2009-10 College Football Coaching Hiring/Firing Thread

[Chief Rum]

Oh, and to be fair, the first line of that post spells out Neuheisel's name. IMO, I established context within the scope of that post such that CRN can only refer to one person (and especially given the structure of the second sentence, after the information supplied by the first).

I think if I threw CRN out there in the blue, it would be one thing, but since my first mention spells out his name, I think I am on solid ground to go with the acronym the second time around.

This is a common device in journalism, BTW. First reference of a proper noun (name of person, place, organization, etc.) in an article is given a full name, establishing the identity in question. And then for simplicity and ease of reading, the following references are done in as simple manner that is acceptable for a reasonable reader to understand to whom the reference is made. For example, the first time a player is mentioned in an article, he is shown with his full name. But every reference thereafter in the article will only be by last name (unless another person in the story shares the same last name).

Forgive me if you're aware of all this. I never know what non-journalism people are aware of with respective to AP style.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

Dawgfan, just stop. Arguing with Rainmaker is a cross between arguing with the devil's advocate and a crazy woman. When you win they'll just change the subject, and if you still beat them they'll deliberately misconstrue your arguments to the point of, well, this quote.

The funny thing is that I made no argument in the last two posts. I asked a couple questions to him. A couple question he apparently can't answer because it will make his view sound ridiculous.

dawgfan has stated in his own words that it is not a serious offense because it is not a booster. That the school has more control over boosters than agents even though the agents were allowed to roam free on campus at practice, games, and in the locker room. Read his posts. Nowhere did I change the subject or misconstrue his statement.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

I've felt that way with you, dawg, and probably everyone else I've corresponded with at times, but I like arguing with you guys because there are times and subjects where you or I will admit we were wrong, or we'll find common ground, or at least we'll agree to disagree. Rainmaker just stakes out a position, is called out on a portion (occasionally even with concrete facts), then jumps on a different part while starting to twist the other person's argument. Even if you've completely destroyed his original argument he'll continue arguing, either on a barely related tangent or by twisting the other posters "arguments" to the point of absurdity like he did dawgfan's there - and then he'll repeat his original argument in a different thread.

I don't know how you destroy someone's opinion on a player, team, coach, or situation. It's an opinion.

Are you still upset over the Mike Leach thread? I mean you made your point, you beat me. Mike Leach is an elite coach. At the top of the list in the Tennessee coaching search and I heard his interview at USC went well. I was wrong to think that major programs wouldn't be jumping over each other trying to hire him. Happy now?

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

The funny thing is that I made no argument in the last two posts. I asked a couple questions to him. A couple question he apparently can't answer because it will make his view sound ridiculous.

Jeebus - this is exactly why many here will avoid getting into any kind of debate with you, because you make shit up.

Which questions? You mean this one?

"So shouldn't schools allow their players to cut deals with sponsors while in college and take down payments for the future? Seems like a great recruiting tool. Come to our school, we won't pay you but we'll line up a group of agents that will bid on your services. You'll be driving a Bentley in no time."

Or this one?

"So it's OK for the school to allow its players to be paid if it's by a fan of the player, not the team? Shouldn't teams just tell their boosters to say they aren't boosters and to call themselves "agents"?"

Or this one?

"You are saying that a player can be paid with the school's knowledge as long as he doesn't have booster status. I'm saying that under your beliefs, it would make sense for a school to tell their supporters to not become official boosters and to just pay the best recruits directly to come to their school. That way it's not a big deal in your eyes."

I answered all of them. To recap, nowhere have I advocated that it's OK for players to be paid, either by boosters or agents or anyone else outside of allowable jobs and their own family members or longtime established family friends.

I shot down the ridiculous notion that a school would tell a booster to pay players without contributing to the program so they can't be called "boosters" - it's a ridiculous scenario that is hardly worth discussing.

As for the last, it leads into the following bullshit:

dawgfan has stated in his own words that it is not a serious offense because it is not a booster. That the school has more control over boosters than agents even though the agents were allowed to roam free on campus at practice, games, and in the locker room. Read his posts. Nowhere did I change the subject or misconstrue his statement.

