For the “we don’t play anybody” crowd

[TheOriginalCane]

Now I hate those fvckers even more.

A few years prior (1985 season/1986 Sugar Bowl, I think) some of our players got involved in an altercation on Bourbon Street, I believe that Greg Mark was one of the guys that got hit in the head with a bottle, and he ended up fighting back and then getting arrested/detained and picked up a charge.

After my arrest, one of my fraternity alums referred me to the same attorney who helped Greg Mark out, and he got Baton Rouge to "nolle prosse" the case, essentially they put it on hold unless I ever came back and started trouble again (at which time I would then have 2 sets of charges). Needless to say, I never went back to Baton Rouge, though I did go to the Sugar Bowl in 1990 (awesome) and 1993 (not so awesome).

 

[Tit-e-skr]

Not me. Not allowed back. Got arrested at halftime of the 1988 game and spent the night in jail.

Odd because the cops don’t usually arrest the female in domestic disputes.

 

[CashMoneyCane]

Your post was way too long for most people, as the only thing most people care about when it comes to Shalala is "Democrat" and "Clinton friend".

That dictates 99% of the Shalala-related opinions on this board.

Fightin is a good dude, law degree, bright guy, even if he and I disagree on Shalala's impact/blame.

As I pointed out earlier, when UM gave Coker an extension in 2005, COKER WAS ONE OF THE HIGHEST PAID COACHES IN COLLEGE FOOTBALL. Clearly, salaries have gone up since then, but in 2005, we were (gladly) paying for a guy with a ring. Shannon and Golden, AS HEAD COACHES, had no comparable resumes, and as such, they were not paid as much.

I'm sorry, but if you can't understand the difference between correlation and causation, you're not remotely intelligent.

Meanwhile, he's arguing that football was successful DESPITE Foote, but unsuccessful BECAUSE OF Shalalala.... which makes zero logical sense.

If you're saying politics is the influence for his opinion, then, again... not very bright. And then there's the complete lack of understanding that the Trustees have far more say over broad, impactful issues (such as athletics) than does an administrator who was hired and paid to fundraise and did so with marked success. How are the new dorms bad for Miami football? Or University Village? You can thank Shalala for those.

I started at Miami in 2001. I've been hearing the blame against Shalala for years. I have yet, to this day, to hear one legitimate example of her deliberately harming the football program, aside from the idiots who want to blame her for losing the OB, which is wildly absurd.

Simultaneously, she actually openly showed an interest in football, which Frenk has not done at all. Yet no one seems to want to blame him for anything.

 

[JD08]

I have an intense dislike for the Clintons as I firmly believe they are completely corrupt and yet I believe Shalala was a net positive for the school as a whole. Yes, athletics suffered, but that was from her choice of AD more than intention. Hanlon's Razor in practice.

 

[305to954]

I'm sorry, but if you can't understand the difference between correlation and causation, you're not remotely intelligent.

Meanwhile, he's arguing that football was successful DESPITE Foote, but unsuccessful BECAUSE OF Shalalala.... which makes zero logical sense.

If you're saying politics is the influence for his opinion, then, again... not very bright. And then there's the complete lack of understanding that the Trustees have far more say over broad, impactful issues (such as athletics) than does an administrator who was hired and paid to fundraise and did so with marked success. How are the new dorms bad for Miami football? Or University Village? You can thank Shalala for those.

I started at Miami in 2001. I've been hearing the blame against Shalala for years. I have yet, to this day, to hear one legitimate example of her deliberately harming the football program, aside from the idiots who want to blame her for losing the OB, which is wildly absurd.

Simultaneously, she actually openly showed an interest in football, which Frenk has not done at all. Yet no one seems to want to blame him for anything.

My man...you making way tooo much sense for CIS

 

[TheOriginalCane]

Odd because the cops don’t usually arrest the female in domestic disputes.

You must be right, because stalkers like you prefer to stalk females, as a male would give you more trouble.

 

[Futbolfreak11]

Keep playing your childish semantic games.

Blake James negotiated a contract with Michigan State.

Notre Dame negotiated a contract with the ACC.

There is a difference.

Sounds like both are "contractual obligation games." When James is gone well still have to play those games he negotiated and signed because.... they are "contractual obligation games"

 

[Trescerocinco]

Same crowd:

-We need an on campus stadium!
-We need to hire only former players!
-Fire everyone after six games!
-Shalala ruined the football program!

All true expect that midget troll shalala did ruin our program and everyone knows it
It's amazing they can be so vocal with all that glue in their mouths.

 

[SayWhat]

Our schedule is a joke.

Our conference opponents, besides when we play Clemson every decade it seems, in the Coastal are like us, mediocre at best besides the rare year one is decent.

FSU is a built in cross rival.

The games we have left, we aren't doing a **** thing to bolster our SOS. I'm not talking about games years out, they're generally compelling matchups when they're made. Just need one more, maybe in an area we would like to recruit. The FIU's, FAU's, and Bethunes of the world don't help.

 

[Tit-e-skr]

You must be right, because stalkers like you prefer to stalk females, as a male would give you more trouble.

Poor baby is looking for things to come back with that you even resorted to calling yourself a female.

Maybe if you throw out one of your dissertations that would be helpful to your fragile state.

Go back to eating your noodles tax boy.

 

[TheOriginalCane]

Sounds like both are "contractual obligation games." When James is gone well still have to play those games he negotiated and signed because.... they are "contractual obligation games"

They are not both "contractual obligation games" genius.

You don't even understand the usage of the phrase.

Stick to the simple stuff, and leave this to the adults. Intelligent people know what a "contractual obligation" game is. It is referring to an obligation you have due to a contract negotiated by someone else.

Idiots like you can come up with a different and more basic term for it, if that will help your pea-brain to understand. I don't care what you do.

But the Notre Dame games have been arranged, agreed-upon, and signed off on by the ACC, while Blake was solely responsible for the Michigan State scheduling. If you are still having trouble discerning the difference, you should just do the world a favor and put a loaded weapon in your mouth.

 

[TheOriginalCane]

Poor baby is looking for things to come back with that you even resorted to calling yourself a female.

Maybe if you throw out one of your dissertations that would be helpful to your fragile state.

Go back to eating your noodles tax boy.

It's hard to even care about a comeback to witless and weak posts such as yours.

I won't even try. I'll just let everyone re-read your pathetic attempt at an insult.

Take a couple of days, I'm sure you'll eventually figure out something that you should have typed instead of that nonsense.

 

[aardvark]

I'm not getting into this again, so you can continue on defending her (love you as a poster, but this is one of a small handful of areas where we are just going to have to continue to agree to disagree), but I'm just gonna jump in here to correct this above statement.

Foote didn't like UM Athletics, though he failed to kill it. Shalala loved to take credit for and wrap herself in the brand of UM Athletics, though she did absolutely nothing to help it win championships and low key neutered the football team with a slew of agenda-driven decisions that were based on factors other than trying to compete with the big boys at the big boy game of trying to win national championships. In the end, she **** near succeeded in killing UM football, and then tried to take credit for saving it by standing up to the big, bad NCAA when they came down on us too hard for a real problem that Shalala had a direct hand and the ultimate responsibility for creating.

Just so both sides of the issue are being presented...

Foote actively hated Miami football. I think Donna was pretty ambivalent on the football team.

 

[g8rh8rMD]

Foote actively hated Miami football. I think Donna was pretty ambivalent on the football team.

That’s about the nicest thing that can accurately be said about her, from a football fan’s perspective.

The truth is, she loved showing up to pose with a trophy, but it was clear from the get-go, she was absolutely bent on veering away from the “bad boy” image of Miami football. The best case that can be made is that she was “ok” with the football team winning, as long as it didn’t feel anything like the teams of the 80’s and 90’s. Which is why I said she “neutered” the program. Among other reasons.

 

[g8rh8rMD]

High level program, our fans would get excited to play them here, and it's a matchup I'd travel to see.

Yeah, sounds like you’re from Atlanta area. So I get that. Just not sure it’s one of those bucket list places where our fans would love to go, and frankly, I’ve not heard great things about the Auburn fan base, not that that is the be all end all. But if it’s close to you, and we have a ton of fans in ATL, I get that.

Non-con, it would be really nice to have two good games per year, at least in the non ND/Clemson years, one home, one away, with marquee teams like Texas, A&M, USC, LSU, Michigan, etc, where our fans can plan a trip to go see MIami play in an iconic CFB environment a few years planning included. Auburn is a fine answer, just not one I’d put at the top of that list, personally.

These neutral site games do no good for us. They are never “neutral”, and always not in our favor. Besides, they are just not that unique. Rather play a H-H than go to some place with no character, it’s like a **** medical convention.

Bottom line, until we’re getting to Charlotte 8 out of 10 years, it doesn’t matter anyway, and these type conversations are unrealistic. We have to win and pack our home stands before these kinds of teams would find a H-H with us attractive.

 

[Brains]

Yeah, sounds like you’re from Atlanta area. So I get that. Just not sure it’s one of those bucket list places where our fans would love to go, and frankly, I’ve not heard great things about the Auburn fan base, not that that is the be all end all. But if it’s close to you, and we have a ton of fans in ATL, I get that.

Non-con, it would be really nice to have two good games per year, at least in the non ND/Clemson years, one home, one away, with marquee teams like Texas, A&M, USC, LSU, Michigan, etc, where our fans can plan a trip to go see MIami play in an iconic CFB environment a few years planning included. Auburn is a fine answer, just not one I’d put at the top of that list, personally.

These neutral site games do no good for us. They are never “neutral”, and always not in our favor. Besides, they are just not that unique. Rather play a H-H than go to some place with no character, it’s like a **** medical convention.

Bottom line, until we’re getting to Charlotte 8 out of 10 years, it doesn’t matter anyway, and these type conversations are unrealistic. We have to win and pack our home stands before these kinds of teams would find a H-H with us attractive.

Born, raised, and stayed in South Florida. I do have a cousin from Columbus, GA and she is an Auburn grad and professor at the school.

 

[hoops156]

That’s about the nicest thing that can accurately be said about her, from a football fan’s perspective.

The truth is, she loved showing up to pose with a trophy, but it was clear from the get-go, she was absolutely bent on veering away from the “bad boy” image of Miami football. The best case that can be made is that she was “ok” with the football team winning, as long as it didn’t feel anything like the teams of the 80’s and 90’s. Which is why I said she “neutered” the program. Among other reasons.

you dont need a bad boy image to win big. you need competent coaching and recruiting. something we lacked regardless of AD/president

 

[g8rh8rMD]

you dont need a bad boy image to win big. you need competent coaching and recruiting. something we lacked regardless of AD/president

I mean, yeah, obviously. But when the #1 objective of the school president is for the football team to be liked, rather than good, you're not going to be good. She was very clear about that. If the choice was being liked or winning games, she did not choose winning. I agree, you can do both, but that's obviously not what we did. And the funny thing is, we're still not liked anyway.

And it is certainly arguable that coaching and recruiting was always lacking regardless of the AD/President combination. I guess my memory is just failing me, but I feel like UM has had at least one really good AD and some pretty good coaches over the years, before Shalala and Flake and Kirby came along.

 

[TheOriginalCane]

I mean, yeah, obviously. But when the #1 objective of the school president is for the football team to be liked, rather than good, you're not going to be good. She was very clear about that. If the choice was being liked or winning games, she did not choose winning. I agree, you can do both, but that's obviously not what we did. And the funny thing is, we're still not liked anyway.

And it is certainly arguable that coaching and recruiting was always lacking regardless of the AD/President combination. I guess my memory is just failing me, but I feel like UM has had at least one really good AD and some pretty good coaches over the years, before Shalala and Flake and Kirby came along.

I'm not going to spend a lot of time "defending" Shalala, but I would point out that she did stand behind the admission of Willie Williams. If ever there was a time that she could have cut-and-run, that was it. But she didn't.

 

[gabednconfused]

Oh, good lord, what a useless statistic, used in a misleading way, to "act" as if Miami is doing a good job of scheduling.

A bit of analysis exposes the truth.

First, nobody said that Miami has NEVER played good teams, only that our scheduling has DECLINED and that we are playing the same crappy teams over and over and over again.

Second, Paul Dee was our AD through 2008. He had some decent games scheduled out for a few years. After our last high-water mark in 2012, when we played K-State and Notre Dame in the same year, this is what has happened since:

2013 - UF
2014 - Nebraska
2015 - nobody
2016 - nobody
2017 - Notre Dame as a contractual obligation arising from ND joining the ACC for all sports except football
2018 - LSU in a pre-season kickoff game
2019 - UF in a pre-season kickoff game

In fact, of these 14 massive "games against ranked Power Five teams", five have come against either The Gata or Notre Dame, two teams that have been traditional rivals of Miami's. Kick in another "contractual obligation" game (Louisville, when we tossed a few games to Big East left-behinds to compensate for us going to the ACC) and FIVE games against teams we have frequently faced in bowl games (2 games with OK, 2 games with Taint, and 1 game with Nebraska).

And look at the DECLINE. In the last 7 years, we have faced exactly FIVE ranked Power 5 teams, and 2 of the 5 were The Gata.

Then look at how we have scheduled beyond the Power 5. In the past 15 years, we have played:

FIU - 3 times
FAU - 3 times
FAMU - 5 times
Bethune-Cookman - 5 times
USF - 6 times (and we scheduled them before they were "good")
UCF - 2 times (and we DEFINITELY scheduled them before they were "good")
Savannah State - 2 times
Toledo - 2 times
Arkansas State - 2 times (one cancelled due to hurricane)

Here are the "good" OOC ranked Power 5 games:

Colorado - once (2005)
Texas A&M - once (2008)
Pitt - once (2010) - contractual obligation game
K-State - once (2011)
Nebraska - once (2015)
Notre Dame - once (2016) - contractual obligation game

That's it. In 15 years, besides our massive FOURTEEN ranked Power 5 opponents, we have had EXACTLY SIX "unranked" Power 5 opponents, though two were contractual obligation games (and query whether Pitt was Power 5 at the time - no).

So, sure, we have gotten lucky that most of our Power 5 opponents have been good when we played them, but we keep going back to the same cast of "usual suspects" (for both Power 5 AND crappy Florida directional schools).

AND LET'S RESTATE SOMETHING IMPORTANT. In the past SEVEN years, we have played exactly ONE game against a ranked Power 5 opponent that wasn't either (a) a traditional rival (The Gata and Notre Dame), (b) a pre-season kickoff game (The Gata and LSU), and/or (c) a contractual obligation game (Notre Dame).

SORRY, BUT THAT IS HORRIBLE SCHEDULING OVER THE PAST SEVEN YEARS.

Post of the year