Randy Edsall Not Fired-Will Coach Against tOSU

[AreYouNUTS]

You are quite right.

I had the pleasure to meet President Barchi last night at an LA-area alumni function. He highlighted the ongoing efforts to transform Rutgers into a truly great university. Rutgers supports 67,000 students. By comparison, 600 students are engaged in D1 sports. While athletics and achievement are important, it cannot be a key focus of the University at this time. The Athletic Department needs to stand on its own and can only do so through booster support.

Unless there are compelling circumstances, I wouldn't expect any changes for the near future.

Bottom line is that a university president isn't going to say "yeah, we're firing him," to some stranger at an alumni function, unless he/she is hammered, lol, and Barchi isn't McCormick! Otherwise, everything he said to you, is basically what he's been saying all along, so at least he's consistent.

How was the event otherwise?

 

[derleider]

That's your opinion. All points are legitimate and many agreed with me. Sorry if you don't.

You know who does though - ADs, who almost never fire a guy midseason. I think they will in this case, and unless they hire Schiano the net effect will be basically the same as if they had kept him until Thanksgiving.

 

[PaKnight]

You're almost stuck having to do things like that though to keep recruiting moving along. The key is how they structure the buyout. But schools are between a rock and a hard place when it comes to these contracts.

This. I think the buyout only increased by $500k.

 

[dconifer]

Believe you're right about Franklin supposed to take over, but think Fridge was forced out a year after Franklin left .
edit : you were right about " Friedgen and Franklin departed Maryland at about the same time (end of 2010 season)."
In November of 2010 the Maryland AD announced Ralph would be returning for the 2011 season and Franklin took the Vanderbilt job after that announcement.
Then in December that same AD announced Friedgen wouldn't be returning

It was like this:

1) Ralph goes 2-10 in 2009. Most expect him gone after 2010, to be replaced by Franklin.
2) Ralph wins a lot of games in 2010. That makes things murky. Franklin asks the AD to promise that he will be the head coach in 2011. The AD says 'No, can't promise that.' Franklin then forfeits his "coach in waiting" buyout and takes the Vanderbilt job in mid-December.
3) Ralph is fired a few days later, between end of season and bowl game. Team record is 9-4.
4) A couple of weeks later, after fans have been buzzing about the impending Leach era, Leach leaves campus without an offer. Edsall is hired.

 

[AreYouNUTS]

You know who does though - ADs, who almost never fire a guy midseason. I think they will in this case, and unless they hire Schiano the net effect will be basically the same as if they had kept him until Thanksgiving.

Well hey you got me now Der! Didn't know you were in the heads of all the AD's around the nation buddy. All points were valid as to reasons you COULD fire a HC during the season (in terms of getting a "head start" on things...). Move on buddy this is stupid.

 

[ruready4somefootball]

My question is, changing coaches now, does it help or hurt recruiting? Now gives you more time to keep the recruits you want, and maybe get new ones that want to play for your new coach. Waiting till the end of the season and you have no chance to get kids that are being recruited as we speak, and probably lose a few we already have. That all depends on who you could get to leave their current position to leave mid season, or someone out of coaching at the moment.

 

[Mike from MD]

Bottom line is that a university president isn't going to say "yeah, we're firing him," to some stranger at an alumni function, unless he/she is hammered, lol, and Barchi isn't McCormick! Otherwise, everything he said to you, is basically what he's been saying all along, so at least he's consistent.

How was the event otherwise?

Wonderful! Three esteemed professors from the Dept of Marine and Coastal Sciences, Benjamin Horton, Jennifer Francis and Scott Glenn gave presentations on various metrics that are used to predict impacts to sea level, weather patterns and storm intensity. All three are global experts and are key policy makers. The Department is world class.

http://www.alumni.rutgers.edu/s/896/index.aspx?sid=896&gid=1&pgid=6897&content_id=9113&authkey=ayH74KP3FuSDe/0csnzebh1Vjzc7z4A5AkfZ5loS0kukD8AxHP1BOg==

http://marine.rutgers.edu/main/

 

[BoroKnight]

He already has a pretty strong connection to Rutgers, no?

Well, that is kind of indirect, don't you think? :)

 

[RUGT]

You are quite right.

I had the pleasure to meet President Barchi last night at an LA-area alumni function. He highlighted the ongoing efforts to transform Rutgers into a truly great university. Rutgers supports 67,000 students. By comparison, 600 students are engaged in D1 sports. While athletics and achievement are important, it cannot be a key focus of the University at this time. The Athletic Department needs to stand on its own and can only do so through booster support.

Unless there are compelling circumstances, I wouldn't expect any changes for the near future.

I am going to disagree with almost all of this. It is an incontrovertible truth that success in FB (and to a lesser extent BB) brings in major donation, ticket dollars, and increases national brand recognition. This has been seen ad nauseum at many other D1 schools, all of which span from the blue bloods to the perennial doormats.

With that fact, it's time to put things into perspective: RU's total budget for the 2015-2016 year is 3.78 BILLION dollars. The monetary difference between a a mediocre football staff and quality one would probably be less than 3 million. It would appear to me (and many others) that such niggardly behavior towards a molecular level sized drop in the budget bucket is, quite frankly, gross levels of incompetence and foresight. The only understandable logic that could underpin such an irrational decision would have to stem from a fear of negative media reports, since there is absolutely zero chance that this athletic expenditure would have any tangible effect on the academic side at Rutgers. I legitimately could not name a better investment for a University than a competent FB staff.

So I ask you, what makes you think athletics would become a 'priority' over academics?

 

[NotInRHouse]

If this administration does the unthinkable and keeps Flood here, they should just have Julie and Barchi come out to mid field before the 15k for the RU-MD cat fight and just flip the bird to the crowd. Then take a shovel to the ground in the symbolic destruction of the foundation laid by Schiano being totally destroyed and plunging the program back to the Shea years.

The mass non-renewal of season tickets would teach them a very valuable lesson. Good luck with the pyramid parking scheme and $9 pierogies with that attitude too. Visiting fans, who would be the majority of the stadium if Flood remains, will not cough up those prices.

 

[MADHAT1]

Solution :
Maryland and Rutgers trade HCs and give their fans a different target to complain about.
Neither one will bring more wins to their new school, but Maryland and Rutgers fans could have a new object to express their displeasure at.

 

[yesrutgers01]

nm

 

[ag67]

My question is, changing coaches now, does it help or hurt recruiting? Now gives you more time to keep the recruits you want, and maybe get new ones that want to play for your new coach. Waiting till the end of the season and you have no chance to get kids that are being recruited as we speak, and probably lose a few we already have. That all depends on who you could get to leave their current position to leave mid season, or someone out of coaching at the moment.

It is not going to matter. I have seen lots of coaching changes, and invariably the vast majority of recruits go elsewhere. It is not the school so much as it is the fact they have established a relationship with the current staff and want to play for them.

I guarantee you can count on one hand the number of recruits who will stay with a school after the coach is fired. The mostly likely to stay are the ones who have no other offers or interest at the same level. If you are referring to RU, we have a strong recruiting class this year. Almost all have at least a few other appealing choices. Classes at top schools may be full, but there would be plenty of choices at other highly competitive schools.

It would be a little easier to retain the recruits at a school like Michigan, where there is a great tradition. Our recruits want to be here because of our coaches, not because of our school.

Especially nowadays recruiting is about building long term relationships, so I don't think it would matter that much if a coach is let go at mid season or at the end - particularly since a new coach is likely not going to be hired during the season.

 

[ag67]

I'm speechless, seriously, you got it straight buddy! Pass some of the 'Ludes over this way 66!

Actually, you got one thing right: this board IS a "small sampling," I've said it for years. That being said, if you really think those OFF the boards (the "general public"), like Flood more than those on the boards, you're so far out of touch with reality I'm not really sure what to say. It is - without question - the complete opposite.

I have no idea what the "general public" thinks about the situation. I do know that most of the fans whom I have talked to agree with my view that Coach Flood is doing a decent job. I imagine almost all of the fans you talk to are "annoyed". Hmm. It couldn't be that we influence the opinions that those around us express, especially something essentially meaningless like sports. Nah! Politics might be a little different.

I have noticed the following. The negative people post far more often than the positive posters - except maybe me. Most of the fans who are closer to the program post far less, but are usually more positive - zappaa being the main exception that I readily notice.

I also believe that those who know their football tend to be more positive. I do not put myself in that group, though I have come to realize most posters understand far less about the art of coaching than I ever imagined.

Undoubtedly you think this view is biased, just as I think yours is. I am not sure how you accurately determine what the "general public" thinks or what the " knowledgeable" football people think. I personally don't think there is a unbiased method, unless Gallup comes along and does a poll scientifically. Mostly I have a feeling that people just believe what they want to believe - no surprise.

 

[SHUSource]

Well, that is kind of indirect, don't you think? :)

A little bit, but you see it, right?