Yes, please do read my posts. Quote me where I said it's not a serious offense because it's not a booster. Quote me where I said it's OK for schools to freely allow agents to roam campuses without any kind of monitoring.

I'll give you a hint - I never said that. But to make your arguments sound less stupid, you misrepresent what I've said. Here's a sampling to show you what I've actually said:

Originally Posted by dawgfan

There is a significant difference between a school booster paying players and sports agents paying players - boosters are trying to help the program; agents are trying to help themselves, and don't care so much about their impact on the school. They have no loyalty to the school, their loyalty is to get themselves paid down the road. Sorry you're having such a hard time understanding this difference.

I believe that USC is guilty of lack of institutional control. I believe that Carroll and the athletic department knew, or should've known, that Bush and his family were receiving benefits. I believe that they set up an atmosphere that allowed agents to get close to players.

But there's a significant difference between boosters and agents, and that's why the punishments will be less for USC than they were for Alabama.

Originally Posted by dawgfan

As I've said earlier in this thread, I don't see enough in what we publicly know about what went on to justify major sanctions against USC's football program. Now, maybe the info Bush gave to the NCAA changes that, and maybe the NCAA uncovered other evidence that hasn't been made public, but sports agents paying Bush is a different animal than boosters paying players, and I think that distinction will spare USC from sanctions as severe as what Alabama got in 2002(3?)

Originally Posted by dawgfan

I think USC deserves some penalties for lack of institutional control. I don't think they deserve penalties as severe as Alabama where program boosters were paying players.

Originally Posted by dawgfan

Once again, I'm not saying USC wasn't guilty of lack of institutional control and not deserving of penalties - I'm saying that since it was sports agents paying Bush and not boosters, the penalties should be less than what Alabama got.

You're guilty of either really poor reading comprehension or deliberately misrepresenting what I say. Either way, it makes "debating" with you pointless.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

I can't say I disagree with that. You're correct that I know there are plenty of subjects you, I, dawgfan, Jon, other strong minded individuals can find common ground on. Sometimes we're irrationally stubborn, but for the most part, we take positions with merit and are open to considering other viewpoints.

You're dead on that when Rain latches onto an opinion, he never lets it go or considers any other position. It's very...tiring.

Yep. When we debate, we may both have very strong, differing opinions. But you don't make shit up or completely misrepresent what I'm trying to say. And I think we both are willing to admit when we're wrong.

RainMaker on the other hand...

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

*sigh*
I am too tired to write a book.
Research the Bama fiasco and the USC fiasco...

Short, the Bama supporter never donated to Bama before....and the supposed Bush supporter gave USSC over 1MM last year...not all to the athletic dept.

I'd love to see the evidence you're referring to in regards to the Alabama case. I've read multiple articles on the case including the official NCAA public report, and I'll note that there wasn't "one" Alabama supporter involved, and at least one of the three that were was a long-time booster.

And I've seen no reports indicating that Michael Michaels or Lloyd Lake have been contributors to the USC athletics department. If you have links to evidence that they did, I'd love to see them. If that turns out to be the case (as I've said repeatedly) that changes the nature of the case.

[Eaglesfan27]

Rocky Seto has decided to stay at USC and will be the new linebacker coach. Also, Todd McNair has been let go.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

I answered all of them. To recap, nowhere have I advocated that it's OK for players to be paid, either by boosters or agents or anyone else outside of allowable jobs and their own family members or longtime established family friends.

I shot down the ridiculous notion that a school would tell a booster to pay players without contributing to the program so they can't be called "boosters" - it's a ridiculous scenario that is hardly worth discussing.

Despite crushing your vision of how pure college sports is, some shady shit does go on by shady people. If penalties are only severe if the payments are made by boosters, it would seem to benefit the school to tell their shadiest boosters to not be boosters. That way they can disconnect themselves from any relationship. It's not ridiculous, it's safe and smart.

