Chud, Winston Moss, Kevin Patrick will all be on campus...

[Onion01]

What proof is there that Dorsey would be a good OC?

 

[AUcane]

What proof is there that Dorsey would be a good OC?

None. That's why you start him as QBC and have him learn from Chud and Coley. And not for nothing but Jed Fisch had a similar trajectory - QBC in the pros and a solid OC in college.

 

[cowboycane]

What proof is there that Dorsey would be a good OC?

There is none. But a lot of the time, finding the next great thing is about finding a great football mind and putting him in place to succeed. Dorsey is on the fast track to a big time gig in the NFL right now. I think he has always shown a great grasp of the game and fully understands the "get the fast guy the ball and let him do something with it" concept.

 

[Onion01]

Fair enough. I'm on board with Dorsey

 

[LuCane]

What proof is there that Dorsey would be a good OC?

What proof is there that most QB coaches who rise to be OCs are going to be good? Also, he's an NFL QB coach employing NFL concepts. He's not even a college QB coach. Are you saying we should only hire people who have a proven track record as a coordinator? If so, we're likely ****ed. Those are in short supply and quite expensive. Also, it matters what "area of specialty" the HC has in his past.

 

[Onion01]

Easy tiger, it was a legitimate question, not a rhetorical one

 

[LuCane]

Easy tiger, it was a legitimate question, not a rhetorical one

I'm aware. That's why I'm asking some questions in return. I don't want our expectations to go into outer space. We need to simply make a good assessment, for the right reasons and finally get ourselves a competent coach.

By the way, probably not the thread to drop it, but a Golden Cane (30+ year booster) I know says...

"I don't care about Golden's contract. We're all mad enough to do something about it." That's the second 6-figure booster in the last 5 days from whom I hear something strong. For the record, he wants Butch, but who knows if it'll be possible. Again, we shall see. Last 6 games will play it all out.

 

[the storm]

They are all being honored/introduced at the game on Saturday.

To get inducted in to the UM HOF, along with Rusty Medearis and Jon Vilma. Sean Taylor in memoriam.

Congrats, maybe while here they can go Expendables-style on the coaching staff and cuckhold them.

 

[Beef Stew]

What proof is there that Dorsey would be a good OC?

There is none. But a lot of the time, finding the next great thing is about finding a great football mind and putting him in place to succeed. Dorsey is on the fast track to a big time gig in the NFL right now. I think he has always shown a great grasp of the game and fully understands the "get the fast guy the ball and let him do something with it" concept.

Why do we always have to be reading the tea leaves trying to find the next up and coming guy? How has that philosophy worked out for us the past 10 years?

Why can't we go hire someone who is already proven?

 

[LuCane]

What proof is there that Dorsey would be a good OC?

There is none. But a lot of the time, finding the next great thing is about finding a great football mind and putting him in place to succeed. Dorsey is on the fast track to a big time gig in the NFL right now. I think he has always shown a great grasp of the game and fully understands the "get the fast guy the ball and let him do something with it" concept.

Why do we always have to be reading the tea leaves trying to find the next up and coming guy? How has that philosophy worked out for us the past 10 years?

Why can't we go hire someone who is already proven?

We've simply hired the wrong up and coming guy 2 times. Because we base our decisions on the wrong factors. Mostly, it seems, reactionary behavior. We could have gone after Gary Patterson instead of Randy. We could have gotten Kevin Sumlin instead Al Golden. The philosophy isn't wrong. The execution is broken.

We're not going to go out and hire a 4M/year coach. That's fantasy land. We don't even need that, honestly.

 

[tsimonitis]

What proof is there that Dorsey would be a good OC?

There is none. But a lot of the time, finding the next great thing is about finding a great football mind and putting him in place to succeed. Dorsey is on the fast track to a big time gig in the NFL right now. I think he has always shown a great grasp of the game and fully understands the "get the fast guy the ball and let him do something with it" concept.

Why do we always have to be reading the tea leaves trying to find the next up and coming guy? How has that philosophy worked out for us the past 10 years?

Why can't we go hire someone who is already proven?

We've simply hired the wrong up and coming guy 2 times. Because we base our decisions on the wrong factors. Mostly, it seems, reactionary behavior. We could have gone after Gary Patterson instead of Randy. We could have gotten Kevin Sumlin instead Al Golden. The philosophy isn't wrong. The execution is broken.

We're not going to go out and hire a 4M/year coach. That's fantasy land. We don't even need that, honestly.

I am hoping that there is some well established coach out there with enough money that says "**** it let's go dominate". And takes less money to win 10 in a row......pipe dreams

 

[Consigliere]

What proof is there that Dorsey would be a good OC?

What proof is there that most QB coaches who rise to be OCs are going to be good? Also, he's an NFL QB coach employing NFL concepts. He's not even a college QB coach. Are you saying we should only hire people who have a proven track record as a coordinator? If so, we're likely ****ed. Those are in short supply and quite expensive. Also, it matters what "area of specialty" the HC has in his past.

I think people fail to realize is coaches are not born at the highest position possible.

They come in and learn, the good ones advance and continue to advance. If they have higher aspirations and the talent, they move on to be coordinators. Those that have success as coordinators tend to get the opportunity to be a head coach.

 

[Beef Stew]

What proof is there that Dorsey would be a good OC?

There is none. But a lot of the time, finding the next great thing is about finding a great football mind and putting him in place to succeed. Dorsey is on the fast track to a big time gig in the NFL right now. I think he has always shown a great grasp of the game and fully understands the "get the fast guy the ball and let him do something with it" concept.

Why do we always have to be reading the tea leaves trying to find the next up and coming guy? How has that philosophy worked out for us the past 10 years?

Why can't we go hire someone who is already proven?

We've simply hired the wrong up and coming guy 2 times. Because we base our decisions on the wrong factors. Mostly, it seems, reactionary behavior. We could have gone after Gary Patterson instead of Randy. We could have gotten Kevin Sumlin instead Al Golden. The philosophy isn't wrong. The execution is broken.

We're not going to go out and hire a 4M/year coach. That's fantasy land. We don't even need that, honestly.

I don't disagree with that, but if Ken Dorsey didn't play at UM nobody would be talking about him for OC (talking about him as a quarterbacks coach is not realistic.... he has that job right now in the NFL).

If we're going to hire a quarterbacks coach from the NFL, why, if you're being objective, are you going to hire the guy from Carolina? It's not a terrible path to take, but I say hire someone from one of the better offenses in the NFL.

Hire someone who comes from a good coaching tree, working under an OC who is having a ton of success. That approach at least has some evidence to back it up.

 

[LuCane]

What proof is there that Dorsey would be a good OC?

There is none. But a lot of the time, finding the next great thing is about finding a great football mind and putting him in place to succeed. Dorsey is on the fast track to a big time gig in the NFL right now. I think he has always shown a great grasp of the game and fully understands the "get the fast guy the ball and let him do something with it" concept.

Why do we always have to be reading the tea leaves trying to find the next up and coming guy? How has that philosophy worked out for us the past 10 years?

Why can't we go hire someone who is already proven?

We've simply hired the wrong up and coming guy 2 times. Because we base our decisions on the wrong factors. Mostly, it seems, reactionary behavior. We could have gone after Gary Patterson instead of Randy. We could have gotten Kevin Sumlin instead Al Golden. The philosophy isn't wrong. The execution is broken.

We're not going to go out and hire a 4M/year coach. That's fantasy land. We don't even need that, honestly.

Point 1: I don't disagree with that, but if Ken Dorsey didn't play at UM nobody would be talking about him for OC (talking about him as a quarterbacks coach is not realistic.... he has that job right now in the NFL).

Point 2: If we're going to hire a quarterbacks coach from the NFL, why, if you're being objective, are you going to hire the guy from Carolina? It's not a terrible path to take, but I say hire someone from one of the better offenses in the NFL.

Point 3: Hire someone who comes from a good coaching tree, working under an OC who is having a ton of success. That approach at least has some evidence to back it up.

I added the red for ease of response.

