Originally Posted by
smootness
You're saying Kingsbury's time at TT means it's a mixed bag for Leach's offense? Kingsbury was not a good HC but his offenses did fine...and regardless, we have direct evidence of what Leach himself would do at TT...and it's better than Kingsbury. Even still, Kingsbury's one year in the SEC produced an incredible offense.
This is pretty insane nitpicking over Leach's resume that no other candidate is going to bring. Can we investigate every coach who has come from a similar tree as Napier to see how successful he would be? Because he was an Alabama assistant after all. And the Saban coaching tree has produced Muschamp, McElwain, and Dooley, and they are not good SEC coaches. So that tree is busted, can't hire Napier. Sarkisian is from the Carroll tree, which produced Ed Orgeron, and when he initially left Carroll, he failed majorly in the SEC. Sarkisian now also has the stink of the Saban tree in addition to that, so you can't hire him, either. So who do we hire?
Leach has proven himself at least to the extent to get a shot in the SEC. I'm not saying we have to hire him or that he's even the best possible candidate, but the idea that by looking at others in the coaching tree and his previous, successful stint as an OC in the SEC, we can say that his offense wouldn't work or that it shouldn't be tried is ridiculous.