Originally Posted by dawgfan

Yes, please do read my posts. Quote me where I said it's nsot a serious offense because it's not a booster. Quote me where I said it's OK for schools to freely allow agents to roam campuses without any kind of monitoring.

Are you joking? You say this and then quote yourself saying it. You even compare it to Alabama and say it's not as serious because it's not involving a booster.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

I'd love to see the evidence you're referring to in regards to the Alabama case. I've read multiple articles on the case including the official NCAA public report, and I'll note that there wasn't "one" Alabama supporter involved, and at least one of the three that were was a long-time booster.

You're right, the main guy in the Alabama case was a booster (and I thought a huge donator). The school I thought not only banished him from everything but returned some money he had given or some other stuff he had done. I'm sure someone can find it. There were others involved but this was the one that got in the most trouble (I think jail time, right?).

Originally Posted by dawgfan

And I've seen no reports indicating that Michael Michaels or Lloyd Lake have been contributors to the USC athletics department. If you have links to evidence that they did, I'd love to see them. If that turns out to be the case (as I've said repeatedly) that changes the nature of the case.

I've never read of the two being direct contributors to the athletics department but they did pay and kep a player at the school happy with the coach's knowledge. So either Pete Carroll is extremely naive (which I doubt you can be to be as succesful as him) or was using people like this to keep his players happy and make USC a more desireable school to play for.

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by Eaglesfan27

Rocky Seto has decided to stay at USC and will be the new linebacker coach. Also, Todd McNair has been let go.

Who is going to be the dogfighting host on campus now?

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Despite crushing your vision of how pure college sports is, some shady shit does go on by shady people. If penalties are only severe if the payments are made by boosters, it would seem to benefit the school to tell their shadiest boosters to not be boosters. That way they can disconnect themselves from any relationship. It's not ridiculous, it's safe and smart.

A season ticket holder is considered a "booster". You seriously find it plausible that someone who is so into a particular school's program is going to not go to games as a way to skirt rules about being a booster so when they do dirty shit, the school won't take as severe a penalty?

Of course there's shady shit that goes on around big-time football programs, but this is utterly implausible.

Are you joking? You say this and then quote yourself saying it. You even compare it to Alabama and say it's not as serious because it's not involving a booster.

Are you joking? This is like me saying "the sky is blue", quoting myself saying "the sky is blue" and you replying "ha - you even quoted yourself as saying the sky is purple".

Quote me where I've said what you accuse me of saying.

I have said none of the things you accuse me of saying. So again, either your reading comprehension is appallingly bad, or you are deliberately misrepresenting what I've said to try to bolster your losing argument.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

A season ticket holder is considered a "booster". You seriously find it plausible that someone who is so into a particular school's program is going to not go to games as a way to skirt rules about being a booster so when they do dirty shit, the school won't take as severe a penalty?

Of course there's shady shit that goes on around big-time football programs, but this is utterly implausible.

So what is it? Is a booster a guy who contributes to the school financially? Is it a season ticket holder? You have stated both. I would believe that a school like USC has a large number of boosters throughout the country who don't feel it is necessary to be season ticket holders to support the team.

All of this is moot anyways since ORNSTEIN WAS A BOOSTER.

Originally Posted by dawgfan

Are you joking? This is like me saying "the sky is blue", quoting myself saying "the sky is blue" and you replying "ha - you even quoted yourself as saying the sky is purple".

Quote me where I've said what you accuse me of saying.

I have said none of the things you accuse me of saying. So again, either your reading comprehension is appallingly bad, or you are deliberately misrepresenting what I've said to try to bolster your losing argument.

You don't even know the facts of the case and keep touting that these guys weren't boosters. I just took exception to where you said that because they weren't boosters it wasn't as serious (which isn't the case here but still a bad argument in my opinion if the school knows). Here is the exact quote, please tell me how I misinterpreted that.

Originally Posted by dawgfan

I think USC deserves some penalties for lack of institutional control. I don't think they deserve penalties as severe as Alabama where program boosters were paying players.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

So what is it? Is a booster a guy who contributes to the school financially? Is it a season ticket holder? You have stated both.

