Suck it up. Next year is the year Flood will be judged.

[ruhudsonfan]

Can't compare Rutgers to USC. A prospective A-list coaching candidate wouldn't.

So we're doomed to this level of ineptitude until which time Flood wins and makes the program attractive to his successor?

For the record, despite being very vocal on the GoFundMe campaign threads, I don't advocate firing him this afternoon--though I wouldn't consider it a deathblow to our ability to hire his replacement.

 

[brgossRU90]

The point about USC is that if a coach is really damaging your program, as their last two were, you get rid of him ASAP or the damage will only deepen.

 

[brgossRU90]

Basically every p5 program except maybe 2 or 3 has more success than we do. Even rock bottom bad kansas went to the orange bowl within the last decade, so it's idiotic for us to do things the "rutgers way."

 

[mildone]

Name an industry or organization, from McDonalds to NASA, that hangs on to a dead wood employee because they don't have his/replacement lined up BEFORE they make that decision.

I'll wait...

Well, first of all, you have to discuss the level of employee we're talking about. There would be no delay in firing a deadwood McDonalds employee who's busing tables. But there would be some delay, albeit a slight one, before firing the manager of a particular McDonald's franchise while arranging for the replacement.

When a board is going to fire a CEO, they do so w/another CEO in mind (or at least a shortlist of likely candidates). Not all the time, but often. When that doesn't happen, they name an interim CEO from among the ranks. But I don't know that we have a better interim head coach among our ranks right now.

The degree of "deadness" of the employee is also a factor. Not everybody agrees about how harmful it is to keep Flood till the end of the season, or till the end of next season. I have never thought of Flood as the right guy. I didn't even understand him being kept around after the dual O coordinator debacle under Schiano. But I also don't subscribe to the narrative that his being here another season will kill the program or cause a 30% decline in season ticket sales. Not if the admin doesn't have it's ducks in a row yet and rushing into it means we hire someone likely to be just as bad as Flood.

Maybe I've just been really lucky, actually I know I have, but when I've been patient about things, I've almost always been well rewarded for that patience. And when I've rushed into things, more often than not, I've regretted it.

 

[brgossRU90]

Almost nobody in college football fires a coach only after they have a replacement lined up.

 

[mildone]

Um, who exactly is looking past the hiring of the next coach? There's have been tons of threads discussing who would should get, how much we'll likely pay and what their qualifications are. There are a few people left who think we shouldn't fire Flood unless we can get a 'guaranteed' winner, whatever that means. The simple fact of the matter is RU could wait 20 years to fire Flood and not have enough money to hire anyone who would be guaranteed to win. There are like 3 of those guys, and they aren't coming here.

What we can do, and I think we will do, is go through a normal P5 hiring process and get a guy with a reasonable resume. A guy some other school might actually have hired, a guy whose resume you look at and don't think 'WTF, he isn't even an FCS level hire.' Lots of people will bitch about the new hire (maybe even me, if it's Golden), but it will be a change when change is needed.

Not firing Flood now because you're unsure of who you might hire is like staying with a girlfriend who makes you miserable because you're scared of being alone. Buck up little camper and get out there and try to make it better. There are no guarantees, certainly not at RU, but keeping a failing coach because you're scared of change is a simply awful idea.

I think you're overstating my case for patience. I'm not necessarily saying not to fire Flood at the end of the season (although I think RU is most likely not to do so, but we'll see). What I'm saying is that too many people are too focused on the firing (judging by the posts about it) and not focused enough on the hiring.

Even our friend from Arkansas can see, and has posted as such, that this may not be a great year to be trying to hire a quality P5 coach w/any chance of competing against the elite Big Ten East schools. If Julie, who has all the facts and figures in front of her and who is not likely to behave out of angst vs. for logical business reasons, thinks the landscape is such that we have a realistic chance to land a quality new coach, then if the RU admin gives their blessing, she will do it and I'm completely okay with that.

But if Julie surveys the landscape and sees that there's nothing but prayers out there for a new coach with a legitimate claim to being able to compete with the elite Big Ten teams, then I'm also okay with delaying a year (as long as she works hard during that year to lay the groudwork for jumping on a good candidate if he becomes available).

 

[ruhudsonfan]

Well, first of all, you have to discuss the level of employee we're talking about. There would be no delay in firing a deadwood McDonalds employee who's busing tables. But there would be some delay, albeit a slight one, before firing the manager of a particular McDonald's franchise while arranging for the replacement.

When a board is going to fire a CEO, they do so w/another CEO in mind (or at least a shortlist of likely candidates). Not all the time, but often. When that doesn't happen, they name an interim CEO from among the ranks. But I don't know that we have a better interim head coach among our ranks right now.

The degree of "deadness" of the employee is also a factor. Not everybody agrees about how harmful it is to keep Flood till the end of the season, or till the end of next season. I have never thought of Flood as the right guy. I didn't even understand him being kept around after the dual O coordinator debacle under Schiano. But I also don't subscribe to the narrative that his being here another season will kill the program or cause a 30% decline in season ticket sales. Not if the admin doesn't have it's ducks in a row yet and rushing into it means we hire someone likely to be just as bad as Flood.

Maybe I've just been really lucky, actually I know I have, but when I've been patient about things, I've almost always been well rewarded for that patience. And when I've rushed into things, more often than not, I've regretted it.

Why do search firms exist?

And I can assure you that if your local McDonalds franchisee walked into her restaurant to discover the manager had mismanged the place into a shit show, they would fire without having a replacement.

If football programs acted the way you're suggesting ever press conference announcing a firing would be immediately followed up by announcing a hiring. I don't think we see that outside of interim coaches or successor relationships.

For a decade this board has been in nearly unified agreement that the pieces exist here to win and/or be competitive in a P5 conference. Now, there is a growing sentiment that we are a program with a huge scarlet (pun intended) letter on our sweater and nobody will come here. Or because there are a dozen plus P5 openings we should wait a year to toss our hats in the ring in trying to land a top coach.

There are too many downside risks to keeping this guy and on field performance is way down the list. How about a 5 digit reduction in season ticket base if he is retained? How about the commitments to fund the renovation of the Hale Center dry up? How about parking passes go unpurchased?

Do you think we could see a $10MM+ reduction in the top line number if he is retained? Because I sure do.

 

[mildone]

So we're doomed to this level of ineptitude until which time Flood wins and makes the program attractive to his successor?

For the record, despite being very vocal on the GoFundMe campaign threads, I don't advocate firing him this afternoon--though I wouldn't consider it a deathblow to our ability to hire his replacement.

Actually, if we ARE going to fire him at the end of the year anyway, firing him now might actually give us a tiny bit of an advantage in obtaining a good replacement (get out ahead of the competition). Although that's kind of iffy; so I don't place much faith in that theory.

 

[mildone]

Almost nobody in college football fires a coach only after they have a replacement lined up.

Correct. And I'm not suggesting that we wait to line up an actual coach. I'm suggesting that we consider the hiring landscape carefully before we act. I don't believe that being deliberate at this point in time has as much potential for harming the football program as the potential for harm in leaping into a coaching search when the hiring deck is substantially stacked against us.

Maybe the deck isn't as bad as I think it is. If not, and if Julie has permission, then I think we'll see Flood fired soon.

 

[miketd1]

So we're doomed to this level of ineptitude until which time Flood wins and makes the program attractive to his successor?

For the record, despite being very vocal on the GoFundMe campaign threads, I don't advocate firing him this afternoon--though I wouldn't consider it a deathblow to our ability to hire his replacement.

USC can get away with firing in the middle of the season because when it comes time to hire, they will be among the first to pick.

We, on the other hand, will be replacing mediocre with either mediocre or unproven with possible upside.

 

[MoobyCow]

I think you're overstating my case for patience. I'm not necessarily saying not to fire Flood at the end of the season (although I think RU is most likely not to do so, but we'll see). What I'm saying is that too many people are too focused on the firing (judging by the posts about it) and not focused enough on the hiring.

