I have a theory about the pattern of HC selections at major programs. It seems to me that when a legend or iconic coach is being replaced there is a set of predictable outcomes that become false steps to mediocrity until the right choice is made. Generally, these bad decisions form a pattern, not necessarily in the same order at different schools but from the same list of options.
I tend to agree with this. Choosing the replacement is a lot like the NFL Draft. A guy may look fantastic and not pan out.
In OU's case these options can be categorized as follows: the loyal assistant; a former player recommended based on friendship; a big name with gravitas; an assistant from either inside or outside the family. Most of these never pan out and it takes repeated mistakes before a cooler more shrewd head prevails in the selection process. These false steps usually play out over a decade or so before the messiah emerges. Selecting the right HC is at best an inexact science.
I suspect - and you're closer to OU than any of us, so you'd have more knowledge of the situation - some rich powers that be get behind a name (like whoever sold Jerry Jones on Bill Parcells or whoever sells anyone on Jon Gruden) and confirmation bias kicks in.
Interestingly, the 4 most successful coaches at OU have all been hired as assistants with no previous HC experience. Our '90's were a poster child for such missteps.
While in no way do I wish to take issue with your or disagree, OU doesn't seem to have much of a track record of hiring ANYONE as head coach who was ever head coach before.
Here are the coaches Oklahoma has hired who had previous FBS/Division I HEAD coaching experience:
Biff Jones (7 years total at Army and LSU)
Jim Tatum (1 year at UNC)
Howard Schnellenberger (national title at Miami)
I'm not trying to pick apart your comments because they're correct as stated - but OU doesn't seem to hire anyone who has ever coached at another school as a head coach regardless. Schnellenberger's national title has to go down as a fluke anyway, although he deserves credit for laying the foundation that Jimmy Johnson used to convince folks he was a better coach than he really was.
Except for Stallings, your '90's into the 2000's were similar.
For the most part, yes.
Perkins - so far as anyone can tell - was Bryant's hand-picked choice (although saying that now creates a lot of people who claim to have inside information that Coach This Other Guy was really the pick). He got a lot of credit basically because of the draft that gave him Lawrence Taylor and the trade that gave him Rob Carpenter turned the Giants into an NFL playoff team.
Curry - nobody not named Joab Thomas wanted this guy as head coach. He was a disaster top to bottom, and the fact we could have had Bobby Bowden is still a sore spot with this entire board.
Dubious - I have no idea who was behind this insanity, but he needs to be shot.
Now.....the Franchione hire was a tiny bit different and probably minimally similar to OU's hiring of Blake. By the time we chose Franchione, we'd been turned down by Butch Davis (more on that in a moment) and Frank Beamer, and Tommy Bowden and Jackie Sherrill (neither with a prayer at getting it) both called PCs to announce they weren't going to Alabama. While this coaching search was going on, the Albert Means scandal hit the front page of the papers and made the hiring that much harder.
As far as Davis - he built the Miami monster that Larry Coker blew to pieces, but there has long been a story that Davis had consented to come to Alabama to the point of a behind-the-door handshake deal.........and was then informed of what the NCAA had on us and backed out. I'm not in the position to know but.......once your job starts getting turned down repeatedly and it gets out, it limits the pool from where you can draw fish. Fran as it turned out had built his entire career on winning with OTHER coach's players - he'd never been anywhere long enough to recruit and see it through.
Despite what some here think, Shula was NOT a guy who "took the job when nobody else would."
But that is why I've long said Alabama CANNOT be a school that hires a coach with ZERO college head coaching experience. That doesn't guarantee success, but it does play a role in a guy knowing what will and will not work when it comes to kids that age. For every Mark Richt or even Lincoln Riley, there are a dozen Mike DuBoses.
When Stallings came to Alabama, he had not been a head coach in college for over two decades, during which many changes occurred. However, he HAD been a head football coach in college, he had the advantage of having been in the Alabama culture (7 years as an assistant) which is admittedly a bit unique, and he had worked for the worst owner in the NFL, which meant anything he dealt with on campus was going to be blissful by comparison.
Who has been successful at Alabama?
Bryant - three colleges before he came
Stallings - one head coaching job in the NFL and one in college
Saban - years as a head coach at both NFL and college
Wallace Wade never had head coaching experience before Alabama, but let's at least acknowledge that the 20s was a century ago and things have changed dramatically since then. Even Steve Spurrier had several years screwing up and learning what wouldn't work in both the USFL (which was basically glorified college ball) and at Duke before he became a Florida coaching legend.
OU has found what works for them, and that's great.
Alabama has done the same - and ironically, it's the opposite of what works at OU.
Both our schools have done a BUNCH to screw up hiring. I'll admit that. And both have done a good job at times as well.
Texas made mistake after mistake between Royal and Brown. Nebraska...I could go on and on. Look at Michigan. Look at USC.[/QUOTE]