forums

Interesting dilemma

Advertisement
fck that if he wins that will give them a reason to try to keep him. I hope we lose so he is gone
 
I'm hoping some dopey school goes after him. He doesn't have to worry about his buyout in that case. I'm sure UM would gladly waive it.
 
They shouldn't wait for anything. A listless performance against Pitt in front of 15k against should be enough to let him go before the bowl game. But UM gon' UM.
 
Advertisement
I have never rooted against us but this week I will be indifferent. Actually Saturday night I was once they started running the score on us I didn't feel a thing sad to say. We are bowl eligible so the SR get a bowl game regardless of this game. Besides if Pitt beats us and we then lose a bowl game we finish 6-7.
 
LMAO at anyone that thinks a school is going to 'go after' Golden after these past two games. 6-7 here we come.
 
I think They're going to cling on the bowl game this year and if they win it'll be their mantra that is a first bowl wi in 10 years so I don't see anything happening until after
 
Dingaan1828 said:
I'm hoping some dopey school goes after him. He doesn't have to worry about his buyout in that case. I'm sure UM would gladly waive it.
Click to expand...

We were the first dopey school. Lightning would have to strike twice.
 
LULZ at the thought that the Pitt game should have anything to do with Folden keeping his job here. That decision should be made already.

Are these idiots going to keep doing the "wait a second...we just won...I think we're improving" ****** shuffle every time we win a game? How'd that work out with our last "there's no arguing that we're getting better because we definitely are" 3 game explosion against the mighty triumvirate of Cincinnati, VT and UNC?

Every team will play a few good games. Stop microanalyzing **** on a play by play or game by game basis. The overall body of work including the sharp decline in recruiting this year tells you all you need to know.
 
Advertisement
One would think it wouldn't matter either way in relation to the buyout. It should be structured in a way that it's severely diminished if he takes another job. It obviously prevents a coach from deliberately becoming a corch to get fired to get the buyout and head elsewhere. That's one of the reasons I still hate Randy. He seemingly was more content to not take another job and continue to collect the buyout monies. That strategy is serving him well now.
 
When players have to be rallied to "win one for coach", they've lost already. I just don't see them winning.

Regardless, same record as Shannon in his fourth year and Randy's *** was fired. Can not tolerate the double standard.
 
Back
Top