I don't understand the landscape of college football enough and specifically, the details of all the variables in play at RU (which are many and well beyond most schools - administrative dysfunction, budget constraints, anti-RU media, NJ culture, etc) to form a sound opinion - but am curious whether demoting Flood, instead of terminating him, would be possible and have some benefits?
By most accounts, he seem to be a good guy who made a rather poor choice. His pitch is now tarnished, but he does (currently) appear to have the tenuous support of the incoming recruiting class. Does retaining him -- even in a lesser capacity and if willing -- provide some degree of badly needed continuity? I think part of the problem Rutgers' football program has, is the constant turnover among coordinators/assistants. Under Flood, I think it is mostly budget related, as well as poor personnel choices, all of which ultimately equal poor results. Under Schiano, I think it was also partly budget related -- he ate up the lion's share of the budget -- as well as, he was simply a bear to work under. That's primarily why I'm not a big fan of Schiano returning. His ego would likely not allow him to keep his grubby paws off of the offense, which were often offensive imo.
So, many are now rightfully questioning Floods ability to be, as someone else put it on the boards, and I'm paraphrasing, the pitchman/politician/ceo of the Rutgers' Football Program. We have unique needs and need a uniquely qualified coach. I think Flood was growing into that role, but unfortunately, he may have shut the window of opportunity. So, I'm just curious, in the current climate, is it possible to hire Coach X, retain Flood, maintain continuity and some/all of our incoming 2016 class? I know it's A LOT TO ASK; maybe impossible. And, while the 2016 class is not plastered with 4-star recruits, it does seem to be a class that fills gaps, and provides good ballers.
By most accounts, he seem to be a good guy who made a rather poor choice. His pitch is now tarnished, but he does (currently) appear to have the tenuous support of the incoming recruiting class. Does retaining him -- even in a lesser capacity and if willing -- provide some degree of badly needed continuity? I think part of the problem Rutgers' football program has, is the constant turnover among coordinators/assistants. Under Flood, I think it is mostly budget related, as well as poor personnel choices, all of which ultimately equal poor results. Under Schiano, I think it was also partly budget related -- he ate up the lion's share of the budget -- as well as, he was simply a bear to work under. That's primarily why I'm not a big fan of Schiano returning. His ego would likely not allow him to keep his grubby paws off of the offense, which were often offensive imo.
So, many are now rightfully questioning Floods ability to be, as someone else put it on the boards, and I'm paraphrasing, the pitchman/politician/ceo of the Rutgers' Football Program. We have unique needs and need a uniquely qualified coach. I think Flood was growing into that role, but unfortunately, he may have shut the window of opportunity. So, I'm just curious, in the current climate, is it possible to hire Coach X, retain Flood, maintain continuity and some/all of our incoming 2016 class? I know it's A LOT TO ASK; maybe impossible. And, while the 2016 class is not plastered with 4-star recruits, it does seem to be a class that fills gaps, and provides good ballers.
