Already? Seems like we don't start this thread until November or December. But two coaches have been fired this weekend, one from a Conference USA school and one from a Big Ten School.

North Texas -

http://www.sportingnews.com/ncaa-footbal...n-mccarney

Maryland -

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...t-maryland

(10-11-2015 03:38 PM)cnyrocketfan Wrote:  Already? Seems like we don't start this thread until November or December. But two coaches have been fired this weekend, one from a Conference USA school and one from a Big Ten School.

North Texas -

http://www.sportingnews.com/ncaa-footbal...n-mccarney

Maryland -

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...t-maryland

Randy Edsall gave up a very good job at Connecticut to go to Maryland. Reminds me of a former Toledo coach.

Let's not forget Beckmann getting canned by Illinois.

Also, I think that Babers or Fleck would be good fits for Maryland but unlikely

Good point about the Illinois job. Add that to the list.

Steve Sarkisian placed on leave from Southern California. He may be on his way out.

(10-11-2015 04:20 PM)SylvaniaRocket Wrote:  

(10-11-2015 03:38 PM)cnyrocketfan Wrote:  Already? Seems like we don't start this thread until November or December. But two coaches have been fired this weekend, one from a Conference USA school and one from a Big Ten School.

North Texas -

http://www.sportingnews.com/ncaa-footbal...n-mccarney

Maryland -

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...t-maryland

Randy Edsall gave up a very good job at Connecticut to go to Maryland. Reminds me of a former Toledo coach.

Both made a boatload of cash.

North Texas lost by like 60 to an fcs school

(10-11-2015 06:32 PM)T4C8 Wrote:  North Texas lost by like 60 to an fcs school

And the coach was canned before the post-game presser...

Reports that USCs coach showed up drunk to practice today and was drunk when they played the other night

(10-11-2015 05:14 PM)SylvaniaRocket Wrote:  Steve Sarkisian placed on leave from Southern California. He may be on his way out.

Steve.... Just enjoys booze a little too much. USC has to offer him help before they can fire him.

i thought he looked goofy during the telecast. makes sense now. sounds like he's got emotional personal and substance health issues and is going through a breakdown.

(10-11-2015 05:14 PM)SylvaniaRocket Wrote:  Steve Sarkisian placed on leave from Southern California. He may be on his way out.

You called it. He's been fired.

South Carolina will be open....Spurrier to retire

(10-12-2015 08:40 PM)T4C8 Wrote:  South Carolina will be open....Spurrier to retire

Things got tough this year and he just flat-out quit. He said so today at his press conference when he clarified that he's resigning, not retiring. He did say that he won't coach in college again (and probably won't coach at all again).

It was a good run for the Gamecocks. Back to mediocrity at best!

I hate to see people implode. I wish all the fired coaches good luck.

Think about this.... winning and losing is a "zero sum" game. Which means there's a loser for every winner. However, it's actually much worse when you think that a certain percentage of teams/schools always win. Let's say about 20%. This means that at least 50% are losing consistently and the other 30% ((80 - (50+20) = 30)) are losing regularly enough to place their coaches in jeopardy. Basically all coaches are on the hot seat but based on the previously stated educated guess the "life" of a coach is somewhere less than 3 to 4 years at 70% of colleges. The problem is that G5 schools lose their coaches whether they win or lose so it's even worse for G5 schools!!!

I was not cut-out for a coaches life-style. It is far too impermanent for me. I wish all the coaches the very best. it's a tough life-especially at the assistant level.

Go Rockets!

(10-13-2015 01:33 PM)IamN2daRockets! Wrote:  I hate to see people implode. I wish all the fired coaches good luck.

Think about this.... winning and losing is a "zero sum" game. Which means there's a loser for every winner. However, it's actually much worse when you think that a certain percentage of teams/schools always win. Let's say about 20%. This means that at least 50% are losing consistently and the other 30% ((80 - (50+20) = 30)) are losing regularly enough to place their coaches in jeopardy. Basically all coaches are on the hot seat but based on the previously stated educated guess the "life" of a coach is somewhere less than 3 to 4 years at 70% of colleges. The problem is that G5 schools lose their coaches whether they win or lose so it's even worse for G5 schools!!!

I was not cut-out for a coaches life-style. It is far too impermanent for me. I wish all the coaches the very best. it's a tough life-especially at the assistant level.

Go Rockets!

Agreed. I've got NO comprehension the attraction to a job whose sole goal is to uproot you. There's like one Bill Snyder and a bunch of traveling salesmen and saleswomen, kids usually in toe.

(10-13-2015 01:33 PM)IamN2daRockets! Wrote:  I hate to see people implode. I wish all the fired coaches good luck.

Think about this.... winning and losing is a "zero sum" game. Which means there's a loser for every winner. However, it's actually much worse when you think that a certain percentage of teams/schools always win. Let's say about 20%. This means that at least 50% are losing consistently and the other 30% ((80 - (50+20) = 30)) are losing regularly enough to place their coaches in jeopardy. Basically all coaches are on the hot seat but based on the previously stated educated guess the "life" of a coach is somewhere less than 3 to 4 years at 70% of colleges. The problem is that G5 schools lose their coaches whether they win or lose so it's even worse for G5 schools!!!

I was not cut-out for a coaches life-style. It is far too impermanent for me. I wish all the coaches the very best. it's a tough life-especially at the assistant level.

Go Rockets!

But a LOT of schools/donors/pro teams/etc. are VERY impatient. They expect IMMEDIATE results, no matter what. That's the major problem. They usually fire coaches before they really have a chance to get settled in and get their recruits in and playing. By doing this, they throw away millions of dollars in buyouts, search firms, etc.

How many times do you see a coach outted after 4-5 yrs and miraculously the following year with a new coach they are good, with the previous coaches mature and seasoned kids. Some programs need 5 yrs to get on track, especially with long histories of loosing. In our own circumstances, stutz rode the wave until the bottom fell out. It's taken us 3 yrs with Beckman and 4 with campbell to get the depth we have now. At a big school, campbell would have been out last year cause he hasn't won a championship.

(10-13-2015 05:17 PM)emanoh Wrote:  How many times do you see a coach outted after 4-5 yrs and miraculously the following year with a new coach they are good, with the previous coaches mature and seasoned kids. Some programs need 5 yrs to get on track, especially with long histories of loosing. In our own circumstances, stutz rode the wave until the bottom fell out. It's taken us 3 yrs with Beckman and 4 with campbell to get the depth we have now. At a big school, campbell would have been out last year cause he hasn't won a championship.

Look at Coach K at Dook for example. He was 17-13 in yr 1, 10-17 in yr 2, 11=17 in yr 3. Nowadays, he woulda been canned after the 3rd yr.

(10-13-2015 06:01 PM)MidnightBlueGold Wrote:  

(10-13-2015 05:17 PM)emanoh Wrote:  How many times do you see a coach outted after 4-5 yrs and miraculously the following year with a new coach they are good, with the previous coaches mature and seasoned kids. Some programs need 5 yrs to get on track, especially with long histories of loosing. In our own circumstances, stutz rode the wave until the bottom fell out. It's taken us 3 yrs with Beckman and 4 with campbell to get the depth we have now. At a big school, campbell would have been out last year cause he hasn't won a championship.

Look at Coach K at Dook for example. He was 17-13 in yr 1, 10-17 in yr 2, 11=17 in yr 3. Nowadays, he woulda been canned after the 3rd yr.

Maybe, maybe not. Duke wasn't DUKE until he took it over, so expectations were still "who's this 'Krizewski' guy"...

But on the whole, you're right. See also: Belichick with Browns vs. Belichick with Pats. Same guy, two stories.