Ifs and Buts

[EastHallApp]

My thoughts:

- Yes, at 7-4 he's back, no question. Only question is whether he gets another extension.

- At 4-7, I have to think he's gone.

- 5 or 6 wins is where it gets dicey.

- Bowl result won't be a factor. For us or anyone else.

- While I think he's clearly back if the strong finish continues, I don't think that's the same as saying everyone is happy with 4 and 5 loss seasons. We do need to find a way to play more consistently in order to win championships.

[t4pizza]

My thoughts:

- Yes, at 7-4 he's back, no question. Only question is whether he gets another extension.

- At 4-7, I have to think he's gone.

- 5 or 6 wins is where it gets dicey.

- Bowl result won't be a factor. For us or anyone else.

- While I think he's clearly back if the strong finish continues, I don't think that's the same as saying everyone is happy with 4 and 5 loss seasons. We do need to find a way to play more consistently in order to win championships.

You honestly think an interim Chancellor will fire a guy with an overall winning record and pay him half a million dollars to leave? She isn't just having an open interview for our Chancellor position, it is an open interview for ALL potential subsequent positions. This isn't the SEC where football matters more than anything else it seems, and there are far and away more schools that want a Chancellor to have high academic standards with fiscal responsibilities. Not sure firing a winning football coach would sit well with most of those schools and it is probably too risky of a move for any interim to make. Regardless of the perceived need, I just can't see any interim making this move. That being said, it is often one of the first things a new Chancellor will do. They often like to clean house (AD included) and bring in their guys. Interesting that this very phenomena may be why Napier is still coaching the Gators today, interim down there also.

[EastHallApp]

My thoughts:

- Yes, at 7-4 he's back, no question. Only question is whether he gets another extension.

- At 4-7, I have to think he's gone.

- 5 or 6 wins is where it gets dicey.

- Bowl result won't be a factor. For us or anyone else.

- While I think he's clearly back if the strong finish continues, I don't think that's the same as saying everyone is happy with 4 and 5 loss seasons. We do need to find a way to play more consistently in order to win championships.

You honestly think an interim Chancellor will fire a guy with an overall winning record and pay him half a million dollars to leave? She isn't just having an open interview for our Chancellor position, it is an open interview for ALL potential subsequent positions. This isn't the SEC where football matters more than anything else it seems, and there are far and away more schools that want a Chancellor to have high academic standards with fiscal responsibilities. Not sure firing a winning football coach would sit well with most of those schools and it is probably too risky of a move for any interim to make. Regardless of the perceived need, I just can't see any interim making this move. That being said, it is often one of the first things a new Chancellor will do. They often like to clean house (AD included) and bring in their guys. Interesting that this very phenomena may be why Napier is still coaching the Gators today, interim down there also.

The AD isn't an interim, and if he decides it's time to make a move, I doubt the interim chancellor (or a permanent one) would overrule him.

I don't know how much weight "overall winning record" will or should carry. We could lose out this year, go 0-12 next year, and Clark would still have an overall winning record. But I think program trajectory is more significant. We may not be the SEC, but I doubt any of us would argue that football is a big deal at App, and I'm talking wins and losses.

Hopefully we win out and this part of the discussion is moot.

[Stonewall]

Doug doesn’t make the decision. He will make a recommendation to whoever the chancellor might be. Depending on the specifics the BOT may be required to vote on it.

[t4pizza]

My thoughts:

- Yes, at 7-4 he's back, no question. Only question is whether he gets another extension.

- At 4-7, I have to think he's gone.

- 5 or 6 wins is where it gets dicey.

- Bowl result won't be a factor. For us or anyone else.

- While I think he's clearly back if the strong finish continues, I don't think that's the same as saying everyone is happy with 4 and 5 loss seasons. We do need to find a way to play more consistently in order to win championships.

You honestly think an interim Chancellor will fire a guy with an overall winning record and pay him half a million dollars to leave? She isn't just having an open interview for our Chancellor position, it is an open interview for ALL potential subsequent positions. This isn't the SEC where football matters more than anything else it seems, and there are far and away more schools that want a Chancellor to have high academic standards with fiscal responsibilities. Not sure firing a winning football coach would sit well with most of those schools and it is probably too risky of a move for any interim to make. Regardless of the perceived need, I just can't see any interim making this move. That being said, it is often one of the first things a new Chancellor will do. They often like to clean house (AD included) and bring in their guys. Interesting that this very phenomena may be why Napier is still coaching the Gators today, interim down there also.

The AD isn't an interim, and if he decides it's time to make a move, I doubt the interim chancellor (or a permanent one) would overrule him.

