None of the assistants get much interview time. Here's why: “Most everywhere that I’ve worked, it’s been that way,” Pruitt said. “And I appreciated it as an assistant coach, so I could work on the opponents and not come out here and hang out with you guys.” “I think it’s important that when you’re talking, you want one message,” he said. “And when you have one message, at least you know what the message will actually be.” From David Ubben at the Athletic https://theathletic.com/473541/2018...-voice-policy-comes-with-plusses-and-minuses/
I always wondered why Saban and other coaches wouldn't let assistants talk to media, I just figured it was a superiority complex. Those quotes make a lot of sense as to why they don't. Thanks for posting that.
It's pretty good reasoning and I think I would love to be able to not talk to the Wes Ruckers of the world
I prefer my boss to give the message rather than for all us underlings to try and give a coherent one over a dozen voices
Besides, there is only so many ways you can say "We are taking this one game at a time, our next opponent is going to be a hard out and we have to play perfect to beat them."
Just to play devil's advocate: Wouldn't more face time for assistants allow them to distinguish themselves as candidates for better jobs in the future? I'm just trying to think of some reasons assistants may want to speak to media.
This is Tinder, not a church social. No one gives a shit about what they sound like or how clever they speak.
Nah, I think Saban has enough of his guys out as HC's or Coordinators now that it is all about on the field success. I don't think media attention helps them at all.
The fact that other coaches want you is more important than your ability to say words. Butch Jones is an example.
It probably works in the assistants favor to where they don't say something stupid to rule them out of another job.
I've been on both ends of the spectrum. I can tell you that being an assistant and just getting to focus on the job at hand that particular week is tremendous. The outside distractions of being the head man takes a toll.
But do they see it that way? We all know it would work in Sab's favor if Twitter just shut his account down completely, but does he see it that way? I guess I'm just pointing out that I think some assistants may not like it this way, even if everyone else knows it's for the best. When we hired Dooley, people cited how well-spoken he was, talked about his law degree, and pointed out tons of shit that didn't really matter, like being HC and AD at his prior gig. I would agree that no one SHOULD give a shit about what a coach sounds like or how clever he speaks when considering hiring him, but I disagree with your statement that it's not considered. If you're trying to get a head coaching gig, then other coaches wanting you doesn't really matter. You need AD's and other school officials to want you. Those people don't always judge solely based on on-field production.
Indy, you are arguing it backwards. Pointing to one well-spoken failure doesn't prove people care. Most would need to be well-spoken to support the argument people care. Instead, I get to point to orgeron, Muschamp, and Leach off the top of my head, and negate your argument completely.