Player fallout if Claeys is let go...

Donate To GopherHole
metrolax said:
Fire Claeys and watch it happen. Word would be out that Minnesota is not a football-friendly place. Our rivals have been using that line against us for decades and it would only get more intense. Trust me, I've been watching Gopher Football for almost 50 years. I'm not the one who would look stupid under that scenario.
Click to expand...

Look up the word hyperbole. Even with our terrible 50-year run, we've never had a ten year stretch were we've averaged 2.5 wins per year or less. 1991 to 1997 was pretty bad, but the numbers your suggesting would be record low. So you think firing Claeys would lead to historic program lows? I don't.

Secondly, aside from die-hards on this board, most of the state (and country) think we have a culture problem (perception is reality) at the U. If the U makes a switch, I'm not convinced that the bricks come crumbling down as hard as you suggest. There may be a lot more to the story that could be communicated to a potential coaching candidate that we aren't privy to. That's how the world works.

The vocal die hards on this board are so convinced the team is behind Claeys 100% and we would have a "intramural" team post-Claeys. We had a hell of a showing in the bowl game, that's for sure.

I've heard from three different people more connected than I that the team likes Claeys but doesn't really respect him. Maybe hence some of the off-field issues?

We can agree to disagree. But just admit that your using hyperbole.
 

The two regents that spent all night with the team have more to say about this than Coyle or Kaler.
 

If they let Claeys go, I want to see Duke McGhee take his best shot at Coyle and Kaler.

Seriously, this is not an ordinary situation. The Players are already upset with Coyle and Kaler. A significant number of the players, according to the AP Story, wanted to re-instate the boycott because they felt Kaler took credit for ending the boycott when in reality, he had almost nothing to do with it. The players called off the boycott after meeting with two members of the Board of Regents.

If Coyle and Kaler let Claeys go, I could easily see a situation where a number of players transfer and/or multiple recruits de-commit.

So, if Coyle has a new coach "all lined up" as some people think, that new coach had better have a bunch of recruits all lined up.
 

diehard said:
The two regents that spent all night with the team have more to say about this than Coyle or Kaler.
Click to expand...

Those two regents said they had nothing to offer the players. The boycott didn't do anything for the players position. They received the promise of fair hearings which were going to happen regardless. Doubt the regents get involved in whether Claeys remains as HC or not.
 

Hates Monikers said:
This is just plain stupid.

In normal coaching changes, the threat of transfer is usually overblown, and there usually isn't much change for reasons others have already stated.

But I do believe that this is a different situation, and a few more would leave out of anger, solidarity and protest. Not to mention rebuilding. Valid reasons, rather than the buffoonery FTF spouts.
Click to expand...


I think we agree. The only risk of players leaving would be the ones so adamant about supporting players who abused the woman. I'm not real heart broken if those players leave the program. I'd prefer we have a program where the act of sexual assaulting women is not defended tooth and nail.
 


BarnBoy said:
This is one of the stupidest things I have read on GopherHole.

Even Brewster who was (arguably) one of the worst P5 hires of all time won 6 and 7 games his second and third years.

An entire decade? Come on man!
Click to expand...

That was the dumbest thing I read on this relatively new year.
Gophers can go out and find their new coach. Any coach want to take over a 9-3 program?
Oh, there is.. how about that! Let's hire one!
Crap. We're 2-9 now.
 

Face The Facts said:
I think we agree. The only risk of players leaving would be the ones so adamant about supporting players who abused the woman. I'm not real heart broken if those players leave the program. I'd prefer we have a program where the act of sexual assaulting women is not defended tooth and nail.
Click to expand...

How have you not been banned yet?
 

Face The Facts said:
I think we agree. The only risk of players leaving would be the ones so adamant about supporting black players who abused the white woman. I'm not real heart broken if those players leave the program. I'd prefer we have a program where only white men are recruited, they don't have sex until after they are married and they only use the missionary position.
Click to expand...
FIFY
 




Some Day...Maybe said:
What, is this Russia? You're mind can't handle it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Nice spelling! Saying stupid nonsense sh1t over and over to get a rise out of people is obnoxious and a waste of people's time. It's not at all shocking that you support it.
 

short ornery norwegian said:
If they let Claeys go, I want to see Duke McGhee take his best shot at Coyle and Kaler.

Seriously, this is not an ordinary situation. The Players are already upset with Coyle and Kaler. A significant number of the players, according to the AP Story, wanted to re-instate the boycott because they felt Kaler took credit for ending the boycott when in reality, he had almost nothing to do with it. The players called off the boycott after meeting with two members of the Board of Regents.

If Coyle and Kaler let Claeys go, I could easily see a situation where a number of players transfer and/or multiple recruits de-commit.

So, if Coyle has a new coach "all lined up" as some people think, that new coach had better have a bunch of recruits all lined up.
Click to expand...

That's just wrong. The Regents power is basically to hire the President, and add a layer of approval to what direction the Administration wants to take the University. Two took the time to listen, but were not able to intervene. The other seven appear to have been disinterested at best.
 

Greenbayguy said:
That's just wrong. The Regents power is basically to hire the President, and add a layer of approval to what direction the Administration wants to take the University. Two took the time to listen, but were not able to intervene. The other seven appear to have been disinterested at best.
Click to expand...

Chairman Dean Johnson definitely does not seem disinterested.
 

Face The Facts said:
Usually how it goes is, coach is let go, players are dissappointed and say they will weigh their decision / might transfer. Then new coach is names, and everyone is now excited about the new coach and his philosophy.

The only players I think we'd be at risk of losing are the ones who are here just to run train on girls who are highly intoxicated.

I'm pretty sure the new coach won't endorse that sort of stuff so possibly many players could be upset by that and transfer to schools where having sex with girls who are barely conscience is considered a good idea.
Click to expand...

Can this troll please be banned so we can have a somewhat readable forum?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 



This administration has been brutal to its coaches! U think one of the most respected coaches in college football jerry kill would be giving Great reviews about this administration? U kidding me these coaches would ask him what the hell is going on there. He would tell them and it's not positive.
 

Typically when a coach is let go the AD keeps kids informed and the kids trust the AD. Not here they would probably punch him in the face for lying about Cleays. This would set the program back years and u could hire a high school coach from Aitkin
 


"Quote Originally Posted by Face The Facts View Post
I think we agree. The only risk of players leaving would be the ones so adamant about supporting black players who abused the white woman. I'm not real heart broken if those players leave the program. I'd prefer we have a program where only white men are recruited, they don't have sex until after they are married and they only use the missionary position."

MennoSota said:
FIFY
Click to expand...

LOL!
 

Either way it is effectively program rebuilding time.

Not from the Brewster level, but if they bring in a new guy I imagine there will be bumps in the road as the new folks take over and figure out what they want to do.
 


bigticket1 said:
Chairman Dean Johnson definitely does not seem disinterested.
Click to expand...

This...

The other two BoR members absolutely had a hand in ending the boycott, and it's been reported as such. Kaler just about screwed that all up with his completely self-serving presser taking credit (a complete lie). Coyle sat obediently and listened to that lie. What great leadership.

My guess? BoR is waiting to see what Kaler and Coyle do. Hate to be either of them right now...
 

PMWinSTP said:
This...

The other two BoR members absolutely had a hand in ending the boycott, and it's been reported as such. Kaler just about screwed that all up with his completely self-serving presser taking credit (a complete lie). Coyle sat obediently and listened to that lie. What great leadership.

My guess? BoR is waiting to see what Kaler and Coyle do. Hate to be either of them right now...
Click to expand...

So 3 of 9 BoR run the show? You want Coyle to publicly call his boss a liar? Smart.
 

PMWinSTP said:
This...

The other two BoR members absolutely had a hand in ending the boycott, and it's been reported as such. Kaler just about screwed that all up with his completely self-serving presser taking credit (a complete lie). Coyle sat obediently and listened to that lie. What great leadership.

My guess? BoR is waiting to see what Kaler and Coyle do. Hate to be either of them right now...
Click to expand...

The two BoR where one of them said they had nothing to offer the players? The offer of nothing helped to end the boycott? The story just keeps getting better.
 


The Board of Regents should just let the dust settle and if they find fault in how Kaler and Coyle handled the situation, then fire them. Their dinking around is comparable to a school board interfering with the daily duties of a building principal. When its over, they should review the policies around this issue and set the guidelines to be administered. But they should leave implementation of those policies to the individuals they have hired to do those tasks.

As for Coyle and Kaler being nervous, I'd love to have the buy-out packages those two will likely be leaving town with if they are let go.
 

BarnBurner said:
Baffling that you won't admit the obvious leadership void. Er, canyon.
Click to expand...

Like I've always said, if you have issues with Kaler's leadership, I understand. I'll give Coyle the benefit of the doubt until he proves he failed to lead on a situation he had control over. This one he had none. It was all on Kaler's side.
 

50PoundHead said:
The Board of Regents should just let the dust settle and if they find fault in how Kaler and Coyle handled the situation, then fire them. Their dinking around is comparable to a school board interfering with the daily duties of a building principal. When its over, they should review the policies around this issue and set the guidelines to be administered. But they should leave implementation of those policies to the individuals they have hired to do those tasks.

As for Coyle and Kaler being nervous, I'd love to have the buy-out packages those two will likely be leaving town with if they are let go.
Click to expand...

They aren't going anywhere. Stop this silliness immediately.
 

LesBolstad said:
They aren't going anywhere. Stop this silliness immediately.
Click to expand...

I'm not contending they are. I was responding to an earlier post that insinuated that Kaler and Coyle should be nervous and what the appropriate role for the Board of Regents is in this whole mess.
 

There wil not be any player boycott or mass exodus if Claeys is fired. One players have to sit out a year unless they go down a level and two most players by their sophomore year are not going anywhere to start over since a lot of the players have made Minnesota home for their college football career. Three many players will look to a new coach as a way of getting a better chance of starting since a new coach has no loyalties to the guys currently here. Remember only 22 guys start which means over 80 guys want to start and play more and would see it in their best interests to make a good impression on the new coach.

Plus this happens all the time in college football and when did you here about a boycott or mass protest of players amounting to anything? In division 1 most players have dreams of playing in the NFL and that is their main goal.
 

GopherWeatherGuy said:
Like I've always said, if you have issues with Kaler's leadership, I understand. I'll give Coyle the benefit of the doubt until he proves he failed to lead on a situation he had control over. This one he had none. It was all on Kaler's side.
Click to expand...

Influence is a huge part of leadership. He does have control over athletics no?

It is more than obvious Coyle is a scared man and not capable of the requirements of the position.
 

scools12 said:
The two BoR where one of them said they had nothing to offer the players? The offer of nothing helped to end the boycott? The story just keeps getting better.
Click to expand...

Of course they couldn't offer something in terms of the decision, they are not administrators. Besides, Kaler tried to offer something and found he really couldn't...that's worse in my book. The BoR members offered many hours of discussion that helped convince the players to reassess the best approach going forward. Kaler almost Effed it up with his presser after.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom