Honest question here…I’ve heard for years that the number of things the ND head coach has to deal with is so broad, complicated, and unique. It’s the undergirding of the “ND’s HC hire needs to have HC experience/can’t learn on the job” argument.
I certainly understand the academic requirements for both recruiting and active players are much more stringent than most, but outside of that, I’ve never gotten a clear sense of why this role is considered so much more difficult than other top programs.
I assume (possibly incorrectly) that most top programs have:
Seems to me a good HC can partially delegate more to mitigate this, and with support of a good AD, can likely get more staff/resources to reduce the HC obligations. Trying to genuinely parse out whether this is a ND-homer “woe is us” bias, or if the differences are real. Feels like a worthwhile question as we debate a DC promoted from within.
I certainly understand the academic requirements for both recruiting and active players are much more stringent than most, but outside of that, I’ve never gotten a clear sense of why this role is considered so much more difficult than other top programs.
I assume (possibly incorrectly) that most top programs have:
- An active booster/alum base that can influence decisions/make the HC’s life trickier
- Dedicated media resources (so team issues become public)
- Overall big operations (100s/1000s of employees dealing with football operations directly/indirectly, with massive budget implications)
- Other public/university engagements (speeches, fundraising events, etc.)
- Some degree of limited resources / all requests are not approved (a handful of notable exceptions here)
Seems to me a good HC can partially delegate more to mitigate this, and with support of a good AD, can likely get more staff/resources to reduce the HC obligations. Trying to genuinely parse out whether this is a ND-homer “woe is us” bias, or if the differences are real. Feels like a worthwhile question as we debate a DC promoted from within.
