forums

Strong gone

Advertisement
Empirical Cane said:
I've explained it multiple times. In crayon on a napkin even.

My theory is yes, Strong was gone/itching to go even if Steel remained.

It speaks volumes that a personality like Strong, with his resume, was brought on staff last year and, as he admits publically, wasn't even interviewed for the sole DC position when he had the title of Co-DC (at least implied).

In most normal functioning organizations, that not only is a miss, but that could also get the hiring authority fired for that level "you gottta be kidding me".

It's ok we all have differing views on what has occurred. No reason to get all hostile over people's ages (I'm far younger than given credit for).

Porsters need to use their spinners...all good friends.

Go Canes.
Click to expand...

None of this buttresses your point that this is a “terrible look“.

“My theory is yes, Strong was gone/itching to go even if Steel remained.”

Above makes no sense in terms of reinforcing what you’re trying to say. You’re basing your theoretical on reading the mind of a person you don’t know, when in reality, he’s already stated/implied his displeasure at not being considered for the DC position. That’s kind of a big clue as to why he left.

So now are you saying he should’ve been interviewed? Guess what? Most serious people find courtesy interviews insulting. If you’ve already got a candidate in mind, and in fact, if that’s the person you’re going to hire, a courtesy interview is insulting - at least it is in private enterprise.

Like I said, you’ve made no strong argument, but it’s up to you to if you want to die on the hill. Tell Custer I said hello.
 
Fatboycane said:
Corporal Klinger on M*A*S*H was too. Maybe we kick the tires on him
Click to expand...

a29bcdb6-12c8-4920-a816-d73febd5b01a_text.gif
 
Advertisement
OriginalCanesCanesCanes said:
None of this buttresses your point that this is a “terrible look“.

“My theory is yes, Strong was gone/itching to go even if Steel remained.”

Above makes no sense in terms of reinforcing what you’re trying to say. You’re basing your theoretical on reading the mind of a person you don’t know, when in reality, he’s already stated/implied his displeasure at not being considered for the DC position. That’s kind of a big clue as to why he left.

So now are you saying he should’ve been interviewed? Guess what? Most serious people find courtesy interviews insulting. If you’ve already got a candidate in mind, and in fact, if that’s the person you’re going to hire, a courtesy interview is insulting - at least it is in private enterprise.

Like I said, you’ve made no strong argument, but it’s up to you to if you want to die on the hill. Tell Custer I said hello.
Click to expand...
It's a spectacular fail of Strong's hire, considering his former role at Miami, that Mario chose not to even interview him.

That is wholly divorced from saying he should have been interviewed.

At least Miami chose to depart company from him and end the pain.
 
Advertisement
JayCane20 said:
If I'm ranking problems on our staff from coaching ability to recruiting ability for each guy left.. Field's recruiting is very close to the bottom of the list to address. TE is so loaded it can wait until next year unless the TE coaching spot is needed for OC for whatever reason.
Click to expand...
Rank em....
 
Advertisement
Good to see that the coaching staff is being flipped too. We just had the worst season ever at Miami and it wasn't just on the players for that season. Mario's first staff was a complete failure but I'm glad that he knows that and is basically admitting his mistake. Hire the OC/DC first and then hire the staff that matches their scheme instead of the backwards hiring we did last year. I wish Strong the best
 
Advertisement
Advertisement
Back
Top