That's a meaningless question. It's not up to me to judge how this benefits the university, but I will for the sake of argument.
First, they're saving the cost of the buyout.
Second, it would be bad for the university's image to fire the guy who they hired without telling that they were about to throw him into a fire as soon as the fire went out.
Third, maybe they think he's a good representative for the university as a whole.
Fourth, maybe they think he'll make changes and turn the football program around.
Fifth, maybe they don't have a replacement coach that they want.
But again, it's not my call. Realistically, I know nothing about the program and couldn't reasonably justify the actions of people with whom I have no connection whatsoever. People on here significantly overestimate how much they think they know. We know nothing about what happens behind the scenes.
Oh, and that's not to mention that the Board seems to agree with the university (otherwise, I assume they would override the university's decision to keep him). And that's also not to mention that maybe some people on the Board actually do want him gone but are giving the university leeway similar to how a Board lets a CEO run their own company even after a bad year.
With all that said, it's ridiculous to think that deciding to keep a coach, without the appearance of any conflict of interest, could possibly result in a breach of fiduciary duty based on the prior performance of the coach.
Being unable to predict the future is not breaching a fiduciary responsibility. That applies for keeping Golden now and that applies for hiring Golden four years ago even though he turned out to be a bad hire. There's no guarantee that the next hire is better than Golden. Just look at how much Randy Shannon sucked.
It is what it is. Stop watching the games and burn your jerseys if you want. I'm done with this thread.
Oh, one last thing. Since you guys want to bring legal action, how about instead of me explaining that the Board is innocent, you go right ahead and prove that the Board is guilty of breaching their fiduciary duty to the university. You know, like how it actually works in real life? I'll wait.
You’re done with this thread, a classic line. Here we go…deep breath (I wrote this on the subway, sorry if there are typos).
PART 1
I honestly have no idea if this COA would survive a motion to dismiss. The case has merit (see the evidence) and would bring great attention to the issue. The point isn’t to win the case, the point is to bring attention to the issue in a different format. They think our fans are disgusting because we fly banners and tweet, how about we present the issue in a different forum (the courtroom). The point we’re trying to achieve is to bring attention to the issue so that a necessary action can be taken. I already posted a law review article on the topic, learn more about how this works there.
As an Alumni, I’m beyond disgusted with our Board and Shalala. It isn’t just athletics, it is the hospital and mismanagement (but this is not for today).
The BOT doesn’t have to know how to predict the future to justify a decision. It is a breach at the time of the decision. There is no proof or evidence to support a position for keeping Al Golden as a coach. This is when the breach occurs simply by retaining him. [The breach of duty occurs] Because it is incredibly risky and is in no way in the best interest of the university to keep him. It is not only risky, it is simply waste and mismanagement of our University’s assets. You don’t retain a failed coach simply because you don’t know who should be the next one. Also, you don’t retain a failed coach simply because the next one may not work. When RS was fired, we had no clue who was next. Our AD and BOT doesn’t prepare properly for these decisions (further breach). You would think they would maintain a list of contacts, interest and names, but they don’t. Instead they waste more money with a Chuck Neinas coaching search. The cycle keeps repeating itself, our BOT and ADMIN lack any and all accountability or standards, they just believe in waste.
Part 2
Now let’s talk some reasons for keeping him that you brought up.
"Saving Money on the Buyout"
As for the buyout and saving money, you can't prove we're saving money by retaining him. Especially because you don't know the terms....but by retaining Al Golden in 2015 here is what will happen. A ton of tickets and donations will not be renewed because people are sick of the product. When less season tickets and single tickets are not renewed/sold, those people tend not to go to as many games (if any). When people don't go to games they can't buy concessions and parking. In addition, less merchandise is sold. My guess is all this will negate the tremendous savings that the BOT
may be claiming.
Please note that this extension was given to him
illogically and irrationally by the BOT who now refuse to send him packing. Remember our BOT has no forward thinking, they play it stupid and they play it wrong...all the time (Coker, RS, Haith and now Golden). This is not about saving money, we're going to get hurt financially this season due to their apathy and lack of accountability. Watch what happens this season. If we fired him next season, I’m sure there will be some buyout at that time as well. It may be less but there will be some buyout. This is why saving money doesn’t work as a reason.
If you think this is about PURELY saving money because the university is poor, this would be wrong. This is a common myth, see the thread below. Remember we're making an additional ton of money through our Adidas Contract and ACC contract now. It's not poor UM.
https://www.canesinsight.com/threads/82257-The-Money-Myth?highlight=the+money+myth
Everything after saving money
Golden and his lack of knowledge of the cloud. I don't care if he had knowledge of the cloud. We all have knowledge that he is a terrible coach. We all have knowledge that he can't achieve success at Miami. We all have knowledge that our student athletes deserve better. The sample size is incredibly large, the data supporting this argument (he blows) is overwhelming. If the alumni and fan base have the evidence, the BOT should as well.
The goodwill he may of earned (lack of knowledge from the cloud) was given to him by the unnecessary extension. If Golden didn't want to be here (due to the cloud) he could have left and not signed an extension. Once he signed, the cloud argument became dead except to the slurpers. The lack of knowledge argument was withdrawn. In addition, once ALbort decided to abandon us and go MIA after the bowl game (UL), he was deep in the red in the goodwill department. He wanted out and couldn't get out. He went MIA when it mattered most in recruiting.
One last thing on the “cloud”, how come Coach L can win and have success under the cloud but ALbort can’t? How come USC and PSU can achieve more with stricter sanctions? Perhaps our sanctions are not an intense as we’re led to believe. Perhaps the “cloud” was an awesome excuse. Perhaps it isn’t a big factor and Al is a terrible coach.
Our University has a terrible image simply because they allow him to remain the coach. It shows our BOT, Admin and DS are apathetic to the athletic department. It shows they're content with a losing product. It shows the love to waste our resources. How does this play to recruits? Why even ask, ALbort is our coach. He is loser.
A good Representative to the university as a whole? Seriously?
He is liar, he is used car-saleman, he lacks any and all accountability. He is a loser. He represents us terribly. I'm not going to go on a long diatribe to attack this point, the fact that you suggest (the BOT) he may be a good representative is amazing. Here are three articles destroying him. Remember it was the BOT, DS and the ADMIN that gave him the extension.
http://mancave.cbslocal.com/2015/01/08/in-defense-of-fandom-trust-and-betrayal/
http://mancave.cbslocal.com/2015/01/06/heres-al-goldens-alleged-letter-to-his-team-on-new-years/
http://mancave.cbslocal.com/2014/12...ajority-of-team-would-transfer-if-no-penalty/
Changes? What changes?
Al Golden has regressed since coaching at UM. He started 6-6 and now we're 6-7. He had his most talented team and lost 7 games. Yes 7 games. Yes 7 games. He is a proven loser who loves to keep the status quo. He loves to support Coach D. It doesn't matter anyway (if he makes changes) because Al Golden is a loser and he will never be the coach UM needs and deserves. Who coached Special Teams? Who is the head coach? Al Golden, is he going to change himself?
In addition, it is the BOT who gave him the extension. They have no credibility in proving they know what is best for the program, why are they able to evaluate Golden with a new staff? Their track record in athletics is pretty bad (Coker Extension, RS Hiring, RS Extension, Haith Extension and Golden’s Extension)…they’ve proven time after time to act against the best interest of the university and make irrational decisions. They don’t have the track record to know Al Golden (with an unknown new staff) is better for the university. They certainly haven’t earned any trust in their decision making.
Replacement Coach?
Just because you don’t have a replacement doesn’t justify keeping the status quo especially when the evidence is overwhelming and against the best interest of the program. The failure to have a list of candidates just proves that our BOT has no clue what they’re doing. Their track record of incompetence is difficult to beat.
RS was a terrible hiring. There is a common rule in selecting a coach. You don’t promote from a failed regime. Coker’s regime was a failure so the solution is to promote someone from that regime? The decision that is in the best interest of the university is to promote someone with zero HC experience? That makes no sense. All these failed decisions just reinforce that the BOT is terrible at making decisions. This is why they have no credibility, this is why they continue to fail. They see evidence against their decision, but ignore it. They’re either retarded (which is not excuse) or illogical (which is not excuse).
This would bring attention to the issue. That is all. We’re going to fight because we want change. I’m not donating or buying anything, but that isn’t enough. We want to bring attention to the issue and we will continue to do so till he is gone and the other issues are fixed. Sorry if you don’t like it.
