Larry Coker hire was worst event in history of UM football

larry coker was Butch Davis' dennis erickson

You can't even compare the two. Erickson was 10x better than Coker. I don't think people remember how truly bad Coker was.

He inherited the greatest collection of talent in CFB history and the most fertile recruiting ground and within 5 years we were mediocre. That's mind boggling.
 
Advertisement
Fairly certain people don't remember how truly bad Butch was either...

Combine the two, then multiply by 10,000, and you get how bad Golden is. At this point, Re-Viva Coker!
 
Shannon by far was the worst hire in History, nothing else comes close.
It was certainly the worst from a logic behind the hiring perspective. In the case of Coker, you promoted a coach from within who had the support of the players while the program was on the rise. I did not agree with it and as noted in this thread, it set off a chain of events that led us to where we are today, but I can at least understand the logic.

In the case of Golden, they hired a guy who turned around the worst program in CFB at a time when there did not seem to be a lot of big name coaches clamoring for the Miami job because Shannon ran it into the ground. Once again, not my top choice but I can see the logic.

In the case of Shannon, there was simply no logic to that hiring. The program was in a downward spiral from perennial national title contenders to the point where they could barely beat FIU and were relegated to lower tier bowl games against teams like Nevada. So why on earth would you attempt to remedy the situation by promoting a coach from the same staff who was responsible for the rapid decline? A coach with no previous HC experience no less. It made absolutely no sense.

Before anyone chimes in because they misinterpreted my point, I am not claiming that Shannon did a better or worse job than Golden. I'm simply pointing out that there was no logic behind the Shannon hiring.
 
Advertisement
The stadium situation and the coaching situation have led to where we are, a rudderless ship with about a 9 win top out if things "go well".
 
Shannon by far was the worst hire in History, nothing else comes close.
It was certainly the worst from a logic behind the hiring perspective. In the case of Coker, you promoted a coach from within who had the support of the players while the program was on the rise. I did not agree with it and as noted in this thread, it set off a chain of events that led us to where we are today, but I can at least understand the logic.

In the case of Golden, they hired a guy who turned around the worst program in CFB at a time when there did not seem to be a lot of big name coaches clamoring for the Miami job because Shannon ran it into the ground. Once again, not my top choice but I can see the logic.

In the case of Shannon, there was simply no logic to that hiring. The program was in a downward spiral from perennial national title contenders to the point where they could barely beat FIU and were relegated to lower tier bowl games against teams like Nevada. So why on earth would you attempt to remedy the situation by promoting a coach from the same staff who was responsible for the rapid decline? A coach with no previous HC experience no less. It made absolutely no sense.

Before anyone chimes in because they misinterpreted my point, I am not claiming that Shannon did a better or worse job than Golden. I'm simply pointing out that there was no logic behind the Shannon hiring.

Yep, when you fire the Commanding Officer of a horrible line staff where every aspect of a program has declined, you don't hire the executive officer with no experience to fix it. Just horrible, horrible thinking and negligence from the U unathletic department.
 
From a purely athletics perspective, Donna was the bad hire. She has been the one to hire the AD's that have made bad HC hires.
 
From a purely athletics perspective, Donna was the bad hire. She has been the one to hire the AD's that have made bad HC hires.

I can't remember their names but Kirby and Einhorn are close enough, those two couldn't run faster to Texas and Nebraska if they tried. How bout a little background check before you hire someone in that position and ask the auestions about fitting in at UM and in Miami in general?
 
Advertisement
The demise of this once proud program begins and ends with Donna Shalala--

Its conceivable that in another 25-30 years, history will show that for a brief period we were the best there ever was, and then we fell off the map-- much in the same way the old Army & Navy teams dominated college football and then the game passed them by. Its the same principal-- "de-emphasized." A conscious choice, a concerted effort to reduce the importance on winning, and competing at the elite level, and a bigger emphasis on the institutions core principles (academia) at the expense of athletics.

It didn't have to be an "either or" proposition, but Donna made it so.
 
The demise of this once proud program begins and ends with Donna Shalala--

Its conceivable that in another 25-30 years, history will show that for a brief period we were the best there ever was, and then we fell off the map-- much in the same way the old Army & Navy teams dominated college football and then the game passed them by. Its the same principal-- "de-emphasized." A conscious choice, a concerted effort to reduce the importance on winning, and competing at the elite level, and a bigger emphasis on the institutions core principles (academia) at the expense of athletics.

It didn't have to be an "either or" proposition, but Donna made it so.

THIS!
 
The demise of this once proud program begins and ends with Donna Shalala--

Its conceivable that in another 25-30 years, history will show that for a brief period we were the best there ever was, and then we fell off the map-- much in the same way the old Army & Navy teams dominated college football and then the game passed them by. Its the same principal-- "de-emphasized." A conscious choice, a concerted effort to reduce the importance on winning, and competing at the elite level, and a bigger emphasis on the institutions core principles (academia) at the expense of athletics.

It didn't have to be an "either or" proposition, but Donna made it so.

That's what I said...
 
You also supported Shannon until the very end on the old board. You have zero foresight, and if you say that you said something, then that means the opposite is probably the more accurate opinion.
The demise of this once proud program begins and ends with Donna Shalala--

Its conceivable that in another 25-30 years, history will show that for a brief period we were the best there ever was, and then we fell off the map-- much in the same way the old Army & Navy teams dominated college football and then the game passed them by. Its the same principal-- "de-emphasized." A conscious choice, a concerted effort to reduce the importance on winning, and competing at the elite level, and a bigger emphasis on the institutions core principles (academia) at the expense of athletics.