Even our friend from Arkansas can see, and has posted as such, that this may not be a great year to be trying to hire a quality P5 coach w/any chance of competing against the elite Big Ten East schools. If Julie, who has all the facts and figures in front of her and who is not likely to behave out of angst vs. for logical business reasons, thinks the landscape is such that we have a realistic chance to land a quality new coach, then if the RU admin gives their blessing, she will do it and I'm completely okay with that.

But if Julie surveys the landscape and sees that there's nothing but prayers out there for a new coach with a legitimate claim to being able to compete with the elite Big Ten teams, then I'm also okay with delaying a year (as long as she works hard during that year to lay the groudwork for jumping on a good candidate if he becomes available).

What do you do if next year there are another bunch of firings? You can't market time hiring a coach. For all we know they will think they have their guy all lined up and he'll back out after #2 & 3 took positions elsewhere. You make a change when change is needed. In a world where Mich, ND, USC, Texas, Florida among others have wound up with the wrong coach trying to figure out whether this is the very best year to do it or not is ridiculous. We'll have qualified applicants this year, whether they are better than what would be on the market next year is completely unknowable. You don't put off a decision based on something that is completely unknowable.

 

[brgossRU90]

USC can get away with firing in the middle of the season because when it comes time to hire, they will be among the first to pick.

We, on the other hand, will be replacing mediocre with either mediocre or unproven with possible upside.

Fludd is not even close to mediocre.

 

[ruhudsonfan]

USC can get away with firing in the middle of the season because when it comes time to hire, they will be among the first to pick.

We, on the other hand, will be replacing mediocre with either mediocre or unproven with possible upside.

Nobody who fires midseason replaces midseason--unless it's from within.

So, I'm not sure I understand how it affects, well, anything.

I've also said many times I'm not advocating firing him RIGHT. F@CKING. NOW.

I just object to the idea that finding his replacement is fraught with too much uncertainty, so we should keep him another year.

 

[mildone]

There are too many downside risks to keeping this guy and on field performance is way down the list. How about a 5 digit reduction in season ticket base if he is retained? How about the commitments to fund the renovation of the Hale Center dry up? How about parking passes go unpurchased?

Do you think we could see a $10MM+ reduction in the top line number if he is retained? Because I sure do.

I don't think I've said that we should have an actual named candidate waiting in the wings to act. I'm saying that (a) I don't just want to hire another wishful thinking coach if that's all we think we can get, (b) my understanding of the hiring market is that it's not going to be employer-friendly this off-season and RU may not be attractive enough to compete for the better prospects, and (c) I don't personally see Flood staying as leading to 5 digit reduction in season ticket sales.

Ultimately though, Julie probably has the information necessary to make the determination about the costs of keeping Flood around vs. the potential costs of a coaching change with a very low likelihood of any meaningful improvement (e.g. consistently competing w/all Big Ten teams and getting to 9+ wins every season with occasional 10+ seasons).

 

[mildone]

What do you do if next year there are another bunch of firings? You can't market time hiring a coach. For all we know they will think they have their guy all lined up and he'll back out after #2 & 3 took positions elsewhere. You make a change when change is needed. In a world where Mich, ND, USC, Texas, Florida among others have wound up with the wrong coach trying to figure out whether this is the very best year to do it or not is ridiculous. We'll have qualified applicants this year, whether they are better than what would be on the market next year is completely unknowable. You don't put off a decision based on something that is completely unknowable.

I agree to a point with what you (and Hudson) are saying. Perhaps my thinking on this is too colored by the degree of success I've had being patient about things when I didn't really want to be patient. In other words, perhaps I'm projecting my luck in such things onto this situation. I'll think more about it.

 

[ruhudsonfan]

I don't think I've said that we should have an actual named candidate waiting in the wings to act. I'm saying that (a) I don't just want to hire another wishful thinking coach if that's all we think we can get, (b) my understanding of the hiring market is that it's not going to be employer-friendly this off-season and RU may not be attractive enough to compete for the better prospects, and (c) I don't personally see Flood staying as leading to 5 digit reduction in season ticket sales.

Ultimately though, Julie probably has the information necessary to make the determination about the costs of keeping Flood around vs. the potential costs of a coaching change with a very low likelihood of any meaningful improvement (e.g. consistently competing w/all Big Ten teams and getting to 9+ wins every season with occasional 10+ seasons).

I think Mooby addressed your point B concerns as well, if not better, than I could. I don't think we can act scared and try and time the market.

If we plotted the number of P5 openings every year for the last 5 (as I think @rutgersguy1 has done) we come up with a pretty consistent number of openings. This year looks to be +3 to + 5 above the norm. Is that enough for a B10 program to not act? To me it isn't.

 

[ruhudsonfan]

I agree to a point with what you (and Hudson) are saying. Perhaps my thinking on this is too colored by the degree of success I've had being patient about things when I didn't really want to be patient. In other words, perhaps I'm projecting my luck in such things onto this situation. I'll think more about it.

One day you'll have to clue us in to what situations all this patience worked out for you. You've piqued my curiosity with the multiple references. lol

 

[mildone]

Why do search firms exist?

To find people like me, of course.

 

[B0ski]

Would love to see him whacked today. Make a statement that Rutgers means business and expects high performance out of their football coach. Get a head start with a new hire. I know, the elephant in the room is $$$$. Just saying that is what I would love to see the powers that be do.

 

[MoobyCow]

I agree to a point with what you (and Hudson) are saying. Perhaps my thinking on this is too colored by the degree of success I've had being patient about things when I didn't really want to be patient. In other words, perhaps I'm projecting my luck in such things onto this situation. I'll think more about it.

Waiting until next year could certainly work out better, maybe a hot coach falls into our lap. We could certainly F up the hire (At RU? No way!) and look like idiots for canning Flood. It's just that I don't see a reason to wait for the unknown in this type of situation.

Keep in mind, I'm talking out my ass. I mean who the hell am I? Some guy who has nothing better to do than bitch about football on a message board.

 

[mildone]

One day you'll have to clue us in to what situations all this patience worked out for you. You've piqued my curiosity with the multiple references. lol

Ha! It would be far more interesting to discuss those few occasions where my patience has not (yet) paid off. For example, despite my great patience so far, Olivia Wilde has not yet managed to fall into my lap and subsequently fall in love with me (as no doubt she would).

 

[mildone]

Waiting until next year could certainly work out better, maybe a hot coach falls into our lap. We could certainly F up the hire (At RU? No way!) and look like idiots for canning Flood. It's just that I don't see a reason to wait for the unknown in this type of situation.

Keep in mind, I'm talking out my ass. I mean who the hell am I? Some guy who has nothing better to do than bitch about football on a message board.

The one, and maybe only, advantage to my way of thinking vis-a-vis patience is that no matter when we fire Flood and who we hire to replace him, the odds (and stats) make it pretty likely that I'll find myself in a position of being able to say "I told you so" in 4-5 years, even though it'll be complete bullshit at that point.

And I'm just the sort of douche-bag to do such a thing. LOL

 

[rutgersguy1]

I think Mooby addressed your point B concerns as well, if not better, than I could. I don't think we can act scared and try and time the market.

If we plotted the number of P5 openings every year for the last 5 (as I think @rutgersguy1 has done) we come up with a pretty consistent number of openings. This year looks to be +3 to + 5 above the norm. Is that enough for a B10 program to not act? To me it isn't.

Actually this year is so far below the norm. Going back to 2001 usually there are about 11-13 P5 openings with 17 being the high once and 4 being the low twice. The last couple years were on the lower end with 7 P5 openings each year. So far this year I think we had 9 but now one is filled with Minnesota hiring their DC. Still though even with that we are anywhere from 2-4 below the norm but that could change at the end of the year. I think it's possible for there to be towards the high end of P5 openings maybe around 14.

Purdue has also said Hazell is returning so that also takes away one potential opening.

I agree with the timing the market thing though. If after deliberation/analysis you feel a change should be made you make it. Could we predict last year how much in season movement was going to happen this year. Next year maybe it's less, maybe it's the same, maybe it's more. Who knows. You can't let the unforeseen and unpredictable dictate to you. Do the due diligence and act accordingly.

 

[RUJohnny99]

Nobody's also mentioning that with Purdue & Minnesota (and likely Illinois) deferring their hiring until next year, the competition for talent among schools comparable to Rutgers will be much tougher in 2016 than it is in 2015.

 

[ru1869]

The economics of the situation will dictate that flood be replaced this year. We have a 52,000 + stadium that needs to be filled or else we lose money.

 

[Knight Shift]

Will you Flood apologists ever give the "easier schedule" next year canard a rest?

Washington on the road is harder than Wash St at home
Iowa at Rutgers is easier than Wisconsin away
Minnesota on the road is at least as hard as 2015 Nebraska at home
Illinois at home is harder than Kansas at home
New Mexico(5-4 this year) might even be harder than Army (lost to Patriot League team Fordham)

2015- Washington 1-3 at home against P5; WSU 3-1 on road against P5, but they suck because they lost to Portland State
2014- Washington 2-4 at Home

 

[vandalen1]

Will you Flood apologists ever give the "easier schedule" next year canard a rest?

Washington on the road is harder than Wash St at home
Iowa at Rutgers is easier than Wisconsin away
Minnesota on the road is at least as hard as 2015 Nebraska at home
Illinois at home is harder than Kansas at home
New Mexico(5-4 this year) might even be harder than Army (lost to Patriot League team Fordham)

I don't apologize for Flood. I don't like him as a HC but I'm also not stupid enough to think this team would be able to compete in the Big 10 right away like some here. Only a jerk would think an AAC team could come in and compete with OSU, MSU or Wisconsin.

WSU is better than Washington and it's not close.
MN will have a new coach next year and they lose 13 starters from this year's team. I don't think anyone can say how good they'll be next year.
Iowa is an up and down team. Wisconsin is always strong.
New Mexico shouldn't be hard and Army shouldn't be hard. No reason to even mention those two. If Rutgers can't beat teams like that they should look to get into the C-USA.

Rutgers should be in a better position to beat some teams next year. Doubt they'll come close to the elite teams again. I'm not sure that will ever happen regardless of the coach. The best Jersey kids get offered by the top schools in the country. Rutgers is not one of the top schools.

 

[MADHAT1]

Leaving Schiano,Golden and Davis out, is there any out of work HCs that would be a good fit so RU could let go of Flood if he loses to Nebraska and hire one of them to replace Kyle before season ends.
Or would it be best not to jump start the hiring process and wait other schools start making their moves at the end of this season.

 

[vandalen1]

Leaving Schiano,Golden and Davis out, is there any out of work HCs that would be a good fit so RU could let go of Flood if he loses to Nebraska and hire one of them to replace Kyle before season ends.
Or would it be best not to jump start the hiring process and wait other schools start making their moves at the end of this season.

If it were me, I'd wait until the season was over and recruits were signed, then I'd let him go. If you don't do that, you have to start recruiting all over and this is a pretty good class. The LB's and DB's are a good group.

 

[NotInRHouse]

First, only HS guidance counselors and people on this board care about USNWR rankings.

Second, the metrics by which the BOG judge the guy have exceeded expectations--by a lot.

Yes but yet RU lurches from one PR crisis to another, which it somehow is doing WORSE at than under a guy who cheated on wife and presided over "Snookigate" and the Rutgersfest fiasco.

Can not some weight be given to these issues?

Someone- Barchi, Hermann, somebody- has allowed the football program to land in a really bad place with no ramifications, from at least while under Schiano and McCormick and BM, the off the field stuff was really, really positive.

Not to mention the constant apologizing looks just so weak. I remember when McCormick took heat for the "Get Back in the Kitchen" banner and didn't even blink.

I get all the academic arguments and I am not a football-over-academics guy at all. The off the field crap with football pisses me off maybe even more than no offensive TDs in most B1G games.

To me, Barchi would get a much better grade if he canned Flood in September and said RU doesn't deal with this BS- because really if there was one thing we did for almost 250 years, it was have a clean, if not extremely successful, athletics program.

