Why can't we get over the hump?

[Sommy]

We seem to get a little momentum, but then stumble nearly every year. We always seem to land back at that .500, which is the theme of MT. .500 coach, average facilities, hell even our name is "Middle" so maybe we are destined to always be average.

Lots of reasons/answers to the thread question, but what are the reasons you see as to why we can never seem to take the bull by the horns and build something special?

For me the answer to that question is talent. The UTSA game highlighted it perfectly for me that we are just not on the same talent level with the more dominant teams. Every position they had us beat. I'm not going to call out anyone specifically, but we haven't had a true DOMINANT player in a while. Every year, our QB's look like 3rd stringers, OL is always weak (or they transfer right away), RB's are usually decent, but not a big standout player, WR's drop balls or can't take charge and make the difficult catch. Defense seems well coached, but again no dominant player that you look to in key moments. Where is the guy that gets that big sack? Or picks off a pass?

I watch a lot of college football games played all over and it just seems like our talent is on a level below a lot of what I see. It's just glaring to me. This has been a theme for a long time, so again not calling any player out specifically, it's across the board.

 

[MidTennMtneer]

I agree. Talent 100%. My question is this...is our talent level due to recruiting? Coaching?

If recruiting, is it the way we recruit? Effort put in by staff? Locations? People say facilities. Will that change? We are in a great location. Not a town in the middle of nowhere. So that isn't it.

If coaching, is it Stock? His staff? Do we need to move around more or flat out replace? If so, who?

Let's put it out there and not the "milking retirement" saying (which is true...) but true reasons to replace a coach and with who?

Stock isn't going anywhere so let's use this to find ways to build that talent up.

 

[FranklinRaider315]

It’s pretty simple….really. And unfortunate. But the Head Coach has zero incentives (nor repercussions) for being better than .500

From there it all flows downhill so we have who we have at various positions.

What’s really sad is you have one of the highest paid safeties on Sundays getting his jersey retired at his alma mater against a background of empty shiny aluminum behind him. And yes, I know those are the band seats but a similar image or worse was also shown of empty seats behind the visitors bench and upper decks.

 

[RaiderDoug]

We seem to get a little momentum, but then stumble nearly every year. We always seem to land back at that .500, which is the theme of MT. .500 coach, average facilities, hell even our name is "Middle" so maybe we are destined to always be average.

Lots of reasons/answers to the thread question, but what are the reasons you see as to why we can never seem to take the bull by the horns and build something special?

For me the answer to that question is talent. The UTSA game highlighted it perfectly for me that we are just not on the same talent level with the more dominant teams. Every position they had us beat. I'm not going to call out anyone specifically, but we haven't had a true DOMINANT player in a while. Every year, our QB's look like 3rd stringers, OL is always weak (or they transfer right away), RB's are usually decent, but not a big standout player, WR's drop balls or can't take charge and make the difficult catch. Defense seems well coached, but again no dominant player that you look to in key moments. Where is the guy that gets that big sack? Or picks off a pass?

I watch a lot of college football games played all over and it just seems like our talent is on a level below a lot of what I see. It's just glaring to me. This has been a theme for a long time, so again not calling any player out specifically, it's across the board.

Gameday (micro) level - we don't have enough talent. It starts with recruiting. Our team just simply doesn't have enough higher end G5 talent to compete for championships. Far too often, our recruits are anonymous guys with little to no FBS offers. Some of these guys can pull a Byard and blow up, but most of them won't. I saw in person a stark difference in the size and speed of UTSA vs MT. Most of our players looked like a high school team, especially on the lines. Obviously, they are good kids, who stay out of trouble and graduate, and that's great, but not enough of them are the types that make a difference on Saturdays.

Is it lazy recruiting? Is it mis-evaluations? Are we losing too many battles (this is where the facilities argument can hold some water)?

I don't think our staff is bad at X's and O's. I've seen enough football over my decades as a fan to realize that very few teams are inventing something new. You have a good system, and when you put good players in it, it works. If you don't have good players (or not enough of them), you don't. Too often, we have too many guys in the 11 on the field that are not good enough relative to their competition on the other side of the field.

I remember an athletic article from last year that profiled 8 different Tennessee high school coaches and they asked about different recruiting staffs. The quote from several of them about MT was something akin to MT has a certain profile they're looking for, and if you don't have a player that fits that profile, you won't hear anything from MTSU.

 

[MTTim]

It's simple. Lazy recruiting and bad coaching has caught up with us and no way to fix it now.

 

[RaiderDoug]

We seem to get a little momentum, but then stumble nearly every year. We always seem to land back at that .500, which is the theme of MT. .500 coach, average facilities, hell even our name is "Middle" so maybe we are destined to always be average.

Lots of reasons/answers to the thread question, but what are the reasons you see as to why we can never seem to take the bull by the horns and build something special?

For me the answer to that question is talent. The UTSA game highlighted it perfectly for me that we are just not on the same talent level with the more dominant teams. Every position they had us beat. I'm not going to call out anyone specifically, but we haven't had a true DOMINANT player in a while. Every year, our QB's look like 3rd stringers, OL is always weak (or they transfer right away), RB's are usually decent, but not a big standout player, WR's drop balls or can't take charge and make the difficult catch. Defense seems well coached, but again no dominant player that you look to in key moments. Where is the guy that gets that big sack? Or picks off a pass?

I watch a lot of college football games played all over and it just seems like our talent is on a level below a lot of what I see. It's just glaring to me. This has been a theme for a long time, so again not calling any player out specifically, it's across the board.

Administration (Macro) level - In short, a lack of ambition and it appears that the MT powers are so afraid of failing that they won't risk succeeding.

Most teams at our level ride the rollercoaster. Some seasons are good, some are bad. Coaches come and go, you hire good ones, sometimes you hire bad ones. People love a winner. People love hope and the promise of something new, so even if you lose, even if you hit rock bottom, you'll be fine.

Rather than risk the unknown of a new staff, they would rather ride with a guy who will never win anything of note, but at the very least will keep you in good APR #'s and never appear on the Fulmer cup.

The priority isn't to win. It's just to not lose.

The problem is, you're selling an entertainment product here. People don't want to see mediocrity. People don't come to the stadium because the APR is up there with Stanford's. They're selling the world's most average hamburger to people who have eaten it 17 straight meals.

All of the ancillary problems (facilities, lack of fan support, etc) stem from this "just don't lose" decision. You want facilities built? Make people want to give you their money. You want full stadiums - make people want to come. Give them a product they can be proud of. Fans are forgiving - alums have built in loyalty - we all want to support MT. But you have to give people some hope.

Personally, I don't see a way forward. Spark's comments on Stock's contract essentially means we're trapped. He's not all of a sudden going to morph into what he's never been, and the MT AD's not smart enough or motivated enough to figure out a way to incentivize greater performance. So we're stuck.

 

[MidTennMtneer]

.....the MT powers are so afraid of failing that they won't risk succeeding.....the priority isn't to win, it's just to not lose.

THIS 100000000000%

Exactly what I've been trying to say. Sadly even some of the players have taken that mentality.

Im gonna make that my Twitter cover photo, credit RaiderDoug. 😁

 

[MT01]

Wisconsin fired their .720 win percentage coach after starting 2-3 this year. I'm not suggesting that was a good move or a standard to be employed, but I raise it because I wonder what it's like to actually be at a school that has standards for both winning and graduation. It's not just P5's that do this. Ga Southern did something similar last year.

 

[MidTennMtneer]

For a coach who has been here 17yrs, winning 3/4 of their games should absolutely be the standard. I've said before I have no problems setting the goal at 6 way back when. Now, it is too low. There should never be a rebuild year for a coach with that tenure.

 

[RaiderDoug]

Wisconsin fired their .720 win percentage coach after starting 2-3 this year. I'm not suggesting that was a good move or a standard to be employed, but I raise it because I wonder what it's like to actually be at a school that has standards for both winning and graduation. It's not just P5's that do this. Ga Southern did something similar last year.

I did some research - there is literally not another situation in the history of college football similar to what we find ourselves in.

I looked at longest tenured college football coaches and then looked at coaches with 100 losses and winning% sub-.525.

As best as I can tell (Yahoo & sports reference don't make it easy), I could find one single example of a coach who met all 3 below criteria:

A. Lasted more than 11 years at one place.
B. Won at a .500 or below clip.
C. Never won a title of any kind.

Guess who?

 

[MT01]

Glen Mason is the only one who comes to mind that even remotely produced a similar situation. But he was fired after 10 years. But combined with his time at Kansas 19 years of .500 ball. He was 20-19 in his last three years (6-7 in his last year). What's Stock's record the last three seasons?

 

[MidTennMtneer]

I did some research - there is literally not another situation in the history of college football similar to what we find ourselves in.

I looked at longest tenured college football coaches and then looked at coaches with 100 losses and winning% sub-.525.

As best as I can tell (Yahoo & sports reference don't make it easy), I could find one single example of a coach who met all 3 below criteria:

A. Lasted more than 11 years at one place.
B. Won at a .500 or below clip.
C. Never won a title of any kind.

Guess who?

Don't need to guess. For reference though on 10 yrs or more. This is it. No others that long with a less than .600 record. None. And I don't think anyone would fuss over Stoops or Doeren and the job they've done. Fitzgerald is an alum and going nowhere. As is Niumatalolo plus being a service academy.

Stoops yr 10 Kentucky 63-54 .539
4-2 in bowls, no division titles

Fitzgerald yr 17 Northwestern 110-94 .539
5-4 in bowls, 2 division titles

Ken Niumatalolo yr 15 106-78 .576
6-4 bowls, 1 division title

Dave Doeren yr 10 NC State 68-50 .575
3-3 bowls, 1 division title

Rick Stockstill yr 17 Middle Tenn 104-100 .510
3-6 bowls, 1 division title

 

[MidTennMtneer]

Glen Mason is the only one who comes to mind that even remotely produced a similar situation. But he was fired after 10 years. But combined with his time at Kansas 19 years of .500 ball. He was 20-19 in his last three years (6-7 in his last year). What's Stock's record the last three seasons?

Since winning the division in 2018
17-24

 

[MT01]

Since winning the division in 2018
17-24

This is the stat that's more telling. What school would retain a coach who had been on the payroll for a decade or more and tolerate 41% win percentage over a three to four year period? Hell, most schools wouldn't tolerate this over any four year period much less after 10 or 15 years of .500.

Yet, at MT this is worthy of automatic contract extensions. I stopped going. I stopped giving. I stopped message boarding. Not sure why I revisited at the beginning of this football season. I'm just done. It's one thing to try and fail. But we aren't even trying to be successful program. For those of you still tolerating this, I hope you enjoy the rest of your season. Cheers.

 

[Hop45]

Don't need to guess. For reference though on 10 yrs or more. This is it. No others that long with a less than .600 record. None. And I don't think anyone would fuss over Stoops or Doeren and the job they've done. Fitzgerald is an alum and going nowhere. As is Niumatalolo plus being a service academy.

Stoops yr 10 Kentucky 63-54 .539
4-2 in bowls, no division titles

Fitzgerald yr 17 Northwestern 110-94 .539
5-4 in bowls, 2 division titles

Ken Niumatalolo yr 15 106-78 .576
6-4 bowls, 1 division title

Dave Doeren yr 10 NC State 68-50 .575
3-3 bowls, 1 division title

Rick Stockstill yr17 Middle Tenn 104-100 .510
3-6 bowls, no division title

All the others have a much tougher conference they "compete" in and still have better numbers than Stock.

 

[MTLynn]

What school would retain a coach who had been on the payroll for a decade or more and tolerate 41% win percentage over a three to four year period? Hell, most schools wouldn't tolerate this over any four year period much less after 10 or 15 years of .500.

A .500 school president tolerates a .500 football coach.

7-wood loves him some stuckstill.

 

[AustinLewis]

The inability to "get over the hump" at MT go far beyond Stock, Massaro, & McPhee (although we can lay some blame at their feet for their inability to take the next step during their tenure).

Poor planning & execution : After a 10 win season in 1992, Boots' hovered around .500 during his final 6 years at MT as HC. If you compare it to other programs that made the FCS to FBS jump in more recent years (JMU, App State), they were successful for several years before making the jump to FBS. IMO, they probably knew they would make the jump years in advance so they built facilities for the jump well ahead of the jump. This improved recruiting, which, in turn, helped with success after the jump.

Disclaimer : The FCS to FBS requirements have changed since MT jumped in late 1990s (this also helps JMU & App State)

Poor Hiring : I'm going off of memory (and hindsight is always 20/20), but I believe Rich Rod was connected to MT opening when they hired Andy Mac and David Cutcliffe was connected to opening when they hired Stock. I realize hindsight is always 20/20 but Rich Rod went 19-4 as OC at Tulane (final two years at Tulane) while Andy Mac went 4-18 as LB coach at Baylor.

Maybe one of the "old timers" can correct my memory on the coaches and the years.

