RE: FIRE SAMANTHA HUGE
[quote='TribeNiner' pid='15980337' dateline='1552696514']
[quote]
TribeNiner -- I have always respected your posts and I still do. I respect what you say about how Huge thought she came in with a mandate and is executing to it (even though I personally disagree with a bunch of the moves she has made). However, just like all of us, I think that some of your statements describing Shaver's success (or lack of it) are over the top. Such as:
1. "has a losing overall record". True, but as I have posted elsewhere I don't think Shaver's early years should be counted against him considering what he inherited. W&M (granted, a different AD) did not have a problem with those years or else they would have fired him then.
2. "a losing record over the last 8-9 of his years here". True, but disingenuous. If you look at just the last 6 years (which seems more apropos than 8 or 9) then Shaver's record is 110-79 (58.2%) and 64-42 (60.4%) in CAA play. That includes this year's subpar 14-17 record. So, clearly an upswing on all that had gone on before.
3. "He won 20 real games in a season once in sixteen years." This is the one that motivated me to post. Shaver has four years of 20 wins but you are obviously discounting D-III wins. The reason I have a problem with that is because all CAA/mid-major coaches schedule lower division games. Even the high majors who don't do that still effectively do the same thing when they schedule the lower or middle mid-majors -- and note that they always play those games at their own venue. Duke hasn't played an OOC away game in years! So, every coach pads his record (or maybe they schedule those games because high majors refuse to schedule them). Also, one important thing to note is that ALL W&M head coaches have always scheduled such games. However, Shaver is still the only one since 1951 who has ever had more than one such 20-win season (Bruce Parkhill had one 20-9 season and Charlie Woolum had one 20-7 season (ending in a first round loss in the CAA tournament and he didn't even get an NIT invite)). So everything is relative and even if you denigrate Shaver's schedules and results, his results are still better than anyone before him since at least 1951.
4. "She's making the move that she thinks is best for the school". This might be true (or it might be true as myself and others have said that she is making the move that she thinks is best for Huge). However, even giving her the benefit of the doubt as to having the absolute best intentions for W&M, I still think that the move was grossly mis-timed. Her own announcement (seemingly backed up by President Rowe) made it clear that making the NCAA tournament was what it is all about. So, if that is true, then her smart move would have been to keep the status quo and not rock the boat and hope that nobody gets injured going into next year. Instead, she fired the coach, riled up the fanbase, possibly induced Pierce (and possibly others) to transfer, and has basically (in the opinion of many of us) ruined our chances for making the NCAAs next year --- which flies directly in the face of her own statement where she said it was a top priority. So THAT is one reason why I am upset (the other is in HOW it was handled -- so callously).
So, bottom line, I guess we all get carried away in how we present the facts and, in this case, I think that I had to call you on how you presented some of the facts.
|