Maturi on Brewster: "I'm going to be patient with a first-time collegiate head coach"

Donate To GopherHole
BleedGopher

BleedGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
62,234
Reaction score
18,879
Points
113
Maturi on Brewster: "I'm going to be patient with a first-time collegiate head coach"

per this article in the Pioneer Press:

From the article:

"I didn't mean anything other than the thoughts of giving somebody a contract extension and a raise (after losing six games in a row) probably wouldn't be likely," Maturi said Tuesday. "That's what it amounts to. I'm trying to be honest and open, but I'm not going to make any of those decisions until the end of the year."

"In the end, when you're the head football coach at the University of Minnesota, you have to win," Maturi said. "I'm going to be patient with a first-time collegiate head coach. It might be to the chagrin of some, but at the same time I believe I know the learning curve. I do believe that he is a better head coach today than he was yesterday."

"They have to begin truly the new regime," Thompson said. "It will probably start this weekend, because they don't have Decker, and (freshman quarterback) MarQueis Gray is going to have to play more. Gray moves the ball and brings a different dynamic to the offense. When they see where (Brewster's) going with his players, if everyone buys in, then I think he will earn that extension."

"They should almost do something now," former Gophers player Gary Hohman said. "He's going into recruiting season, and people want to know who they're going to play for. It's the nature of the business. You have to have some kind of security for the kids coming in."

http://www.twincities.com/sports/ci_13655672

Go Gophers!!
 

Thanks for posting, Bleed. I would say that this should put the "fire Brew" group to rest, but then again I would be expecting too much out of rational human beings. Wait, I meant "rational."

Good to see that Maturi isn't going to be pushed one way or another and has the foresight to see this through for awhile (Cue some kind of derisive comment).
 

Is anyone else annoyed by Maturi saying, "Gray is going to have to play more"? As much as I agree with him, I don't like the AD telling a coach who should play. Reminds me a little too much of Jerry Jones and Al Davis.
 

Troy McClure said:
Is anyone else annoyed by Maturi saying, "Gray is going to have to play more"? As much as I agree with him, I don't like the AD telling a coach who should play. Reminds me a little too much of Jerry Jones and Al Davis.
Click to expand...

Except that Maturi didn't say that, so...
 

Troy McClure said:
Is anyone else annoyed by Maturi saying, "Gray is going to have to play more"? As much as I agree with him, I don't like the AD telling a coach who should play. Reminds me a little too much of Jerry Jones and Al Davis.
Click to expand...

Just to be correct, Darrell Thompson made this statement about playing Gray and not Maturi.
 


Troy McClure said:
Is anyone else annoyed by Maturi saying, "Gray is going to have to play more"? As much as I agree with him, I don't like the AD telling a coach who should play. Reminds me a little too much of Jerry Jones and Al Davis.
Click to expand...

Read the article more closely. It was Darrell Thompson who said that, NOT Maturi.
 

Agree with Maturi on the learning curve. In the pro game, you've got secretaries for secretaries and all kinds of folks running around that fall under the auspices of the general manager. In the college game, you don't have that, so Brewster has to learn how to administer the program in many ways as well as coach and recruit. That takes time.

I have seen growth in Brewster as a gameday coach. He's buttoned it down a bit. Now he needs to get and maintain a strong set of assistants to go with the improved talent he appears to be bringing into the program. Maybe he gets it done or maybe he doesn't, but it's nice to see Maturi preaching patience.

Thompson's right. With the unfortunate loss of Decker, the turnover is going to accelerate and we are going to see the new regime taking hold. I'm guardedly optimistic.
 


The local sports reporters are known for throwing softball questions out, particularly to sources they don't want to burn. A few weeks back the Trib had an article where they interviewed Mike Lynn on the 20th anniversary of the Herschel Walker trade. I would have liked to see Lynn get asked "How does it feel to have engineered a trade so dimwitted that the NFL named a rule after it so it would never happen again?"

I thought overall it was a good article, but likewise, I would have liked to see Joel get asked the question "3 years down the road, if you had it to do over again, would you have hired a firsttime coach, or gone after someone with head coaching experience who wouldn't have had a learning curve coming into the job?"