Courtesy of the first Google I ran across, here's the thumbnail courtesy of Pepperdine University's webpage

Under NCAA rules, a “Representative of the Institution’s Athletics Interests (also known as a “Booster”) is any individual who:
• Made any type of contribution to the University or athletics department;
• Joined a Pepperdine booster club (i.e., Waves Club, Junior Waves Club, Riptide) or any sport specific support group;
• Provided benefits (e.g., summer jobs) to prospective or enrolled student-athletes or their families;
• Assisted, in any manner, in the recruitment of prospective student-athletes;
• Participated as a varsity athlete at Pepperdine University;
• Parents or legal guardian of an enrolled student-athlete;
• Promoted the athletics program in any way.
Note: Once an individual is identified as a “Representative of the Institution’s Athletics Interests,” the person retains that identity FOREVER.

edit to add: There's a ton of these kind of pages out there. LSU is one that has a pretty decent simple Q&A page I noticed that. Also Eckerd College's page, for example, does include as season ticket holders ("You are or have been a season ticket holder in any sport."). Va Tech has one that says the same thing... which rather ironically would make me an official booster of UGA. Hmm ... opportunity to wreak havoc perhaps?

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

So what is it? Is a booster a guy who contributes to the school financially? Is it a season ticket holder? You have stated both. I would believe that a school like USC has a large number of boosters throughout the country who don't feel it is necessary to be season ticket holders to support the team.

All of this is moot anyways since ORNSTEIN WAS A BOOSTER.

We know that Bush's family was living in a house provided by Michaels and Lake. We don't know that Bush or his family received money from Ornstein - just that he's accused of doing so. If it turns out Ornstein did in fact provide money to Bush's family, that changes things (and I've pointed out throughout this thread that my opinion can change as we get more info).

To recap, I'm discussing the case based on what we know, and at this point the Ornstein portion of the case is still just an allegation.

I suspect it's true, but we'll find out February.

You don't even know the facts of the case and keep touting that these guys weren't boosters. I just took exception to where you said that because they weren't boosters it wasn't as serious (which isn't the case here but still a bad argument in my opinion if the school knows). Here is the exact quote, please tell me how I misinterpreted that.

I know the facts of the case just fine. Michaels and Lake, to my knowledge, have never been identified as boosters.

And let's be clear - the arguments you've been making haven't been, until this post, that the Bush case involved boosters - it's been that it doesn't matter if they were boosters or not.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Courtesy of the first Google I ran across, here's the thumbnail courtesy of Pepperdine University's webpage



edit to add: There's a ton of these kind of pages out there. LSU is one that has a pretty decent simple Q&A page I noticed that. Also Eckerd College's page, for example, does include as season ticket holders ("You are or have been a season ticket holder in any sport."). Va Tech has one that says the same thing... which rather ironically would make me an official booster of UGA. Hmm ... opportunity to wreak havoc perhaps?

Thank you Jon.

I don't recall ever saying a booster is only someone who contributes to the program or only a season-ticket holder - I assumed (apparently incorrectly) that one would understand I was noting some of the ways in which one would be defined as a booster, rather than stating the only way one could be defined as a booster.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

I don't recall ever saying a booster is only someone who contributes to the program or only a season-ticket holder - I assumed (apparently incorrectly) that one would understand I was noting some of the ways in which one would be defined as a booster, rather than stating the only way one could be defined as a booster.

FTR, just to be clear, I ain't got an opinion one way or the other on what you did or didn't say/imply/mean, and nothing I posted was intended to reflect on any of it. I noted the season ticket thing more heavily purely because the first page I found didn't mention it but several others did, and to be honest I didn't realize that simple season ticket ownership was enough.

I would have figured that you would have to buy season tickets that required an additional donation to the athletic department in order to qualify for/enhance your ability to purchase them but that doesn't seem to be the case. And honestly, any rule that would qualify me as an official representative of UGA is pretty fucked up (I bought women's basketball season tickets for a couple of years purely in order to have good seats for when the Lady Vols came to town, a great deal for just $25/yr).

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

I know the facts of the case just fine. Michaels and Lake, to my knowledge, have never been identified as boosters.

And let's be clear - the arguments you've been making haven't been, until this post, that the Bush case involved boosters - it's been that it doesn't matter if they were boosters or not.

I don't think it matters whether they are considered an actual booster or not. Especially considering how vague the NCAA's description is. I just thought the notion that USC should be able to control a booster more than an agent was silly. Especially since they had let these people run around campus like they owned it.

My argument is that if you are allowing people on to your facilities who are paying your athletes and you know about it, it's really bad.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

FTR, just to be clear, I ain't got an opinion one way or the other on what you did or didn't say/imply/mean, and nothing I posted was intended to reflect on any of it. I noted the season ticket thing more heavily purely because the first page I found didn't mention it but several others did, and to be honest I didn't realize that simple season ticket ownership was enough.

I would have figured that you would have to buy season tickets that required an additional donation to the athletic department in order to qualify for/enhance your ability to purchase them but that doesn't seem to be the case. And honestly, any rule that would qualify me as an official representative of UGA is pretty fucked up (I bought women's basketball season tickets for a couple of years purely in order to have good seats for when the Lady Vols came to town, a great deal for just $25/yr).

It's really vague. We had DePaul season tickets growing up although my parents weren't alumni and really not huge fans of the school. More about the Rosemont Horizon being close to where we lived and they had some great players and played some good teams.

I also had a Deion Sanders Florida State jersey as a kid. Does that constitute "promoting the athletic department in any way"? Am I a Florida State booster?

Good to know you're a UGA booster.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Courtesy of the first Google I ran across, here's the thumbnail courtesy of Pepperdine University's webpage



edit to add: There's a ton of these kind of pages out there. LSU is one that has a pretty decent simple Q&A page I noticed that. Also Eckerd College's page, for example, does include as season ticket holders ("You are or have been a season ticket holder in any sport."). Va Tech has one that says the same thing... which rather ironically would make me an official booster of UGA. Hmm ... opportunity to wreak havoc perhaps?

Hmmm...IIRC, Bush worked a summer job in Ornstein's office. Going by that list provided by JIMG, that would make Ornstein a booster.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

I don't think it matters whether they are considered an actual booster or not. Especially considering how vague the NCAA's description is. I just thought the notion that USC should be able to control a booster more than an agent was silly.

It all has to do with the basic notion that boosters care about the program, and agents care about their bottom line. The difference being that, the boosters are more likely to follow what the program says in terms of rules and what to do and what not to do.

And let's be clear - the NCAA takes into account the actual relationship between violators and the school - a guy that just happened to have season tickets to the program for one year many years ago and otherwise had no real involvement with the program is going to be looked at much differently than a guy that has had a 30-year involvement with the program, contributing money yearly and purchasing luxury suite tickets.

Especially since they had let these people run around campus like they owned it.

My argument is that if you are allowing people on to your facilities who are paying your athletes and you know about it, it's really bad.

Letting the agents run free around the program was bad, and it's why USC will be penalized - we agree on this. The degree to which they get penalized will mostly come down to how much USC knew what was going on, and whether any involved in the program encouraged it.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

FTR, just to be clear, I ain't got an opinion one way or the other on what you did or didn't say/imply/mean, and nothing I posted was intended to reflect on any of it.

I know, I was just happy to see you provide the information that I figured most people who follow college football closely already knew regarding who could be defined as a "booster".

[MacroGuru]

Not to beat a dead horse, but there is finally an official release about Kyle Whittingham turning down the Vols..

Utah football: Whittingham turns down Vols - Salt Lake Tribune

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

That's a mistake of context on my part (or perspective on yours ). You, as a Notre Dame fan, have little reason to constantly write Neuheisel's name. I, as a UCLA fan who is heavily engaged in talk on the football program, must necessarily write his name quite often, as do others of my ilk. Result? We abbreviate. It's easier, and everyone knows what we mean in those places we engage in such talk. So it's a mistake that I bring out that acronym here, where the context is lost, but understandable, if you consider my perspective.

Oh, I have no problem with the acronym - it's the unnecessary practice of adding Coach as a prefix. I would've picked up RN immediately, but CRN confused me at first. When I abbreviate Brian Kelly I'll use BK (even if, as one ND poster put it, our coach's name reminds me of fast food and Weis isn't even there anymore).



Yesterday (1/17)

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

Even if you've completely destroyed (Rainmaker's) original argument he'll continue arguing, either on a barely related tangent or by twisting the other posters "arguments" to the point of absurdity like he did dawgfan's there - and then he'll repeat his original argument in a different thread.

1/02

Originally Posted by RainMaker

BishopMVP, we will bump this in the offseason and show all the major programs offering (Mike Leach) jobs. I say he's not major program caliber, you say he is. Lets see what the major programs have to say this offseason. That'll determine who is right.

1/03

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

Except I never said anything of the sort. (Leach is) an elite offensive mind who hasn't coached defense particularly well, is an extremely odd man who is currently engaging in multiple lawsuits against his (former) school and AD (...) I don't think he'll be getting any offers from major schools this offseason.

1/17

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Are you still upset over the Mike Leach thread? I mean you made your point, you beat me. Mike Leach is an elite coach. At the top of the list in the Tennessee coaching search and I heard his interview at USC went well. I was wrong to think that major programs wouldn't be jumping over each other trying to hire him. Happy now?

Thanks for proving my point.

[DeToxRox]

Lane Kiffin: Busty Coeds, Crashed Car, Affairs, Hookup Apartment | Bumpshack.com

The Kiffin stories are beginning to emerge. Just the beginning. Not sure what will come of it but it'll be funny to check out anyway:

One of the stories:

Strictly rumor at this point but I am hearing from multiple sources:

USC Trojans football coach Lane Kiffin left quite a hoopla of scandal back in Knoxville before fleeing the Tennessee Vols after just one season to return to Southern California.

* Kiffin hooked up multiple times with college coeds and boosters kept an apartment for him in downtown Knoxville for his rendezvous. His affairs were not much of a secret to those boosters close to the program and those near Lane that often had to cover his trails.
* After the 2009 UT-Kentucky game, a local Knoxville bar opened up after hours from 2-4am for Kiffin and several busty coeds.
* Lane, driving drunk with coeds, crashed car, then left coeds when neighbor arrived to pick him up and drive away from the potential PR disaster. Knoxville police might have helped cover this up as well for Super Boy.
* Car that Kiffin wrecked was a loaner to Kiffin and the UT program from a Knoxville dealership. Wrecked car was returned to dealership but the damages were never paid for by Kiffin or the Vols. The dealership is now livid in the wake of Lane skating out of town.

TMZ is reportedly in Knoxville right now interviewing the coeds and ponying up cash for photos of the wreck and Kiffin with coeds in scandalous circumstances.

Photo above is of Kiffin partying at a Knoxville bar last spring with Pittsburgh Steelers coach Mike Tomlin. Lane’s wife, Layla Kiffin, was allegedly home at the time nursing their newborn son Knox.

If true these details bring together the worst of the Tiger Woods and Steve McNair scandals of last year.

Check back for details as they develop…

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by DeToxRox

Lane Kiffin: Busty Coeds, Crashed Car, Affairs, Hookup Apartment | Bumpshack.com

The Kiffin stories are beginning to emerge. Just the beginning. Not sure what will come of it but it'll be funny to check out anyway:

One of the stories:

Those are just some of the romours floating around. There is also one involving a hot-tub, several assitant coaches and the Vol "hostesses" that will probably see the light of day soon.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

Thanks for proving my point.

You argue with unfalsifiable claims. You state that Mike Leach is capable of being a top coach for a major program and then end it by leaving yourself a safety net by essentially saying you can never prove otherwise.

