86
ILLINIGRAD2014 said:
It just feels like a panic hire. I know people will argue it's not and he was our guy. Just simply do not buy that for a second and no evidence would point to that. An unproven DC cost this team games the past few years and i don't see how hiring another unproven DC is the answer.
Click to expand...

Not the hire I would’ve made but I definitely don’t think it’s a panic hire. What I like is we are the only team in the BIG running this so it will be harder to game plan for.
 
#311      
fuddrules
illini0440 said:
2. He had to retire to offset his buyout of remaining years.
3. He’s never held the primary play caller position but it was his defense and philosophy at Montana. He taught it to his coaches and coordinators and he’s obviously had his say in play calls as a HC.
Click to expand...

Should Hauck leave UM for any reason other than "by reason of retirement, death, disability or incapacity," UM will receive as liquidated damages an "amount equal to Coach's Base Salary at the time of the termination, multiplied by the number of years remaining under this Contract and/or extension at the time of termination. In the case of partial years, the amount will be pro-rated by the number of months left in the partial year."

His contract ran through 2027 - Hauck saw his base salary increase from $221,813 to $265,000 in this new deal, which went into effect on Jan. 1. His new deal expires on Jan. 31, 2027

Looks like he would owe 265k or a little more.

That explains it but a little cheap on the part of Illinois, IMO. Buy it out in December and get on with it.

www.montanasports.com

Details released of Bobby Hauck's new contract with the Montana Grizzlies

MTN Sports obtained a copy of Bobby Hauck's new three-year contract that runs through January of 2027 and sees a number of pay increases and incentives available for UM's football coach.
www.montanasports.com www.montanasports.com


 
#313      
ILLINIGRAD2014
therealmiket86 said:
Not the hire I would’ve made but I definitely don’t think it’s a panic hire. What I like is we are the only team in the BIG running this so it will be harder to game plan for.
Click to expand...
Now that is something i can get behind, if that's the idea. But people telling me they love this hire are kidding themselves. They don't, they just like Bret. Which is another thing i can get behind, but this narrative that we landed some diamond in the rough and outsmarted everyone is not very close to being accurate.
 
#314      
phats22
just confirming, we plan on fielding a defense, correct?
 
#315      
ChiefGritty
www.afca.com

MONTANA HEAD COACH BOBBY HAUCK NAMED 2025 AFCA PRESIDENT

University of Montana head coach Bobby Hauck will lead the American Football Coaches Association (AFCA) in 2025 as president of the organization. Hauck, who moves up from first vice-president, succeeds outgoing president Jeff McMartin of Central College. Hauck was elected president by members...
www.afca.com www.afca.com

Also serving on the Board in 2025: Clark Lea, Vanderbilt University; Jay Norvell, Colorado State University; Jason Simpson, University of Tennessee-Martin; Alvin Parker, Virginia Union University; Bret Bielema, University of Illinois; Chris Klieman, Kansas State University; Tony Elliott, University of Virginia; Charles Huff, University of Southern Mississippi; Brent Venables, University of Oklahoma; Grant Newsome, University of Michigan, ex officio member and chairman of the Assistant Coaches Committee; Van Malone, Kansas State University, ex officio member and chairman of the Minority Advancement Committee; Michael Christensen, Carson (Calif.) High School, ex officio member and chairman of the High School Committee; and Scott Strohmeier, Iowa Western Community College, ex officio member and Junior College representative. AFCA Executive Director Craig Bohl serves as secretary-treasurer of the organization.
Click to expand...
 
#316      
mhuml32
illini0440 said:
2. He had to retire to offset his buyout of remaining years.
3. He’s never held the primary play caller position but it was his defense and philosophy at Montana. He taught it to his coaches and coordinators and he’s obviously had his say in play calls as a HC.
Click to expand...

If his true intentions were to leave, then negotiate on the buyout because his actions have no standing within contract law. If my job stipulates a buyout to leave, I can’t just retire for four days, take a new job, and act like I dissolved contract obligations. This is like Michael Scott “declaring” bankruptcy.
 
#317      
Mr. Tibbs
mhuml32 said:
If his true intentions were to leave, then negotiate on the buyout because his actions have no standing within contract law. If my job stipulates a buyout to leave, I can’t just retire for four days, take a new job, and act like I dissolved contract obligations. This is like Michael Scott “declaring” bankruptcy.
Click to expand...
its possible that a step down , from HC to DC, would not result in a buyout anyway

but I agree that in cases of form vs substance, substance wins 99% (or more) of the time

and its very possible , that if Hauck was the plan B, he might have been hired on as a Defensive Analyst anyway to assist whomever was hired as DC
 
#318      
purcy51
fuddrules said:
Should Hauck leave UM for any reason other than "by reason of retirement, death, disability or incapacity," UM will receive as liquidated damages an "amount equal to Coach's Base Salary at the time of the termination, multiplied by the number of years remaining under this Contract and/or extension at the time of termination. In the case of partial years, the amount will be pro-rated by the number of months left in the partial year."

