i created a whole new thread because this has been mentioned before-something many of us have apparently forgotten to ask ourselves in the wake of the DMAC thread.
i would like someone on here to answer this question for me.
WHAT IS HONESTLY THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AN "INEXPERIENCED" DMAC,A FUTURE HALL-OF-FAME-QB,TAKING OVER AS HC AND AN INEXPERIENCED MICHAEL CLEMONS TAKING OVER THE ARGONAUTS MANY YEARS AGO?
when answering this question, please refer to argonauts' records in the previous 6 years.
this is the right move from all aspects of the organization. positive media for a change, fan rejuvenation and renewed trust in the HC position,
player response-it just all makes sense, now or in 9 weeks when the clock strikes 12 on the season.
what says dmac even wants that job as a hc maybe he is content doing what he is doing. the biggest difference though is clemons took over a much much better team then the garbage dmac would take over. itd be setting him up for failure. just look how dunnigan suceeded in calgary
Very true. Pinball came into a stacked Argo team. Danny Mac (or anyone else) would be inheriting a team with so many holes, it’d give a piece of Swiss cheese a run for its money. I hope he’d be considered when it comes time to replace Taafe but I feel sorry for the guy who ‘wins’ this HC job.
I, as a fan, would have absolutely no trust in someone with no coaching experience.
Don’t get me wrong. I think very highly of Danny as a person and was always a fan of his as a QB, but I have very little reason to trust him as a HC.
Given Charlie’s track record in Montreal I had fan rejuvenation and renewed trust in the HC position when he was hired here, but I’m still waiting this thing out. It’s moving forward, but I’m still not convinced ( yet) that it’s moving fast enough.