See this is the problem with the majority of your posts on this forum. You routinely engage in revisionist history, by criticizing decisions that were made without properly contextualizing them. Its a fact that Diaz was hired to be the HC @ Temple. It's also a fact that Temple HCs go on to become P5 HCs at a high probability. Whether or not he coached a game for Temple is irrelevant, because the W-L record is not the only factor that determines whether they receive a P5 job. The likelihood that Diaz would've failed at Temple, and not received a P5 HC job, was lower than him one day receiving one. Also, just because MIA hired a Temple HC in the past, doesn't mean every Temple HC would fail @ MIA. Is that not assuming the conclusion? Furthermore, how much blame do you place on the university and administration for his failures @ MIA? Do you think a school like LSU would've allowed him to keep his friend as the DC for as long as he did?
No offense, but you're engaged in a patently absurd argument.
Diaz never coached a single game at Temple. You're trying to construct some argument about Temple Head Coaches which is suspect in credibility to begin with, then use it to paint Diaz as a credible 'G5 head coach' hire. It would be funny if it weren't so sad. Diaz was the DC from a failed staff at Miami. The second one we've hired at Miami in the last 4 bad head coach hires. The entire point of our hiring him as you describe it (save money by holding the staph together) is
premised on him being the DC from the failed staph.
And your 'fact' regarding Temple is bizarre in this context. Not only because it's irrelevant to Manny, who never coached there, but because you present it as if being a Temple coach is some causal and inscrutable variable. No one hires a coach without examining them and their body of work. Since Manny never coached at Temple, we know for sure no one did that in respect of his body of work at Temple. If there was any logic to his hiring, it was based on his DC work at UM and prior, or just he's cheap, though I contend that's an excuse, not a rationale. You sound like you think hiring a coach is some sort of scratch-off lottery game where all the AD knows is what program their last contract was with. (Did Manny even get a single payroll check at Temple?)
You also state 'The likelihood that Diaz would've failed at Temple, and not received a P5 HC job, was lower than him one day receiving one.' Do you really believe that's an explanation for his hiring at Miami? Do you think the job of making a hiring decision for head coach at Miami is to look at someone at a G5 program and conclude that if there's a decent chance they won't fail where they are and may become a P5 HC one day, that that means we should hire them?
The only 'context' needed around Manny's hiring is that it was a terrible, rushed, panic decision by an incompetent and unprepared AD and BOT. He may end up figuring it out and becoming a good HC. I sure hope he does. But there isn't anything that's going to make the process around his hire look competent in retrospect. It wasn't competent.
It's always easier to be an arm chair QB, when you're a casual fan/observer. This is why you have a tendency to look at decisions in a vacuum, and say things like "the university had plenty of viable options, had they just performed a meaningless, symbolic HC search". LMAO. If you honestly believe the options for this university weren't/aren't limited, than I'm sorry, but you're even more lost in this discussion than I thought. An actual, thorough HC search, would've meant the university potentially having to pay for another search committee, firing staffs on both sides of the ball, buying out next HC, and paying him a higher salary than what they're paying Diaz currently. You think the university had the means or the willingness to do that??
Talk about assuming your conclusions. If you start with the premise a search would have been meaningless and symbolic, then sure, it would be meaningless and symbolic. Just one more reason to fire the AD, I guess. Searches are not supposed to be meaningless and symbolic. Especially when your 'preferred' candidate isn't compelling and at best is marginally qualified for consideration for the role. We'd never hire Manny if his dad wasn't Mayor of Miami and friends with members of the BOT. Intredasting that Flake James also hired the son of a booster to be HC of the baseball team. Trend?
Oh, and you're 'search committees are expensive' argument is idiotic. The retained search in CFB costs $200 grand give or take. We really saved a lot avoiding a search, only to pay Temple $4 mm to buyout the contract of the guy they just hired.
Firing staffs? Manny fired the offensive staff, and hired Enos and others, and fired them too! A year later! Because Manny wasn't prepared for the job. Hiring unprepared people costs more, generally, not less. Only fools fail to see that. Buying out the next HC? Paying someone else more than Diaz? What are you even talking about? You're making up scenarios to try to sound smart, but you're not sounding smart. You sound like you're at a loss to defend your point.
