- So, the decision is made to much consternation by many so here are my thoughts today:
- Coaching changes do not happen in a bubble. Other than about 4 names, no one was going to get the Oregon job without a second interview. It is in this second interview where substance begins to really be understood. Vision, culture, concepts, potential assistants, all of those things that are part of a formal plan get discussed after the initial conversations
- The reason for this change, regardless of what we all think, was not because the defense was bad; it was about the culture. There were systemic problems alluded to often; things which could not be overcome simply by firing a few defensive coaches and moving on.
- The results were not equivalent to the talent on the roster. Mark Helfrich had one of the most significant statistical metrics drops in recent times (Dave Bartoo).
- This was never about a single bad season. It was about a trend, and a cultural malaise that had become too much for a defensive coordinator to overcome.
- Recruiting losses in the short term should never be a consideration. So, maybe Oregon loses 2018 commit Colson Yankoff. But they might have anyway. What if, in the process, they get Tua? Is that a good trade? Many think it would be
- I am not convinced Matt Rhule had a true formal offer to be the next head coach. I think the Ducks were very interested, but I also think Rhule wanted to go to Baylor for multiple reasons; was one of them recruiting in a more friendly area? Sure. But do not consider it an 'excuse' if someone of deep faith wants to work at a faith based school with significant issues that need addressed. CFall it a mission, that is what Matt Rhule was on
- Chip Kelly. Never bought into this 'It's Chip' nonsense. Chip was offered the job, and he declined. After he declined, he did not pull a 'oh, maybe, keep it on hold' He wants to turn it around in SF and will never say "Yeah, I can't do this. Goin' back to Oregon' he will never admit failure. He may get fired, but will never concede
- Fleck. I think he got more than what Canzano says. He got more than a token 'listen' on Monday. What happened was simply this: Oregon was very high on him but there were some issues. 1) He wants to coach in the Cotton Bowl. Oregon needs a head coach now. 2) He had not done a lot of in-depth look at where Oregon is and what the vision moving forward should be. His plans were not solid. This is why the 'style over substance' stuff started to float about.
- Was Taggart the #1 guy? No. That was tom Herman. So, I think I am goign to change the South Park song "Blame Canada" to "Blame Kansas" if Texas wins that game, plays in a bowl game, Charlie Strong is not fired. Early rumors about Fisher and LSU would have likely driven Herman right to Oregon. Kansas won, and the rest is history.
- So where int eh pecking order was Taggart? Hard to say. He was above Harsin. He was above Schiano. But we do not know who all else was interviewed. I think the Ducks would have taken McElwain, but he was not really leaving.
- After conducting close to a dozen formal and informal interviews, the Ducks brass kept coming back to Taggart. His vision was better, his plan better and his energy better..
- This is why you actually conduct interviews rather than go off of fan lists. Sometimes a guy looks great on paper, but his vision, strategy, goals, all those things that make a program successful are more evident in one person versus another. Taggart is an upgrade and a culture change was needed.
Over the next few days we will start looking at staff changes and potential options. All for now
- Coaching changes do not happen in a bubble. Other than about 4 names, no one was going to get the Oregon job without a second interview. It is in this second interview where substance begins to really be understood. Vision, culture, concepts, potential assistants, all of those things that are part of a formal plan get discussed after the initial conversations
- The reason for this change, regardless of what we all think, was not because the defense was bad; it was about the culture. There were systemic problems alluded to often; things which could not be overcome simply by firing a few defensive coaches and moving on.
- The results were not equivalent to the talent on the roster. Mark Helfrich had one of the most significant statistical metrics drops in recent times (Dave Bartoo).
- This was never about a single bad season. It was about a trend, and a cultural malaise that had become too much for a defensive coordinator to overcome.
- Recruiting losses in the short term should never be a consideration. So, maybe Oregon loses 2018 commit Colson Yankoff. But they might have anyway. What if, in the process, they get Tua? Is that a good trade? Many think it would be
- I am not convinced Matt Rhule had a true formal offer to be the next head coach. I think the Ducks were very interested, but I also think Rhule wanted to go to Baylor for multiple reasons; was one of them recruiting in a more friendly area? Sure. But do not consider it an 'excuse' if someone of deep faith wants to work at a faith based school with significant issues that need addressed. CFall it a mission, that is what Matt Rhule was on
- Chip Kelly. Never bought into this 'It's Chip' nonsense. Chip was offered the job, and he declined. After he declined, he did not pull a 'oh, maybe, keep it on hold' He wants to turn it around in SF and will never say "Yeah, I can't do this. Goin' back to Oregon' he will never admit failure. He may get fired, but will never concede
- Fleck. I think he got more than what Canzano says. He got more than a token 'listen' on Monday. What happened was simply this: Oregon was very high on him but there were some issues. 1) He wants to coach in the Cotton Bowl. Oregon needs a head coach now. 2) He had not done a lot of in-depth look at where Oregon is and what the vision moving forward should be. His plans were not solid. This is why the 'style over substance' stuff started to float about.
- Was Taggart the #1 guy? No. That was tom Herman. So, I think I am goign to change the South Park song "Blame Canada" to "Blame Kansas" if Texas wins that game, plays in a bowl game, Charlie Strong is not fired. Early rumors about Fisher and LSU would have likely driven Herman right to Oregon. Kansas won, and the rest is history.
- So where int eh pecking order was Taggart? Hard to say. He was above Harsin. He was above Schiano. But we do not know who all else was interviewed. I think the Ducks would have taken McElwain, but he was not really leaving.
- After conducting close to a dozen formal and informal interviews, the Ducks brass kept coming back to Taggart. His vision was better, his plan better and his energy better..
- This is why you actually conduct interviews rather than go off of fan lists. Sometimes a guy looks great on paper, but his vision, strategy, goals, all those things that make a program successful are more evident in one person versus another. Taggart is an upgrade and a culture change was needed.
Over the next few days we will start looking at staff changes and potential options. All for now
