Good one.
Actually would love to hear your thoughts on all of this.I've been as big of a Leidner supporter as anyone. That being said, what a really, really, REALLY stupid thing for him to say. You don't throw your alma mater under the bus, even when it made a mistake by firing your coach. He's going to look back at this 5, 10, 15 years from now with the benefit of maturity and realize what an absolute idiot he was for opening his mouth.
Give Leidner a break. It's emotional moment for those guys. I don't mind them being angry.
Mitch was a lender of the football to the Wisconsin defense in the second half
I agree they need stability, which is exactly why they had to either extend long term or fire. They didn't punt. That's good. You can disagree with the decision but a one year extension with a tiny buyout would've just ended in a firing next year anyways.You guys hate on Leidner too much, he's better than anyone else we had by far. Plus he ranks third is passing yards, second in completions, second in completion percentage, third rushing yards by qb, first rushing tds by qb. Not to mention he's never had any off the field or character issues. Oh, and he went 31-21 in his four seasons while making a bowl game each year. For a school that had struggled to get six wins per year I'd say he had a pretty nice career.
He's got a good point about the not wanting to be part of the program too. When you fire a coach who won nine games for the second time in a century, there's going to be some question marks. And Claeys wasn't supporting sexual assault, he was sticking with his team and showing them support. It's nice to be on good terms with your players.
Iowa has had two coaches since 1979, Wisconsin fired its last coach in 1989. I'd say they have quite a bit more success than us, I wonder if there's any correlation there? The U needs some stability in its program.
University of Minnesota....typical.
The NCAA should allow each player the ability to transfer and be eligible immediately!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
They can, but why would the NCAA change the rules based on this one case?Agreed. If any of the players do not feel that they can play for this administration then I truly hope they transfer assuming that's in their best interest academically.
I agree they need stability, which is exactly why they had to either extend long term or fire. They didn't punt. That's good. You can disagree with the decision but a one year extension with a tiny buyout would've just ended in a firing next year anyways.
I don't know that he would have been fired, if he continued to win 7+ games I would be happy to keep him around. But for all I know he would coach us to a 3-9 season next year. Still, now we're set to have a 3-9 season with a new coach and all of the recruits/players that will transfer. Make a coach show he can't win before you get rid of him. Especially when you've been one of the worst football programs in the Big 10 over most of our lifetimes.
Agreed. If any of the players do not feel that they can play for this administration then I truly hope they transfer assuming that's in their best interest academically.
Do you honestly think that would happen?I hope they all transfer...watch Marky C. try and explain how his leadership has led to us forfeiting all our games next year and losing tens of millions of dollars. **** him.
I personally thought Claeys proved he couldn't win when he couldn't get a score against Michigan his first year due to total mismanagement. Maybe someone in the admin thought the same thing.
You don't think he proved he can't win. I thought he did.
Again, you can disagree with their assessment...but you can't say the move was anti-stability. The move was to bring stability.
Do you honestly think that would happen?
You mean except for the bowl game last year, 9 wins this year including a bowl game. What planet are you on...you can hate Claeys and be happy for his firing, but when you say idiotic and stupid **** like this you make yourself look like a dbag troll.
I personally thought Claeys proved he couldn't win when he couldn't get a score against Michigan his first year due to total mismanagement. Maybe someone in the admin thought the same thing.
You don't think he proved he can't win. I thought he did.
Again, you can disagree with their assessment...but you can't say the move was anti-stability. The move was to bring stability.
So we fire our coach every four years to gain stability?
So we fire our coach every four years to gain stability?
If you think you'll fire him next year, much better move for stability to do it now.
Hopefully
Agreed. That's why until last night I didn't think they'd fire him.No coach is lined up and when is national signing day?
It will be interesting to see how many of our verbal commits flip in the next week.
I don't think the timing could be worse.