Which school made the best hire in this cycle? I realize Stanford has yet to announce theirs, and I suppose UConn could back out from Whipple (it's not official yet) but for the purposes of this poll, just consider Stanford to be "Internal candidate X" and UConn to be Whipple.

Poll limitations forced me to leave off Stanford.

Jon Embree? Who is that haha. Didn't realize Colorado had made a move

Wow, there are a lot of head scratchers in that list. I think Muschamp will have the best opportunity for success initially. Edsall isn't a bad hire but I don't think Maryland was right to get rid of Friedgen and the same goes for Miami/Shannon.

Florida is really the only team on there that has enough talent coming back to make the Muschamp hire look really good.

aka what Karen said.

I don't get the move to Maryland.. doesn't make too much sense IMO

Minnesota is the winner IMO. Brewster = bad.

After looking like a head-scratcher at first, I'll admit, when you look at the rest of the coaches that were hired this year, Jerry Kill looks pretty damn solid, especially considering where the program is relative to some others here.

Florida got the best guy, but it was still a downgrade from their previous coach (although it wasn't their choice to get rid of him). I think that Colorado and Minnesota definitely both upgraded (you can't get much worse than they had been). I also think that Michigan probably upgraded. So, while I think Florida ended up with the best coach in the long run, I don't necessarily think that they made the best hire because it wasn't an upgrade (although it's hard to upgrade from one of the top five coaches in the game).

krambman;635615 wrote:Florida got the best guy, but it was still a downgrade from their previous coach (although it wasn't their choice to get rid of him). I think that Colorado and Minnesota definitely both upgraded (you can't get much worse than they had been). I also think that Michigan probably upgraded. So, while I think Florida ended up with the best coach in the long run, I don't necessarily think that they made the best hire because it wasn't an upgrade (although it's hard to upgrade from one of the top five coaches in the game).

Good points. Obviously in one sense its a downgrade from Meyer, but like you said, its not like it was Florida's choice to be replacing him.

karen lotz;635534 wrote:Wow, there are a lot of head scratchers in that list. I think Muschamp will have the best opportunity for success initially. Edsall isn't a bad hire but I don't think Maryland was right to get rid of Friedgen and the same goes for Miami/Shannon.

Yeah, not really anything spectacular on the surface for anyone there.

Muschamp, I guess, would've been highly sought after despite no head coaching experience. But I still see that as somewhat of a risk for a program that has won two recent national titles. There is a history though and the right fit can be just as important as the big name - see, it is still just as much up in the air as any other hire.

Maryland probably did as well as its going to do. UConn and Maryland are comparable programs, but Maryland probably provides someone with a little more opportunity. Edsall did okay, but he does have a BCS bowl under his belt, so bringing in a guy who has succeeded as much as your program with less probably can't be called a bad move.

Miami and Michigan...and even Pitt, though their situation has just been a cluster all the way around...hired guys who made themselves look good merely by being compared to other guys who had been really bad. There's something to be said for being able to win somewhere that hasn't seen a lot of winning, but one or two seasons like that doesn't necessarily mean you're capable of taking a big time program to the very top. At least, compared to the rest of the list, those guys do have the head coaching experience.

Hoke is probably the guy who is set up the best. Muschamp may have more at his disposal, but also has the task of filling the biggest shoes. Hoke, on the other hand, can fix the attitude or aura of the program first and buy time if the wins don't come immediately. As soon as he has Michigan playing decent ball late in the season he's going to be hailed as the savior of the program.

This is a tough question to answer. The standards aren't the same at every school.

The new guys a Miami, Michigan and Florida have to turn their programs into top ten teams or they won't be there long.
UConn, Indy,Minnesota, Baylor...............................just win more than than they lose and they will be there until a better opportunity knocks on the door.

I think Indiana made the best hire, but they still won't be very good.

A bunch of underwhelming hires on that list.

I'm guessing that Hoke at Michigan has the potential to be the best hire, simply because he has the opportunity to restore a once-great rivalry to the position it deserves. Michigan football hasn't been at this low level since the pre-Schembechler days.

Of course, he could be a total bust. As a Buckeye fan, I would rather Michigan be a dominant force in college football again so that we can ruin their season. If everyone else is whipping them it takes a little of the luster away from The Game.

not a ton of sexy names out there in positions to fill major vacancies...

I think Indiana's hire the most. They got the best hire considering who they are.

Not overally impressed with any of the hires, but Muchamp is probably the best hire IMO.

Ask me in three years....

Florida