Opinion: The curious case of the Dan Lanning “Announcement”

Kirby Smart has done an amazing job since becoming the head coach of the Georgia football team.

It took him just two years to lead the Bulldogs to an SEC Championship and a berth in the National Championship.

Want to talk recruiting? The talent currently entering the halls of the Butts-Mehre Building is unprecedented, and a reason many prognosticators are predicting that Georgia will win a coveted national title in the not-to-distant future.

Yes, Bulldog fans should be thrilled that Smart is their head coach. Having said that, the public confirmation of Dan Lanning's promotion to defensive coordinator deserves comment. It's one of the oddest deals I’ve seen in 32 years of covering collegiate athletics.

For those unaware, the word from on high didn’t come in the form of a press release or a formal announcement by the University. No, it's the result of an open records request, one made by UGASports and other media outlets that regularly cover Georgia's athletic program.

I’m still scratching my head, trying to figure out why Smart didn’t consider the false narratives that would be created by not announcing the promotion up front.

When Georgia announced the promotion of James Coley, the hirings of tight end coach Todd Hartley and defensive back coach Charlton Warren, and even offensive analyst Shawn Watson, the school released the news in a professionally written email to beat writers, complete with a quote from Smart extolling the virtues of the program’s latest hire.

That wasn’t the case with Lanning.

It wasn’t until Georgia’s open records office replied to requests late Friday afternoon, listing Georgia’s assistants and their titles and salaries, that anyone outside the program could say what Lanning’s title was.

Was this a wise decision by Smart?

There’s no doubt a good portion of the Bulldog Nation who don’t give a flying flip how it affects the media and their ability to do their job. "It's Smart's team and he can do what he wants; you (media) don't have a right to know." I get it and understand 100 percent.

That’s actually not my gripe. It’s the false narrative that was unnecessarily created that Georgia had to settle for Lanning when that was not the case.

But while everyone tries to figures out Smart’s motives were—he’s been unavailable for comment since the Sugar Bowl—those reasons, whatever they are, seem curious at best.

The fact the media had to find out on its own via an FOI request has been a running joke for opposing fans.

Now, Coach Smart doesn’t care what anyone thinks, but it’s a shame that this incorrect narrative on Lanning’s hire has been allowed to percolate among Bulldog rivals: they could claim use Smart really didn’t “get his man,” and use it as recruiting propaganda.

It was also a wasted opportunity by Smart to extol the virtues of Lanning, who by all accounts was offered the defensive coordinator job at Colorado by his former boss Mel Tucker before electing to remain in Athens.

Assuming Lanning was Smart’s choice from the get-go (and it certainly seems that he was), why wouldn’t he want to make the news public as quickly as possible and tell the world what a great hire he believes him to be?

Personally, I like the move.

Lanning, from all indications, is loved by his players. We know he's a high-energy competitor who relates well to his players.

For those who believe Lanning too young at 33 for his new gig, consider this. That’s exactly the same age that Smart was when Nick Saban tabbed him as Alabama’s defensive coordinator in 2008. The guess here is that Lanning will do just fine.

It’s just the way his “announcement” was handled that’s left many asking the same questions I am.

Was Smart mad at the media? Was it over some of the leaks that got out regarding recent injuries, or perhaps the search for a new defensive backs coach before Warren was ultimately hired?

Your guess is as good as mine. Sitting here, it just seems petty.

Smart’s the head coach and can handle his program’s affairs as he sees fit. He’s the caretaker, and with a yearly salary of $7 million, he’s expected to make the right calls.

In this particular instance, it just seems things could have been handled differently, in a way that would ultimately have benefited all parties.