And sometime during the Andy Mac era, Andy Mac hired a LSU assistant to MT staff but Saban promoted him a few days later. Coach went on to do big things. I think I'm remembering the details correct on this

There have been some top notch assistants come through MT over the years (Larry Fedora, Manny Diaz, Glen Elarbee, Geep Wade, & others). They've gone on to do bigger & better things elsewhere & MT hasn't always done a great job replacing those they lost.

#BuildBlueNow is the first time in a long time MT has invested serious time, attention, and energy into the athletic facilities. Assuming they live up to the most recent pictures, should be game changing for several athletic programs.

 

[AustinLewis]

The inability to "get over the hump" at MT go far beyond Stock, Massaro, & McPhee (although we can lay some blame at their feet for their inability to take the next step during their tenure).

Poor planning & execution : After a 10 win season in 1992, Boots' hovered around .500 during his final 6 years at MT as HC. If you compare it to other programs that made the FCS to FBS jump in more recent years (JMU, App State), they were successful for several years before making the jump to FBS. IMO, they probably knew they would make the jump years in advance so they built facilities for the jump well ahead of the jump. This improved recruiting, which, in turn, helped with success after the jump.

Disclaimer : The FCS to FBS requirements have changed since MT jumped in late 1990s (this also helps JMU & App State)

Poor Hiring : I'm going off of memory (and hindsight is always 20/20), but I believe Rich Rod was connected to MT opening when they hired Andy Mac and David Cutcliffe was connected to opening when they hired Stock. I realize hindsight is always 20/20 but Rich Rod went 19-4 as OC at Tulane (final two years at Tulane) while Andy Mac went 4-18 as LB coach at Baylor.

Maybe one of the "old timers" can correct my memory on the coaches and the years.

And sometime during the Andy Mac era, Andy Mac hired a LSU assistant to MT staff but Saban promoted him a few days later. Coach went on to do big things. I think I'm remembering the details correct on this

There have been some top notch assistants come through MT over the years (Larry Fedora, Manny Diaz, Glen Elarbee, Geep Wade, & others). They've gone on to do bigger & better things elsewhere & MT hasn't always done a great job replacing those they lost.

#BuildBlueNow is the first time in a long time MT has invested serious time, attention, and energy into the athletic facilities. Assuming they live up to the most recent pictures, should be game changing for several athletic programs.

Re : I’m more familiar with MT athletics after 2005ish when I began to follow coaches more closely.
Maybe others on Andy Macs staff that I’m unaware of

 

[AustinLewis]

The inability to "get over the hump" at MT go far beyond Stock, Massaro, & McPhee (although we can lay some blame at their feet for their inability to take the next step during their tenure).

Poor planning & execution : After a 10 win season in 1992, Boots' hovered around .500 during his final 6 years at MT as HC. If you compare it to other programs that made the FCS to FBS jump in more recent years (JMU, App State), they were successful for several years before making the jump to FBS. IMO, they probably knew they would make the jump years in advance so they built facilities for the jump well ahead of the jump. This improved recruiting, which, in turn, helped with success after the jump.

Disclaimer : The FCS to FBS requirements have changed since MT jumped in late 1990s (this also helps JMU & App State)

Poor Hiring : I'm going off of memory (and hindsight is always 20/20), but I believe Rich Rod was connected to MT opening when they hired Andy Mac and David Cutcliffe was connected to opening when they hired Stock. I realize hindsight is always 20/20 but Rich Rod went 19-4 as OC at Tulane (final two years at Tulane) while Andy Mac went 4-18 as LB coach at Baylor.

Maybe one of the "old timers" can correct my memory on the coaches and the years.

And sometime during the Andy Mac era, Andy Mac hired a LSU assistant to MT staff but Saban promoted him a few days later. Coach went on to do big things. I think I'm remembering the details correct on this

There have been some top notch assistants come through MT over the years (Larry Fedora, Manny Diaz, Glen Elarbee, Geep Wade, & others). They've gone on to do bigger & better things elsewhere & MT hasn't always done a great job replacing those they lost.

#BuildBlueNow is the first time in a long time MT has invested serious time, attention, and energy into the athletic facilities. Assuming they live up to the most recent pictures, should be game changing for several athletic programs.

