No Pirate for Maryland- ESPN says it's Edsall

Donate To GopherHole
G

GRGOPHER

One of Kill's Krew
Joined
Nov 1, 2010
Messages
281
Reaction score
0
Points
16
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5981463

Randy Edsall, who built a fledgling Connecticut program into a Big East champion and BCS bowl team, has been hired by Maryland to succeed Ralph Friedgen, sources told ESPN's Joe Schad on Sunday.


Edsall, whose team lost to Oklahoma in Saturday night's Tostistos Fiesta Bowl, did not return Sunday to Connecticut on the UConn charter flight.


Instead, said ESPN.com sources, he and his family were to fly from Phoenix to Maryland to meet with Terrapin school officials
Click to expand...
 

My only question is, why go to a school that fires its coach after an 8-4 season. One would think that would be the last place a coach would want to go. It's not like Maryland is in a football hot bed.
 

jovs said:
My only question is, why go to a school that fires its coach after an 8-4 season. One would think that would be the last place a coach would want to go. It's not like Maryland is in a football hot bed.
Click to expand...


Maryland is in a football hot bed.
 


What is interesting is if it was true that he took himself out of the running for the MN job, the fact that he took another job shows that he was looking, but he did not want any part of the MN program. I think Edsall's attitude mirrored those of all the successful BCS coaches that we were looking at. Any coach that has built a winning program at a BCS school did not want to touch this program. With that said, I am extremely happy with Kill and would rather have him than Edsall. After watching UCONN get smothered by OU, it is clear that UConn is a mediocre team in a really crappy conference. I do not think that Edsall will make much of a difference at Maryland.
 


jovs said:
My only question is, why go to a school that fires its coach after an 8-4 season. One would think that would be the last place a coach would want to go. It's not like Maryland is in a football hot bed.
Click to expand...

Maryland wanted to get rid of the Fridge since at least last year (when they won I think only 2-3 games) but didn't want to buy out his contract. And as someone else said, they are in a football hotbed but haven't been able to keep recruits in the area.
 


I doubt he was their first choice either. Friedgen is a better offensive coach than Edsall, but Edsall will do okay. He won't dominate that conference or win a NC if that is what they are thinking.
If Edsall passed on this job for Maryland, I think that is good for both sides. He'll do better there, and Kill will do better here than Edsall would have.
 




GO4INLALALAND said:
What is interesting is if it was true that he took himself out of the running for the MN job, the fact that he took another job shows that he was looking, but he did not want any part of the MN program. I think Edsall's attitude mirrored those of all the successful BCS coaches that we were looking at. Any coach that has built a winning program at a BCS school did not want to touch this program. With that said, I am extremely happy with Kill and would rather have him than Edsall. After watching UCONN get smothered by OU, it is clear that UConn is a mediocre team in a really crappy conference. I do not think that Edsall will make much of a difference at Maryland.
Click to expand...


What do you mean? Leach wanted to come here.
 

This is interesting because one of the biggest Maryland boosters in the founder of Under Armour. Texas Tech has been an Under Armour school and he has a close relationship with Leach. I am really surprised they would take mediocre Randy Edsall over successful Mike Leach, especially considering the UA relationship.
 


Leach fans, don't take this as a slam against Leach, but I think he's interested in "everywhere" because in the short term it doesn't appear he is going to be hired "anywhere." Probably trying to build up his court case.
 



Have to wonder how the coaching change affects Marquise Vann's decision. He dropped the Gophers after the coaching change and pledged to UCONN.
 


This reminds me of O'Brien leaving BC for NC State. Why?
 

GO4INLALALAND said:
Agreed. I don't see Edsall as an upgrade from Friedgen. It was a lateral hire at best and possibly a downgrade. Time will tell.
Click to expand...

Agree also.

The MD AD said he fired Friedgen because he wanted Maryland to compete for national championships and didn't think Friedgen was going to get them there. OK, if you say so.

Then your logical move is to hire Leach and deal with his baggage or you take a flier and hire Gus "The next big thing" Malzahn.

Whatever.
 

What is funny is that ESPN is the reason Leach has no job due to their questionable journalism skills.
At the same time, they are the ones falsely making him a candidate for every job around the country.
 

Interesting...I have been wondering why Edsall changed his mind about the MN job...I always assumed it was something to do with the bowl game and wanting to stay at UCONN...maybe Edsall asked Maturi if he could stay at UCONN until after they played the bowl game and Maturi said he needed to come after the reg season or not at all...if that is what happened...then good for Maturi for having some ballz.
 

Rosemountian said:
What is funny is that ESPN is the reason Leach has no job due to their questionable journalism skills.
At the same time, they are the ones falsely making him a candidate for every job around the country.
Click to expand...

I know you love Leach, but there's more to Leach's issues than how ESPN decided to report the James' incident and the fact that Craig James works there. I think what ESPN reports hardly qualifies as news, but it's fairly clear that Texas Tech was just waiting for a reason to fire Leach. One could argue that the James issue provided enough spark, but my guess is something else would have come up shortly.
 

50PoundHead said:
I know you love Leach, but there's more to Leach's issues than how ESPN decided to report the James' incident and the fact that Craig James works there. I think what ESPN reports hardly qualifies as news, but it's fairly clear that Texas Tech was just waiting for a reason to fire Leach. One could argue that the James issue provided enough spark, but my guess is something else would have come up shortly.
Click to expand...

Nice guess. I think your guess is wrong.
Without the James incident they had nothing to justify "firing him with cause" and they would not have eaten the contract they just gave him if they actually had to pay it. He would still be the coach there if the James incident had been reported differently, and there would be people within Tech that are looking for ways to get rid of him. But other than the James incident he has had nothing close to anything that would give them justification to "fire him with cause" in his whole career.

Now he has terrible language, and no doubt tech wanted to rid themselves of him, but they couldn't afford to eat that contract if they had to pay it. And nothing in Leach's history other than the James incident is even close to anything that could get them out of that contract.

They actually fired him with cause due to his lack of cooperation in the aftermath of the james incident if I am not mistaken. So I suppose they could have found something else to point at to stick him with insubordination accusations, but the James incident is what gave the accusations their teeth.
 

Well, FWIW ESPN got the result right (though possibly not the timing) this time.

Local and national media reporting Edsall to be introduced as head coach of Terps tomorrow.

Edit: confirmed tonight, introduced tomorrow
 

Rosemountian said:
Nice guess. I think your guess is wrong.
Without the James incident they had nothing to justify "firing him with cause" and they would not have eaten the contract they just gave him if they actually had to pay it. He would still be the coach there if the James incident had been reported differently, and there would be people within Tech that are looking for ways to get rid of him. But other than the James incident he has had nothing close to anything that would give them justification to "fire him with cause" in his whole career.

Now he has terrible language, and no doubt tech wanted to rid themselves of him, but they couldn't afford to eat that contract if they had to pay it. And nothing in Leach's history other than the James incident is even close to anything that could get them out of that contract.

They actually fired him with cause due to his lack of cooperation in the aftermath of the james incident if I am not mistaken. So I suppose they could have found something else to point at to stick him with insubordination accusations, but the James incident is what gave the accusations their teeth.
Click to expand...

But how did the reporting of the incident have anything to do with Leach's reaction to the administration's inquiry about the incident?
 

Rosemountian said:
What is funny is that ESPN is the reason Leach has no job due to their questionable journalism skills.
At the same time, they are the ones falsely making him a candidate for every job around the country.
Click to expand...

Not so fast. Leach was fired because the Texas Tech administration wanted him gone, not what some ESPN blow hards said. The incident was just the excuse they were waiting for.
 

WAGopher said:
Not so fast. Leach was fired because the Texas Tech administration wanted him gone, not what some ESPN blow hards said. The incident was just the excuse they were waiting for.
Click to expand...

No kidding. But if that issue wasn't completely blown out of proportion, what event would have given them the ability to get out of their contract.

Leach has no history of doing anything that could cost him his contract. This was the lone event.
 

50PoundHead said:
But how did the reporting of the incident have anything to do with Leach's reaction to the administration's inquiry about the incident?
Click to expand...

If the Incident was presented with both sides of the story and not completely blown out of proportion, the University investigation would have centered around whether there actually was an incident that occurred...rather than using the allegation as a get out of contract free card. Tech played their investigation in a way that they knew they could set up leach to get out of their contract. Forcing Leach to apologize for something Leach claims never happened, and then firing him for not doing that.

If it was presented in a responsible way by ESPN, there actually would have had to have been an investigation into the incident....as it is, many people take James at his word and ignore the facts that dispute James story. Because of the way it was presented and the fact that it gave Tech the perfect opportunity to set their coach up to be insubordinate, no one will ever really completely know what happened.

And I am not trying to say Leach is a good guy, or should be a coach somewhere. Obviously there are athletic directors around the country that dont think this. They probably have a reason.

I just think it is hilarious that without the James incident, there is no way that Tech gets Leach fired without paying him. If they had to pay him, he doesnt get fired. And now they are falsely reporting him as a candidate for every job that comes available.

Leach to Pitt (ESPN Rumors) are probably a few days away.
 

50PoundHead said:
I know you love Leach, but there's more to Leach's issues than how ESPN decided to report the James' incident and the fact that Craig James works there. I think what ESPN reports hardly qualifies as news, but it's fairly clear that Texas Tech was just waiting for a reason to fire Leach. One could argue that the James issue provided enough spark, but my guess is something else would have come up shortly.
Click to expand...

The old guard boosters at Tech hated him. He is not a good ace kisser and that is very important with that crowd. They were also pissed that he forced them to renegotiate his last contract. Part of Leach's court case includes emails form one booster in particular urging them to structure the contract so that they could fire him at the first opportunity.

On a side note what do you think of the way Edsall handled his departure. One player reports that he made Jordan Todman stand up and address the team, telling them he was leaving for the NFL early. Then Edsall ducks out without talking to the team first. I know there isn't a great way to handle situations like this but you would have thought he would have met with the team before flying the coop.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom