Am I the only one questioning the DuPaix hire?

Am I the only one still scratching my head on the DuPaix hire? I'm not doubting his abilities nor am I saying the hire shouldn't have been made.



Some great points have been made about his intelligence, passion, recruiting ability, and his coming from another independent program. I'm just having a difficult time understanding why we hire a guy who has ran an option offense as a player and coach on every level he's been on. Where does his expertise contribute to our offense, particulary to the inside receivers/TE's?



Ultimately I trust Bronco and Doman in their decisions, but for the moment I'm still trying to grasp this hire.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

The only answer I can come up with is where did LaVell's expertise with the passing game come from when he got hired, because he was a defensive coach, if I remember correctly. A good coach is a good coach, and hiring a position coach is totally different. You look for background, skill set, and then teaching ability. I think he has the background and skill set to teach what we are going to do just fine. And will probably make us better too with his background experience. We are not going to be a throw it 45+ times team anymore. Not like hte he is our O-coordinator here.

I hope that the good coach is a good coach works out - sometimes but not always... have seen some of the greatest coaches struggle out of their element at times in the past....



I am not going to admit to "questioning" the hire, but I have found myself cautiously holding my breath. I have loved the BYU "brand" of football and hope we swing a little closer that way - I will not enjoy seeing an option injury to a dropback passer if that were to transpire at some point in the future...



There are many questions, but I have maintained that Bronco has earned my faith so I am counting on the fact that he knows more than I do and this will be good; as always, I'll enjoy watching the Cougs to find out.

I always take a Wait / See approach to coaches and recruits. I do subscribe to the "A good coach is A good coach" line of thinking - made of the right stuff. It works out fine in the long run. But sometimes there is a learning curve investment. There is risk with any coaching change. But once the decision was made to make coaching changes - there is risk no matter whom you pick. There is a risk to not making a change as well.



Given how 2010 played out, which could largely have been predicted, and given that the net result was significant coaching changes, everyone would have been better off if the changes had been made a year earlier. Then 2010 would have been invested in the new coaches. It still would have been a mess, but you would now have players with talent with a year working with coaches with experience in the system to be run in 2011. WIN WIN for the coaches too if made a year ago. Hill would have quickly found a job and Anae would have gotten a clear OC job. Higgins would have done as well then as he did now.



The problem is - a year ago, Bronco did not seem to know that he needed to change coaches. He did announce that 2 or 3 would be gone after 2009, but in the context of them being great coaches and someone else giving them big time opportunities.



Bronco does seem to learn and hopefully the new coaches will work out - and if they are in fact made of the right stuff, they will in the long run and geez lets give them realistic expectations during the first transition season - so they can meet or exceed expectations and feel good about themselves. This team will need to heal after all that has happened. Winning will help that. This team will be very competitive in 2011 unless the new coaches are not made of the right stuff. But they will not be perfect. I will be happy if we get back to 10 wins. Very happy.