Coach idea

[CadaverDawg]

What if we hired Hudspeth and gave him $2 million to throw at Grantham as DC? Any chance Grantham would come back to Starkville for a big pay day since his son will be here for the next 4 years? To me a Hudspeth/Grantham combo would be as close to a homerun as we could get...and we would instantly be tougher and get rid of that "soft" label Joe has given us. I just don't know if Grantham would leave Florida unless it was for a HC job or something.

Thoughts?

[ShotgunDawg]

I think I started a 100 response thread on this 3 weeks ago. Yes it would work

[parabrave]

UM whats wrong with Shoop. After this year starting with the loss of all the starters from last year, tutorgate taking away the starters and alot of your depth and a load of injuries I don't think Grantham would've done any better. The only item I didn't like was the lack of tackling and overall toughness.

[CadaverDawg]

UM whats wrong with Shoop. After this year starting with the loss of all the starters from last year, tutorgate taking away the starters and alot of your depth and a load of injuries I don't think Grantham would've done any better. The only item I didn't like was the lack of tackling and overall toughness.

We could do much worse than Shoop as DC. Think he'd stay if we brought in Hudspeth? I could live with that...I'd just rather have Grantham if at all possible

[crackerjax]

UM whats wrong with Shoop. After this year starting with the loss of all the starters from last year, tutorgate taking away the starters and alot of your depth and a load of injuries I don't think Grantham would've done any better. The only item I didn't like was the lack of tackling and overall toughness.

When you are playing Bama and have a QB with a banged up ankle in 3rd-and-long, and you repeatedly fail to even try to blitz, there?s probably someone out there better than you at being defensive coordinator.

[Coach34]

Hud would be the "safe" hire for us.

He is better than what we have currently
Just won Austin Peay their 1st conference title
Knows current players on our team and could convince a couple of QB's to stay put and not transfer
Will run a power spread offense because he would adapt to his talent
Has contacts all over Miss, Louisiana, and Alabama- 90% of our recruiting footprint
Good recruiter
Would not leave State for another job regardless of how much he won

It wouldn't be a sexy hire- but after this last disaster- safe aint such a bad way to go.

Would Grantham come back for $2MM and a multi-year contract? Possibly and would be worth looking into. Especially with his kid being here.

[KOdawg1]

You could talk me into it. Probably not my first choice, but him + Grantham would consistently have us as a 7-8 win team. We'd be tough. I personally don't find it to be that big of a deal, but you'll have some criticism about the NCAA stuff

[HoopsDawg]

Why do people continue to brush over his 15-22 record his last 3 years at ULL?

If the OP said Grantham with Napier then I could be into it.

[Dawgfan77]

I love HUD. Known him since he was at Winston Academy. I want Napier but I wouldn?t hate the Hud hire.

[Cooterpoot]

We aren’t hiring Hud.

[CadaverDawg]

Why do people continue to brush over his 15-22 record his last 3 years at ULL?

If the OP said Grantham with Napier then I could be into it.

Because he has since won a Conference Title with a new team, and that stretch doesn't define him.

[1bigdawg]

I don't get the love for Hud with his record at ULL. Great guy, tough actual results make him see like what we have.

People are saying Napier is great and he was a position coach for Saban. I don't feel great about him just because he was a position coach or because he has succeeded in the worst conference in Div. 1.

[Homedawg]

What if we hired Hudspeth and gave him $2 million to throw at Grantham as DC? Any chance Grantham would come back to Starkville for a big pay day since his son will be here for the next 4 years? To me a Hudspeth/Grantham combo would be as close to a homerun as we could get...and we would instantly be tougher and get rid of that "soft" label Joe has given us. I just don't know if Grantham would leave Florida unless it was for a HC job or something.


Thoughts?

No. He isn't coming back here to be Dc. This keeps getting tossed around. It's not happening.

[HoopsDawg]

Because he has since won a Conference Title with a new team, and that stretch doesn't define him.

Austin Peay is an FCS team. Same as Moorhead with Fordham.

