Posted on: February 8, 2011 10:06 am
Edited on: February 8, 2011 10:11 am
Posted by Chip Patterson
The coaching carousel has slowed since the regular season ended in December, but there are still several pieces shuffling back and forth, particularly in the ACC and Big East. After moving Connecticut into the FBS and all the way to the Fiesta Bowl in 2010, Huskies head coach Randy Edsall departed to take Ralph Friedgen's vacant seat at Maryland. Maryland's offensive coordinator, James Franklin, accepted a head coaching position at Vanderbilt while defensive coordinator Don Brown was retained. Just before Edsall was ready to round out his staff by hiring Andre Powell, former running backs coach at Clemson, to the same position in College Park, Brown shocked the Terps fan base by bolting to Connecticut, Edsall's former employer.
Confusing, I know.
Now former Miami head coach Randy Shannon has emerged as a candidate to replace Brown at Maryland. ESPN.com's Bruce Feldman is reporting that Shannon will be in town on Tuesday and Wednesday to interview for the defensive coordinator position. Shannon served as defensive coordinator for the Hurricanes for six years under Larry Coker before being promoted to head coach. Shannon also is a highly-touted recruiter, with deep ties to the schools in the Miami-Dade County area.
Also in the running for Don Brown's job in College Park is former Maryland assistant Kevin Lampa. Lampa spent four seasons as a secondary coach under Ralph Friedgen, and interviewed for the position on Friday. Shannon's services are not being tied exclusively to Maryland, either. With UCLA awkwardly ridding itself of Rocky Seto thanks to a Facebook flub, Shannon has also become a target for the Bruins.
While the biggest moves are made in December and January, these shifts of assistant coaches could be some of the details that can make or break the 2011 season for these teams. Shannon is a well-respected coach and recruiter, and seasoned enough to jump right in with little transition. He will likely be coaching in 2011, and he will be a great addition to whatever staff he joins.
Posted on: November 1, 2010 1:47 pm
Edited on: November 1, 2010 2:07 pm
Posted by Jerry Hinnen
After the Mountain West 's smash-and-grab of Nevada and Fresno State foiled their plans to add BYU and left them with only six football-playing members, it was common knowledge that the WAC was going to have to make a desperate move to remain a viable Division I league.
How desperate? According to this report from the San Marcos Daily Journal , home newspaper for the Texas State Bobcats, this desperate:
Consider it a done deal.If you're keeping track, that's two football programs in TSU and Texas-San Antonio with FCS records of 4-4 (1-3 in the Southland Conference ) and FILE NOT FOUND , respectively. Why no record for UTSA? Because the Roadrunners don't even have a football program yet . They're scheduled to begin FCS play in 2011. (Their head coach is former Miami head man Larry Coker , so they've got that going for them.) The one potentially known quantity on the FCS level, former I-AA national champion and Big Sky powerhouse Montana , is apparently taking a pass for the time being.
So yes, the WAC will be able to continue playing FBS football. But if this report is accurate, the teams involved appear to bring so little to the table that that's the only bare-bones positive they'll be able to find in this entire expansion mess. (Though geographical odd duck Louisiana Tech might also be happy about exchanging two cross-country trips for relatvely short jogs into Texas.) The bottom line is that come 2012, the Sun Belt is going to have a serious challenger for the "honor" of being the FBS's weakest conference.
HT: Cowboy Altitude
Posted on: September 20, 2010 8:49 pm
Posted by Adam Jacobi
Following the impending exodus of Nevada and Boise State, the WAC looks to be in dire straits; the most high-profile member remaining will be, like, Hawaii -- and that's not the football program it used to be by any stretch. But if the WAC's expecting great candidates to step forward to fill the voids being left, they're probably not going to be blown away by the schools presenting themselves to the WAC at a meeting later this month:
WAC commissioner Karl Benson said Texas State and UT-San Antonio will make presentations to the league's membership committee at its Sept. 28 meeting in Dallas. The membership committee is comprised of the athletic directors from the six remaining members of the WAC (Idaho, Hawaii, Louisiana Tech San Jose State, New Mexico State and Utah State).
Benson said he expects no decisions at the meeting.
On paper, the two schools are actually attractive targets. They're both on the high-population corridor of I-35 in Texas between Dallas and San Antonio, and their enrollment numbers are huge: TSU boasts over 32,000 students, and UTSA has over 28,000 of its own. Big schools with tepid academic standards and huge television markets? Again, on paper, decent fits.
What separates the schools, however, is the ability to invest heavily in athletics. UTSA has recently pushed forward with expansion plans in athletics, and they're starting a new football program next season with Larry Coker at the helm. Most notably, UTSA will be playing in the Alamadome, and having a high-profile stadium ready and waiting will be a huge boost for the young program -- especially if they want to join a conference that isn't, like, the Sun Belt. The real question, of course, is whether the program can be ready for WAC play by 2012, the date Benson set forth for getting back to eight members. Year 2 of play and already in FBS? Best of luck, sirs.
Texas State, meanwhile, is stuck in a 30-year-old, 15,000-seat stadium -- and their paltry $87 million endowment isn't going to be able to make much progress on that front. Sure, it's great that TSU wants to make the move up to I-A, but if they don't make the proper investments in the program and its infrastructure, they'll just be a farther-west version of Florida International or Western Kentucky: teams that jumped up a sub-division for no real reason.
At the end of the day, though, if the WAC says yes to either of these two schools, it won't be doing a whole lot to immediately rectify its new "have-not" status.