SouthernFans.com
TrueGSU.com

Follow GSUFANS.com on
Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 63

Thread: Back seat driver

  1. #41
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Warner Robins, GA
    Posts
    23,558

    Default Re: Back seat driver

    Quote Originally Posted by BillyBob View Post
    I know you don't like TK, but that doesn't make your contention the coaching decision was completely facile fact. TK said before the Coastal game it was also about stuff going on behind the scenes.

    Remember when we were for sure headed for 0-12 and people didn't see a single win on the schedule? What we had in the last 5 games if obviously not where we want to be, but it was a step up from the very inept and bad team we saw in the first half of the season. We progressed well without having any off-season practice.
    Or bye weeks.

    The most we had was the somewhat longer week between App and USA. We also got screwed on time heading back from Louisiana cause the plane had a flat tire and they didn't get back until late Sunday, which automatically threw things out of sync. That's not an excuse, it just threw off the routine. The staff had to deal with some trying times after the UMass game.

    The week leading into Troy was just wasted because of the transition.


  2. #42

    Default Re: Back seat driver

    Quote Originally Posted by BillyBob View Post
    I know you don't like TK, but that doesn't make your contention the coaching decision was completely facile fact. TK said before the Coastal game it was also about stuff going on behind the scenes.

    Remember when we were for sure headed for 0-12 and people didn't see a single win on the schedule? What we had in the last 5 games if obviously not where we want to be, but it was a step up from the very inept and bad team we saw in the first half of the season. We progressed well without having any off-season practice.
    I know you won't believe it, but I haven't been a genuine TK Hater, and up until this hire I was pretty much on the fence about him. I just look at each situation and ask the obvious questions that don't seem to have obvious answers. Your approach appears to be to sit back, look at any suggestion that he may have done anything in a less than ideal way, and say "Well, you don't know that for sure because you weren't standing right there when it happened, therefore your theory -even your asking of the question-is invalid", and adopt the default position that TK is infallible, and makes the ideal decision in every situation.

    I'll ask you again: Please explain to me what YOU think was the process behind this hire? Why did we hire Lunsford, and why did we do it when we did? Was it not due to the 'turnaround', before which Lunsford was not so much as an afterthought? Was the timing not due to recruiting deadlines? Then what? You must have some original thoughts on this other than "TK did it, therefore it must have been the best outcome possible. "

    The fact that TK did it doesn't make it a bad decision by default, but the fact that TK did it doesn't make it the best decision by default either. I form my opinions on each issue based on the available information. What is your opinion about this and what is your rationale? You don't have to 'prove' that you're 'right', I'm asking for your reasoned opinion.

    In order for you to make what I consider to be a convincing argument, you must first establish a position other than an observation that my position is invalid simply because you hold that I have no standing to form one.
    Last edited by GATAlac El Dorado; 5th December 2017 at 08:23 AM.
    I hope we build a statue to Chad Lunsford one day and he elbow drops us to victory after glorious victory!!!!

  3. #43

    Default Re: Back seat driver

    Quote Originally Posted by GATAlac El Dorado View Post
    I know you won't believe it, but I haven't been a genuine TK Hater, and up until this hire I was pretty much on the fence about him. I just look at each situation and ask the obvious questions that don't seem to have obvious answers. Your approach appears to be to sit back, look at any suggestion that he may have done anything in a less than ideal way, and say "Well, you don't know that for sure because you weren't standing right there when it happened, therefore your theory -even your asking of the question-is invalid", and adopt the default position that TK is infallible, and makes the ideal decision in every situation.

    I'll ask you again: Please explain to me what YOU think was the process behind this hire? Why did we hire Lunsford, and why did we do it when we did? Was it not due to the 'turnaround', before which Lunsford was not so much as an afterthought? Was the timing not due to recruiting deadlines? Then what? You must have some original thoughts on this other than "TK did it, therefore it must have been the best outcome possible. "

    The fact that TK did it doesn't make it a bad decision by default, but the fact that TK did it doesn't make it the best decision by default either. I form my opinions on each issue based on the available information. What is your opinion about this and what is your rationale? You don't have to 'prove' that you're 'right', I'm asking for your reasoned opinion.

    In order for you to make what I consider to be a convincing argument, you must first establish a position other than an observation that my position is invalid simply because you hold that I have no standing to form one.
    So what you are basically saying is, you were on the fence until this hire was made and even though you admit to not knowing what the thought process was behind the hire you're now giving TK the detriment of the doubt?

    I don't claim to know what what went on, but I have a few reasons to believe it's not as simplistic as you think it is:

    1. I don't think an AD whose job might literally depend on this one hire is going to be impulsive or facile when choosing a coach.

    2. The track record of hiring interim coaches is pretty good, and there might not be any better way to vet a coach than to have him take over a program. If anyone has a good example of an interim coach who took over who was a failure in terms of what a particular school is accustomed to, I'll listen, but every example I can find was pretty good to great.

    3. So many of the negative talking points about TK have been busted, as I previously pointed out.
    Hey TK! Change the culture back!

    If you think TK is the reason we don't have better non-conference football schedules, see this post.

  4. Default Re: Back seat driver

    Quote Originally Posted by coastga View Post
    Anybody second guessing the Lunsford hire after the Coastal Carolina game?
    TK just mishandled the timing, if he would've waited an extra 6 - 7 days, the full focus would've been on Coastal game, instead he announced it on Monday prior to the game, that turned a lot of attention to the positive/congrats stuff all week long.

    I always felt like if we going to take interim tag off of Lunsford, it should've been following the final game of the season, that way the coaches/players would've been completely focused at the task at hand and fighting that much harder. Instead celebrating early and not staying focused.

  5. #45

    Default Re: Back seat driver

    Quote Originally Posted by GS99-00 View Post
    TK just mishandled the timing, if he would've waited an extra 6 - 7 days, the full focus would've been on Coastal game, instead he announced it on Monday prior to the game, that turned a lot of attention to the positive/congrats stuff all week long.

    I always felt like if we going to take interim tag off of Lunsford, it should've been following the final game of the season, that way the coaches/players would've been completely focused at the task at hand and fighting that much harder. Instead celebrating early and not staying focused.
    I think the timing was great, we had a solid coach for the last game, the game didn’t matter either. It was only a last audition for the other coaches to see if they would be carried over to next year

  6. #46

    Default Re: Back seat driver

    Quote Originally Posted by BillyBob View Post
    So what you are basically saying is, you were on the fence until this hire was made and even though you admit to not knowing what the thought process was behind the hire you're now giving TK the detriment of the doubt?

    I don't claim to know what what went on, but I have a few reasons to believe it's not as simplistic as you think it is:

    1. I don't think an AD whose job might literally depend on this one hire is going to be impulsive or facile when choosing a coach.

    2. The track record of hiring interim coaches is pretty good, and there might not be any better way to vet a coach than to have him take over a program. If anyone has a good example of an interim coach who took over who was a failure in terms of what a particular school is accustomed to, I'll listen, but every example I can find was pretty good to great.

    3. So many of the negative talking points about TK have been busted, as I previously pointed out.
    TK could have blown me away with this hire, and it would have been a layup for him. Didn't even have to be a flexbone guy to do it either, although it was obviously my preference. Instead, I'm left yet again scratching my head to justify another major move. With this latest action, I have arrived at the point where the preponderance of the evidence is too much for me to give the benefit of the doubt. The detriment of the doubt is what you get when substantial doubt exists in the absence of reasonable mitigating information.

    You didn't answer my question. Forget what I have concluded from observing the available information, what do YOU think was the rationale behind this hire and its timing?

    1. Is not an explanation or a rationale for the hire. "TK COULDN'T make a mistake here because he knows it would cost him his job" ergo the decision was a sound one? That just means he had every apparent motivation to get it right, but has no bearing at all on whether he would/did.

    As an aside, your supposition (which I think is reasonable) that his job might depend on this hire is exactly the kind of assumption that you like to invalidate my conclusions for. How do you know that for sure? Were you there when Hebert told him that? I digress.

    2. "I can't think of any interim coaches that failed miserably. ". Again, this is a rationale for why the hire might turn out all right, not an explanation or rationale for hiring decision, unless you're suggesting that we hired precisely BECAUSE he was the interim and interims often do OK?

    3. Your 'busting' of many of the talking points, while it may sufficient to close the book on them all for you, has been counter-busted sufficiently such that questions remain. Just saying don't go dropping the mic on that.

    Tell me YOUR reasoned opinion as to the rationale behind this hire and it's timing. More specifically, and other than 'TK is smarter than us so we should trust him', why Chad Lunsford and not someone else and why November 27 and not a later date?
    I hope we build a statue to Chad Lunsford one day and he elbow drops us to victory after glorious victory!!!!

  7. Default Re: Back seat driver

    Quote Originally Posted by OliveBranchEagle View Post
    It was only a last audition for the other coaches to see if they would be carried over to next year
    I don't believe that for a minute. Imo CCL' s decision to not retain both coordinators was made long before our last game of the season. And to think the game was an audition for other coaches is laughable. CCL wanted and needed this win, but unfortunately he was out coached.

  8. #48

    Default Re: Back seat driver

    Quote Originally Posted by GATAlac El Dorado View Post
    You didn't answer my question. Forget what I have concluded from observing the available information, what do YOU think was the rationale behind this hire and its timing?
    I think it's evaluating the job Lunsford has done in more ways than just the Box scores. And that ties into the point about hiring interim coaches.

    Quote Originally Posted by GATAlac El Dorado View Post
    1. Is not an explanation or a rationale for the hire. "TK COULDN'T make a mistake here because he knows it would cost him his job" ergo the decision was a sound one? That just means he had every apparent motivation to get it right, but has no bearing at all on whether he would/did.
    No, it doesn't mean for sure that a sound process was used in the hire, but it does cast serious doubt on the idea it wasn't and few people were really questioning the Fritz hire by the end of his time year (except for a few that seem to think the OT loss to UGA is somehow a failure by him and not a great job game-planning for that game).

    Now tell me, what's your reason for thinking the hire is not based on anything but two games?

    Quote Originally Posted by GATAlac El Dorado View Post
    As an aside, your supposition (which I think is reasonable) that his job might depend on this hire is exactly the kind of assumption that you like to invalidate my conclusions for. How do you know that for sure? Were you there when Hebert told him that? I digress.
    You're right, if we have a couple of bad years of football ahead a good bsaketball or baseball season could save him or Hebert just may not care. But if you're in TK's position can you really be confident you can survive another hire? I wouldn't be at all.

    Quote Originally Posted by GATAlac El Dorado View Post
    2. "I can't think of any interim coaches that failed miserably. ". Again, this is a rationale for why the hire might turn out all right, not an explanation or rationale for hiring decision, unless you're suggesting that we hired precisely BECAUSE he was the interim and interims often do OK?
    No, interim coaches don't automatically get hired. Someone posted an article in my "historical performance of interim coaches" thread showing even those with good records some don't get hired.

    Quote Originally Posted by GATAlac El Dorado View Post
    3. Your 'busting' of many of the talking points, while it may sufficient to close the book on them all for you, has been counter-busted sufficiently such that questions remain. Just saying don't go dropping the mic on that.
    I have yet to see a good explanation of how TK bungled the Fritz situation. Maybe there is one, but I haven't seen a good one yet. Fritz was offered a pretty high pay and a pretty long contract period and let's be real beyond what we could most likely pay and beyond what most people here would be willing to give him.

    I also don't think there's not a lot of room for any reasonable doubt that Brent Davis (for example) wants no part of this job.
    Hey TK! Change the culture back!

    If you think TK is the reason we don't have better non-conference football schedules, see this post.

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Warner Robins, GA
    Posts
    23,558

    Default Re: Back seat driver

    Quote Originally Posted by eaglefan200 View Post
    I don't believe that for a minute. Imo CCL' s decision to not retain both coordinators was made long before our last game of the season. And to think the game was an audition for other coaches is laughable. CCL wanted and needed this win, but unfortunately he was out coached.
    Wanted? Definitely.

    Needed? No way. Why would he need it?


  10. #50

    Default Re: Back seat driver

    Quote Originally Posted by BillyBob View Post
    I think it's evaluating the job Lunsford has done in more ways than just the Box scores. And that ties into the point about hiring interim coaches.



    No, it doesn't mean for sure that a sound process was used in the hire, but it does cast serious doubt on the idea it wasn't and few people were really questioning the Fritz hire by the end of his time year (except for a few that seem to think the OT loss to UGA is somehow a failure by him and not a great job game-planning for that game).

    Now tell me, what's your reason for thinking the hire is not based on anything but two games?



    You're right, if we have a couple of bad years of football ahead a good bsaketball or baseball season could save him or Hebert just may not care. But if you're in TK's position can you really be confident you can survive another hire? I wouldn't be at all.



    No, interim coaches don't automatically get hired. Someone posted an article in my "historical performance of interim coaches" thread showing even those with good records some don't get hired.



    I have yet to see a good explanation of how TK bungled the Fritz situation. Maybe there is one, but I haven't seen a good one yet. Fritz was offered a pretty high pay and a pretty long contract period and let's be real beyond what we could most likely pay and beyond what most people here would be willing to give him.

    I also don't think there's not a lot of room for any reasonable doubt that Brent Davis (for example) wants no part of this job.
    -I frankly can't see anything solid reason for the hire beyond (very arguably) the two main ones put forth by the proponents of the hire. Namely, the 'turnaround', which I think is pretty questionable relative to how real it was apart from the player morale and relative to how much CL was responsible for. The only other factor that makes any sense was TK viewing (and misreading IMO) the sudden groundswell of support for CL as representing the choice as a can't miss hire relative to fan/booster support regardless of how it turned out. Essentially a free roll of the dice with a get out of jail free card. What makes the most sense to me is that, whether due to outside perceptions or to TK's refusal to consider certain options or whatever it was, TK found himself with exactly one guy to whom he could offer the job, and rather than open it back up and risk having to potentially give it to Lunsford anyway if we still ended up with no takers (and an obvious perception that we struck out and 'settled' on CL), he decided to declare victory with a hire that brought a lot of immediate smiles.

    -As to Fritz, as I've said before, the contract offer he waved at the press was essentially a by-that-time counter offer that was too little too late, and had it or a similar offer been presented before the season or much earlier on, our chances of keeping him would've been 75-80% rather than 10%.

    -With Davis, I was pleasantly surprised to learn of his serious interest in the job this go around, but if that bridge wasn't burned before, we dang sure tried to finish it off this time.
    I hope we build a statue to Chad Lunsford one day and he elbow drops us to victory after glorious victory!!!!

Similar Threads

  1. What's your Wofford seat location?
    By BrendanGS in forum Tailgate, Travel and Meeting Talk
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 10th November 2011, 05:10 PM
  2. Navy Seat Locations
    By GSU92 in forum Tailgate, Travel and Meeting Talk
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 18th August 2010, 08:20 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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