Hoke Not Out

Donate To GopherHole
D

Duluthguy

Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
330
Reaction score
0
Points
16
The Daily Aztec has a column from Sunday titled "Matt-er of Fact: Guess This is Goodbye, Brady"

The columnist firmly believes Hoke is leaving for Minnesota, and says that when he asked Hoke if he'd be still coaching the team for the bowl game, Hoke said,"I hope so." Apparently he has made no denial of his interest despite all of the rumors and tweets saying he has.

Take it for what it's worth, but at least this guy bothered to talk to the coach in question.

http://www.thedailyaztec.com/matt-er-of-fact-guess-this-is-goodbye-brady-1.2416465
 


Didn't the Strib say that his buyout is reduced by $500,000 on December 15?

If that's the case, it could be a long 16 days.
 

Buyout goes from $1.5 mil. to $1 mil. after Dec. 15.
 

Thanks for the info DuluthGuy. Interesting read. As you said, the columnist firmly believes he's leaving for us.

As for the bowl game, if he were leaving for us, I'm sure they'd like to make it official after the 15th...saves us about $500,000 as I recall.

But like everything else about this search...I'll believe it when I see it. At least it's a little more reliable source than a "tweet"
 








Art Vandelay said:
Really?
Click to expand...

Ron Johnson Super Fan said:
Tell me Art, what top candidate are we going to get instead? Saban, Stoops, Meyer, Patterson, Dungy? Who's it going to be?
Click to expand...

Honestly, I wish we aimed higher.

I wouldnt be upset if Hoke was the guy, but I'd hope that we gave some sort of attention to attracting a "home run" hire like those big names you mentioned.
 

Gopher Fan said:
Honestly, I wish we aimed higher.

I wouldnt be upset if Hoke was the guy, but I'd hope that we gave some sort of attention to attracting a "home run" hire like those big names you mentioned.
Click to expand...

Any insight into what we'd need to do to get their attention? The first three have won NCs at their respective schools in the last five years, the fourth is finally moving to a AQ conference and the last has stated repeatedly he has no interest in coaching again.

Short of offering $10MM per year, what is it you think the Gophs could do to even get these guys to even pick up the phone?
 

FrothyGopher said:
Any insight into what we'd need to do to get their attention? The first three have won NCs at their respective schools in the last five years, the fourth is finally moving to a AQ conference and the last has stated repeatedly he has no interest in coaching again.

Short of offering $10MM per year, what is it you think the Gophs could do to even get these guys to even pick up the phone?
Click to expand...

I know those guys aren't realistic.

But I'd try my hand to see if Peterson, Patterson, Mendenhall, Mullen, or any current NFL HC were interested. Mullen should be the guy if it is true that he is a finalist.
 




Yeah. That columnist did sound very bitter and like he is preemptively pissed-off at Hoke when the guy hasn't gone anywhere yet and may not go anywhere at all. He makes this assertion in his column:

"Don't worry about us. The Aztecs will be just fine. The Red and Black play at an NFL stadium in the greatest city in the world. There is no reason SDSU shouldn't contend for a conference title every season – with Hoke, or without."

Yes Qualcomm Stadium is very nice, but it's not San Diego State's home turf just as the Metrodome wasn't the Gophers, and that's reflected in the attendance at SDSU games, which is just bloody awful, and for a pretty good team. Every time I've seen them playing at 'home', the crowd has been absolutely miniscule and all you see is a vast sea of empty seats in this huge, booming stadium. It's kind of sad really. But they're tenants in that NFL stadium just as the Gophers were tenants at the Dome, and that is completely obvious and in my opinion is most certainly *not* a selling point in favor of San Diego State or any college team forced to share a stadium with an NFL team.
 

When all is said and done

Gopher Fan said:
I know those guys aren't realistic.

But I'd try my hand to see if Peterson, Patterson, Mendenhall, Mullen, or any current NFL HC were interested. Mullen should be the guy if it is true that he is a finalist.
Click to expand...

I think it would behoove a lot of Gopher fans to realize right now that when the new HC is hired and announced, the fans will know 5-10% about what actually went on during the search.

At BEST, we might know one or two names who actually interviewed. But don't think for a minute that we'll know who was contacted, who wasn't, what their response was, how seriously they were considered, etc.

Fans who assume that they didn't attempt to get A, B, C, and D before actually hiring G are kidding themselves.


