the reason he did not get the job was because he was only at UTC for 1 year, 5-6 I believe. No HC track record.
Keith Gill and was Danny was right.
- Thread starter PhillySpider
- Start date
the reason he did not get the job was because he was only at UTC for 1 year, 5-6 I believe. No HC track record.
No he wasn't at UTC at that time. He was DC under Clawson when Clawson left. He then stayed on for 1 year as DC with London the year we won National Championship. He was then hired at UTC after that season. We hired London over him. Not sure he was really passed over, although not unheard of to hire assistant after successful tenure under previous head coach. London was always a top target, he was actually in the running when Clawson was hired & was impressive in interviews, so the 2nd go around was expected and London was also alum. Worked out fine for Huesman as he went to UTC following year and did well.
Thanks for posting. You have credibility. It surprised me to hear that the players in '07-'08 didn't like him. I've talked to very few; he certainly had the endorsement of Sidbury when we hired him. Obviously you know a lot more players from that era than I do. If he can't inspire better play then that's a problem long-term.
Everybody dislikes their coaches at times. That may have been a reason he didn't get the HC job in '08, but it wasn't the reason. London was at the top of that list from the start. I too would have loved to see us hire Healy in '16, but that was unrealistic. He had only been at Austin Peay for a year and it seems out of character for him to jump ship after just one season.
No coach is perfect. When London left for W&M the first time, he didn't tell us! Now, there wasn't social media or cell phones back then, but just a little courtesy while we were busting our butts in offseason workouts would have been nice. Still love the guy.
Older gent in our section was telling us a rumor I'd never heard before: that we tried to get Clawson to come back in '11 (he was at BG), he asked to sleep on it, we didn't wait and hired Rocco.
There's just something about Danny; I can't explain it. He was pleasant enough in our few interactions, and his teams certainly were better disciplined. It just makes you wonder, though:
- Notably snubbed from the playoffs at Liberty, Richmond, and already at Delaware
- Teams are constantly "disrespected" in the polls, particularly the coaches' poll. The Hens are 7 spots below Elon, a team they have a better record than and beat head to head? They were still below Towson last week, after beating them.
- Never seriously considered for an FBS HC job.
Spoke with 2 prominent players on that 09 NC team and both commented they liked London more then DC said he was a lot more personable. They didn't comment on his knowledge of the game. Imagine RH was probably closer to DC in terms of player relations then that of Mike London.
Ive always been of the opinion that if we never hired Dave Clawson UR football isnt what it is today. No national championship. He set the blueprint for future success here and those 07-09 teams were unquestionably the most talented since I began following the Spiders in the mid 90s. Can't imagine we couldnt wait one extra night for him to say no. If we did shame on us. I would of taken him again in a heart beat even if it was for just four years.
DR is a very intense individual when I conversed with him in a matter a fact type of way. I like Rocco (Other then how he left), however, I know from those working in athletics he was a royal PIA and kind of a jerk to some other coaches especially when he didn't get his way.
From the players I knew in the 2006-9 era, the offensive guys loved DC. They thought he was a genius and knew he’d put them in position to win. He was hard on some guys (see Stacey Tutt) but there was no doubt he knew his stuff. The defensive guys liked London better (as in they really loved him) because he was less technical and more emotional. The guys on offense thought London was a nice guy but didn’t know enough to hire decent assistants. RH never came up with a strong reaction other than the statement that if he was here in 2009 that we would have gone back-to-back even with weak offensive coaches. I have a small sample size to work with so no idea if they represented the whole team or not. Just thought I’d share.
I was in school during the Reid years. There were definitely guys that didn’t like playing for him. Then again there were guys who just absolutely loved him. I think there is very rarely unanimous opinions.
I was in school during the Reid years. There were definitely guys that didn’t like playing for him. Then again there were guys who just absolutely loved him. I think there is very rarely unanimous opinions.
I am sure there is some correlation between wins and how much the players like the coach.
Wake Forest's defense is terrible. Maybe the Wolfpack puts up 50 tonight, DC calls up RH, and by next season we're all singing Kumbaya with our new, young up-and-coming HC....
Aaron Corp. (Ha!)
Wake Forest's defense is terrible. Maybe the Wolfpack puts up 50 tonight, DC calls up RH, and by next season we're all singing Kumbaya with our new, young up-and-coming HC....
Aaron Corp. (Ha!)
ditto, miss you PA but know you are having fun with kirby back and those dawgs with a lot more bite
do you guys remember Dick Tarrant? the players hated, detested, his practices because he was so tough and vocal. players do not have to like their coaches for there to be success. what i want as an alum is a guy who represents our school in the right way, great character (not being wire tapped by the fbi), who can win and put our student/athletes in a position to be better in their lives going forward. as we see each and every year, many coaches get canned, others hired, winning is the bottom line but you also have to consider, well at least we should, the student/athlete and how he or she is being treated in their years here.