Additional note : IIRC, Cutcliffe took Duke job before MT got ducks in a row. Memory is a bit fuzzy though

 

[arg3b]

Additional note : IIRC, Cutcliffe took Duke job before MT got ducks in a row. Memory is a bit fuzzy though

You’re correct IIRC. The hot rumors after Andy Mac was fired were Cutcliffe, Watson Brown, and Stock

 

[arg3b]

Jeeze, I just looked up Watson Brown’s overall coaching record… 4-18 at Rice and 10-45 at Vandy. Overall 136-211-1 with an opening gig at Austin Peay in the early 80s, and long tenures at UAB and Tenn Tech

 

[arg3b]

But I can say we dodged that bullet, because had Massero hired Brown we’d still have him, but it would be a minimum 2 wins a year that triggers the auto extension

 

[RaiderDoug]

But I can say we dodged that bullet, because had Massero hired Brown we’d still have him, but it would be a minimum 2 wins a year that triggers the auto extension

I'd rather Watson Brown. The record might not be difference, but he's 8 years older than Stock, we'd be that closer to retirement and getting out of this mess.

 

[Sommy]

Jeeze, I just looked up Watson Brown’s overall coaching record… 4-18 at Rice and 10-45 at Vandy. Overall 136-211-1 with an opening gig at Austin Peay in the early 80s, and long tenures at UAB and Tenn Tech

I remember when Watson Brown's name came up and after looking at his career record at that point I was shocked. What in the world could anyone see in him to even CONSIDER him for the HC back then. Probably dodged a bullet with not hiring him. He's never had success anywhere. On paper he looks like a bad coach.

 

[mtfblue]

Additional note : IIRC, Cutcliffe took Duke job before MT got ducks in a row. Memory is a bit fuzzy though

Was it Duke or Ole Miss

 

[AustinLewis]

Was it Duke or Ole Miss

Ole Miss.

I stand corrected.

I thought there was another finalist - a third guy - when Stock was hired. Watson Brown was one, Stock was 2, and the 3rd was ????

 

[RaiderDoug]

Ole Miss.

I stand corrected.

I thought there was another finalist - a third guy - when Stock was hired. Watson Brown was one, Stock was 2, and the 3rd was ????

Cut got fired from Ole Miss in 2004. Took a year off, and then went back to Tennessee as OC from 2006-07, took the Duke job in 2008.

Stock got the MT job in 2006.

This actually looks worse because it's one thing for a school like MT to get pipped by Duke or Ole Miss, it's another to hire a dud like Stockstill when a coach like Cutcliffe was literally doing nothing and wanting to get back into coaching.

Although being objective, the start of the Stock era wasn't so bad - our first bowl trip, our first bowl win, 10 win season. I simply don't see how he wasn't fired after 2011 and going 2-10, finishing last, and having a record at that point of 35-40.

 

[MidTennMtneer]

I tried searching but to no avail. I remember as I started following big time in 2004 but no socials back then really so you know how stuff went.

Did find this nugget of an SGA resolution to get Andy canned. Was shot down in an 11-20 vote November 2004.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.mtsu.edu/sga/documents/archives-2004-2005/res-10-04-F.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwi2gJCVuMn6AhUuomoFHd25BrAQFnoECBwQAQ&usg=AOvVaw1aL0mOeFQVgStnNf7sJQFy

 

[AustinLewis]

Cut got fired from Ole Miss in 2004. Took a year off, and then went back to Tennessee as OC from 2006-07, took the Duke job in 2008.

Stock got the MT job in 2006.

This actually looks worse because it's one thing for a school like MT to get pipped by Duke or Ole Miss, it's another to hire a dud like Stockstill when a coach like Cutcliffe was literally doing nothing and wanting to get back into coaching.

I didn't know Cut was involved with MT when MT hired Andy Mac. That was new info to me (when I 1st read the article).

For some reason, I connected Cutcliffe to the search that led to hiring Stock.

 

[RaiderDeez]

Cut got fired from Ole Miss in 2004. Took a year off, and then went back to Tennessee as OC from 2006-07, took the Duke job in 2008.

Stock got the MT job in 2006.

This actually looks worse because it's one thing for a school like MT to get pipped by Duke or Ole Miss, it's another to hire a dud like Stockstill when a coach like Cutcliffe was literally doing nothing and wanting to get back into coaching.

Although being objective, the start of the Stock era wasn't so bad - our first bowl trip, our first bowl win, 10 win season. I simply don't see how he wasn't fired after 2011 and going 2-10, finishing last, and having a record at that point of 35-40.

