Penn State Football: Tony Dungy Won't be the Next Coach of the Nittany Lions
Donald Miralle/Getty Images
Penn State can cross another potential coach of its list of candidates.
After being publicly rebuffed by Mississippi State coach Dan Mullen a few days ago, it sounds as if former Indianapolis Colts coach Tony Dungy also shares Mullen’s sentiment of having no interest in coaching the Nittany Lions next season.
Dungy told USA Today that his focus right now is on being a parent and taking care of his family and that he has no plans of returning to coaching at this time.
The 56-year-old Dungy retired from coaching after the 2008 season with the Colts and has since been serving as a studio analyst for NBC’s Football Night in America.
Given his reputation for having strong leadership traits, some thought that Dungy would be a perfect fit for the Penn State job, given all that’s gone on at the school over the last month.
The Nittany Lions obviously need to find a coach who has strong convictions and one who can handle the recovery process that the program will have to endure over the next few years.
While Dungy may be a great leader, the fact that he’s never coached at the collegiate level would be a huge detriment to him at Penn State, as you can’t just walk into that type of job and into that type of situation and start learning things on the fly.
Dungy is happy where he’s at, and that’s great, but the fact is, he’s just not the right fit for Penn State anyway.
Yes, the Nittany Lions need a coach with great character, but they also need a coach who knows how to handle the ins and outs of being the face of a major college football program, and that’s something you only gain from past experience.
It will be interesting to see where the school’s coaching search ultimately leads to, but there are much better candidates out there in the college ranks who would definitely be better fits at Penn State than Tony Dungy.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?