Would be like me saying Aaron Gray is the greatest Center in the history of the game of basketball. But I don't believe any coach will ever give him the 35 minutes a night he needs to prove it so I win because you can't prove me wrong.

It's a weak way to argue by precluding that the one thing we can use to gauge how valuable he is is off the table.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

Those are just some of the romours floating around. There is also one involving a hot-tub, several assitant coaches and the Vol "hostesses" that will probably see the light of day soon.

I hope one of those assistants in the hot tub is not Monte.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

You argue with unfalsifiable claims. You state that Mike Leach is capable of being a top coach for a major program and then end it by leaving yourself a safety net by essentially saying you can never prove otherwise.

You said that Mike Leach's offense would not work against top-tier defenses and/or in the SEC. I said it did, then posted stats - both against top nationally ranked defenses from the Big 12, and from his time as OC at Kentucky - where he put up points and yards against both. Instead of staying on topic, where you'd lost, you replied with

Originally Posted by Rainmaker

BishopMVP, we will bump this in the offseason and show all the major programs offering (Mike Leach) jobs. I say he's not major program caliber, you say he is. Lets see what the major programs have to say this offseason. That'll determine who is right.

which is a complete non-sequitur. Have fun twisting this.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

You said that Mike Leach's offense would not work against top-tier defenses and/or in the SEC. I said it did, then posted stats - both against top nationally ranked defenses from the Big 12, and from his time as OC at Kentucky - where he put up points and yards against both. Instead of staying on topic, where you'd lost, you replied withwhich is a complete non-sequitur. Have fun twisting this.

You cherry picked games throughout his long career. Glossing over the fact that in games against ranked schools, his record was dismal. We went back and forth arguing about particular stats and records.

I said the best way to settle this would be to see how in-demand the coach is. If the guy is an elite coach, he should be in high demand like every other elite coach. It's the simplest way to end the argument. You don't like that approach because for such an "elite" coach, no one fucking wants him.

[CU Tiger]

Clemson DC Kevin Steele is gone to UT, for an apparent base salary of $850k plus incentives to take it over $2MM annually....

Clemson has a team meeting today at 5pm

[CU Tiger]

Well in one of the strangest twists in recent memory, looks like Steele is staying a Tiger, and apparently CDS will be diverting salary to make up the difference..

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

I said the best way to settle this would be to see how in-demand the coach is. If the guy is an elite coach, he should be in high demand like every other elite coach. It's the simplest way to end the argument. You don't like that approach because for such an "elite" coach, no one fucking wants him.

For the last time, I never said he was an elite coach - I said he was an elite offensive coach. I did however say that Auburn hiring Gene Chizik proved that an AD's judgment doesn't mean a damn thing (and the 2 prominent hirings since Leach's firing - of Lane Kiffin and Derek Dooley - have confirmed this), and that due to the non-football issues surrounding Leach he was unlikely to get hired this offseason. Without resorting to bullet points, I'm not sure how much clearer and more concise I can get, so I'm done "arguing".

[JonInMiddleGA]

Tennessee confirms the one car accident involving a leased Lexus & Kiffy. Says he fell asleep at the wheel on his way home after a late film session but cannot account for the time between he left the athletic complex & the time of the crash apparently at least a couple of hours later. It appears no police report was ever filed but Kiffin's insurance company reportedly paid for the damages.

[Eaglesfan27]

This happened over 6 months ago and is just coming out now? Seems like a non-issue if the police felt nothing needed to be done 6 months ago.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

Well in one of the strangest twists in recent memory, looks like Steele is staying a Tiger, and apparently CDS will be diverting salary to make up the difference..

(Again with the unnecessary addition of Coach to an acronym )

On topic, I did hear that Sweeney tried doing that last year too - taking a lower salary, then when the university insisted he keep the higher salary he wanted to pay extra GA's or assistants with his own money. You'd probably have a better idea if any of that is true.

[Dr. Sak]

For those who liked the book "Meat Market", Bruce Feldman is working on a book now on Mike Leach.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Eaglesfan27

This happened over 6 months ago and is just coming out now? Seems like a non-issue if the police felt nothing needed to be done 6 months ago.

