forums

LSU Stole Miami's Soul Nine Years Ago

Advertisement
It was lost some time before that game. This program moved away from its roots and it won't get its soul back until it returns to those roots.
 
Nope, the home loss to GT that season, 14-10, that kept us out of the ACC CG, and then Shalala giving Coker an extension seconds later, was THE turning point.
 
LuCane said:
It was lost some time before that game. This program moved away from its roots and it won't get its soul back until it returns to those roots.
Click to expand...

Lu,

In your opinion, what do these "roots" represent? Is it a brand of athlete (I.e recruiting), a style of play (x's & o's), culture, etc...?
 
College football is more fun when the Canes are kicking ***. Always loved the attitude. Hope it turns around soon. At the expense of the Seminoles and Gators.
 
If this is going to turn into a discussion about when the turning point was, my opinion is that it was the second we named Larry Coker the head coach in order to satisfy the players. It netted us a Championship. I think a ballsy hire may have lost us some players and maybe we don't win the 2001 Championship. But, we would have avoided the damage from the Coker era that led to the Randy Shannon ("stay local") reaction. The Randy Shannon era led to a problem with having a CEO and an organized leader, which made Golden's resume more enticing.

In each of those steps, we continued to skip what has always made us great: putting talent (a lot of it local) in the position to succeed through either cutting edge schemes (defense in 80s, offense in 90s) or other-wordly evaluation skills (Butch era). The bottom line is Miami is in an insane geographic area for football and, when we've been good, we've always pushed the envelope to max out those talents.

I'm still unsure why we continue to miss on this root cause. Well, I have my opinions, but anyway...
 
LuCane said:
If this is going to turn into a discussion about when the turning point was, my opinion is that it was the second we named Larry Coker the head coach in order to satisfy the players. It netted us a Championship. I think a ballsy hire may have lost us some players and maybe we don't win the 2001 Championship. But, we would have avoided the damage from the Coker era that led to the Randy Shannon ("stay local") reaction. The Randy Shannon era led to a problem with having a CEO and an organized leader, which made Golden's resume more enticing.

In each of those steps, we continued to skip what has always made us great: putting talent (a lot of it local) in the position to succeed through either cutting edge schemes (defense in 80s, offense in 90s) or other-wordly evaluation skills (Butch era). The bottom line is Miami is in an insane geographic area for football and, when we've been good, we've always pushed the envelope to max out those talents.

I'm still unsure why we continue to miss on this root cause. Well, I have my opinions, but anyway...
Click to expand...

So I others words, roots = good coaching.
 
Peripheral issues. That game against LSU is a meaningless as losing to OSU. Its the f'king coaches we hire in 3 succession why we are here talking about this. None of the kids on the team...or the coaches care about that game. It has no impact on them not being prepared for the games they play. 9 years? Quit being ridiculous. We are hiring the wrong people.....every school does it, we have done it 3 consecutive times.
 
Advertisement
I've often said this over the years. That game was to us what Buster Douglas was to Tyson. They hit the bully in the mouth and the bully hasn't been the same since. It was like Dorothy pulling back the curtain...
 
It is too bad that there is such a disconnect with the school administration and the athletic program. The former influences the purse strings of the athletic program and holds it hostage if athletics is not a priority. Both the academic and athletic sides benefit when the football program has success. The administration of the school seems too short sighted to see that. Miami needs to build an on campus stadium and recreate a college atmosphere around the program. It is in such an awesome locale.
 
Don Caneleone said:
LuCane said:
If this is going to turn into a discussion about when the turning point was, my opinion is that it was the second we named Larry Coker the head coach in order to satisfy the players. It netted us a Championship. I think a ballsy hire may have lost us some players and maybe we don't win the 2001 Championship. But, we would have avoided the damage from the Coker era that led to the Randy Shannon ("stay local") reaction. The Randy Shannon era led to a problem with having a CEO and an organized leader, which made Golden's resume more enticing.

In each of those steps, we continued to skip what has always made us great: putting talent (a lot of it local) in the position to succeed through either cutting edge schemes (defense in 80s, offense in 90s) or other-wordly evaluation skills (Butch era). The bottom line is Miami is in an insane geographic area for football and, when we've been good, we've always pushed the envelope to max out those talents.

I'm still unsure why we continue to miss on this root cause. Well, I have my opinions, but anyway...
Click to expand...

So I others words, roots = good coaching.
Click to expand...

No. Coaching that pushes the envelope. There are plenty of styles. We'd be closer to our roots with Oregon's style than with Stanford's, for example. Boston College, as an extreme example, has had well-coached teams in spurts over the years. Those aren't our roots, however. The players this program was built on are all remembered for a certain attitude. That attitude is really just a symptom of a foundation of aggression. What is needed for players to be aggressive is usually on the edges of how the game is played.

The extremely weird thing that I've talked about to some far closer to the program (in terms of $ and influence) than I, is that if we're trying to build a University and Health System based on innovation, how in the **** can we have one of its biggest brands (the football program that creates so many associations for the broader school/system) not coincide with that style?

How has each AD failed to frame the issue for the Board of Trustees and Shalala/Admin in this way? How is it not backed up by basic evidence/data of how the brand would be positively influenced and lead to their true interests (the Medical School and their big bet on UHealth) being supported at the bottom line ($)?

This is a leadership failure, in my potentially worthless opinion.
 
genuinelsutiger said:
It was a program killer. I don't think the Canes have been the same since the Brawl in the Tunnel.
Click to expand...

DIArr.gif
 
supacane said:
Peripheral issues. That game against LSU is a meaningless as losing to OSU. Its the f'king coaches we hire in 3 succession why we are here talking about this. None of the kids on the team...or the coaches care about that game. It has no impact on them not being prepared for the games they play. 9 years? Quit being ridiculous. We are hiring the wrong people.....every school does it, we have done it 3 consecutive times.
Click to expand...
While most of the above is indeed, true, however, it cannot be dismissed..that certain energy that flows within the living soul of college sports. Call it car a prone chalking it up as college football being "cyclical"- at any rate, it exists. We will build up our talent and eventually meet LSU again. When we destroy LSU, it will usher in a period of mediocrity for the Tigers and usher in the return of the glory days in Coral Gables. But it has to happen against LSU to break the cycle. Crazy?.......
 
It's still difficult to believe Miami was a 7 point favorite in that bowl game against LSU, due to extreme overreaction to the quarterbacking situation. In all the years I've used the preseason ratings system to bet bowl games, LSU in that Peach Bowl had one of the highest projected percentages of success, since LSU was higher rated than Miami in preseason yet was receiving a full touchdown.

Here are the preseason consensus ratings for 2005: http://preseason.stassen.com/consensus/2005.html

The highest theoretical advantage I've ever seen in a bowl game was a few years later, also a play on LSU. They were preseason Top 10 and yet somehow a 4 point bowl underdog to Georgia Tech. That was also an LSU rout in the first half.

I absolutely love it when preseason rankings are ignored when bowl game odds are set.
 
Advertisement
The souls of the students, faculty, administration officials, and members of the Board of Trustees are alive and well: living, loving and enjoying life. Life can be a great deal of fun.
 
It's not uncommon for powerhouse programs to have periods of dormancy. USC and Bama were messes before they hired Pete Carroll and Nick Saban respectively. Identifying good coaches isn't easy. Unless you have the war chest to hire a coach who's won at a big program, you have to gamble on first-time coaches, coaches who have won at smaller schools, or retreads who might have something left in the tank.

As Lu pointed out, we used a linear thought process for hiring coaches:

1. Promote Coker because the upperclassmen want him
2. Hire Shannon because he'll recruit locally instead of whiffing nationally like Coker
3. Hire Golden because he's a good ambassador and he built up a floundering program

All of the hires were logical at the time, but not bold or inspired. That's not to say a logical hire can't/won't work here, but that hasn't exactly been what's worked in the past.
 
arcane said:
The souls of the students, faculty, administration officials, and members of the Board of Trustees are alive and well: living, loving and enjoying life. Life can be a great deal of fun.
Click to expand...


Congratulations. This is a thread about the football program. It's a decent thread in a sea of pure **** on this message board this week. Please consider staying on topic.
 
CanesAreAble said:
It's not uncommon for powerhouse programs to have periods of dormancy. USC and Bama were messes before they hired Pete Carroll and Nick Saban respectively. Identifying good coaches isn't easy. Unless you have the war chest to hire a coach who's won at a big program, you have to gamble on first-time coaches, coaches who have won at smaller schools, or retreads who might have something left in the tank.

As Lu pointed out, we used a linear thought process for hiring coaches:

1. Promote Coker because the upperclassmen want him
2. Hire Shannon because he'll recruit locally instead of whiffing nationally like Coker
3. Hire Golden because he's a good ambassador and he built up a floundering program

All of the hires were logical at the time, but not bold or inspired. That's not to say a logical hire can't/won't work here, but that hasn't exactly been what's worked in the past.
Click to expand...


Worse yet, as I've told you off the board, we've hired coaches who are linear thinkers. Like anything, there is an underlying cause that has to be fixed before this **** changes.
 
Back
Top