I don't know how much weight "overall winning record" will or should carry. We could lose out this year, go 0-12 next year, and Clark would still have an overall winning record. But I think program trajectory is more significant. We may not be the SEC, but I doubt any of us would argue that football is a big deal at App, and I'm talking wins and losses.

Hopefully we win out and this part of the discussion is moot.

I get all that, and again I am not even saying he should or shouldn't be let go, I am simply saying that I don't see anyway an interim chancellor does this at App. Now, the new Chancellor might do it in the off season as soon as that person is named, but it is the Chancellors ultimate decision, the AD might want to do it and recommend it but only the Chancellor can actually do it and I just don't see that as a realistic option with an interim. But we shall all see soon enough; I have been wrong plenty of times in my life an may be this time as well.

[Bootsy]

It would be a far cry to expect an interim Chancellor would even consider firing Clark. While buyout money could be secured, there’s no way an interim Chancellor has the political air cover to support a decision like this. So maybe we should stay within the realm of reality here?

[Stonewall]

I’m not certain that is accurate. Less likely, yes. Absolutely? I would not say .

[NewApp]

I thought about this a good bit while I was doing yard work this afternoon.
Hypothetically, if App wins out AND wins a bowl game, it would look terrible to fire Clark. However, this would be the second year in a row that the team started pretty terribly and turned it around in the second half of the season. Clark has been the head guy 5 years now. This is the third year in a row that App has looked pretty bad the first half of the season. Personally, I'd rather move on from Clark and gamble that we can find an up-and-coming coach that can really make some noise. However, I think there are some people in charge who are fine with winning 6-9 games a season with a bowl game most years.
To me, after the way App exploded into FBS and simply dominated for the first 8-ish years made me want to see App become the next Boise State, Cincinnati, or Memphis, not the next Toledo or Ohio.

People have shifted their baseline. They are now ok with 6,7,8 win seasons. They are ok with going to the MR Clean Backwoods bowl in Timbuktu, Nowhere. They are ok with losing winnable games against peer teams. They are now ok with not being known as giant killers. They are ok with horrible clock management. The are ok with undisciplined players giving away yardage from penalties. They are ok with vanilla and unimaginative play calling. They are ok with the defense of a wet paper bag. They are ok with losing 3,4,5 games in a row. It's just mediocre ball and now people are ok with it. People fear the unknown and I think a lot are worried about who takes over and how the team will fair. People would rather be mediocre than to take the chance of a losing season in order to find greatness.

You have a million dollars to buy out his contract?

[KentHogan]

The Chancellor, interim or not, should allow the AD to make the decision.

That being said, I don’t have much faith in Gillin to move on from Clark.

[311neers]

I thought about this a good bit while I was doing yard work this afternoon.
Hypothetically, if App wins out AND wins a bowl game, it would look terrible to fire Clark. However, this would be the second year in a row that the team started pretty terribly and turned it around in the second half of the season. Clark has been the head guy 5 years now. This is the third year in a row that App has looked pretty bad the first half of the season. Personally, I'd rather move on from Clark and gamble that we can find an up-and-coming coach that can really make some noise. However, I think there are some people in charge who are fine with winning 6-9 games a season with a bowl game most years.
To me, after the way App exploded into FBS and simply dominated for the first 8-ish years made me want to see App become the next Boise State, Cincinnati, or Memphis, not the next Toledo or Ohio.

People have shifted their baseline. They are now ok with 6,7,8 win seasons. They are ok with going to the MR Clean Backwoods bowl in Timbuktu, Nowhere. They are ok with losing winnable games against peer teams. They are now ok with not being known as giant killers. They are ok with horrible clock management. The are ok with undisciplined players giving away yardage from penalties. They are ok with vanilla and unimaginative play calling. They are ok with the defense of a wet paper bag. They are ok with losing 3,4,5 games in a row. It's just mediocre ball and now people are ok with it. People fear the unknown and I think a lot are worried about who takes over and how the team will fair. People would rather be mediocre than to take the chance of a losing season in order to find greatness.

You have a million dollars to buy out his contract?

Drops to $500k Dec. 2. Yes, if/when they ask people/donors for money, we can get to that number. Remember, we were "fully funded" for $100M East side expansion... what's $500k?

[appfanjj]

If SC returns we damn well better win the first game on next year’s schedule.

[Bootsy]

I’m not certain that is accurate. Less likely, yes. Absolutely? I would not say .

Call me when it happens.

And on a related note, no one’s happier than Shawn Clark to see Everts retire. If she were still in the big chair, Clark might be gone and we wouldn’t be having this discussion.

