Monte has helped his career, but Lane has enough skill to be promoted up the chain. Dooley didn't and this is why he remained a position coach, till La Tech bought his last name and NFL time. The real crime was Tennessee taking a low mid-level conference hire chance on him.
Meh. I don't think he's really to blame for the situation in Oakland. Norv Turner got another shot and he didn't do any better. Art Shell was a pretty decent coach that failed miserably with the Raiders just before Kiffin. He did well enough to warrant optimism in one season at UT and was on the right track at USC until this past season. He certainly hasn't been the kind of miserable failure Dooley was where you already know he should never under any circumstances be offered another head coaching job.
I don't get this. Why is being the son of a career dc some sort of silver spoon? By this theory mike Shula should have got rehired constantly.
Shula got the bama job because his name was Shula. You don't get that his ties to Monte got him where he is today? I guess you think all the bowdens earned their way the hard way.
I've said all along that my candidates for an open head coaching position at a major school would consists solely of people who 1) had experienced great success, e.g. won conference championships, as a head coach at another program or 2) were top coordinators for power coaches at NC level programs. I'll not hold Kiffin out as savior; that ship sailed long ago. But there is no question he fits #2. That is the reason he got the NFL gig, which to me was just gravy on the resume. His family ties sure didn't hurt, but his career trajectory was a major reason he could compile that all-star staff. You can argue that Jones fits #1, but that's the point--it's an argument. He followed Kelly, so it is tough to tell how much of the success was his, and despite all of his "championships," I kept seeing Louisville and WVU in BCS games while Cincy played in the Liberty. It doesn't mean one is can't miss or the other is doomed to fail, but it does make Lane the more attractive prospect by a pretty wide margin, IMO. That's the reason we were battling USC for Kiffin and Colorado for Jones. Aspbergers no longer exists. Must be ego. Asperger's syndrome dropped from psychiatrists' handbook the DSM | Society | guardian.co.uk
There's no question that having the last name Kiffin helped Lane, especially starting out and getting some initial looks. It's also true that he's also a pretty brilliant offensive mind. Having his dad in his corner most-definitely helped, but I doubt that happens if he doesn't have some sort of coaching acumen. All I've tried to say is that on-paper, Jones' resume is about as impressive as UT has ever hired. Kiffin most definitely is in that discussion too. I don't think it's a slam-dunk either way.
cotton - A question I just thought of. Am I allowed to count 89 as a SEC title since Bama went to the Sugar?
Different era, but yes. I do think the fact that Jones finished in a muti-way tie in the weakest BCS conference in the land for both of his championships should be taken into account when evaluating them.
Kiffin and Dooley both got head starts because of their last names. From what I've heard from everyone, including guys on the team, Kiffin worked his ass off and Dooley was a lazy piece of shit. Lane may or may not work out at USC, but he'll continue to find gainful employment coaching football for as long as he wants it. Dooley isn't going to rise any higher than he is now. If I were a betting man, I'd say he gets canned pretty quickly in Dallas and goes back to being a college position coach.
In hind-sight, I really wish that hadn't of happened. He would have been a better coach than Shula for sure, but I think he keeps his head above water enough to make it a couple of more years.
I wasn't trying to discredit them; I simply think that the press release line that "Jones has won 4 conference championships in 6 years as head coach" needs some explanation.