Point 1 is totally fair. I guess it's possible. He is a riser as an NFL coach. I wasn't a Jedd Fisch guy ("he was the best in the world!") because he initially was a lot like a Scott Linehan-type, which is to say a really smart guy who over thought things and the team would fail to just run the **** ball when needed. However, he's the type of Coordinator hire we should be looking for: NFL riser with Xs and Os chops and legit intellect. I trust those guys more. Their ambition (and sometimes passion) keeps them innovating, adjusting and making the team better. Would like to see a Jedd Fisch-type with Kaaya - who can scan the field.

As for your second and third points, I think there's some disconnect there. I am in total agreement with point 3. Basically, I want a guy who's been exposed to a lot of good concepts and has a core philosophy he now wants to put together. So, I wouldn't agree with point 2 completely because I'm not worried about Carolina's results. There are a lot of variables there. I'm looking at what concepts Ken Dorsey has been exposed to as a backup QB (where he was really an assistant) and then as a coach.

In short, I try to avoid looking at solely results without the context. I think Dorsey is an up-and-comer, but I also agree we should look for others like him.

 

[3G Cane]

What proof is there that Dorsey would be a good OC?

There is none. But a lot of the time, finding the next great thing is about finding a great football mind and putting him in place to succeed. Dorsey is on the fast track to a big time gig in the NFL right now. I think he has always shown a great grasp of the game and fully understands the "get the fast guy the ball and let him do something with it" concept.

Why do we always have to be reading the tea leaves trying to find the next up and coming guy? How has that philosophy worked out for us the past 10 years?

Why can't we go hire someone who is already proven?

We've simply hired the wrong up and coming guy 2 times. Because we base our decisions on the wrong factors. Mostly, it seems, reactionary behavior. We could have gone after Gary Patterson instead of Randy. We could have gotten Kevin Sumlin instead Al Golden. The philosophy isn't wrong. The execution is broken.

We're not going to go out and hire a 4M/year coach. That's fantasy land. We don't even need that, honestly.

Al?

 

[LuCane]

What proof is there that Dorsey would be a good OC?

There is none. But a lot of the time, finding the next great thing is about finding a great football mind and putting him in place to succeed. Dorsey is on the fast track to a big time gig in the NFL right now. I think he has always shown a great grasp of the game and fully understands the "get the fast guy the ball and let him do something with it" concept.

Why do we always have to be reading the tea leaves trying to find the next up and coming guy? How has that philosophy worked out for us the past 10 years?

Why can't we go hire someone who is already proven?

We've simply hired the wrong up and coming guy 2 times. Because we base our decisions on the wrong factors. Mostly, it seems, reactionary behavior. We could have gone after Gary Patterson instead of Randy. We could have gotten Kevin Sumlin instead Al Golden. The philosophy isn't wrong. The execution is broken.

We're not going to go out and hire a 4M/year coach. That's fantasy land. We don't even need that, honestly.

Al?

Sheeit. Tremendous insult. I'm talking about hiring approach.

 

[CANE1775]

I even had to chuckle at that one Lu. You lobbed that one up. LOL

 

[Savage Cane]

Kehoe must be the only OL coach you people can name.

He's not a good coach. The game has passed him by.

+1 The game blasted past him years ago. He needs to hang up his whistle..
& ride off into the sunset.

 

[3G Cane]

There is none. But a lot of the time, finding the next great thing is about finding a great football mind and putting him in place to succeed. Dorsey is on the fast track to a big time gig in the NFL right now. I think he has always shown a great grasp of the game and fully understands the "get the fast guy the ball and let him do something with it" concept.

Why do we always have to be reading the tea leaves trying to find the next up and coming guy? How has that philosophy worked out for us the past 10 years?

Why can't we go hire someone who is already proven?

We've simply hired the wrong up and coming guy 2 times. Because we base our decisions on the wrong factors. Mostly, it seems, reactionary behavior. We could have gone after Gary Patterson instead of Randy. We could have gotten Kevin Sumlin instead Al Golden. The philosophy isn't wrong. The execution is broken.

We're not going to go out and hire a 4M/year coach. That's fantasy land. We don't even need that, honestly.

Al?

Sheeit. Tremendous insult. I'm talking about hiring approach.

Oh I know, still couldn't resist.