In fairness to Maturi, firing Mason on Jan 2 didn't leave him with a lot of options. He certainly didn't have the luxury of courting a marquee coach for months like he did with Tubby.
 



Just a general observation:

Have you ever heard a big conference AD saying a football coach needs ample time to learn how to do his job?

I'm just saying.

I want to be an entry-level millionaire!
 

Studwell55 said:
Just a general observation:

Have you ever heard a big conference AD saying a football coach needs ample time to learn how to do his job?

I'm just saying.

I want to be an entry-level millionaire!
Click to expand...

Well it's not like Brewster's just flopping all over the place, winning 2 or 3 games a year. He flopped his first year, and followed it up with 7 wins. If he's able to get 7 again, I think he will have proven himself to be at least an okay coach. I think Maturi is really kinda saying that first year was a bust, and probably is more forgiving of that than he would be if it were a more experienced coach out there.

He probably also realizes that it's not like this program has a recent strong history of 10 win seasons all over the place, and knows that it probably isn't fair to expect that in Year 3 for ANY coach considering the circumstances he walked into. As I said, 7 wins should earn him an extension IMO. 6 is iffy, but it depends on how it goes down. If it's like we lose heartbreakers to MSU and Iowa, but beat Illinois and SDSU convincingly, I'd be cool with an extension as well. 5, no.
 

Overall, I think Joel talked too much...he does not need to explain every detail of his evaluation of Brewster. Bottom line is that the program is no different than when Mason was the coach right now, except for the stadium. It is up to Joel as to how long he wants to keep Brewster and if he thinks he is the guy to get it done.
 

Too Long in the Wasteland said:
The local sports reporters are known for throwing softball questions out, particularly to sources they don't want to burn. A few weeks back the Trib had an article where they interviewed Mike Lynn on the 20th anniversary of the Herschel Walker trade. I would have liked to see Lynn get asked "How does it feel to have engineered a trade so dimwitted that the NFL named a rule after it so it would never happen again?"

I thought overall it was a good article, but likewise, I would have liked to see Joel get asked the question "3 years down the road, if you had it to do over again, would you have hired a firsttime coach, or gone after someone with head coaching experience who wouldn't have had a learning curve coming into the job?"

In fairness to Maturi, firing Mason on Jan 2 didn't leave him with a lot of options. He certainly didn't have the luxury of courting a marquee coach for months like he did with Tubby.
Click to expand...

The difference between asking Lynn that kind of question and asking Maturi is that Maturi is still the AD and Brewster is still here. Lynn is no longer the GM of a team that has Walker on it.
 



50PoundHead said:
Agree with Maturi on the learning curve. In the pro game, you've got secretaries for secretaries and all kinds of folks running around that fall under the auspices of the general manager. In the college game, you don't have that, so Brewster has to learn how to administer the program in many ways as well as coach and recruit. That takes time.



That's absolutely absurd!
Click to expand...
 


upchurch said:
Maturi is learning on the job, too.
Click to expand...

I know you're just trying to be snarky, but you've failed miserably.

Maturi has been in athletic administration for over 40 years, and has been an AD/associate AD at the college level for 22 years.

Nice try, though.
 

Did Woodward & Bernstein hold off on asking tough questions because Nixon and his cronies were still in office???

A good journalist needs to ask questions that make his subject uncomfortable, and not just pitch underhand. If the "do-over" question I posed had been asked by Marcus Fuller, I'm sure that Maturi would have given a pat, non-controversial answer. But its a question that many of the St. Paul paper's readers have been wondering about. And its certainly been front and center on this board.
 

Too Long in the Wasteland said:
Did Woodward & Bernstein hold off on asking tough questions because Nixon and his cronies were still in office???

A good journalist needs to ask questions that make his subject uncomfortable, and not just pitch underhand. If the "do-over" question I posed had been asked by Marcus Fuller, I'm sure that Maturi would have given a pat, non-controversial answer. But its a question that many of the St. Paul paper's readers have been wondering about. And its certainly been front and center on this board.
Click to expand...

The question as you posed it would rightly be read as "do you think Brewster was a good choice?" It's a question that can only be answered one way: Yes. To say otherwise would be akin to an NFL GM/Owner saying they don't support their head coach, in the middle of the season.
The question would have been a waste of both the journalist and Maturi's time, and could very well be seen by Maturi as an attempt to 'trip him up' with a thinly disguised effort to get him to throw Brew under the bus.
 

Given all that went down with the Mase termination and accompanying recruiting meltdown, I find it encouraging that Joel M is factoring a sensible amount of patience into his decision-making process regarding TB's tenure as HC.
 

RedPoo -

You make a good point that there's only one way for JM to answer a direct question. But maybe a more nuanced query could elicit a more enlightening response? Something to the effect of "You knew that in hiring a first-time head coach there would be a learning curve. Has that curve been steeper, or taken longer, than you anticipated?" That gives our AD options on responding that don't involve sticking a knife in Brewster's back.

What was it that our VP, Biden said? Something to the effect that "a gaffe is when a politician accidentally says the truth?"
 

Too Long I understand your point and it's a valid one, but regardless of how Maturi is asked this question he's going to answer it in the same way. For better or for worse Maturi and Brewster's futures are now inextricably linked. He will sink or swim on the basis of Brewster so it would be counterproductive for him to undercut his coach at this point.
 

Khaliq said:
Too Long I understand your point and it's a valid one, but regardless of how Maturi is asked this question he's going to answer it in the same way. For better or for worse Maturi and Brewster's futures are now inextricably linked. He will sink or swim on the basis of Brewster so it would be counterproductive for him to undercut his coach at this point.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

People forget how controversial replacing the previous coach was in 2006. The local media didn't think much of it because, I suppose, they had fueled the fire. But nationally, we had the entire country rolling their eyes.

Then, to hire an executive seach firm, and ultimately a coach with no HC experience (despite that the position was for the highest-level of college football) had the sports world rolling their eyes all over again. The way the Brewster hire/ Mason replacement was done, it's a high-stakes gamble.

We don't know yet if the gamble will pay-off. But they both need a big-time win to get some breathing-room. And the only time left that it can happen this year is either against Iowa, or maybe if they beat MSU, IL and SDSU and are paired against a decent bowl-game opponent.
 

They are not going to fire him this year, that would be idiotic. Depending on how the season ends, next season becomes more critical, especially if this year falls apart. Complete disintegration of the rest of this year and next year would spell the doom for him. A little success in the next year and a half should secure a chance to continue the turnaround a little more. He has to show some success in the next year and a half though. Bowl game this year and at least 500 in the Big Ten next year should be enough.
 

It may be that the perfect candidate wasn't there. At least if you failed with Brewster because of his lack of experience he'd have aquired some decent talent for the next guy to work with. So while it looks like a high risk hiring, it's probably actually a low risk one, given the choices. Look at the difference just a few years with Brewster has meant and how diffently we're probably viewed as a big time potential. Brewsters proven you can recruit here, and we now have good facilities. If Brew can't get it done we're going to have a better chance at a great replacement than we had in 2006.
 

Schnoodler said:
It may be that the perfect candidate wasn't there. At least if you failed with Brewster because of his lack of experience he'd have aquired some decent talent for the next guy to work with. So while it looks like a high risk hiring, it's probably actually a low risk one, given the choices. Look at the difference just a few years with Brewster has meant and how diffently we're probably viewed as a big time potential. Brewsters proven you can recruit here, and we now have good facilities. If Brew can't get it done we're going to have a better chance at a great replacement than we had in 2006.
Click to expand...

Maturi has never been called out for the timing of Mason's firing IMO. There was really no excuse for it. If it was going to be done, it should have been done after the regular season ended. Did the freakin Insight Bowl really shape his decision? If so, that's scary. How often do you see a team fire it's coach AFTER the bowl game? Almost never. Whatever candidates there may have been were completely picked over by January and no matter who you brought in would be screwed for that year's recruiting class.
 

howeda7 said:
Maturi has never been called out for the timing of Mason's firing IMO. There was really no excuse for it. If it was going to be done, it should have been done after the regular season ended. Did the freakin Insight Bowl really shape his decision? If so, that's scary.
Click to expand...

He's already stated publicly if the kid doesn't make that 52 yard field goal, Mase probably would've been the coach in 2007.

And enough about Maturi's fate being tied to Brewster...Maturi will leave the U when he retires no matter what happens to Brew (barring scandal of course).
 

Maximus said:
He's already stated publicly if the kid doesn't make that 52 yard field goal, Mase probably would've been the coach in 2007.

And enough about Maturi's fate being tied to Brewster...Maturi will leave the U when he retires no matter what happens to Brew (barring scandal of course).
Click to expand...

Yeah, I've heard that, but I guess I simply don't believe that. Deciding the fate of your 10 year head coach on the basis of a loss in a 3rd-rate bowl game that you weren't even favored to win is just mind-boggling. It means that not only is Mason still the coach if the kid misses the field goal, but that if we had lost by the exact same score in a straight-up shoot out as was expected going in, he'd have remained the coach as well. It's a horrible basis for firing a coach. I like to think it's cover for something, most likely that some big money leaned on Bruinicks who leaned on Maturi to do it and he needed an excuse. Either way, it should have been done after the Iowa game.

I agree that Maturi's fate needn't be tied to the football coach. This isn't Alabama. However, if the football team tanks the last 4 and men's hockey can't right the ship, that combination would put some heat on. Tubby might save him from any real pressure. Someone refresh my memory as I don't follow the hockey that closely, is Lucia a Maturi hire or not?
 

I think though the last nail was in the coffin at that time. I suppose he should have waited a year while doing his searching. I'm not sure he had all the info before the bowl game to make the change then. unfortunately Maturi doesn't get the benefit of hind sight. Going into that bowl game remember Mason was being lauded for his comeback season, he had just rattled off some nice wins to get to the bowl game. So momentum was in Masons favor after the regular season. If Maturi was on the fence he was stuck there.

The other thing we don't know, is if there wasn't already things going on behind the scenes. Look at how the Tubby thing played out. It seemed like he fell out of the sky but it was a multi month thing.

Plus its possible the decision to fire Mason may have been made but they weren't able to find a guy in time. Why fire him before the bowl if you haven't found his replacement yet. it's a pretty small coaching circle, you don't place ads, you make phone calls. Who's to say these weren't already in the works to some degree. It wasn't such a great job for a great coach at the time.
 

It was my understanding that the Mason loss became the identity of the team, not only lose games, but lose games by giving up the biggest comeback in the history of {insert place}. I thought that the need for a big time donation for the new stadium was looking slimmer with the apathy that was setting in among Gopher Nation. It is a lot easier to sell "winning" when you have a new candidate.
 

Schnoodler said:
I think though the last nail was in the coffin at that time. I suppose he should have waited a year while doing his searching. I'm not sure he had all the info before the bowl game to make the change then. unfortunately Maturi doesn't get the benefit of hind sight. Going into that bowl game remember Mason was being lauded for his comeback season, he had just rattled off some nice wins to get to the bowl game. So momentum was in Masons favor after the regular season. If Maturi was on the fence he was stuck there.

The other thing we don't know, is if there wasn't already things going on behind the scenes. Look at how the Tubby thing played out. It seemed like he fell out of the sky but it was a multi month thing.

Plus its possible the decision to fire Mason may have been made but they weren't able to find a guy in time. Why fire him before the bowl if you haven't found his replacement yet. it's a pretty small coaching circle, you don't place ads, you make phone calls. Who's to say these weren't already in the works to some degree. It wasn't such a great job for a great coach at the time.
Click to expand...

If that were true more teams would do it that way. In almost every other case, the coach is informed of his firing and given a choice of whether to coach the bowl game. Even though it's all done through back-channels, coaches that already have jobs elsewhere aren't going to stick thier neck out very far for a job that isn't even technically open. You have to let it be known publicly that it is. Yes, we were in talks with Tubby for months, but the job was open. Do you think he'd have listened to us if Monson was still on the job? No way.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom