OT: College Football

[wartyOne]

Okay, the College Football postseason is, and always has been, a laughing stock. What I find truly repulsive is that when teams like Wisconsin make prestigious bowl games, and their coaches aren't there, because they've taken jobs elsewhere.

Why even bother having a "postseason?" It's totally fictitious anyways.

Is it really too much to ask that the coach at least stay through the end of the season? Imagine the next step. Some guru takes Purdue to the Rose Bowl twice, then goes 7-0 in his third year, and some Goddamned SEC team hires him because they fired their coach two games ago. Said coach then stops coaching Purdue before game 8.

What's the fucking difference?

 

[arsenal6106]

Okay, the College Football postseason is, and always has been, a laughing stock. What I find truly repulsive is that when teams like Wisconsin make prestigious bowl games, and their coaches aren't there, because they've taken jobs elsewhere.

Why even bother having a "postseason?" It's totally fictitious anyways.

Is it really too much to ask that the coach at least stay through the end of the season? Imagine the next step. Some guru takes Purdue to the Rose Bowl twice, then goes 7-0 in his third year, and some Goddamned SEC team hires him because they fired their coach two games ago. Said coach then stops coaching Purdue before game 8.

What's the fucking difference?

Yeah, I hate when that happens. From the players' point of view, I bet it's a slap in the face.

At the same time, isn't the coach losing money by not coaching that bowl game? B/c of the bonuses you get for winning bowl games, etc.

 

[wartyOne]

Yeah, I hate when that happens. From the players' point of view, I bet it's a slap in the face.

At the same time, isn't the coach losing money by not coaching that bowl game? B/c of the bonuses you get for winning bowl games, etc.

I'm sure that bonus isn't close to the $4M he's going to get next year from Arkansas.

Ridiculous. College Football's postseason is a joke. Top to bottom. Nothing but a complete cash grab. No bearing on the season at all.

 

[Yadahell]

I was listening to an interview with Bret Bielema this morning and he was lamenting at the fact that he couldn't pay his assistants what he wanted to pay them. At Arkansas, he will be able to do that.

The SEC has so many advantages when it comes to $$ and prestige that it makes it difficult for most other conferences to compete.

There aren't many guys like Boise State's Chris Peterson in today's NCAA football. He's repeatedly been offered better positions and more money elsewhere and continues to turn them down.

I'm not particularly thrilled with the bowl matchups at all this year. Kansas State vs. Oregon is fairly interesting, but could turn out to be a route. I don't see how the golden domers can hang with Alabama.

 

[BINGO]

Good point Warty!

However, I remember one instance (forgot which coach and which school for that matter) in which a coach was told by the chancellor of that institution that he couldn't coach the bowl game b/c he (the coach) went against his word by accepting another job elsewhere. Even though the coach wanted to be with his current players one last time to finish what they had started. I forgot the details of it...

 

[SY8goat]

Okay, the College Football postseason is, and always has been, a laughing stock. What I find truly repulsive is that when teams like Wisconsin make prestigious bowl games, and their coaches aren't there, because they've taken jobs elsewhere.

Why even bother having a "postseason?" It's totally fictitious anyways.

Is it really too much to ask that the coach at least stay through the end of the season? Imagine the next step. Some guru takes Purdue to the Rose Bowl twice, then goes 7-0 in his third year, and some Goddamned SEC team hires him because they fired their coach two games ago. Said coach then stops coaching Purdue before game 8.

What's the fucking difference?

It is for the kids Warty!

Don't they get free stuff from the sponsors?

The whole point of these sponsored Bowl games is to make $$$. Yeah, it is not much of a post-season.

 

[MHSL82]

Okay, the College Football postseason is, and always has been, a laughing stock. What I find truly repulsive is that when teams like Wisconsin make prestigious bowl games, and their coaches aren't there, because they've taken jobs elsewhere.

Why even bother having a "postseason?" It's totally fictitious anyways.

Is it really too much to ask that the coach at least stay through the end of the season? Imagine the next step. Some guru takes Purdue to the Rose Bowl twice, then goes 7-0 in his third year, and some Goddamned SEC team hires him because they fired their coach two games ago. Said coach then stops coaching Purdue before game 8.

What's the fucking difference?

What would you think of a similar rule to tampering or recruiting, where the NCAA would fine coaches and/or colleges who recruit during the season or before all colleges are done with the season? I understand that this would hurt high school recruits, as the earliest you have your coach, the earlier you could recruit - subject to timing rules of recruitment, but when the bowls are in December and January, it would give from January to summer to recruit. The timing would just be part of having to replace your coach. This, I guess would be hard to enforce, because these things go through agents, who aren't going to report people when that's where they get their money. Plus, unemployed coaches would either have the benefit of doing the interviews first (though schools should wait until interviewing everybody) or unemployed coaches would have to wait for no competitive reason.

I just don't know the solution other than schools making contracts that help retain coaches more - but some coaches have more leverage.

 

[wartyOne]

What would you think of a similar rule to tampering or recruiting, where the NCAA would fine coaches and/or colleges who recruit during the season or before all colleges are done with the season? I understand that this would hurt high school recruits, as the earliest you have your coach, the earlier you could recruit - subject to timing rules of recruitment, but when the bowls are in December and January, it would give from January to summer to recruit. The timing would just be part of having to replace your coach. This, I guess would be hard to enforce, because these things go through agents, who aren't going to report people when that's where they get their money. Plus, unemployed coaches would either have the benefit of doing the interviews first (though schools should wait until interviewing everybody) or unemployed coaches would have to wait for no competitive reason.

I just don't know the solution other than schools making contracts that help retain coaches more - but some coaches have more leverage.

Not sure I'm following your question. Put up lights on the house today, and I'm a bit drinky right now.

 

[wartyOne]

It is for the kids Warty!

Don't they get free stuff from the sponsors?

The whole point of these sponsored Bowl games is to make $$$. Yeah, it is not much of a post-season.

They do, and they $hould, e$pecially con$idering what i$ at $take in the BC$ bowl$.

But I think it's pretty shameful that coaches take other jobs before their team's season is over.

Equate this to the NFL. Can you imagine the 9ers making the Super Bowl, but before the game is played Harbaugh is hired by Dallas (much better stadium, America's team, bigger salary, more media coverage, etc.) and an interim coach gets blown out by Denver. What the fuck?

How is it not in these guys' contracts that they have to at least FINISH the season before looking to cash in with the SEC?

 

[Flyingiguana]

notre dame > SEC

 

[wartyOne]

notre dame > SEC

I hope so.

Fuck Nick Saban.

But I'm not holding my breath.