Athletic Director Announcement

[SANJAY]

If Malzahn had come here we could have been in the national title game.

[slick1ru2]

If Malzahn had come here we could have been in the national title game.

 

Or at least not lose to a FCS team.

[raptorcj]

A big difference also being Malzahn didn't do what his predecessor did, force the pro style, run based offense on the team, which didn't cater to their skills.

 

This article, aimed at Michigan and based on the Auburn turn around has some great points that CWT should consider.

 

http://www.michigandaily.com/sports/sportswednesday-column-what-michigan-can-learn-auburn-if-praying-doesn%E2%80%99t-work?page=0,0

 

 

...

Those changes are how Auburn went from winless in the Southeastern Conference to a play away from a championship the following season. And they provide a blueprint for a team like Michigan, hoping to go from 7-6 to something better. So what can Michigan learn?

 

It begins with evaluation. Why was Auburn so bad? Its defensive-oriented head coach had a defense in disarray with an offense struggling to adapt to the pro style. Its coaching failed to develop and deploy the roster’s still-formidable talent. And it lacked production at a major position — in this case, at quarterback....

 

 

chills...

[Bear]

winner by default woolard

did not like his approach and he was an eleventh hour addition to the final cut sounds like an "inside job" and they only had others interview for the show. this process stunck from the begining that's why we did not get the great candidates the i had expected

hope he does well but i doubt it. usf has done a crappy job in handleing the hiring of this key person in our growth phase i hope it does not bite us in the AR$E

just my $0.02

 

winner by default woolard

did not like his approach and he was an eleventh hour addition to the final cut sounds like an "inside job" and they only had others interview for the show. this process stunck from the begining that's why we did not get the great candidates the i had expected

hope he does well but i doubt it. usf has done a crappy job in handleing the hiring of this key person in our growth phase i hope it does not bite us in the AR$E

just my $0.02

 

 

You called it

[Bear]

interesting an ad from a non football school from a non bcs conference

good luck

 

Smazza was right

[Who'sYourData?]

 

 

 

 

Well it was until slick went to Petrino

When you think of how Woolard signed off on such a sham of an investigation report and signed off on the $2.7 million dollar settlement and re-signed Holtz and still paying him and now paying Taggart, you have to think a rational man would not act as irresponsible and reckless were it with his own money. There is no way I would have ever terminated someone's career based on the report filed, rife with bias, speculation and contradiction. Just a poor performance by a guy paid quite handsomely whose teams just don't get it done.

There was no bias in that report. You might be unhappy with the outcome, but the parties authoring that report have and still have extremely well respected reputations and no vested interest in anything other than a fair and impartial outcome. Doesn't mean the report was right -- sometimes folks do their best and get fooled or get the wrong information. But it was clear CJL did not respect the process, was not open to the investigation, and in fact took steps to directly circumvent a fair and impartial investigation. That is the true reason he had to be fired - he left senior administration with no options. Frankly that should have been the grounds for his termination anyway -- by making it about actions in the locker room which no one could be sure exactly what happened the administration opened themselves to have to defend rumor and speculation.

Either way, not sure it serves much for USF that we continue debating this. I know you have a lot of personal admiration for CJL and frankly so do I -- as I said think unlike mostly any other coach we will every hire for USF, CJL did not see it as a stepping stone to his next career move. He genuinely loved USF football. It was tragic how the relationship ended - regardless of fault.

There was bias. When parties on either side have opinions or descriptions, but one side is deemed more credible, that is a bias. When Miller tells a myriad of different stories, he is deemed to have more credibility than someone whose story conflicts with his. When players identified to testify by Miller couldn't support his story, that should have merit too. It takes a willing desire to choose sides in order that a desired outcome can be met. That is bias.

When you say Leavitt did not respect the process and took steps to circumvent a fair and impartial process, can you elaborate? Because while that is a popular thing to say, there is only wafer thin evidence disclosed to that point in the report. Again, if you are dealing with Barry Cohen type threats and all, then that itself is not credible.

Since you can't seem to let this go...

Leavitt lied. He said he knelt down in front of the player in question and was speaking to him quietly. Not a single witness said Leavitt was down on one knee. Are you really going to tell me he did not lie to investigators when he said he was down on his knees and only shook Miller's knee instead of grabbing him around the collar?

Leavitt clearly lied in at least one instance, and still you are a denier. You have a man crush, we get it. But your denials that he wasn't trying to cover up what happened are beyond what a reasonable person would conclude.

And you probably don't remember in your denial state, but I steadfastly stood behind Leavitt until the investigation was complete and all the facts were known. I wasn't going to judge until the proof was there. And it was, overwhelmingly. Not that his actions were wrong, but that he was lying and manipulating. Very easy to see for the unbiased.

The Athletic Director and the President gave him an out, and he refused to take it. They told him exactly what he needed to say to find a way out, and he refused. They could have been out in front of the situation more, but I suspect a rational person would assume that Leavitt would be smart enough to accept a small penalty rather than pretend nothing happened. But he was too stubborn. That isn't the fault of the AD or the president.

Sorry, couldnt read your whole post, but you do know the situation was a bundle of lies led by the accuser himself. Secondly, it's good to see you took some time to read the report. The report says no one confirmed Leavitt kneeling. It also fails to state where it was attempted to corroborate that fact. It was not dicumented in the report that anyone was asked.

And, for the record, failing to kneel is not a crime.

 

 

I read the report thoroughly.  The entire report is not a bundle of lies.  Eyewitness testimony is all kinds of unreliable.  That is why you talk to as many people as possible and piece things together to get the most accurate story.

 

A dozen or so people in the room were interviewed, and NOT ONE said Leavitt was kneeling.  If I'm describing a scene and someone is kneeling, I'm going to state that.  Most people will.  No one did.  Leavitt lied about that point.  There is no reason for him to lie other than he felt that at least others could view what he did as wrong.  If you are going to lie about a significant point like that, your entire statement is pretty much worthless.

 

Someone kneeling in front of someone sitting is going to have a very difficult time slapping or hitting that person in the face.  Try it sometime.

[Who'sYourData?]

If Malzahn had come here we could have been in the national title game.

 

If Malzahn had come here at any point he would have been hired away long before getting us to a national title game.  

[gobulls83]

 

interesting an ad from a non football school from a non bcs conference

good luck

 

Smazza was right

 

 

You missed the part where he called it a good hire:

 

http://thebullspen.com/index.php/topic/2627-athletic-director-announcement/page-4#entry26295

 

To be fair, smazza was far from the only one.

[DELdaBull]

Our AD should have been fired the day after he fired Holtz. The extension was too egregious

Hindsight. If Holtz took USF to a BCS game everyone would be saying its the best thing DW ever did. Teams do slump. And its nothing compared to what Auburn paid Chizik, $11.09 million to him and his assistants. Too bad after going 3-9, his last year, like Hotlz did, CWT didn't come in and get the team to the NC like Gus Malzahn did with that team. Or at least to a BCS game. Or a bowl game. Or .500.

If you want to point a finger at him about something current, not hindsight, let's see what CWT does. He has brought in a coach that might not succeed at this level due to the type of offense he runs and the quality of players he needs to recruit and by at least one account, hasn't so far.

#1. You do not give a coach with 3 years left on his contract coming off of a 5 and 7 campaign a raise and a contract extension.

#2. If the season after you give said coach that raise and contract extension you fire that coach for non performance of a 3 and 9 season you too should be fired.

Very simple logic.

[gobulls83]

If "hindsight" isn't a good enough reason to fire someone, then nobody would ever be fired from any job anywhere. You don't know something is a mistake until it has already happened. Of course people would love Woolard if the Holtz deal had worked out - but it didn't work out, so who cares how people would have felt if it had? What would it take to get Woolard (or anyone else in any position anywhere) fired if past mistakes aren't a good enough reason? Looking into the future and seeing those mistakes?

 

If it had worked, and somebody said, "we shouldn't praise Woolard, because if the deal had failed he would have been an idiot," then that person would be making a nonsense argument. So it is in this case, too.

Edited January 9, 2014 by gobulls83