That being said, it's safe to say by now that there isn't a SINGLE guy that will be hired that will make everyone happy. I think we all know that much. There isn't a realistic name that has been tossed around that hasn't received criticism from a number of people.

I'm just sitting back and enjoying the comical ride. Up to this point, I basically don't know that I believe a thing that's come out. It's amusing to watch everybody get stirred up about it though.
 

Right on, Ogee. We still don't know what happened last time around when Brew was hired. What happened with Charlie Strong? How about Patterson - did we really offer $2million - did he decline and later accept after it was too late? Who else was in the picture. As Maturi said,"Only I know who was interested and who wasn't." Don't think that will change this time around.
 

If it is true, SDSU should be willing to negotiate the buyout lower. Delaying this just hurts them more. Later start on next coach and throws recruiting into complete turmoil.
 

Strong stuff - I'm surprised a columnist would stick his neck out like that if it isn't certain. Frankly. San Diego is one of my favorite cities - I think I'd stick with the Aztecs, but Minnesota is definitely a step up in the football world.
 

Update

Great Plains Gopher said:
Strong stuff - I'm surprised a columnist would stick his neck out like that if it isn't certain. Frankly. San Diego is one of my favorite cities - I think I'd stick with the Aztecs, but Minnesota is definitely a step up in the football world.
Click to expand...

Hoke Coach of the Year in his conference and being pursued by Indiana, according to Indianapolis Star.
 

Indiana has no football tradition. Three big ten wins in the last three years? We thought we had issues. FB program is behind the bb program, Purdue and Notre Dame.

What coach when contacted by the media is going to say "I have been contacted by Minnesota, interviewed with them and I want the job." Mason is probably one of the few who let everyone know he was looking for a new job especially osu.
 

Doogie said:
Buyout goes from $1.5 mil. to $1 mil. after Dec. 15.
Click to expand...

If they wait till December 15th, the gophers lost almost the entire 3 week recruiting period.
That 500,000 dollars would set back the entire program 1 full recruiting class.
 

Recruiting

Recruiting fills seats because good athletes are on the field year over year. Missing a recruiting class for $500,000 is the value of a ten thousand tickets sold for one game. Missing a recruiting class and losing games will lose 10,000 ticket buyers or more. So, in the great forecast, why risk the $500,000 in year 2 -4 over the savings it might get you this year. The long view would suggest recruiting players now is more important than waiting 2 weeks. It may take more than a few weeks to complete the class. We have to keep the recruits we have and bring another 10-12in to complete the roster. Add in the fact that you will keep marketing costs lower by winning games with these recruits and the recruiting window looms larger. We need to get back into the recruiting race. The fact we have done nothing in this regard is astonishing. Do global corporations not recruit staff while a new CEO is being hired? They have enough of a mission to seek and hire well qualified candidates. Why is football so very different in recruiting than any other business -- other than the NCAA! The fundamentals are the same. We don't need the coach to recruit the program. The coach is a talk around point and not fundamentally the biggest obstacle. How the University recruits is its business and nobody elses. That is a fundamental fact and not even the NCAA can deny the relevance of needing to recruit without a coach. This business of not recruiting now until a coach signs is driving me crazy. It makes about as much sense as shooting yourself in the foot. Recruiting is selling the idea of the U. It lays the ground work for getting the kids to sign up. Literally anybody can perform this function and having coaches do it anytime before the close of the deal is mystifying.
 

A guy I work with use to coach with Hoke and is apparently pretty close, told me that Hoke is out. He is waiting for Michigan or going to stay where he is at. Take it for what it is worth.
 

The difference is that at a global corporation the new CEO is likely to retain the majority of the workforce so it is in their best interest to keep going full steam ahead.

When a new coach comes in the odds are good that almost all of the workforce (assistant coaches) will be let go so it would be hard for them to try and convince kids that Minnesota is such a great place. The coaches are probably all busy looking for jobs of their own.
 

I just think it is possibly telling that hoke said he had not "officially" been offered the job. I'm not sure why else one would phrase an answer that way unless it was for legal purpose. Thus while the U and hoke wait for dec. 15th, each are continuing with respective smoke screens. Whether it's worth the 500k in savings I'm not able to answer, but it was probably discussed between hoke & maturi if this is at all a possible scenario.
 

gopherguy said:
I just think it is possibly telling that hoke said he had not "officially" been offered the job. I'm not sure why else one would phrase an answer that way unless it was for legal purpose. Thus while the U and hoke wait for dec. 15th, each are continuing with respective smoke screens. Whether it's worth the 500k in savings I'm not able to answer, but it was probably discussed between home & maturi if this is at all a possible scenario.
Click to expand...

Can't the U and SDSU come to an agreement on the buyout so that Hoke could be hired earlier than 12/15? It hurts the U from a PR standpoint to wait till 12/15, plus SDSU could get a jump on their own search...
 

Oneoldgopher said:
Recruiting fills seats because good athletes are on the field year over year. Missing a recruiting class for $500,000 is the value of a ten thousand tickets sold for one game. Missing a recruiting class and losing games will lose 10,000 ticket buyers or more. So, in the great forecast, why risk the $500,000 in year 2 -4 over the savings it might get you this year. The long view would suggest recruiting players now is more important than waiting 2 weeks. It may take more than a few weeks to complete the class. We have to keep the recruits we have and bring another 10-12in to complete the roster. Add in the fact that you will keep marketing costs lower by winning games with these recruits and the recruiting window looms larger. We need to get back into the recruiting race. The fact we have done nothing in this regard is astonishing. Do global corporations not recruit staff while a new CEO is being hired? They have enough of a mission to seek and hire well qualified candidates. Why is football so very different in recruiting than any other business -- other than the NCAA! The fundamentals are the same. We don't need the coach to recruit the program. The coach is a talk around point and not fundamentally the biggest obstacle. How the University recruits is its business and nobody elses. That is a fundamental fact and not even the NCAA can deny the relevance of needing to recruit without a coach. This business of not recruiting now until a coach signs is driving me crazy. It makes about as much sense as shooting yourself in the foot. Recruiting is selling the idea of the U. It lays the ground work for getting the kids to sign up. Literally anybody can perform this function and having coaches do it anytime before the close of the deal is mystifying.
Click to expand...

You have a great point, and in an ideal world, the University would be able to appoint someone to handle recruiting during a transition. My guess is that the reason the NCAA won't allow this is that they are trying to level the playing field as much as possible. Say, for example, that Miami asked Michael Irvin, Warren Sapp, etc. to handle recruiting during a transition. They are afforded an unfair advantage because of their history. Who would Indiana have to do something similar? Anthony Thompson? It's understood that certain schools intrinsically have more to sell, and that certain staffs will do better regardless of school quality because they are better coaches and are compensated accordingly. I would guess that the NCAA would try to eliminate advantages such as this that have nothing to do with the amount of money paid for competitive advantage and everything to do with the other factors (history, quality of player alumni, etc.) This is the same reason schools get reprimanded if current NFLers and prominent alumni pimp their schools on TV or other media.
 

Boosters cannot befriend a kid and then steer him to a particular university.

just check out the Movie (The blind side)
 

dpodoll68 said:
You have a great point, and in an ideal world, the University would be able to appoint someone to handle recruiting during a transition. My guess is that the reason the NCAA won't allow this is that they are trying to level the playing field as much as possible. Say, for example, that Miami asked Michael Irvin, Warren Sapp, etc. to handle recruiting during a transition. They are afforded an unfair advantage because of their history. Who would Indiana have to do something similar? Anthony Thompson? It's understood that certain schools intrinsically have more to sell, and that certain staffs will do better regardless of school quality because they are better coaches and are compensated accordingly. I would guess that the NCAA would try to eliminate advantages such as this that have nothing to do with the amount of money paid for competitive advantage and everything to do with the other factors (history, quality of player alumni, etc.) This is the same reason schools get reprimanded if current NFLers and prominent alumni pimp their schools on TV or other media.
Click to expand...

Before I head off to my next meeting...

Why not have somebody who is a regular employee, an HR Recruiter, do this. They don't have to speak football to sell the U. They can relate football culture to the prospect. We have a lot to offer in that regard. The NCAA can possibly offer a waiver in this case, since we are at a disadvantage because we do not have a seated HC.
 

Oneoldgopher said:
Before I head off to my next meeting...

Why not have somebody who is a regular employee, an HR Recruiter, do this. They don't have to speak football to sell the U. They can relate football culture to the prospect. We have a lot to offer in that regard. The NCAA can possibly offer a waiver in this case, since we are at a disadvantage because we do not have a seated HC.
Click to expand...

That's my point exactly. What's to stop Miami from saying, "Here, Michael Irvin, take this bogus $75 k/yr job in alumni relations (or whatever) and you can recruit for us." If the NCAA allowed it, it would be open season for all prominent alumni to be pushing their schools like crazy.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom