Wednesday, December 1, 2010

Hypocracy at The U, Indiana coach fired?

College Football coaches get fired all the time. At this point in my life, I have watched and followed college football long enough to know the ins and outs of the sports and what it is really all about, MONEY!!!!!

That being said, every once in a while there is a story that comes out that truly surprises me. In the last couple of weeks, Indiana and Miami both fired their head coaches. Both of these firings amaze me for different reasons. As for the money aspect of it and how I think the money affects coach hirings and firings, the BCS, etc. that will be saved for another time. For now, on to why these two firings stood out to me above any other normal season of coaches being hired/fired.

First, The coach of Indiana got fired after posting just one win in the big 10. Normally, a coach with one win in conference that gets fired is no big deal, but in this case I just dont get it. Indiana is a basketball school and it always will be. Randel-El went there and he is a NFL star and since then they have done nothing. They are in a power 6 conference and they will never, ever be able to compete with the big boys( mich, mich st, ohio st, etc). Yes, every once in a while they will have an upset win, but they will always be a basketball school and their football team will never be able to be good. They just dont recruit for that and they never will be( think Duke, wash st, temple etc).
I understand the flip side of the new big ten. They will now have enough teams to have 2 conferences and will be able to gain way more money for the conf. and they want all the schools to be able to compete more. I think that the AD and president of Indiana think that the new big ten will be able to attract a newer, bigger name coach. The real life situation is that they are Indiana and no one wants to coach there and no one wants to play for them.
Who cares if they won 1 game in conf. last year. You are Indiana, you still have a good graduation rate etc, don't fire the coach. I am not sure what they think a new coach will bring, but I don't see any way in the next 10 years the will ever be able to get more then 4 wins in conf.

NOW, for the Miami situation. This is totally different the situation mentioned above. The U used to be a powerhouse. They used to be feared and respected at the same time. They used to be favored in every game they played and every kid in the country wanted to play there. They ran into some hard times a while ago and the program was in serious trouble both with play on the field and behavior off of the field. They fell to the lowest graduation rate of players for any school in a power 6 conf.

The school president and AD held a huge press conference when they hired Randy Shannon and they said that their number one priority with this hiring was to turn the program around and to get the right kinds of kids there. They vowed that their number one priority was to get graduation rate up and winning was second. Well, 4 years later, Miami now has the third highest graduation rate in all of d-1 football. They have cut down all of the off-the-field arrests etc. The program is now cleaned up. They brought in the right coach for the job and he got done exactly what was promised. However, in that time, the talent on the field has gone dramatically downhill. The U is no longer feared, no longer respected. They are probably the 4th choice in state for kids to go to instead of being a unanimous #1. Because of that, Shannon got fired. Yes, his stats for a big time program were awful and because of that I understand the firing. What I don't understand is if you fire him, how does the AD not get fired also.

The AD brought him in and made it very clear that winning and bowl games were not top priority and that everything else was. It turns out that was all a lie, and winning and bowl games and money were the most important thing. Graduation rate, a clean program etc. were not actual priorities for them. This is not surprising at all, since it is all about money and winning, but why put on a 4-year charade about education and a clean program when all you really wanted was the complete opposite.

No comments: