Bad Hires?

[jjlovecub]

I’m just trying to be sure I have this right.

So EVERY football coach since CJL was a bad hire? You can’t say CWT wasn’t because we have thread after thread on this Board where people said he was. I remember some calling for CJL but not like those who followed him. 

Our last 2 ADs were bad hires? I know Utah agreed with us. I’m sure it is only a matter of time before we call for Kelly’s head  

Every basketball coach was a bad hire? I really liked Stan Heath but I get I was in the minority outside of his tourney run when people gave him a pass

So my question is - do we consistently make bad hires all around or are our fans out of touch with what a quality hire is? That’s a honest question that I really want the answer to. If it is the latter then how do we change and make the right hire?

[HPbull]

Coach Strong you pulling out all stops I see. Go take a nap, yes your hire was a bad hire. I hope AD Kelly cans you and if he don't then yeah he would probably need to be relieved of his duties as well. Texas gave us a two year trial period on their dime to see how you would work out, it would be financially irresponsible to pay you millions of dollars starting Jan 1for the product that you are putting out on the field. 

[JTrue]

18 minutes ago, jjlovecub said:

I’m just trying to be sure I have this right.

So EVERY football coach since CJL was a bad hire? You can’t say CWT wasn’t because we have thread after thread on this Board where people said he was. I remember some calling for CJL but not like those who followed him. 

Our last 2 ADs were bad hires? I know Utah agreed with us. I’m sure it is only a matter of time before we call for Kelly’s head  

Every basketball coach was a bad hire? I really liked Stan Heath but I get I was in the minority outside of his tourney run when people gave him a pass

So my question is - do we consistently make bad hires all around or are our fans out of touch with what a quality hire is? That’s a honest question that I really want the answer to. If it is the latter then how do we change and make the right hire?

Part of the problem is not knowing the difference between a bad hire and bad results. Holtz wasn’t a bad hire by any stretch.

[Thebullsfan]

Jim comeback... You can blame it all on Judy.

[MikeG]

I am not saying Strong was a bad hire-- he filled in at a time when the team needed a new coach.

But his shelf life is limited and we need to take the buyout and move on. He is not the answer- cut our ties before we make a financial error keeping him around for another  year of this miserable style of football.

As for the other hires-- some were bad from the get go. Some had decent results. There were some guys who simply were out of their element when they got hired-- Robert McCullom was clearly overwhelmed when he got hired and we jumped into the Big East. I was not a fan of the Skip Holtz hire either from the start-- though he did do the job that was asked of him I suppose and our team suffered under that academic house cleaning.

Some hires just sort of suck and are done for the wrong reasons. As fans-- we are entitled to our opinions and even changing those opinions. Over time-- a coach can lose a team or even hurt a program. Changes are necessary. Only a handful of coaches last longer than 4 or 5 years.

[CousinRicky]

41 minutes ago, jjlovecub said:

I’m just trying to be sure I have this right.

So EVERY football coach since CJL was a bad hire? You can’t say CWT wasn’t because we have thread after thread on this Board where people said he was. I remember some calling for CJL but not like those who followed him. 

Our last 2 ADs were bad hires? I know Utah agreed with us. I’m sure it is only a matter of time before we call for Kelly’s head  

Every basketball coach was a bad hire? I really liked Stan Heath but I get I was in the minority outside of his tourney run when people gave him a pass

So my question is - do we consistently make bad hires all around or are our fans out of touch with what a quality hire is? That’s a honest question that I really want the answer to. If it is the latter then how do we change and make the right hire?

 

22 minutes ago, JTrue said:

Part of the problem is not knowing the difference between a bad hire and bad results. Holtz wasn’t a bad hire by any stretch.

Exactly.  Woolard was supposedly horrible but had hired Heath and Taggart and got facilities built.  Even Harlan, who I am not a fan of, hired Kingston for baseball and he may have hired Steve Bradley for golf and MBB's Brian Gregory.  But he did hire Orlando which turned out poorly.  Holtz and Strong didn't work out but it doesn't mean they were bad hires.  Holtz and a good track record coming in and many people thought that Strong just wasn't a good fit at Texas.  And, if you believe some stories, it was Taggart that contacted Strong about the job being open.  

