The Pittsburgh Power entry in the Arena Football League has interviewed at least four candidates for the head coaching position and Jacksonville Sharks offensive coordinator Chris Siegfried has emerged as the frontrunner, according to sources close to the situation.
Power principal owner/general manager Matt Shaner said a news conference to name the franchise's inaugural coach is planned for Wednesday at Consol Energy Center. The Power will begin play as an expansion team in 2011.
"As a franchise, we wouldn't feel right discussing candidates until after there is a signed contract," Shaner said. "We expect a contract to be signed early (this) week."
Indications are that Siegfried, a former arenafootball2 coach of the year at Spokane, has been chosen over at least three other candidates. They are Pittsburgh native Rich Ingold, Tampa Bay storm assistant head coach Dave Ewart and former Arizona Rattlers coach Kevin Guy.
Siegfried could not be reached for comment Saturday.
Siegfried attended West Hazleton High School in eastern Pennsylvania and was a three-year starter at Division II Millersville. He coached the Spokane Shock to the 2006 af2 championship and was named the league's coach of the year. He also coached in the af2 with the Arkansas Twisters and the Cape Fear (N.C.) Wildcats.
Ingold is the former coach of the AFL's Dallas Vigilantes and twice was an arenafootball2 coach of the year at Wilkes-Barre/Scranton.
Ingold said Friday he had withdrawn his name from consideration for the Power's job and has been weighing a coaching offer from another indoor team.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.