As a former college head coach (not football) and someone who currently runs an organization, I started thinking about HCPN's tenure based on a CEO's performance evaluation. Every AD does an end of season performance review, and every board of directors evaluates their CEO. What would the categories be, and how would his evaluation end up? Here are my very general thoughts:
Personnel acquisition: 5 of 10. In this business, this category would relate to recruiting and staff hires. As much of this board is dedicated to recruiting, I need not get into specifics, but I believe he is middle of the scale conference wise and nationally in recruiting. His staff hires on the other hand are below average. His first DC was a disaster, and his last OC hire a disaster. He should get credit for Chaney and Canada, but they left and that is on him as the CEO. He has been too loyal to position coaches who have failed in development of players, game planning and recruiting.
Personnel retention and development: 4 of 10. Other than the secondary, I can't think of a unit that has gotten better. Maybe Dline? The situation with Pickett and Paris Ford not developing are huge negatives here. His players seem to love him which is a positive, but in this category loyalty may hurt him in the long run (see Watson and Dennis Briggs).
Game week preparation: 6 of 10. I'm not schooled enough in the X's and O's to make an evaluation on my own in this category, so if I was an AD I would bring someone in to perform this evaluation. From the outside, other than Central Florida and Clemson, it seemed as Pitt was ready to play early on and was at least had a competitive game plan early on.
Game Management: 1 of 10. I can't imagine that there is a worse game manager in power 5 football. He lacks emotional intelligence, and fails to anticipate game situations. I'm not sure if he understands the clock rules, he wastes timeouts, uses timeouts foolishly, and is probably the worst end of half coach I have ever seen. As a side note, I sat in the first row behind the bench for two away games this year. The lack of sideline organization, communication and control is stunning. If the CEO isn't good in these areas, he better find someone who excels here. I'm sure someone could go back and look at how many points we lost because of his epic shortcomings during the games.
Media relations: 4 of 10. Does not interview well, and does not sell the program in a positive manner. Seems to have a strained relationship with the media at times. While some may argue that this isn't important (see Saban), the CEO is the face of the program. Pitt has the ability to excel in this area because EJ is the best in the business, but HCPN simply does not have the ability to effectively engage with the media over the course of a season. (On a side note, please tell him to stop answering multiple questions with "no doubt about it."
Performance: 5 of 10. The bottom line is your record. 7-7.
The company is under performing, and it is on the CEO. H2P.
Personnel acquisition: 5 of 10. In this business, this category would relate to recruiting and staff hires. As much of this board is dedicated to recruiting, I need not get into specifics, but I believe he is middle of the scale conference wise and nationally in recruiting. His staff hires on the other hand are below average. His first DC was a disaster, and his last OC hire a disaster. He should get credit for Chaney and Canada, but they left and that is on him as the CEO. He has been too loyal to position coaches who have failed in development of players, game planning and recruiting.
Personnel retention and development: 4 of 10. Other than the secondary, I can't think of a unit that has gotten better. Maybe Dline? The situation with Pickett and Paris Ford not developing are huge negatives here. His players seem to love him which is a positive, but in this category loyalty may hurt him in the long run (see Watson and Dennis Briggs).
Game week preparation: 6 of 10. I'm not schooled enough in the X's and O's to make an evaluation on my own in this category, so if I was an AD I would bring someone in to perform this evaluation. From the outside, other than Central Florida and Clemson, it seemed as Pitt was ready to play early on and was at least had a competitive game plan early on.
Game Management: 1 of 10. I can't imagine that there is a worse game manager in power 5 football. He lacks emotional intelligence, and fails to anticipate game situations. I'm not sure if he understands the clock rules, he wastes timeouts, uses timeouts foolishly, and is probably the worst end of half coach I have ever seen. As a side note, I sat in the first row behind the bench for two away games this year. The lack of sideline organization, communication and control is stunning. If the CEO isn't good in these areas, he better find someone who excels here. I'm sure someone could go back and look at how many points we lost because of his epic shortcomings during the games.
Media relations: 4 of 10. Does not interview well, and does not sell the program in a positive manner. Seems to have a strained relationship with the media at times. While some may argue that this isn't important (see Saban), the CEO is the face of the program. Pitt has the ability to excel in this area because EJ is the best in the business, but HCPN simply does not have the ability to effectively engage with the media over the course of a season. (On a side note, please tell him to stop answering multiple questions with "no doubt about it."
Performance: 5 of 10. The bottom line is your record. 7-7.
The company is under performing, and it is on the CEO. H2P.
