Get ready for Grantham.

[CoastRat.sixpack]

My source, who has never been wrong and is 100% credible on anything state, gave me the list which were the usual suspects. Napier is the top of list. But, he confirmed that we have actually interviewed Grantham. Maybe you all knew that already, and If so, I live in Pearl Harbor.

My point is, if they already interviewed Grantham , and If Grantham knows they are waiting hoping for Napier, he may try to force their hand with a deadline. I would.

That’s where this search gets screwed up, if we interview our B choices first, they can put the squeeze on us. And we will have to bite bc we aren’t sure on our A target, Napier, who wants to coach his bowl game.

Get ready for Grantham.

 

[tenureplan]

Would not be the end of the world but there is a reason he has never been a head coach before. We should have waited til Monday to fire Joe.

 

[msstate7]

Yuck

 

[Shmuley]

Grantham is in no position to dictate anything.

 

[DogStuckAtUM.sixpack]

Lord, have mercy on my soul.

 

[Ranchdawg]

I have a good negotiating tactic for someone trying to "squeeze". "BYE, DON'T LET THE SCREEN DOOR. .

 

[The Peeper]

What kind of deadline would Grantham have for a reason? Gotta go rake leaves, taking the little woman on a post season vacation? He's got nothing to offer for a deadline or as a HC, please just say NO Cohen

 

[Irondawg]

We didn’t need to wait to fire him. Word had already leaked and the players were gone. Trying to wait until Monday would have been worse

 

[tired]

Why should we get ready for Grantham? I read your post, but....we are absolutely sure on Napier. He wants to be left the 17 alone until after his bowl.

 

[tired]

Grantham is in no position to dictate anything.

He's not

 

[CoastRat.sixpack]

Grantham is in no position to dictate anything.

You mean other than the fact that he already has a job and the mere fact that we were interested enough to interview him would do nothing but increase his stock for another team next year?

Especially when we already passed on him once, no doubt he would let it be known that HE was the one who withdrew his name from consideration. And we would look like we don’t have our sh*t together.

That would be more egg on our face. Of course it won’t matter if we get Napier anyway.

But to say he has no leverage? We gave it to him by interviewing him.

 

[blacklistedbully]

My source, who has never been wrong and is 100% credible on anything state, gave me the list which were the usual suspects. Napier is the top of list. But, he confirmed that we have actually interviewed Grantham. Maybe you all knew that already, and If so, I live in Pearl Harbor.

My point is, if they already interviewed Grantham , and If Grantham knows they are waiting hoping for Napier, he may try to force their hand with a deadline. I would.

That’s where this search gets screwed up, if we interview our B choices first, they can put the squeeze on us. And we will have to bite bc we aren’t sure on our A target, Napier, who wants to coach his bowl game.

Get ready for Grantham.

Schlossnagle tried to pull that on Cohen and it didn't turn our well for him. I'm sure Grantham & his agent know this.

 

[kired]

No way we hire a defensive guy as HC. If we have any level of success our OC would be hired away every 1-2 years, like we saw with our DCs under Mullen. You can't have that kind of continuous turnover at your OC position and develop an offense. And even if we start paying our assistants better, we'll never be in a position to pay enough to keep a successful OC for more than a couple of years.

Just look at Auburn (was it 2012?) with Chizik after Malzahn left, and when they hired Gus back the next year as HC. That's where we'd be eventually no matter how good the first 2 or 3 years are.

 

[Tds & Beer]

If we hire grantham i will just check out for a few years.

 

[She Mate Me]

My source, who has never been wrong and is 100% credible on anything state, gave me the list which were the usual suspects. Napier is the top of list. But, he confirmed that we have actually interviewed Grantham. Maybe you all knew that already, and If so, I live in Pearl Harbor.

My point is, if they already interviewed Grantham , and If Grantham knows they are waiting hoping for Napier, he may try to force their hand with a deadline. I would.

That’s where this search gets screwed up, if we interview our B choices first, they can put the squeeze on us. And we will have to bite bc we aren’t sure on our A target, Napier, who wants to coach his bowl game.

Get ready for Grantham.

Not interested in a shouting (typing) match with anyone, but I would have no problem with this hire. One of the highest paid assistants in college football, a known commodity to the school leaders, played under Beamer, clearly capable and MSU has always played solid defense when we have won. Might work, might not, but I'd be OK with it.

 

[patdog]

Me either. In fact, of the names being mentioned, he might be at the top of my list, assuming Napier really isn't interested (which appears to be the case).

 

[Maroon Eagle]

I think there's a decent chance a defensive guy is hired as head coach if only because I think a DC would be more willing to give up control of offensive playcalling to an OC when compared to an OC-turned-head coach meddling with the DC as well taking too much offensive responsibilities.

Not saying it'll happen but just something to ponder.

 

[Cooterpoot]

Would not be the end of the world but there is a reason he has never been a head coach before. We should have waited til Monday to fire Joe.

Because he hasn't pursued opportunities. He's now looking. Head and shoulders better than Judge. Very good recruiter.

 

[The Situation]

I think there's a decent chance a defensive guy is hired as head coach if only because I think a DC would be more willing to give up control of offensive playcalling to an OC when compared to an OC-turned-head coach meddling with the DC as well taking too much offensive responsibilities.

Not saying it'll happen but just something to ponder.

We've never tried this at MSU so why not? Tyler, Bellard, Felker, Sherrill, Croom, Mullen, Moorhead....all offensive guys. The only difference in the good ones and the bad ones were that they were, uh.....good and bad. Actually, Sherrill was a defensive guy although it certainly seems like he was an old line coach or something. Point still remains. Offensive head coaching isn't a necessity.

A defensive coach would maximize the type of talent Mississippi produces. As long as he has an identity for the offense and sticks with it, you accomplish the same thing.

My concern with Grantham is that he's an angry blowhard bubba type. But maybe not, seems he's come a long way since the throat slashing days. Maybe he could be a Gary Patterson?