Elon bought a Rolls-Royce and decided the best thing to do is drive it around like a McLaren. Do I need to remind you how that turned out last time? If most of us bought a new car we wouldn't pay someone else to drive it so it makes sense that Elon wants to take the reins. After all, Santa doesn't let an elf drive the sleigh or deliver the presents, why should Elon let someone else bring stability and freedom to Twitter?

For one, the fallout from using startup culture to reshape a developed company will simply cause it to break. Unlike the McLaren, if Elon crashes this one we all suffer. For another, hiring someone to usher in the change he wants to see will allow him to shape a vision which can't be done while manning a rudder. Finally, the only person in the entire world capable of doing just that - is me.

You disagree? Of course you do! Well then, who should it be? Perhaps someone with the technical chops to jump into a mountain of code and begin solving difficult problems while shining a light on new opportunities? Or maybe, someone with a seasoned hand at running a large firm who will bring in the needed relationships, create strategic partnerships and connect with leaders across the world? Generally, those are the two options people expect. A veteran steward of business or a seasoned professional within the industry.

Yet, if that were the case Elon would be the best choice as he fits both of those archetypes. Which is precisely why I'm suggesting myself as a third. The untested, inexperienced and completely unknown wildcard. The employees and user-base have made the changes they are going to make so it's unlikely people will just abandon ship. Who runs the company no longer has an affect on it's stock price. Elon already said Twitter is going to do some 'dumb things' so why not this?

Of course, I could also crash the Twittermobile into a wall or guardrail and that wouldn't surprise anyone. Hell, most people would expect it! But, what if I didn't? What if, god forbid, I actually improved Twitter? How would the world react to a nobody proving that what somebodies do isn't actually that difficult? I don't know the answer to that. What I do know, is that people love surprises for the same reason they love an underdog.

Shit isn't boring. Not being bored is a huge part of success. Whether fueled by interest, hope, drugs, mania, or social exuberance, it provides the heat that makes the stir-fry sizzle. In the wake of Elon's purchase Twitter needs a serious injection of interest because in the face of market alternatives things are going to start getting pretty boring over there.

So, why me and not some other underdog? For starters, I'm throwing my hat in the ring. For enders, Elon needs me to continue growing as a leader. He is not developing leaders who lead and it's holding him back. I believe part of that is because too many of the available leaders that would be acceptable either don't want the job or won't be able to work for him. Evolving Elon requires a rough block of stone from which a new leader can be hewed. A final project that is one part publicity stunt two parts forging talent. The nexus of which will reignite an engine for growth and engagement within a vehicle that is slowly sputtering out.

Lastly, we need to shift the paradigm of corporate success away from public companies and back to private firms. Over the last four decades mergers, acquisitions, and IPOs have been the primary way of cashing out in the corporate world. You either become a big enough problem to warrant a buyout or competitive enough that banks want to own you. That journey used to begin in a garage with friends. It now begins in incubators and venture capitalist firms. The essence of what drives interest traded away for a hint of the success that fuels it. The end result is a grossly misdirected and uninspired landscape of innovations. We can help change that.

To begin, Elon Musk should pay me to run Twitter. I'll do it for minimum wage and heath insurance.