[Ifyouonlyknew]

Grantham isn't coming back to MSU for less than the HC job.

[HoopsDawg]

Grantham isn't coming back to MSU for less than the HC job.

It's funny how bad we want Grantham, while at the same time my UGA buddies still make fun of him and are glad he's not their DC anymore. Good ole 3rd and Grantham.

[Ifyouonlyknew]

It's funny how bad we want Grantham, while at the same time my UGA buddies still make fun of him and are glad he's not their DC anymore. Good ole 3rd and Grantham.

I don't understand because I think Shoop is equal to Grantham.

[gtowndawg]

Hud would be the "safe" hire for us.

He is better than what we have currently
Just won Austin Peay their 1st conference title
Knows current players on our team and could convince a couple of QB's to stay put and not transfer
Will run a power spread offense because he would adapt to his talent
Has contacts all over Miss, Louisiana, and Alabama- 90% of our recruiting footprint
Good recruiter
Would not leave State for another job regardless of how much he won

It wouldn't be a sexy hire- but after this last disaster- safe aint such a bad way to go.

Would Grantham come back for $2MM and a multi-year contract? Possibly and would be worth looking into. Especially with his kid being here.

I know he's not everyone's choice, but I'm 100% behind Hud if we go that route. Give him the money for a great staff and that guy will work himself to the bone to make us the best we can be.

[I seen it dawg]

Les miles.... resume, great recruiter, team would be tough, maybe he's learned to leave offense alone and hire someone to coach it.

[dawgday166]

I don't understand because I think Shoop is equal to Grantham.

I rate him higher myself. Grantham you know what you're getting most every down. Shoop will fool the hell out of you. He mixes and disguises much better IMO.

[DeputyDawg94]

Hud could be our Kirk Ferentz. Probably never win a conference championship but win a bunch of games and we wouldn’t have to worry about him checking out every year at Thanksgiving. I could see him staying for a long time.

[Todd4State]

What if we hired Hudspeth and gave him $2 million to throw at Grantham as DC? Any chance Grantham would come back to Starkville for a big pay day since his son will be here for the next 4 years? To me a Hudspeth/Grantham combo would be as close to a homerun as we could get...and we would instantly be tougher and get rid of that "soft" label Joe has given us. I just don't know if Grantham would leave Florida unless it was for a HC job or something.

Thoughts?

Looking at the numbers Grantham is paid 1.8 so I would imagine it would probably be more like 2.0-2.5 million to realistically get him. That would actually put him on par or higher than Dave Aranda's AAV and he's the highest paid DC in the country. Being able to say that he's the highest paid guy in football plus being able to see his son conveniently would probably make him think long and hard about it.

At worst I think it would cause a bidding war with Florida which may cause them to overpay him or call his bluff and say "take it". And that would cause a trickle down effect for Florida which would cost them more money for assistants. And I'm all for sticking it to Florida. It also might cause Dan to lose his Joe Lee Dunn which I'm also all for. Good new for him is Manny Diaz might be available...again.

It's kind of like post buyout interest in a way.

IF it is Hud I wouldn't be surprised if he kept Shoop simply because they have worked together before so there is more known about how they work together and it would ease any transition because the defensive players would know the system on their side of the ball already.

[Ifyouonlyknew]

Looking at the numbers Grantham is paid 1.8 so I would imagine it would probably be more like 2.0-2.5 million to realistically get him. That would actually put him on par or higher than Dave Aranda's AAV and he's the highest paid DC in the country. Being able to say that he's the highest paid guy in football plus being able to see his son conveniently would probably make him think long and hard about it.

At worst I think it would cause a bidding war with Florida which may cause them to overpay him or call his bluff and say "take it". And that would cause a trickle down effect for Florida which would cost them more money for assistants. And I'm all for sticking it to Florida. It also might cause Dan to lose his Joe Lee Dunn which I'm also all for. Good new for him is Manny Diaz might be available...again.

It's kind of like post buyout interest in a way.

IF it is Hud I wouldn't be surprised if he kept Shoop simply because they have worked together before so there is more known about how they work together and it would ease any transition because the defensive players would know the system on their side of the ball already.

Grantham isn't coming here to be a DC.

[OLJWales]

Grantham isn't coming here to be a DC.

Is he in the mix for HC? is Gene totally out of consideration? Hoping our Athletic Dept has an ounce of sense by not considering him?

[Ifyouonlyknew]

Is he in the mix for HC? is Gene totally out of consideration? Hoping our Athletic Dept has an ounce of since by not considering him?

I don't expect either to ever be the HC at MSU

[OLJWales]

I don't expect either to ever be the HC at MSU

thank you sir, greatly appreciated

[Jack Lambert]

Grantham isn't coming back to MSU for less than the HC job.

Maybe he thinks it would be great to coach at the school my son plays baseball at. Father love is strong.

[confucius say]

I don't understand because I think Shoop is equal to Grantham.

Or better

[confucius say]

I don't expect either to ever be the HC at MSU

Who do you expect to coach us in 2020?

[Ifyouonlyknew]

Who do you expect to coach us in 2020?

$3mil dollar question

[Ifyouonlyknew]

Maybe he thinks it would be great to coach at the school my son plays baseball at. Father love is strong.

Hold on to whatever hope you have I guess.

[confucius say]

$3mil dollar question

Will his first name be joe?

[Ifyouonlyknew]

Will his first name be joe?

Yes last name Gibbs

[Commercecomet24]

Yes last name Gibbs

Rep given!

[Really Clark?]

Yes last name Gibbs

Rep given!!

[Sienfield]

$3mil dollar question

That narrows it down quite a bit. For 3 Million we could get Hud or Napier maybe.

[Johnson85]

Why do people continue to brush over his 15-22 record his last 3 years at ULL?

If the OP said Grantham with Napier then I could be into it.

I don't get why people would be more excited about Napier than Hud. Hud turned ULL from a graveyard to a good sunbelt program. Napier looks good so far but even though ULL had regressed, they weren't the dumpster fire that Hud took over. Hud looked great at ULL after two and even after three seasons, probably better than Napier does because of Hud's previous head coaching experience and the fact that ULL was such a historically bad program when he took over. Granted Napier doesn't have the blemish that Hud has from his latter years at ULL, but he hasn't had much of an opportunity to gain any blemish. Lots of coaches start off hot because they walk into a good situation but then reveal their true selves after a few years.

I don't have a problem with Napier and don't think Hud is head and shoulders a better choice, but unless somebody has some good insight into Napier beyond his record and stats at ULL, then it seems like Hud is the safer bet.

[Covercorner2]

Hud would be the "safe" hire for us.

He is better than what we have currently
Just won Austin Peay their 1st conference title
Knows current players on our team and could convince a couple of QB's to stay put and not transfer
Will run a power spread offense because he would adapt to his talent
Has contacts all over Miss, Louisiana, and Alabama- 90% of our recruiting footprint
Good recruiter
Would not leave State for another job regardless of how much he won

It wouldn't be a sexy hire- but after this last disaster- safe aint such a bad way to go.

Would Grantham come back for $2MM and a multi-year contract? Possibly and would be worth looking into. Especially with his kid being here.

A lot of this also applies to Napier, and Napier has had more success at the D1 level. That's who I would hire.

- Runs the ball? check
- Saban tree? check
- Successful as D1 HC? check
- Relatively young? check
- Has recruited the area? check

[bulldawg28]

Shoop brings more variety than Grantham. Grantham is strictly man and kept the safeties covering WR'S getting beat deep. He also played too much zero coverage with no safety help. I still remember Auburn and GA going over Mclaurin's head. Shoop addressed that instantly with better schemes. I prefer Shoop any day of the week over Grantham.

[Johnson85]

A lot of this also applies to Napier, and Napier has had more success at the D1 level. That's who I would hire.

- Runs the ball? check
- Saban tree? check
- Successful as D1 HC? check
- Relatively young? check
- Has recruited the area? check

How has Napier had more success as a Dvision I level? Napier had mixed success as a OC early with Clemson before being let go. He had a good year as OC at ASU that got him the ULL job. He is going to finish up with somewhere around 18 wins in his first two years as Head Coach. That doesn't seem more successful than Hud taking over a historically bad program and winning 9 games a yea for his first four years.

[Really Clark?]

How has Napier had more success as a Dvision I level? Napier had mixed success as a OC early with Clemson before being let go. He had a good year as OC at ASU that got him the ULL job. He is going to finish up with somewhere around 18 wins in his first two years as Head Coach. That doesn't seem more successful than Hud taking over a historically bad program and winning 9 games a yea for his first four years.

I think he meant as HC, reading his check list

[Johnson85]

I think he meant as HC, reading his check list

That's what I thought at first, but that's an even less defensible position though. If you just compare DI head coaching jobs, Napier definitely hasn't had as much success as Hud. Not his fault. He's only had two years (almost) and done great in his two years, but Hud did great in his first four.

[HoopsDawg]

How has Napier had more success as a Dvision I level? Napier had mixed success as a OC early with Clemson before being let go. He had a good year as OC at ASU that got him the ULL job. He is going to finish up with somewhere around 18 wins in his first two years as Head Coach. That doesn't seem more successful than Hud taking over a historically bad program and winning 9 games a yea for his first four years.

You clearly prefer Hud over Napier so you aren't interested in being objective.

I don't have a bias. Napier's resume is objectively more impressive to me. The 4 years at Bama alone put him over Hud in my book. Recruiting coordinator at Clemson. Offensive coordinator at Power 5 schools. And this year he has ULL 9th in the country in Total Offense. I'm happy that Hud is having success at the FCS level and has been able to get his career back on track after the last 3 years at ULL.

[Johnson85]

You clearly prefer Hud over Napier so you aren't interested in being objective.

I don't have a bias. Napier's resume is objectively more impressive to me. The 4 years at Bama alone put him over Hud in my book. Recruiting coordinator at Clemson. Offensive coordinator at Power 5 schools. And this year he has ULL 9th in the country in Total Offense. I'm happy that Hud is having success at the FCS level and has been able to get his career back on track after the last 3 years at ULL.

I don't really have a preference. I think they're more or less interchangeable based on their record. I was just pointing out he hasn't had more success at Division I. I don't really think that's arguable. How you want to weigh the fact that Hud eventually faltered whereas Napier hasn't been there long enough yet to know is I think a good question. But I think in general people give way too much credit to up and coming head coaches with short records without thinking about selection bias.

[Covercorner2]

That's what I thought at first, but that's an even less defensible position though. If you just compare DI head coaching jobs, Napier definitely hasn't had as much success as Hud. Not his fault. He's only had two years (almost) and done great in his two years, but Hud did great in his first four.

Napier is 9-2 at ULL right now. Hud's best record at the same school was 9-4, and those wins are vacated. So basically Napier would have to lose out to not have more success at the same school, and there is no asterisk next to those results.

[Johnson85]

Napier is 9-2 at ULL right now. Hud's best record at the same school was 9-4, and those wins are vacated. So basically Napier would have to lose out to not have more success at the same school, and there is no asterisk next to those results.

And his first year was 7-7, which was worse than Hud's 9-4. And Napier's got two years of track record, not 4, and didn't have to raise the program from the dead to begin with. Again, I have no problem if people that know more about the coaches than their records and stats think Napier is the better coach or better fit for MSU. But Napier hasn't had more success than Hud yet. His track record is very appealing right now, it's just not much of one.

[Covercorner2]

And his first year was 7-7, which was worse than Hud's 9-4. And Napier's got two years of track record, not 4, and didn't have to raise the program from the dead to begin with. Again, I have no problem if people that know more about the coaches than their records and stats think Napier is the better coach or better fit for MSU. But Napier hasn't had more success than Hud yet. His track record is very appealing right now, it's just not much of one.