We, as fans, want to win and win now.  So we just trash everything about someone.  I guess on a board like this that kind of stuff happens. 

[George_Bullnard_Shaw]

All coaches, excepting Saban and a very few exceptions wear out their welcome. So they could eventually be seen as "bad hires". They aren't but they will produce bad results at some point.

[Bull94]

19 hours ago, MikeG said:

I am not saying Strong was a bad hire-- he filled in at a time when the team needed a new coach.

But his shelf life is limited and we need to take the buyout and move on. He is not the answer- cut our ties before we make a financial error keeping him around for another  year of this miserable style of football.

As for the other hires-- some were bad from the get go. Some had decent results. There were some guys who simply were out of their element when they got hired-- Robert McCullom was clearly overwhelmed when he got hired and we jumped into the Big East. I was not a fan of the Skip Holtz hire either from the start-- though he did do the job that was asked of him I suppose and our team suffered under that academic house cleaning.

Some hires just sort of suck and are done for the wrong reasons. As fans-- we are entitled to our opinions and even changing those opinions. Over time-- a coach can lose a team or even hurt a program. Changes are necessary. Only a handful of coaches last longer than 4 or 5 years.

Strong was a bad hire. anybody who looked at what he did at texas knew he wasn't a good hire. he turned that program into a dumpster fire.

I liked McCullom. Remember he recruited more NBA players here than any  other coach. He just had some bad luck. Lost his leading scorer to cancer (RIP Brian Mosley) and transitioned into the best basketball conference in the country with terrible facilities and no support. it was good to see him on the bench for FAMU the other night.

Holtz was a ho hum hire. didn't really excite me at the time but I can see why it was made.

[IBulleve]

20 hours ago, JTrue said:

Part of the problem is not knowing the difference between a bad hire and bad results. Holtz wasn’t a bad hire by any stretch.

This. I don’t even think Strong was a bad hire at the time. I actually thought there was a chance that he was a slight upgrade over CWT. With that being said, this is clearly not the case and we need to cut bait immediately 

[Orlando Bull]

The reality is that being in the BE hurt us... we have a bully's mentality and it clouds our vision. UCF knows who they are. They have hired the young hungry coaches and have had success with them. Over here, we feel too good to take a chance on those guys sometimes when a "big name" is available. It's easy to hire Holtz or Strong because they have some pedigree and "sound" good when you say it. But, Holtz was a bad fit for our culture. I am not sure why, but, he couldn't get settled here. Seems to be doing fine at LaTech last I looked.

Strong just doesn't want to be here. I get the sense that he feels like this job is beneath him. He was the DC at UF, HC at UL (stepping stone), and then coached one of the biggest programs in the NCAA. I don't doubt that he's uninterested in coaching in a half-empty pro-stadium. That's probably what he sees when he look at this program. Ho-hum program in a decent location.

We need someone who actually cares about USF, or, is trying to make a name for himself to get to a better gig. I think CCS just assumed he'd get a better job after being here a couple of years. He should have taken anything he could have gotten last year.

USF has to stop looking for someone who will finish their career here (unless they are open to hiring CJL back). We need to be looking for someone who wants to start their career here. Who is taking the job as what could be their only chance to show that they can be a head coach and will relentlessly try to prove themselves. I mentioned Manny Diaz from UM. South Florida native, scrappy coach. Maybe he comes here, finds success and bolts after a couple of seasons... or, maybe he comes here, finds success and waits for the UM job to open up if that is where his heart is.

Either way, the Larry Scott experience should show him something. Scott did a good job with UM when he took over, but, he wasn't really considered for the job when Richt was hired. Diaz would be the same. If Richt sours in Miami, he's going to be seen as part of that staff and likely won't get a chance. He should go out after a HUGE defensive game against Pitt last week, leave UM wanting more of him and go try his hand as a HC somewhere so that they come calling when it's time to let go of Richt.