It didn't have to be an "either or" proposition, but Donna made it so.

That's what I said...
 
Advertisement
You also supported Shannon until the very end on the old board. You have zero foresight, and if you say that you said something, then that means the opposite is probably the more accurate opinion.
The demise of this once proud program begins and ends with Donna Shalala--

Its conceivable that in another 25-30 years, history will show that for a brief period we were the best there ever was, and then we fell off the map-- much in the same way the old Army & Navy teams dominated college football and then the game passed them by. Its the same principal-- "de-emphasized." A conscious choice, a concerted effort to reduce the importance on winning, and competing at the elite level, and a bigger emphasis on the institutions core principles (academia) at the expense of athletics.

It didn't have to be an "either or" proposition, but Donna made it so.

That's what I said...

LOL, Is that the route you are taking because you are butt hurt on getting negged, making **** up...

I never supported Shannon. Nice try. Plenty of posters on here know the truth kid.

You figured out how to post a picture yet???
 
Shannon by far was the worst hire in History, nothing else comes close.
It was certainly the worst from a logic behind the hiring perspective. In the case of Coker, you promoted a coach from within who had the support of the players while the program was on the rise. I did not agree with it and as noted in this thread, it set off a chain of events that led us to where we are today, but I can at least understand the logic.

In the case of Golden, they hired a guy who turned around the worst program in CFB at a time when there did not seem to be a lot of big name coaches clamoring for the Miami job because Shannon ran it into the ground. Once again, not my top choice but I can see the logic.

In the case of Shannon, there was simply no logic to that hiring. The program was in a downward spiral from perennial national title contenders to the point where they could barely beat FIU and were relegated to lower tier bowl games against teams like Nevada. So why on earth would you attempt to remedy the situation by promoting a coach from the same staff who was responsible for the rapid decline? A coach with no previous HC experience no less. It made absolutely no sense.

Before anyone chimes in because they misinterpreted my point, I am not claiming that Shannon did a better or worse job than Golden. I'm simply pointing out that there was no logic behind the Shannon hiring.

The hiring made some sense at the time.

Coker's buyout was expensive. Funds were limited so it was thought.

Shannon was a former cane player, a local Sofia guy with local recruiting connections. It was so thought.

He was a great college player, very good pro player, and a very good DC here (some would argue it was because of the amazing talent on the team) I think he was a pretty good DC regardless.

But on a more personal level, to me randy was a hero. On that personal level he fought through sh#t that would have crippled most everyone. Iirc one of his brothers stole his identity and at least one of his siblings died of aids resulting from drug abuse. Randy fought through all this and a lot more. To me he was the picture in dictionary of what it meant to be a cane, to never let the world or others define you, to persevere, to struggle and succeed. I was all for the hire.

Unfortunately, as a head coach it seems randy finally got in over his head.

I still have a lot of respect for him. But I remember Patrick nix and a punter at wide receiver, Kirby freeman and the last game at the orange bowl.

Hindsight is based on things you couldn't have seen.
 
Advertisement
Shalala has supported the football team a lot more than Foote did. Foote would have shut it down if he could have. Let's not forget how little the adminstration liked football under JJ and Erickson, maybe some don't remember, Shalala is a sycophant compared to the prior administration.

Someone mentioned Alvarez...hihi Shalala, look up there relationship.

Hopefully the next pres will understand that football and academic success are not necessarily mutually exclusive.

CONDI
 
Shannon by far was the worst hire in History, nothing else comes close.
It was certainly the worst from a logic behind the hiring perspective. In the case of Coker, you promoted a coach from within who had the support of the players while the program was on the rise. I did not agree with it and as noted in this thread, it set off a chain of events that led us to where we are today, but I can at least understand the logic.

In the case of Golden, they hired a guy who turned around the worst program in CFB at a time when there did not seem to be a lot of big name coaches clamoring for the Miami job because Shannon ran it into the ground. Once again, not my top choice but I can see the logic.

In the case of Shannon, there was simply no logic to that hiring. The program was in a downward spiral from perennial national title contenders to the point where they could barely beat FIU and were relegated to lower tier bowl games against teams like Nevada. So why on earth would you attempt to remedy the situation by promoting a coach from the same staff who was responsible for the rapid decline? A coach with no previous HC experience no less. It made absolutely no sense.

Before anyone chimes in because they misinterpreted my point, I am not claiming that Shannon did a better or worse job than Golden. I'm simply pointing out that there was no logic behind the Shannon hiring.

The hiring made some sense at the time.

Coker's buyout was expensive. Funds were limited so it was thought.

Shannon was a former cane player, a local Sofia guy with local recruiting connections. It was so thought.

He was a great college player, very good pro player, and a very good DC here (some would argue it was because of the amazing talent on the team) I think he was a pretty good DC regardless.

But on a more personal level, to me randy was a hero. On that personal level he fought through sh#t that would have crippled most everyone. Iirc one of his brothers stole his identity and at least one of his siblings died of aids resulting from drug abuse. Randy fought through all this and a lot more. To me he was the picture in dictionary of what it meant to be a cane, to never let the world or others define you, to persevere, to struggle and succeed. I was all for the hire.

Unfortunately, as a head coach it seems randy finally got in over his head.

I still have a lot of respect for him. But I remember Patrick nix and a punter at wide receiver, Kirby freeman and the last game at the orange bowl.

Hindsight is based on things you couldn't have seen.

Randy was a bad hire from jump. You never and I mean you never hire a coordinator from a failed staff. WE went cheap and got what we paid for. It is as simple as that. The U deserves better.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top