Fact is, barring a loss to ULM, Napier will have had a more successful season at the same program than Hud....

[Coach34]

Fact is, barring a loss to ULM, Napier will have had a more successful season at the same program than Hud....

but they didn’t start at the same beginning point

[sandjunky]

Exactly, context matters

[HoopsDawg]

but they didn’t start at the same beginning point

Good point, Napier had to take over a 5-7 program that was on probation.

[the_real_MSU_is_us]

I asked this in another thread but I will again here because it's relevent:

Hud went 9-4 his first 4 seasons, then things fell apart.

1) Why did he not get better with time? One would think with his recruits that know his system and have been developed by his coached, they'd show improvement. Why doesn't this stagnation bother anyone?

2) Hudd was still the coach when things fell apart. That's a knock on him for not navigating that. Was he not responsible for having his players well coached and ready to go? Yet they weren't. For 3 straight seasons too, it's not like he had 1 tough year and was let go. 3 years and he couldn't right the ship that he himself led into the storm... and all of those 3 years he had his own recruits, so we cna't blame bad apples or poor scheme fit either.

Why don't I see anyone discussing these glaring resume issues?

[Jack Lambert]

Hold on to whatever hope you have I guess.

I don't care. I was just saying why he might want to come back.

[Johnson85]

Good point, Napier had to take over a 5-7 program that was on probation.

It's hilarious to see you talk about other people being objective. Napier took over a better situation than Hud did. Hud had shown they could win and 5-7, while still down from where Hud was the first four years, was still a better position than ULL historically was in.

Napier looks like a good prospective coach and I wouldn't have a problem with him at all over Hud. He doesn't have the track record that Hud does, for good and bad. Either Hud or Napier could potentially be the next Saban or the next Willie Taggert. Willie Taggert is much more likely just b/c there are a lot of Willie Taggerts and not many Sabans. Hud has more of a track record, which makes it less likely he is going to fall on either extreme. But even Hud's longer track record doesn't mean he won't be the next WIllie Taggert b/c it's just never a sure thing moving from a G5 to P5, or even within P5, so I don't have a problem with how anybody weighs those risks, as long as the person making the utlimate decision has some knowledge/insight beyond records and stats.

[Johnson85]

I asked this in another thread but I will again here because it's relevent:

Hud went 9-4 his first 4 seasons, then things fell apart.

1) Why did he not get better with time? One would think with his recruits that know his system and have been developed by his coached, they'd show improvement. Why doesn't this stagnation bother anyone? Seriously? Why didn't he get ULL past 9-4? Mullen went 5-7 (which was a great 5-7), 9-4, 7-6, 8-5,7-6 in his first five years. Why didn't Mullen's team show improvement from that 9-4 in his second season? Would you really be upset if Hud came in here and got us to 9-4 for the next four years? I mean, I don't think Hud is some slam dunk hire. I'd be happy with him as well as a few other possibilities that have been mentioned. But seeing some people come up with the reasons to argue against him makes me feel like we're in lala land.


2) Hudd was still the coach when things fell apart. That's a knock on him for not navigating that. Was he not responsible for having his players well coached and ready to go? Yet they weren't. For 3 straight seasons too, it's not like he had 1 tough year and was let go. 3 years and he couldn't right the ship that he himself led into the storm... and all of those 3 years he had his own recruits, so we cna't blame bad apples or poor scheme fit either.

Why don't I see anyone discussing these glaring resume issues? He had three years where while on probation, he fell to the dead middle of the conference. That's not good, but that's not exactly unforgivable.

And why don't you point out the G5 Head Coach with a good track record that doesn't have a blemish on it. I'm not sure we have that option right now because of how quickly g5 coaches get hired up now. We had that option I think and missed last time with Satterfield. And also supposedly with what's his name from Utah. If we have an option like that this time, we shouldn't pass it up again. But all the name getting thrown out there to my knowledge are guys either with blemishes or that haven't been a head coach long enough to get a blemish.