[asu66]

Stonewall's right, any buyout contract would absolutely require an executive session discussion and then an action item approval by the BOT in an open meeting.

[Pikapp79]

It would be a far cry to expect an interim Chancellor would even consider firing Clark. While buyout money could be secured, there’s no way an interim Chancellor has the political air cover to support a decision like this. So maybe we should stay within the realm of reality here?

This is painful but probably correct. Kick the mediocre can down the road.

[AtlAppMan]

Why have an interim Chancellor if they aren’t going to make any management decisions? If that is the case just leave seat vacant and let the lieutenants run their respective departments and save the money. Either you are the head person and you make the decisions when they need to be made or get out of the seat.
There will be two choices at the end of the season stay on same path or make a change. Both come with consequences.

[Bootsy]

Why have an interim Chancellor if they aren’t going to make any management decisions? If that is the case just leave seat vacant and let the lieutenants run their respective departments and save the money. Either you are the head person and you make the decisions when they need to be made or get out of the seat.
There will be two choices at the end of the season stay on same path or make a change. Both come with consequences.

Heather Norris has made important decisions during her time wearing the "interim" tag. Her response before/after Helene to safeguard the health and welfare of students, citizens and the community made a big difference. Her willingness to partner with town/county government and law enforcement. Her ongoing work to help the High Country recover from historic devastation. Getting the students back and salvaging the semester. Not to mention factoring in all of the endless details involved in running the school whether the storm happened or not. I could keep going, but you get the point.

Having someone with managerial courage and executive presence made all of these good things happen; that's why Norris is in the position. Can you imagine going through Helene and not having a leader to speak for and make decisions for the University, students and staff?

Heather Norris IS making decisions. It's just that those decisions happen to be on things that are a little higher in priority than whether or not Shawn Clark should keep his job.

[T-Dog]

I trust that if Norris needs to make a head football coach decision that she will make the decision she thinks is best for App State and would not shy away from it because of the interim title, if circumstances and timing dictates it.

[AppSt94]

No one that I have spoken to feels that the sentiment is to move away from Shawn. That doesn’t mean that they won’t, but it would likely be a scenario where they feel that they have no other choice.

[t4pizza]

Why have an interim Chancellor if they aren’t going to make any management decisions? If that is the case just leave seat vacant and let the lieutenants run their respective departments and save the money. Either you are the head person and you make the decisions when they need to be made or get out of the seat.
There will be two choices at the end of the season stay on same path or make a change. Both come with consequences.

It isn't that she can't make the decisions (she can and dose on a daily basis) , it is that most likely she (or any other interim) would not make that type of decision. Remember, she is literally having an on the job interview for the position of Chancellor at any university. Why do something that could be deemed irresponsible by so many potential employers? It just doesn't make sense in the real world, very little upside to it. It would be one thing if donations dried up (they haven't), or if ticket sales significantly lagged (they haven't) or if players were getting in a lot of legal trouble on a regular basis (they haven't) or if players were not going to class, not progressing with their degrees and not graduating (again, not happening) or even if we were really losing for multiple years (hasn't happened). In those cases, a decision to fire a coach and pay a ton of money is much easier to explain and easier for future employers to understand. But since none of those issues are happening, it is nearly impossible for me to believe that the interim would make a decision to fire a winning football coach that is owed a lot of money. Those type of things rarely happen in the real world.

[mike87]

Why have an interim Chancellor if they aren’t going to make any management decisions? If that is the case just leave seat vacant and let the lieutenants run their respective departments and save the money. Either you are the head person and you make the decisions when they need to be made or get out of the seat.
There will be two choices at the end of the season stay on same path or make a change. Both come with consequences.

It isn't that she can't make the decisions (she can and dose on a daily basis) , it is that most likely she (or any other interim) would not make that type of decision. Remember, she is literally having an on the job interview for the position of Chancellor at any university. Why do something that could be deemed irresponsible by so many potential employers? It just doesn't make sense in the real world, very little upside to it. It would be one thing if donations dried up (they haven't), or if ticket sales significantly lagged (they haven't) or if players were getting in a lot of legal trouble on a regular basis (they haven't) or if players were not going to class, not progressing with their degrees and not graduating (again, not happening) or even if we were really losing for multiple years (hasn't happened). In those cases, a decision to fire a coach and pay a ton of money is much easier to explain and easier for future employers to understand. But since none of those issues are happening, it is nearly impossible for me to believe that the interim would make a decision to fire a winning football coach that is owed a lot of money. Those type of things rarely happen in the real world.

But the anonymous guys on the message board say he should be fired...