 

[rutgersfan7]

If it were me, I'd wait until the season was over and recruits were signed, then I'd let him go. If you don't do that, you have to start recruiting all over and this is a pretty good class. The LB's and DB's are a good group.

Not a good idea for a lot of different reasons. By that time everyone else will have made their hire, putting us last on the pecking order. Also really unfair to the recruits and would have serious downstream implications for recruiting moving forward. There is a reason you have never seen this done unless the term was for off the field issues. If he isn't fired within a week or so after Maryland, he will be here for next year.

 

[MoobyCow]

Leaving Schiano,Golden and Davis out, is there any out of work HCs that would be a good fit so RU could let go of Flood if he loses to Nebraska and hire one of them to replace Kyle before season ends.
Or would it be best not to jump start the hiring process and wait other schools start making their moves at the end of this season.

I don't think there is. The vast majority of candidates have jobs so you can't hire them before the season is over anyway.

 

[lighty]

Maybe I've just been really lucky, actually I know I have, but when I've been patient about things, I've almost always been well rewarded for that patience. And when I've rushed into things, more often than not, I've regretted it.

Do you believe RU would be rushing into this decision? Flood's termination has been thought of several times before. It's not like this is being based on one bad year.

How much patience do we need? Another 3-4 years of this?

 

[brgossRU90]

We spent ONE year in the AAC and now I'm reading that we were an AAC team that shouldn't expect to be able to compete in the big ten anytime soon. What's that sound I just heard? The goal posts moving again...

 

[mildone]

Do you believe RU would be rushing into this decision? Flood's termination has been thought of several times before. It's not like this is being based on one bad year.

How much patience do we need? Another 3-4 years of this?

I say give a full decade and let's see where we're at.
























So... did your head explode? :)

 

[rutgersguy1]

I say give a full decade and let's see where we're at.

So... did your head explode? :)

Yup and then we can hire Nick Saban after he fails with the Colts. He'll be in his 70s but what the hell. :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

 

[lighty]

actually I think there are Flood supporters who probably think he should be given a decade. By then Laviano will be our QB coach and he will help Flood battle Towson for recruits.

 

[RUJohnny99]

Yes but yet RU lurches from one PR crisis to another, which it somehow is doing WORSE at than under a guy who cheated on wife and presided over "Snookigate" and the Rutgersfest fiasco.

Can not some weight be given to these issues?

Seriously?

You think Snookigate & Rutgersfest were a PR crisis?

Please come back when you have an example under Barchi that was worse than a kid jumping off the GWB because his roommate taped him with another guy.

And let's go beyond McCormick. Lawrence made a statement that blacks do not possess "the genetic hereditary background" to do well on SATs. Give me a similar example of Barchi saying something so racis.

Barchi is easily the best thing to happen to Rutgers since the Bloustein/Tom Kean build up of Busch in the 80s.

 

[Blitz8RUCrazy]

lol just keep kicking that can down the road guys... some of you never learn... :flush:

 

[Scarlet Shack]

Why do search firms exist?

And I can assure you that if your local McDonalds franchisee walked into her restaurant to discover the manager had mismanged the place into a shit show, they would fire without having a replacement.

If football programs acted the way you're suggesting ever press conference announcing a firing would be immediately followed up by announcing a hiring. I don't think we see that outside of interim coaches or successor relationships.

For a decade this board has been in nearly unified agreement that the pieces exist here to win and/or be competitive in a P5 conference. Now, there is a growing sentiment that we are a program with a huge scarlet (pun intended) letter on our sweater and nobody will come here. Or because there are a dozen plus P5 openings we should wait a year to toss our hats in the ring in trying to land a top coach.

There are too many downside risks to keeping this guy and on field performance is way down the list. How about a 5 digit reduction in season ticket base if he is retained? How about the commitments to fund the renovation of the Hale Center dry up? How about parking passes go unpurchased?

Do you think we could see a $10MM+ reduction in the top line number if he is retained? Because I sure do.

I've been saying a minimum of five million next year if flood is retained

This is exactly why we will not keep flood