His contract ran through 2027 - Hauck saw his base salary increase from $221,813 to $265,000 in this new deal, which went into effect on Jan. 1. His new deal expires on Jan. 31, 2027

Looks like he would owe 265k or a little more.

That explains it but a little cheap on the part of Illinois, IMO. Buy it out in December and get on with it.

www.montanasports.com

Details released of Bobby Hauck's new contract with the Montana Grizzlies

MTN Sports obtained a copy of Bobby Hauck's new three-year contract that runs through January of 2027 and sees a number of pay increases and incentives available for UM's football coach.
www.montanasports.com www.montanasports.com


Click to expand...
I agree. This is the only aspect of this hire that bothers me. Definitely not "in the spirit" of the contract language. Avoiding a buyout on a technicality? We can do better. We have the mo ey, just pay it and avoid the legal hassle
 
#319      
ChiefGritty
ChiefGritty said:
www.afca.com

MONTANA HEAD COACH BOBBY HAUCK NAMED 2025 AFCA PRESIDENT

University of Montana head coach Bobby Hauck will lead the American Football Coaches Association (AFCA) in 2025 as president of the organization. Hauck, who moves up from first vice-president, succeeds outgoing president Jeff McMartin of Central College. Hauck was elected president by members...
www.afca.com www.afca.com
Click to expand...
Not only did 2025 AFCA President Bobby Hauck ragequit being a head coach at the end of the season with scornful words about where the profession was heading, his fellow board member Chris Klieman did too!

Those must have been interesting meetings...
 
#320      
Chuck Nuggets
Iamgroot said:
Im not trying to be negative but severely unchecked with this hire.This guy has no interest in recruiting is reversed more as offensive guy from everything ive read and could find on him.idk if we weren't willing to spend what was necessary for a upgrade to ahen or if we waited to late to start looking but I cant see how this can be looked at in any other way then a downgrade.I truly hope im wrong but wow am I completely underwhelmed with this hire.How can we go from stoops,partridge,walters etc to a guy that has no DC experience i really dont get this.I truly hope im wrong and if I am I promise I'll be the first to eat crow just cant believe this the best we could do.I never thought id say this but this hire is giving me I miss Ahen vibes all the way around
Click to expand...
I understand your hesitance, and am a little confused by it myself, but I'd advise taking my approach on this one: trust Coach B.

He's earned our patience and benefit of doubt, IMO. I don't know what's going on, but I know I trust Coach B.
 
#321      
skyIdub
I don’t have a hot take…but it kinda feels like this.

We are at a restaurant specifically for a special dessert that we’ve been waiting to try for a long time. We watch as that dessert is delivered to the table right next to ours where yummy noises proceed to fill our ears for our entire meal.
We finish our meal and the waiter informs us that table next to us received the last of the special dessert we wanted….so please enjoy this complimentary hot fudge Sunday instead.
The cherries are organic.
 
#323      
phats22
mhuml32 said:
If his true intentions were to leave, then negotiate on the buyout because his actions have no standing within contract law. If my job stipulates a buyout to leave, I can’t just retire for four days, take a new job, and act like I dissolved contract obligations. This is like Michael Scott “declaring” bankruptcy.
Click to expand...
totally hear you and I understand many of the concerns/comments around the hire but, for me, there are too many unknowns to really say much re: timing. maybe his retirement and subsequent hire was true to that timeline and it was a pivot (though not drastic in terms of scheme) after Partridge went a different direction?

my main thought though- just want to say I love this board so much and love everyone's opinions and passion. who would have thought of a world just a few years ago where we would be this animated about FB moves in Feb because we actually have fair expectations of success on the field?

kudos to BB, JW and continued future success of the program

giphy.gif
 
#324      
the juiceman cometh
mhuml32 said:
If his true intentions were to leave, then negotiate on the buyout because his actions have no standing within contract law. If my job stipulates a buyout to leave, I can’t just retire for four days, take a new job, and act like I dissolved contract obligations. This is like Michael Scott “declaring” bankruptcy.
Click to expand...
It's questionable, but not sure Montana would choose to pursue it. My guess is it gets resolved by some behind-the-scenes negotiation. Of note, Montana state law sets a very high bar for liquidated damages clauses and there's a decent chance this clause would be deemed void, even without the sham retirement.

28-2-721. When provision fixing liquidated damages valid, MCA

archive.legmt.gov archive.legmt.gov
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back