Are we sure that Cutcliffe just didn't turn us down? Surely he made way more money to return to UTK as OC than he would've as HC here, right?

 

[RaiderDoug]

Are we sure that Cutcliffe just didn't turn us down? Surely he made way more money to return to UTK as OC than he would've as HC here, right?

No idea. Maybe? I kind of just took the word of prior posters that he was interested.

 

[sWiley]

Are we sure that Cutcliffe just didn't turn us down? Surely he made way more money to return to UTK as OC than he would've as HC here, right?

Cutcliffe turned us down. He was one of the 3 being looked at. Massaro wanted, in order, cutcliffe, brown, then stockstill

I vividly remember cutcliffe being widely talked about because he had a niece at MT at the time and some thought that might influence him wanting to come here

it didn’t. Cutcliffe turned us down, Watson brown turned us down (he wanted more $ I believe) and so Stockstill got the job on the cheap. His pay was mediocre at best when we first signed him.

 

[Predarat]

I remember the Watson Brown thing because I think the DNJ printed that he was all but hired with just a handshake needed then everything fell apart.

 

[BRaiderDave]

Ole Miss.

I stand corrected.

I thought there was another finalist - a third guy - when Stock was hired. Watson Brown was one, Stock was 2, and the 3rd was ????

Pretty sure it was Rich Rodriguez

 

[FranklinRaider315]

Pretty sure it was Rich Rodriguez

He still had some of the West Virginia stink on him. 😂😂

 

[SpaceRaider]

I didn't know Cut was involved with MT when MT hired Andy Mac. That was new info to me (when I 1st read the article).

For some reason, I connected Cutcliffe to the search that led to hiring Stock.

The candidates to replace Boots who stepped down, was andymac, Cutcliffe, and Rich Rodriguez. Some people said Cutcliffe never interested, but allowed his name to be connected to the search. I think it was pretty well fixed for andymac from the start, if Nick Saban had been a candidate, andymac would still have got the job. MT has not had a merit based hire as Football coach in over 40 years. Boots had won an OVC Championship with Austin Peay State and was hired away by MT.

 

[MidTennMtneer]

He still had some of the West Virginia stink on him. 😂😂

Dude, he still does even now. I still say he threw that Pitt game no matter what he says.

Half the state wants him back, the other half wants to ban him for all eternity. I'm the latter. And that's with WVU having a coach that has Stockstill written all over him. .500 with a huge buyout.

 

[Sommy]

Does anyone remember Will Muschamp's name coming up back then when we hired Stock? In all fairness, from what I remember, Massaro supposedly REALLY wanted him, but he wasn't interested or something.

When Stock was hired, there was excitement. Supposedly an awesome recruiter and he promised "basketball on grass", referring to an exciting offense.

 

[MTLynn]

When Stock was hired, there was excitement. Supposedly an awesome recruiter and he promised "basketball on grass", referring to an exciting offense.

Rick probably meant that the offense would resemble basketball after smoking grass.

 

[asuhatesme]

Cutcliffe turned us down. He was one of the 3 being looked at. Massaro wanted, in order, cutcliffe, brown, then stockstill

I vividly remember cutcliffe being widely talked about because he had a niece at MT at the time and some thought that might influence him wanting to come here

it didn’t. Cutcliffe turned us down, Watson brown turned us down (he wanted more $ I believe) and so Stockstill got the job on the cheap. His pay was mediocre at best when we first signed him.

At least get it right, guys.
Cutcliffe was choice No. 1 never had any interest. Allegedly we also inquired about Chavis
Muschamp was interviewed seemed interested, then backed out.

It came down to Stock, Eddie Gran and Pat Sullivan (RIP). When Massaro was talking to Watson Brown about Sullivan, Brown indicated he might be interested. McPhee fell in love with the idea of poaching a CUSA HC and pulled rank on Massaro. It probably would’ve happened but McPhee couldn’t keep his mouth shut, so Brown pulled out. That obviously took Sullivan out of the running and it came down to Stock and Gran (then the running backs coach at Auburn).
Stock got the job.

For all of Massaro’s shortcomings, he’s never really been allowed to make his own hires. McPhee pirated the FB search, baseball alums pirated the search when Peterson retired, and then McPhee once again got involved when Kermit left.

Basically no one in the university can make any decision without that micromanaging clown or a president stepping on toes. The biggest fault you can point to with the AD is that he never had the balls to resign and tell everyone where the bodies are buried on his way out the door.