ADC: Update from Football Scoop
FootballScoop.com has an article up about the latest rumblings on the Michigan AD search. Some points, which might help calm people's fears:
- Hackett wants the search done before the OSU game.
- Hackett is willing to fire/hire a coach, but would prefer the new AD does it
- Many current AD's have already expressed interest, including the usual suspects (Manuel, Bates, Castiglione)
- Castiglione would probably take the job if offered
Read the whole article here. Hopefully it helps calm some of the recent panic about this search.
November 4th, 2014 at 1:11 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 4th, 2014 at 1:24 PM ^
Stoops would be a big name for sure. However, his house is absolutely crazy!! I think he's entrenched in Oklahoma.
November 4th, 2014 at 1:15 PM ^
November 4th, 2014 at 2:39 PM ^
November 4th, 2014 at 1:26 PM ^
Sounds like maybe Hackett will serve as the "Hack Man"...uhathankyou.
November 4th, 2014 at 1:26 PM ^
November 4th, 2014 at 1:53 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 4th, 2014 at 3:39 PM ^
It's awful. My gf is from Oklahoma and it's just not fun to see her family.
November 4th, 2014 at 1:44 PM ^
http://youtu.be/ksCORGPrbnY
November 4th, 2014 at 1:45 PM ^
All the previous hubbub about the AD search taking "a year or two" and the ambiguity about hiring a new coach was just plain bullshit. I am immensely grateful.
November 4th, 2014 at 1:58 PM ^
If you ever believed they were actually going to take a year with this...
November 4th, 2014 at 2:02 PM ^
I love it how Hackett says a timeline, and then when a maybe-not-so-reliable with no sources says a different timeline, the reaction is "well thank God that was debunked." Maybe Football Scoop is the one with the inaccurate timeline?
November 4th, 2014 at 2:05 PM ^
Could be as a rivals mod indicated today. That Hacket stays up for up to 9 months, but it will be hand-in-hand with the new AD during "transition" period?
November 4th, 2014 at 2:10 PM ^
Oh totally, and that makes the most sense. I just find it funny that if people don't like some news, as soon as anybody reports otherwise, even if it's a less credible source than who reported the news you didn't like, they believe the person reporting what they want to hear.
November 4th, 2014 at 4:29 PM ^
timeline. It wasn't a question about not liking the news. It was a problem with that not making a lick of sense. It really didn't make a difference who reported it, it simply couldn't be true and it was obvious that they either misunderstood or misheard what they reported. Is this news relialble? I don't know, but at least it's plausible. That alone makes it much more credible.
November 4th, 2014 at 2:18 PM ^
November 4th, 2014 at 2:21 PM ^
But that wouldn't be the case. There wouldn't be two department heads, there would be one (the guy we hire) and another guys (Hackett) who is around to keep the boat afloat while guy 1 gets familiarized with everything. If there is a disagreement on anything as small as what flavor coffee is brewed, Hackett loses. HIs decision making power is gone once the new guy is there, unless the new guy says "handle X,Y and Z for me until I say otherwise."
November 4th, 2014 at 2:38 PM ^
November 4th, 2014 at 1:59 PM ^
November 4th, 2014 at 2:08 PM ^
fwiw, Football Scoop is generally considered one of the most credible sources. They've been said to have a very solid track record with this type of info.
November 4th, 2014 at 2:14 PM ^
That may be, but first of all, they don't name any of their sources for any of this info. So they are either regurgitating stuff we already know, or they are just "reporting" stuff that is likely to happen anyway and claiming they knew it all along.
And second of all, this article doesn't really say anything. It lists the same names we've known about for a month, saying they have expressed interest, but through unofficlal avenues (so someone's wife said "that UM job wouldn't be bad, right honey?") or that someone would "likely" be interested if offered. I could have written this article based on absolutely no inside knowledge.
Of course guys with UM ties would be interested in their job but at Michigan. And you could say every single AD would "likely" take the job if offered. Especially because if he doesn't, you're still not wrong.
November 4th, 2014 at 2:22 PM ^
...is Michigan's supposed goal of having an new AD by the end of the month. They could be wrong about that, of course, but it is at least an assertion of fact...I agree with you re: the rest of the article.
November 4th, 2014 at 2:27 PM ^
But what is that based on? Where are they getting that info? They don't say, so I have to assume they're simply guessing. If I was guessing, I would guess the same thing, but that doesn't make it so.
And also, saying "Ideally, Michigan would like to have an AD hired by month's end" is a lot different than saying "People with knowledge expect Michigan to have an AD hired no later than the end of November." Poor journalists do a lot of the former, because when it doesn't come true, they can just say that Michigan didn't achieve their goal and they never have to admit that their info wasn't true or was just pure BS.
November 4th, 2014 at 2:38 PM ^
At Michigan, sources tell us the University’s internal goal is to have hired a new athletic director “by the Ohio State game” (November 29th). Interim athletic director Jim Hackett, while empowered to make strategic decisions, would prefer to have the new athletic director make the decision on Brady Hoke’s future with the program is what we are told.
I'm not suggesting we take the above as fact. But I also don't think it's any different than what Sam Webb did yesterday when he said Hackett was telling former players that he could be around for 18-24 months (which doesn't necessarily contradict the idea that Hackett would like to be done sooner).
November 4th, 2014 at 3:01 PM ^
And that all may be true. But when articles use too many phrases like "(unnamed) sources tell us" or "internal goal is" or "would prefer to" I tend to get extremely skeptical. There is nothing being "reported" there that we didn't already know or that just follows logically. Of course the University would like this done quickly, if possible. Of course Hackett would prefer the new guy handle the things the new guy is supposed to be handling.
All this article says is what Michigan would "like" to have happen (hire a good AD and soon, no duh) and that guys in this industry have "shown interest" in taking a higher paying job. No shit.
November 4th, 2014 at 2:53 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 4th, 2014 at 3:06 PM ^
My source is my dog. He has just told me that Hackett has been hired to fire Hoke and hire Harbaugh, but he will allow the new AD to announce the Harbaugh hiring in order for it to be "his" hire.
In return Hackett gets a bag of cash, 2 lifetime season tickets in a luxury box (one of the side-ones, not 50 yard line), and the Kraft Noodle.
Either that, or my dog really needs to pee badly. I'm not sure.
November 4th, 2014 at 3:53 PM ^
Lots of writers do. That's journalism - you interview people and then report on it.
Yes, sometimes you have the insider guy who is getting leaked info, but there's no way to know if that guy is legit or not. And sometimes these sources are third hand. Now, if Chris Broussard or Adam Schefter are reporting what their "sources" say, that's one thing. But when someone who doesn't have credibility does it, color me skeptical.
November 4th, 2014 at 7:26 PM ^
November 4th, 2014 at 2:35 PM ^
November 4th, 2014 at 3:09 PM ^
November 4th, 2014 at 3:39 PM ^
November 4th, 2014 at 3:49 PM ^
I don't care who the AD is as long as he isn't a dick and can hire a great football coach. Well and continue to growth the whole athletic department.
November 4th, 2014 at 5:49 PM ^