I'm sure you remember the stories of Billy Gillispie and Lexington/Kentucky State Police. I'm sure it's a non-issue in that nothing will come of it, but I'm more than willing to believe he was drunk.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Eaglesfan27

This happened over 6 months ago and is just coming out now? Seems like a non-issue if the police felt nothing needed to be done 6 months ago.

Err ... not so fast there my friend. One of the questions about the whole thing is what the police knew, when they knew it, and to what degree if any they were involved in covering up the incident.

[Samdari]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Tennessee confirms the one car accident involving a leased Lexus & Kiffy. Says he fell asleep at the wheel on his way home after a late film session but cannot account for the time between he left the athletic complex & the time of the crash apparently at least a couple of hours later. It appears no police report was ever filed but Kiffin's insurance company reportedly paid for the damages.

I read that and thought it was worded intentionally to create the controversy when there need be none.

One of the assistant coaches saw him in the coaching complex at midnight. Not leaving it, but in it. The accident happened 2-ish. The unaccounted for hours could have been in his office.

They are really looking for something to make this guy look bad down there. No need, just let his leaving them after 14 months speak for his character and move on.

[DanGarion]

Pete Carroll's Trip to Seattle Delayed from Rob Riggle

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

(Again with the unnecessary addition of Coach to an acronym )

On topic, I did hear that Sweeney tried doing that last year too - taking a lower salary, then when the university insisted he keep the higher salary he wanted to pay extra GA's or assistants with his own money. You'd probably have a better idea if any of that is true.

CDS CDS CDS LOL
Sort of.
He actually negotiated to be paid less for his first year (the lowest salary in the ACC) so that he cold spend more money on attracting quality assistants and creating a performance modifier scale where his first year performance would set his next 2 years salary and his 2nd years performance years 4 and 5.

All was well until they fired the team chaplain this year and said it was unaffordable, then CDS () offered to pay his salary to retain him and they would not allow it.

[DaddyTorgo]

I dunno if there's an offseason college football thread, so i'm posting this here


BOSTON -- Boston College linebacker Mark Herzlich is back on the practice field for the first time since leaving the team to undergo cancer treatment.

Herzlich led part of the captain's practice on Thursday in the bubble-covered field at Alumni Stadium.



BOOYA!!!!

ROCK THE FUCKING HOUSE!!!!

I got tears in my eyes right now just thinking about that.

[DeToxRox]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

I dunno if there's an offseason college football thread, so i'm posting this here


BOSTON -- Boston College linebacker Mark Herzlich is back on the practice field for the first time since leaving the team to undergo cancer treatment.

Herzlich led part of the captain's practice on Thursday in the bubble-covered field at Alumni Stadium.



BOOYA!!!!

ROCK THE FUCKING HOUSE!!!!

I got tears in my eyes right now just thinking about that.

Bad ass. That kid is a monster.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by DeToxRox

Bad ass. That kid is a monster.

Hell Yeah! Less than a year since the treatment!!!

I fiercely hope that he can rebuild his draft stock and prove to the NFL that he's worth a draft pick and just gets the chance to succeed.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Best Kiffy song parody I've seen I think, something in it for both Vol fans & Vol haters alike. Runaway Lane by Chris Vernon.

[Warhammer]

Verno has some good things every now and again...

[MrBug708]

Lane Kiff's deal was 20 million for 5 years

[Eaglesfan27]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

Lane Kiff's deal was 20 million for 5 years

Link on that? I've heard everything from 2 million per year to 4 million, but I've never seen any concrete verified info.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Eaglesfan27

Link on that? I've heard everything from 2 million per year to 4 million, but I've never seen any concrete verified info.

Apparently the LA Daily News is reporting it (Wolf? Not sure...). I haven't found it yet.

[Eaglesfan27]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

Apparently the LA Daily News is reporting it (Wolf? Not sure...). I haven't found it yet.

Wolf gets a lot of stuff wrong, wouldn't surprise me if he reported it.