Ucla fires Foster & VT fires Pry

[Tidewater]

I'd like to see Rees get it.

Well, he already dislikes USCw, which is one of the requirements of the job.

 

[Power Eye]

I heard on the radio this morning that the players on UCLA and VT can now transfer and be eligible immediately, this year because they haven't played the fourth game . Maybe we can cherry pick a DLineman , OT or LB from their squads.
If this info is correct, why would any team fire their coach after three games ?

They can transfer and they can redshirt since they haven't played their 4th game, but they can't play immediately at a new school. Also, it is unlikely that many of the better players would leave right now for the simple reason that they would lose out on their revenue sharing.

 

[CoolBreeze]

What do you have against Tommy Rees? 😛

Agreed. That program is a career killer which is why they had to go with a former player anyway. Did Foster even have any experience?

 

[Redwood Forrest]

UCLA fires coach Foster after Bruins start 0-3

UCLA fired DeShaun Foster after he started his second season as coach 0-3.

www.espn.com

i’m thinking the player-to-Head ball coach route may need to be revisited. They were trying to follow Colorado but now even Colorado is questioning its decision.

UCLA has dug themselves a deep, dark hole.

 

[4Q Basket Case]

Both of these firings are lessons in what happens when you fire a coach for underperformance.

Yeah, it feels good in the moment. "I'll show you you're not all that. Get your sorry carcass outta here, loser. You're not going to run down our program anymore!"

The you sit around feeling all good and self-satisfied.....until you realize that now you have to go out and get a new HC. From somewhere.

And if your AD is the one who hired the coach you just fired (and that's the case for both VT and UCLA), you now have a winged AD on your hands. One who now has to go out and convince somebody to be the next HC. When candidates will wonder who their boss will be.

I'm not saying never fire or advocate for the firing of your coach. Sometimes it's necessary. I'm saying don't do it in a knee-jerk reaction to a disappointing game or season.

Hiring a new coach is always something of a crapshoot. You just never know how the new guy will work out. Many forget that while Saban was the closest thing to a sure thing, there were doubters due to his reputation as a money-grubbing job-hopper, the fact that very few (none?) of his assistants followed him from MSU to LSU, and the fact that he wasn't all that successful in the NFL.

You need to ask the question, "Who would realistically come, and most likely would represent an upgrade from what we have now?" I say most likely because you never know for sure.

 

[DzynKingRTR]

Both of these firings are lessons in what happens when you fire a coach for underperformance.

Yeah, it feels good in the moment. "I'll show you you're not all that. Get your sorry carcass outta here, loser. You're not going to run down our program anymore!"

The you sit around feeling all good and self-satisfied.....until you realize that now you have to go out and get a new HC. From somewhere.

And if your AD is the one who hired the coach you just fired (and that's the case for both VT and UCLA), you now have a winged AD on your hands. One who now has to go out and convince somebody to be the next HC. When candidates will wonder who their boss will be.

I'm not saying never fire or advocate for the firing of your coach. Sometimes it's necessary. I'm saying don't do it in a knee-jerk reaction to a disappointing game or season.

Hiring a new coach is always something of a crapshoot. You just never know how the new guy will work out. Many forget that while Saban was the closest thing to a sure thing, there were doubters due to his reputation as a money-grubbing job-hopper, the fact that very few (none?) of his assistants followed him from MSU to LSU, and the fact that he wasn't all that successful in the NFL.

You need to ask the question, "Who would realistically come, and most likely would represent an upgrade from what we have now?" I say most likely because you never know for sure.

I remember one poster on here that argued Saban constantly lost games he shouldn't lose. Cannot remember who it was but he actually wasn't too far off. Sure undefeated in 09 and 20, but 09 had 2 uncomfortably close games and 20 had the SEC championship game that came way too close.

 

[NoNC4Tubs]

UCLA has dug themselves a deep, dark hole.

Is there a buyout for Imaleaveya? 🤔

 

[Bamabuzzard]

Both of these firings are lessons in what happens when you fire a coach for underperformance.

Yeah, it feels good in the moment. "I'll show you you're not all that. Get your sorry carcass outta here, loser. You're not going to run down our program anymore!"

The you sit around feeling all good and self-satisfied.....until you realize that now you have to go out and get a new HC. From somewhere.

And if your AD is the one who hired the coach you just fired (and that's the case for both VT and UCLA), you now have a winged AD on your hands. One who now has to go out and convince somebody to be the next HC. When candidates will wonder who their boss will be.

I'm not saying never fire or advocate for the firing of your coach. Sometimes it's necessary. I'm saying don't do it in a knee-jerk reaction to a disappointing game or season.

Hiring a new coach is always something of a crapshoot. You just never know how the new guy will work out. Many forget that while Saban was the closest thing to a sure thing, there were doubters due to his reputation as a money-grubbing job-hopper, the fact that very few (none?) of his assistants followed him from MSU to LSU, and the fact that he wasn't all that successful in the NFL.

You need to ask the question, "Who would realistically come, and most likely would represent an upgrade from what we have now?" I say most likely because you never know for sure.

And it's not like they can get a head start in recruiting because players aren't going to be interested in a team they don't even know who the head coach is going to be. They probably should have just ridden it out and eaten the crap sandwich.

 

[bamajas]

I remember one poster on here that argued Saban constantly lost games he shouldn't lose. Cannot remember who it was but he actually wasn't too far off. Sure undefeated in 09 and 20, but 09 had 2 uncomfortably close games and 20 had the SEC championship game that came way too close.

I argue he was the reverse, and that was key to his dominant run. Those close games would've easily been Ls with just slightly less mental toughness

No coach in history has had the comfortable wins + undefeated runs like you're projecting

 

[Redwood Forrest]

I'd like to see Rees get it.

UCLA is not what is used to be, IMO. Maybe Rees can turn them around.