I understand the rationale for wanting to bring Schiano back: His is a known quantity, He has already shown he can get it done here. He has the respect of a large portion of the fan base, local coaches, and community. Even if Schiano doesn't win a national championship, his upside is way better than what we have now under Ash. Picking someone else would either be a bigger risk, or much more expensive.
I also understand the rationale for objecting to Schiano. We know what his ceiling is, and other than capturing lightning in a bottle in 2006, his ceiling is not as good as we want to be. Being better than Ash is a low bar. There are plenty of examples of other coaches returning to where they had previous success, only to fail to achieve that success.
Assuming Schiano wants to return, I think those arguments balance out slightly toward hiring Schiano. But there is another huge risk: What happens if Schiano fails, or plateaus.
If we bring Schiano back, how long do we give him to succeed? What guarantees would we have to provide. And if he fails, how do we fire him. And if we fire him, does that relegate Rutgers to "coach's graveyard" status. I think if we end up firing Schiano, does that create the reputation that no one can make Rutgers a winner in the Big Ten, not even someone who was previously successful here.
When you factor in that risk, I think the pendulum swings back against hiring Schiano. I think it is much better to roll the dice on another coach, who most likely would be better than Ash, and if not the level of winner we want, can at least be a stepping stone on the path the high level success.
This seems like the most reasonable take on Schiano v2.0 on this thread. It's a fascinating possibility to discuss and every time the subject is broached in earnest on this board, it seems to generate a five-plus page thread. I think that says something about the interest the Rutgers football community maintains for him.
I agree with those who say his hire would immediately cause the ticket office's phone lines to blow up. He would bring immediate credibility to your base, that's for sure.
I'm not certain that it extends beyond your base, though.
Let me say this before I go on: Schiano v2.0 would be terrific theater mostly because everyone here has
such a strong opinion about how it would go, and seeing it play out would be so compelling. You don't even have to be a Rutgers fan to think so; I love this topic despite zero emotional investment in the program.
But as long as I'm tossing my opinion onto the pile, I have to say that his successful return is far from guaranteed (aside from that initial spike in ticket sales), and could lead to the disappointing and awkward scenario Upstream posited above. I don't think there is any question that things would be better right away. I think we all know what Ash is and is not, and there isn't anywhere to go but up from here. Schiano is a pro who knows how to run a professional program (not in the SEC way, either!). As far as being the CEO of a program, I think the guy is as solid as they come.
But in many ways, he and his brand are not what they were the first time around. He was hired almost 20 years ago, and the program needed his youthful energy and borderline naivete for such a heavy lift. And let's just stipulate that what he managed to do was nearly miraculous. No, he never got Rutgers to the promised land, but anyone who remembers what he inherited in December 2000 knows how far he really took it - incredible.
How much of that "special sauce" does he retain, though? He made a lot of hay out of Rutgers being his dream job, and his seeming inseparability from New Jersey. He refused other, better jobs to remain there. Even as he struggled to get Rutgers over the hump, his integrity was unquestioned. It seemed to be a defining asset, and he seemed like someone poised to remain there forever as he endeavored with the program to do things never done there before...
...And then it wasn't his dream job anymore. In fact, it was so not his dream job that he left the program at a pretty terrible time and in a lousy spot. Look, the guy's got a right to go after whatever job he wants and can get, but he spent down almost all of the mythology he had created about Rutgers: the dream job, the only place he wants to be. And he left a numbers of kids from some top high school programs in the lurch. I disagree with the idea posted by a few here that he is one of the most respected men among New Jersey high school coaches. I'm not as dialed in as I used to be, but it's my impression that this is not at all true.
Then there is the matter of his national brand, which is most certainly diminished since 2012. There was the matter of coaching his Bucs players to go hard after the Giants' O-line in the waning moments of a decided game. You can think what you want about the philosophy, but he lost the battle of public perception on that issue, badly.
And the Tennessee thing: It wasn't fair to him, and it's easy to say that he may be having the last laugh on the Vols' fans now, but Clay Travis didn't start that uproar about Schiano/Sandusky/Penn State because he actually believed it. He started it to rally public support against the hire of a coach he thought was a bad football hire. And those fans ran with it because they thought the same way (though I guess many were gullible enough to also buy into Travis' rationale). Not matter what, John Currie lost his job over his desire to high Schiano for the Tennessee job. That whole affair did nothing good for Schiano's national brand. It will always be used against him in recruiting, if he can even land a job he considers worthwhile. There is a huge disparity between the way he is seen by the national college football community and the way he is recalled by the Rutgers football community.
I think he would do a creditable job upon any return to Rutgers (which supposes he has any interest in one, something most people I trust seem to think is most unlikely), but it's hard to say exactly what that looks like. My best guess? Frustrating seasons hovering around .500, an occasional 8- or 9-win season once or twice a decade, but just as many 4- and 5-win seasons. And that's the best-case scenario, since none of the data suggests anything better. The pool is a lot deeper now than it was in the Big East. He always recruited above Rutgers' level then, yet a league title always eluded him. How is he supposed to deliver on any real promise now, competing in a much tougher, deeper league as today's Greg Schiano: older, less hungry, stained by controversy (however unfair), hometown credibility spent down considerably? He can't sell "Rutgers is my dream job, come along with me and let's do it for Jersey" anymore, because now everyone knows it's not true, and he'll leave if given a better opportunity (which, again, is his right). That makes a difference when you've never
actually won anything, but you're asking talented kids who can play anywhere and win anywhere to buy into your vision of what
could be - one that a somewhat long record shows is simply beyond reach by him.
And then what? The idea that he could return is based on the idea that Schiano left on his own, and is always welcome back. And let's say he is, for the sake of discussion. And let's say he produced a decade of teams that averages out to five or six wins a year. Is that good enough? I know that kind of team would see great in 2020, but if it was clear you're not really ever headed anywhere and just merely avoiding weekly humiliation (which is something right now, I guess), do you want to continue with the v2.0 experiment? How do you fire him? Do you want the greatest Rutgers football coach of the modern era to be sent packing? How do you have him back in future years to celebrate notable teams? As it is now, he is the guy who will always bring the house down when he returns for ceremonial reasons. Without him, who is there to venerate that way?
Over and over on this board, you see the false choice of moving forward with Schiano or without Schiano when there is a whole world of candidates besides him. Making a good hire isn't easy, but it's not impossible, either.