+ Reply to Thread
Page 18 of 18 FirstFirst ... 8161718
Results 256 to 258 of 258

Thread: Cal and Dykes

  1. #256
    Champ Amos Moses has a reputation beyond reputeAmos Moses has a reputation beyond reputeAmos Moses has a reputation beyond reputeAmos Moses has a reputation beyond reputeAmos Moses has a reputation beyond reputeAmos Moses has a reputation beyond reputeAmos Moses has a reputation beyond reputeAmos Moses has a reputation beyond reputeAmos Moses has a reputation beyond reputeAmos Moses has a reputation beyond reputeAmos Moses has a reputation beyond repute Amos Moses's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,582

  2. #257
    Champ LookingForResults has a reputation beyond reputeLookingForResults has a reputation beyond reputeLookingForResults has a reputation beyond reputeLookingForResults has a reputation beyond reputeLookingForResults has a reputation beyond reputeLookingForResults has a reputation beyond reputeLookingForResults has a reputation beyond reputeLookingForResults has a reputation beyond reputeLookingForResults has a reputation beyond reputeLookingForResults has a reputation beyond reputeLookingForResults has a reputation beyond repute
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    7,690

    Re: Cal and Dykes

    Quote Originally Posted by theprofessor View Post
    You want us to believe you understand how things work, but then you make comments like this. You act like Peterson was the first coach to ever come around Boise. There was Dan Hawkins before him. And Dirk Koetter before him. Those two guys helped build the Boise program and then left for greener pastures. They helped pave the way for Peterson to do what he's done and helped make Boise an attractive destination. We're not at that place yet. I hope that Dooley was our Koetter and Dykes is our Hawkins. Maybe the next guy, or the guy after him, will be our Peterson and will stay for the long haul. Or maybe not. Maybe we'll never get there. But I hope we do. Until then, I won't begrudge any coach for doing what he thinks is in his best interest
    What happened for your deep concern for the PLAYERS that you had when they missed a bowl game? The number one reason kids commit to a school is because they like the relationship that they think they have with the coaches. Losing a coach who is doing "what he thinks is in his best interest" is a FAR bigger deal to a kid who thought he had a personal connection with that coach, and who thought the coach was as committed to the program as much as the coach asked him to be, than not going to a bowl game.

    Try being consistent. If you're going to hate an AD for not getting in a bowl and so harming the players, then you should also hate a coach, who by leaving does far more damage by not only breaking the trust of the players, he destroys the continuity of a program and possibly/probably causes those players to endure a losing season in the first year of transition.

    Having said that, I accept coaches leaving if they are forthright in the manner in which they seek another job. But if that is acceptable, then it is established that the players are NOT primary and foremost in any decision chain. They are employees and their interests, while not disregarded, are secondary to whatever a coach "thinks is in his best interest," and secondary to what is considered to be the best interest of the university. BVDV and likely DR (BVDV does nothing alone) decided it was in the best interest of the university to explore other bowl opportunities and in the process lost the first, and in the end the only, invitation. The players lost a chance for a bowl game, but their interest was rightfully secondary to the greater interest of the university. The only legitimate area for second-guessing is whether what was believed to be in the best interest of the university actually was.

    So if you want to fire one, you should want to fire them all for all three harmed the players. But selective indignation doesn't hold water.
    Last edited by LookingForResults; 12-07-2012 at 11:15 PM.

  3. #258
    Champ theprofessor has a reputation beyond reputetheprofessor has a reputation beyond reputetheprofessor has a reputation beyond reputetheprofessor has a reputation beyond reputetheprofessor has a reputation beyond reputetheprofessor has a reputation beyond reputetheprofessor has a reputation beyond reputetheprofessor has a reputation beyond reputetheprofessor has a reputation beyond reputetheprofessor has a reputation beyond reputetheprofessor has a reputation beyond repute theprofessor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Alexandria
    Posts
    6,358

    Re: Cal and Dykes

    Quote Originally Posted by LookingForResults View Post
    What happened for your deep concern for the PLAYERS that you had when they missed a bowl game? The number one reason kids commit to a school is because they like the relationship that they think they have with the coaches. Losing a coach who is doing "what he thinks is in his best interest" is a FAR bigger deal to a kid who thought he had a personal connection with that coach, and who thought the coach was as committed to the program as much as they asked him to be, than not going to a bowl game.

    Try being consistent. If you're going to hate an AD for not getting in a bowl and so harming the players, then you should also hate a coach, who by leaving does far more damage by not only breaking the trust of the players, he destroys the continuity of a program and possibly/probably causes those players to endure a losing season in the first year of transition.

    Having said that, I accept coaches leaving if they are forthright in the manner in which they seek another job. But if that is acceptable, then it is established that the players are NOT primary and foremost in any decision chain. They are employees and their interests, while not disregarded, are secondary to whatever a coach "thinks is in his best interest," and secondary to what is considered to be the best interest of the university. BVDV and likely DR (BVDV does nothing alone) decided it was in the best interest of the university to explore other bowl opportunities and in the process lost the first, and in the end the only, invitation.

    So if you want to fire one, you should want to fire them all. But selective indignation doesn't hold water.
    Rick, I haven't been banging on the "poor players" drum as far as missing a bowl game, though I do feel badly that the seniors won't get one more game. I think not going bowling at 9-3 is a poor reflection on our university, and I think it's an even poorer reflection that we "rejected" -- or allowed an invite to expire, if you want to play semantics -- a bowl bid. I think it sucks for the fans, it sucks for the further development of our players and it's damaging to recruiting.

    I do agree that, for most players, relationship with coaches (sometimes an assistant more than the head coach) is the primary reason for committing to a school, though there are certainly other factors that play into the mix. And coaches leaving does suck for them. But no program is immune. If I'm not mistaken, LSU, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina and Missouri are the only SEC schools who don't have a player playing for at least his second head coach. That means nine of the 14 schools in the biggest and baddest league in the country have had new coaches in the past four or five years. All of those programs have had to undergo transitions, too. It's not just schools at our level that are affected. Hell, Wisconsin, which has won three straight Big Ten titles, just lost its coach. It happens.

    We are not in a position to where we're going to hold on to good coaches for a long period of time. Despite your arguments to the contrary, Sonny Dykes proved himself to be a good coach during his tenure in Ruston. He improved the team from four wins the year before his arrival to five, eight and nine wins. Louisiana Tech became nationally relevant again during his watch. He got a chance to triple his salary or more. I wish him well. I hope we are able to provide better resources to the next coach, and the coach after him. Will we ever be in a position where we can offer competitive salaries and find our Petersen? Who knows, but probably not. I just want us to continue making improvement. We have come a long, long way in the past six years. It wasn't long ago that our program was irrelevant and our coach was one of the lowest-paid in the entire country. The salary for the head coach has tripled since then, and our program is much better off today. It's a good time to be a Bulldog!
    the bold, the beautiful, theprofessor

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts