Gopher SID: "I can't confirm or deny anything in ESPN 1500's report"

[GoAUpher]

I find it hard to believe that they paid a professional firm to assist in this process and couldn't vet candidates in a timely manner. I would have to guess that this search firm focuses on college/pro football and probably had a good start on vetting many candidates before they were hired at the U. I know most recruiting places don't recommend people they know nothing about.

Dude, they made a hire in 18 days. That included interviews and contract negotiations. Let's not pretend the timeframe played no part in this. No one knows what vetting did or did not occur, but it seems to me that given more time the Maturi might have been more inclined to go with someone who might not have "wowed" him as much in the interview but who had a better pedigree (Charlie Strong comes to mind).

 

[GoAUpher]

Those on here that like this mid-season timing are wrong IMO. Any potential candidate will look at how the last coach as treated before accepting the job. It reflects on the school when something as absurd as a one game ultimatum comes up. I mean you can't make this up. A one game ultimatum? If I am a prospective coach I look at this situation and politely say "not interested".

minngg, with all respect, I sincerely doubt this is a 1 game ultimatum. This smacks of a previously made decision that leaked. Deciding to fire him if he loses when you already plan to fire him is making a choice about timing, not making it about the Purdue game. Had this stayed quiet and we beat Purdue, I think it is very likely the same plan would have been in place for the next loss (be it PSU, OSU, etc).

 

[Silvio]

My point is what when you hire a search firm you are paying them to do the vetting.

Look at how long top places usually take to hire a coach, I would guess it is close to 18 days. How long did USC take to get Kiffin, what about ND and Kelly?

I think we can both agree the Maturi can't operate at the speed and pace shown by other big time schools when making these types of discussions.

 

[Silvio]

minngg, with all respect, I sincerely doubt this is a 1 game ultimatum. This smacks of a previously made decision that leaked. Deciding to fire him if he loses when you already plan to fire him is making a choice about timing, not making it about the Purdue game. Had this stayed quiet and we beat Purdue, I think it is very likely the same plan would have been in place for the next loss (be it PSU, OSU, etc).

The problem is it didn't stay quiet. If one more loss is the plan that is also stupid. Common sense says it should be two more losses and the elimination from bowl contention. If they get two more wins against PU and PSU, but a loss to OSU is going to get him fired, then it should have been done after the WI game.

 

[Khaliq]

One game or two games is immaterial. Mid-season firings are somewhat rare but not unheard of. It leaking out ahead of time is a little embarrassing but will be forgotten about a few months from now. I think you're reaching a bit here.

 

[The 12th Man]

Let's be clear- there is only one reason why they would publicly announce the firing midseason: To appease the fan base and, hopefully, keep more people in the seats. There have been people on this board who have said they will not support the team until Brewster is fired, so maybe the school is thinking that announcing it now will show that they "care about winning" and are "dedicated to success" (or whatever other cliches people want to use) so that they won't lose more revenue. For the benefit of the program, let's hope they are right.

Announcing it midseason has no effect on the coaching search, as almost all of it is done privately anyway. My guess is that the process started before this leak took place. We also probably will not know if an outside firm was hired until after the fact. Those firms keep things VERY quiet when conducting a search so the school has plausible deniability on everything.

As for recruiting, most kids will wait until the new coach is hired to make their decision. In the mean time, the assistant coaches who are retained by the athletic department for the interim will bust their tails trying to keep commitments, as the coaches all want to keep their jobs and want to show the new coach that they are worth keeping on. This happens every time a head coach is fired. It is TOUGH to find a good coaching job, and the Big Ten is just about at the top. Believe it or not, not many people move up from a job like Minnesota.

Finally, before condemning the entire athletic department, remember that it only takes one jerkoff to spill the beans. Speculation about who that jerkoff might be is just that: speculation.

 

[GoAUpher]

My point is what when you hire a search firm you are paying them to do the vetting.

Look at how long top places usually take to hire a coach, I would guess it is close to 18 days. How long did USC take to get Kiffin, what about ND and Kelly?

I think we can both agree the Maturi can't operate at the speed and pace shown by other big time schools when making these types of discussions.

Well, since Kiffin already coached at USC and Kelly was 1 second in the Texas game away from the national title game I'm not sure what kind of vetting you think needed to be done there. Kelly is a no-brainer and SC went with the devil they knew.

You pay the search firm to give you the bio/stats on the candidate and the thoughts of co-workers, peers, friends, etc. I don't think either of us has any idea how much good vetting happens in 18 days. I'm betting the firm did a good job. But what they can't do is help you determine if the background they provided you equals success. If you notice, the strongly rumored first offer from the U went to an established HC with a pedigree, an easy decision to make. When that didn't pan out, then you're looking at more unproven choices. It looks like Maturi took the interviews and picked Brew.

The real problem here is the lack of time (not the completely unknowable quality of the vetting). If there had been more time the search firm could A) provided more background info assuming any existed B) come up with a 2nd round of candidates if Maturi really felt it was warranted and C) Maturi could have made a decision that wasn't being impacted by a ticking clock.

 

[Maximus]

Those on here that like this mid-season timing are wrong IMO. Any potential candidate will look at how the last coach as treated before accepting the job.

With a loss against Purdue, I doubt potential candidates will be outraged the way a coach who has won 7 of his last 25 games and was 6-21 in the Big Ten was treated.

While this is not a premier job or an even an average job, it's one of just 60 (?) head coaching jobs in major college football. There will be plenty of candidates.

 

[GoAUpher]

The problem is it didn't stay quiet. If one more loss is the plan that is also stupid. Common sense says it should be two more losses and the elimination from bowl contention. If they get two more wins against PU and PSU, but a loss to OSU is going to get him fired, then it should have been done after the WI game.

Personally I'd agree with you about the "wait until officially eliminated" part. But since there's a snowball's chance in hell of Brewster losing to Purdue and beating PSU, OSU, MSU, Illinois, and Iowa I'm pretty sure the U wasn't too worried.

As for the Wisky game firing, I can see your point. But the thing to consider is that it may have taken this week for the decision for a mid-season firing to really get made for whatever reason.

 

[tjgopher]

Those on here that like this mid-season timing are wrong IMO. Any potential candidate will look at how the last coach as treated before accepting the job. It reflects on the school when something as absurd as a one game ultimatum comes up. I mean you can't make this up. A one game ultimatum? If I am a prospective coach I look at this situation and politely say "not interested".

3 or 4 of the most pursued "hot hires" chose to go to schools that made mid-season changes:

--Urban Meyer took the FLA job after Zook got canned mid-season. Many thought the deal was done soon after Zook was fired, otherwise Meyer was going to Notre Dame. The back channels were firing long before and it GREATLY benefited FLA.

--Butch Davis was hotly pursued by several schools. UNC got a head start and landed their man after firing their coach mid-season.

--Steve Spurrier accepted the South Carolina job after Lou Holtz announced with a few weeks left in the season that he would retire. Holtz reportedly told the higher ups he was leaving even before that, making it possible for S. CAR. to pursue Spurrier.

 

[50PoundHead]

There are about 1,000 guys who would want the Minnesota job, about 20 of whom would be truly qualified. This is part of the business. I don't think when Brewster is fired, next Monday or a Monday in November matters in the least to them.

 

[gopherphan]

most good coaching candidates wont worry about how brewster is treated at this point, theyll be wondering why he wasnt canned earlier.

 

[GoAUpher]

3 or 4 of the most pursued "hot hires" chose to go to schools that made mid-season changes:

--Urban Meyer took the FLA job after Zook got canned mid-season. Many thought the deal was done soon after Zook was fired, otherwise Meyer was going to Notre Dame. The back channels were firing long before and it GREATLY benefited FLA.

--Butch Davis was hotly pursued by several schools. UNC got a head start and landed their man after firing their coach mid-season.

--Steve Spurrier accepted the South Carolina job after Lou Holtz announced with a few weeks left in the season that he would retire. Holtz reportedly told the higher ups he was leaving even before that, making it possible for S. CAR. to pursue Spurrier.

Don't forget Dantonio and MSU. That's the one that galls me from 2006. My personal opinion is that MN was a sweeter looking (or at east equal quality) job at the time Mason got fired. Dithering took a very reasonable candidate out of commission.

 

[Silvio]

One game or two games is immaterial. Mid-season firings are somewhat rare but not unheard of. It leaking out ahead of time is a little embarrassing but will be forgotten about a few months from now. I think you're reaching a bit here.

I would bet one or two losses is a big deal. You are saying that you basically believe a coach can do nothing to turn around a season and/or save his job. It shows that you will bail early in your support of the next guy also. One thing to remember, we don't know what the overall expectations for this season was for Maturi and the University as a whole. If you fire a coach who still has a chance to achieve those goals, that is a problem.

 

[GoAUpher]

I would bet one or two losses is a big deal. You are saying that you basically believe a coach can do nothing to turn around a season and/or save his job. It shows that you will bail early in your support of the next guy also. One thing to remember, we don't know what the overall expectations for this season was for Maturi and the University as a whole. If you fire a coach who still has a chance to achieve those goals, that is a problem.

Expectations can't change midseason? Say after losses to a 1-AA, a MAC, terrible clock management in the best chance for a B10 win, and a uncompetitive loss to your biggest rival?

 

[howeda7]

This wouldn't be based on 1 game. Its just the powers that be making a preemptive decision on when to announce it. In this case, the loss would give them the perfect opportunity to announce it. A win would make them delay the announcement (probably until after then next loss). The problem here is the leak. If it's intentional then Maturi and crew are idiots. If its accidental then they're incompetent at keeping sensitive decisions secret.

So which are you Mr. Maturi, an idiot or incompetent?

 

[GoAUpher]

So which are you Mr. Maturi, an idiot or incompetent?

Can we vote for both? I really do think he's a good AD overall, but his handling of everything contract related or tied to the 3 biggest profile programs is just so haphazard.

 

[Silvio]

3 or 4 of the most pursued "hot hires" chose to go to schools that made mid-season changes:

--Urban Meyer took the FLA job after Zook got canned mid-season. Many thought the deal was done soon after Zook was fired, otherwise Meyer was going to Notre Dame. The back channels were firing long before and it GREATLY benefited FLA.

--Butch Davis was hotly pursued by several schools. UNC got a head start and landed their man after firing their coach mid-season.

--Steve Spurrier accepted the South Carolina job after Lou Holtz announced with a few weeks left in the season that he would retire. Holtz reportedly told the higher ups he was leaving even before that, making it possible for S. CAR. to pursue Spurrier.

The timing of the Zooker's firing at Fl had little to do with it. Urban Meyer was the hottest coaching candidate in a long time, he went to the school with the most talent on its roster by far that had an open coaching position. Zooker is a great recruiter but a poor coach. You don't have to fire a coach to have back channels firing, that is why they are called back channels.

I don't know about the other two so I'll accept that you are correct. You have also cited 3 of the better coaches in the last 20 years. Two were known commodities in big time college football while the 3rd was the hottest rising coach in quite some time. I don't think that (based on salary) the U can land a coach of this caliber. The U is the type of school that these coaches string along to get more money out of their desired destination (See Patterson TCU).

 

[Silvio]

Expectations can't change midseason? Say after losses to a 1-AA, a MAC, terrible clock management in the best chance for a B10 win, and a uncompetitive loss to your biggest rival?

Yes they can, they can also change multiple times. If you get to your overall goal from a record standpoint (say 5-7) with some embarrassing and unforeseen loses (USD, NIU) they you have also won a couple games that you were not expected to win. Do they even out? Depends were the unexpected wins come from.

Hypothetical Question:

Would upsetting #1 OSU off set the loss to NIU?

 

[GoAUpher]

You don't have to fire a coach to have back channels firing, that is why they are called back channels.

True, but it certainly helps cover your school's ass. Do you recall the Tommy Tubberville fiasco @ Auburn?

 

[GoAUpher]

Yes they can, they can also change multiple times. If you get to your overall goal from a record standpoint (say 5-7) with some embarrassing and unforeseen loses (USD, NIU) they you have also won a couple games that you were not expected to win. Do they even out? Depends were the unexpected wins come from.

Hypothetical Question:

Would upsetting #1 OSU off set the loss to NIU?

What other hypothetical things are happening? Does he lose all the other games? Because then even if it cancels out the NIU game it doesn't really matter.

Look, its about weighing the whole set of evidence. Even if a miracle occurred and we got to 5-7, would that offset the under-performance of the last 3.5 seasons? Do you want to rehire a coach who managed to win the games that mattered only when his head was on the chopping block (because what happens if you ever extend him again)? Do you ignore the preponderance of evidence and hope that he catches lightening in a bottle to end the season (knowing that its more likely that he doesn't)? Or do you cut your ties now, calm the fan-base, and get a head start on all the other schools who will have vacancies?

It seems pretty clear where the U and most fans come down on this one.

 

[Silvio]

True, but it certainly helps cover your school's ass. Do you recall the Tommy Tubberville fiasco @ Auburn?

I do, it was sloppy and embarrassing but they made a good hire and everyone knew Tubberville was gone anyways. People understand it is an ugly part of the business. Does anyone know if they way Auburn acted help hole their recruiting class together?

 

[howeda7]

Can we vote for both? I really do think he's a good AD overall, but his handling of everything contract related or tied to the 3 biggest profile programs is just so haphazard.

That's kind of like saying your accountant doesn't know math, but has impeccible hand-writing and keeps neat files. If he screws up the 3 biggest programs, it doesn't matter what he does with the rest.

 

[howeda7]

I do, it was sloppy and embarrassing but they made a good hire and everyone knew Tubberville was gone anyways. People understand it is an ugly part of the business. Does anyone know if they way Auburn acted help hole their recruiting class together?

He wasn't fired then. That's the point. They went behind his back trying to get Bobby Petrino. What's Bobby Petrino's record at Auburn again? The whole thing blew up in thier faces and Tubberville's tenure dragged on for another year, severely damaged.

In Brew's case there's nothing to damage, but it's still better to announce to the world that, yes, there is actually an 800 pound elephant in the room and then we can all stop talking about it.

 

[GoAUpher]

That's kind of like saying your accountant doesn't know math, but has impeccible hand-writing and keeps neat files. If he screws up the 3 biggest programs, it doesn't matter what he does with the rest.

Well, I think its more like saying you're accountant will be really solid 95% of the time but you risk him screwing up on the biggest accounts. Doesn't mean he's not a good accountant, just means his bosses need to recognize his limitations and not put him in a position to fail.

In the U's case, it means he shouldn't be AD here anymore. But that doesn't mean he wouldn't still be a good AD in another school (probably a smaller one).

 

[GoAUpher]

I do, it was sloppy and embarrassing but they made a good hire and everyone knew Tubberville was gone anyways. People understand it is an ugly part of the business. Does anyone know if they way Auburn acted help hole their recruiting class together?

I really don't get your concerns. You worry that a coach who has been on the hotseat for a while might get fired before he puts up a furious winning streak (that still leaves his overall record looking like crap) but you think its no big deal to try and hire an existing coach from another school behind the back of your own existing coach? And the reason you seem to care about the former is because it might make the U look bad even though the latter is more likely to damage the school's reputation? Care to square those 2?

 

[howeda7]

Well, I think its more like saying you're accountant will be really solid 95% of the time but you risk him screwing up on the biggest accounts. Doesn't mean he's not a good accountant, just means his bosses need to recognize his limitations and not put him in a position to fail.

In the U's case, it means he shouldn't be AD here anymore. But that doesn't mean he wouldn't still be a good AD in another school (probably a smaller one).

To use your analogy, Football, men's basketball and hockey are 95% of how an AD's tenure at Minnesota's going to be judged. If you win in the other sports, great. But if those 3 are successful no one's going to care if the Volleyball team suddenly goes in the tank. That may not be fair, but that's the way it is.

You're probably right Maturi would be (and was) fine at a school like Miami-Ohio. He doesn't have the decisive nature or drive to be successfull in the Big 10, especially not at a place where you have to go in and fight your own Administration to get what you want.

 

[Silvio]

What other hypothetical things are happening? Does he lose all the other games? Because then even if it cancels out the NIU game it doesn't really matter.

Look, its about weighing the whole set of evidence. Even if a miracle occurred and we got to 5-7, would that offset the under-performance of the last 3.5 seasons? Do you want to rehire a coach who managed to win the games that mattered only when his head was on the chopping block (because what happens if you ever extend him again)? Do you ignore the preponderance of evidence and hope that he catches lightening in a bottle to end the season (knowing that its more likely that he doesn't)? Or do you cut your ties now, calm the fan-base, and get a head start on all the other schools who will have vacancies?

It seems pretty clear where the U and most fans come down on this one.

I don't know if I would call the past 3+ seasons under performance. I think if you look at it from an objective standpoint that the talent was very bare when Brew arrived. The W-L record for 2007 was unacceptable and ended any 'honeymoon" period Brew had with the team.

For me 2008 and 2009 were typical season of the last 13 or so years. A games in which they team was blownout, but finished with a 3-5 BigTen Record. Up to this point had not beat a rival, but WI and IA were relatively strong compared to the history of their programs. These losses were not a good sign, but he still deserved to coach a full five years.

2010, has been unacceptable so far. The defense I believed was young but talented. I thought it would take its lumps early in the season, I did not think this would lead to a loss against USD. I think that significant improvement needs to be shown for Brew to keep his job. For me, a 3-5 big ten record would be enough to give brew a fifth year which must be a break out year.

I do not believe you get any sort of advantage in the hiring process by firing your coach early.

In terms of "calming" your fan base this is done with the hiring of the new coach, not the timing of firing the old coach. Tickets for this year have already been sold, there will be minimal financial change from ticket sales. Renewal rates will be based on the new hire not the firing.

If the coach starts winning games it won't be because his head is on the chopping block, it will be because a young defense gains maturity and starts playing better. That would be a sign of improvement.

 

[GoAUpher]

To use your analogy, Football, men's basketball and hockey are 95% of how an AD's tenure at Minnesota's going to be judged. If you win in the other sports, great. But if those 3 are successful no one's going to care if the Volleyball team suddenly goes in the tank. That may not be fair, but that's the way it is.

You're probably right Maturi would be (and was) fine at a school like Miami-Ohio. He doesn't have the decisive nature or drive to be successfull in the Big 10, especially not at a place where you have to go in and fight your own Administration to get what you want.

I guess I was talking about volume of work, not importance, when it came to the %. Any way you slice it, I agree with you that he isn't cutting it as a Big 10 AD.

 

[glovedgopher]

A little birdie told me earlier in the week that Brewster and Joel had some kind of agreement that if Brew didn't win 7 games he would be gone. I didn't really put much stock in it but it might be legit.