Posted on 10/28/2004 8:27:28 PM PDT by mlbford2
And who exactly would you want to replace him?
It is hard to say two and a half years ahead of time, but John Gruden or Mike Shanahan would be good choices. That scenario is the least of my concerns. Getting Spurrier back is what matters to me at the moment.
And who would you want if they fail?
You are going on the assumption that Spurrier = National Championship ever year. Your setting yourself up for huge dissapointment.
When did I say Spurrier = National Championship every year? When did I say anything even close to that? You're attacking a ridiculous position that I never took. When Spurrier was there, we were consistently one of the top teams in the country, and almost always in the national championship hunt. That is what I want to have again. There is no reason Florida should not be a top contender for number one most every year, and the team to beat in the SEC.
You said, "If Spurrier returns, so will the winning ways. Period."
The "winning ways" never left Florida, unless you don't consider 8 wins "winning." If that's true, then will 9 wins satisfy you? 10 wins? What will it take?
You also said "Florida is far too good a school to not be in the national championship hunt every year" and "Florida should be vying for number one every year." But what if Spurrier doesn't reach that?
Florida is setting an extremely bad example for its students. If others are pissed and things aren't going as well as you want, you start firing people and blame others, regardless of what the facts are. What goes around comes around. Trust me on that.
At Texas A&M, we had R.C. Slocum for 13 years. I started wanting a change after 1995, 6 years into his tenure (not 2.5). I sent a letter to the AD then outlining 10 reasons why I thought a change should be made, and none of the ten reasons had anything to do with his record. I challenge you to list 10 specific things that Ron Zook is or isn't doing that should be changed. And I mean SPECIFIC. Don't say "play calling" without an analysis of what is happening, why it isn't working and evidence that a change it will work.
You still haven't showed me where I said I expected us to win the national championship every year. I expect to be competitive and in the hunt. Winning 8 games a year makes you an also ran. When Spurrier was there, we were usually favored to win the SEC, did win it more often than not, made the SEC championship game almost every year, and were in the national championship hunt most of the time. That's what I expect. If you're content with your alma mater winning 8 games a year at most, bully for you. I'm not content with Florida being that far below the top echelon. Spurrier never won less than 9, and I want to go back to that level of play. You just have lower expectations than I do. I'm sorry if it offends your egalitarian sensibilities that UF grads like me won't accept a mediocre team.
I gave you specific quotes that hinted toward that. Pretending it didn't is foolish.
I challenged you to list 10 things that Zook did right or wrong and how you would change them. I did that with RC Slocum in 1995. You do it now.
The difference between 8 and 9 wins isn't worth firing an entire staff. That's stupid. Unless you can prove that Zook couldn't do what Spurrier did, you don't know for a fact that UF is going anywhere with a new coach.
Phil Fulmer beat Steve two out of the last four and it would have been three but for a bad call. Phil will be just fine.
I hope Steve comes back to Fla so gator fans can quit whining. The league caught Spurrier. He is a good coach, but there are lots of good coaches.
Who the hell are you to tell me I have to point out ten specific things that Ron Zook did wrong? When the team repeatedly loses games in the last two minutes, that's due to coaching. The Gators are 4-4, which is indefensible for a school of that size and prestige, with that tradition and with the kind of recruiting they are capable of. They never did that under Spurrier. What specific things Zook objectively did wrong is irrelevant. Results are what matters. I can objectively point out to you why a bumblebee can't fly, but obviously I'd be wrong. You may be able to objectively argue that Zook did nothing in particular as a coach that was incorrect, and you'd be just as obviously wrong. You want ten things? How about ten losses in two seasons? There are ten things right there. It wasn't like Zook took over some struggling program he had to rebuild, for crying out loud. Right now we're a .500 ball club.
And saying UF should be "vying for number one" and "in the national championship hunt" is not "hinting" that I expect a national championship every year. You're either being deliberately obtuse or are a little light in the clear-thinking department. Spurrier was at Florida for 12 years, and we won one National Championship, lost another National Championship bowl game, and had a shot at it going into our bowl maybe a couple of other times. How could me wanting to go back to those winning ways in any way suggest that I expect us to win the national championship every year? That's ridiculous. I just don't want to be no one's preseason pick for number one and then be mathematically eliminated from the national championship picture by week five. What I want is to go back to being a preseason top five pick and at least have a shot at it every year. Having a shot doesn't mean winning it, it means having a team that contends for it. If at some point during the season we get knocked out of it by one loss too many, I can live with that, and look forward to the next year and maybe an SEC title as consolation. What I can't live with is that loss coming in September, to no one's real surprise, with more to follow and little reason to think next year will be different.
If you are a 1L somewhere as your screen name suggests, you'd better refine your analytical approach if you want a snowball's chance in hell of making law review. Setting up a straw-man argument as an issue on a final doesn't go over to well.
Congratulations, and may your hangover be measly.
Dude, I graduated from law school almost 5 years ago near the top of my class. It is YOU that needs to learn a little about analytical thinking: you didn't even check to see how long I'd been a member. Failure to do so before making that comment makes you look like an utter fool.
You're pissed because you are losing and want the coach's head. You admitted you'd want Spurrier's head if he was losing, though you claim right now he's the savior of the world for UF.
I'm trying to get through to you that firing coaches doesn't guarantee wins. If you can't give me specific reasons why Zook should be gone (other than the fact that he doesn't win as much as YOU would like), then you don't know if you've solved your problem by changing coaches. If that is truly too difficult of a concept for you to understand then you've got much bigger problems than UF's won lost record.
I was an editor of the Vanderbilt Law Review, had four American Jurisprudence Awards, regular appearances on the Dean's List, and scored above the 99th percentile on the LSAT. I'll compare IQs, incomes or both any day of the week, pal.
Firing the coach doesn't produce wins. Having the right coach, though, can. Spurrier was the right coach before, and I want to see him back. Your conditional factual of what I woud want "if" he were to perform as poorly as Zook is a commonly utilized distraction indicative of a weak argument. I want Spurrier back because he NEVER performed that poorly.
I don't know what second-rate law school you went to, but you're the one who disingenuously started lecturing this Florida alum when you clearly don't give a damn how good a team Florida has, but were merely voicing objections to firing Zook based on some principle that carries with it completely externalized costs borne by others. Funny how adherence to that principle would simply ensure that Florida stays mediocre. Florida is doing poorly because they hired someone who had no business being a head coach at a program that size. I was willing to give him a chance his first year, but he was obviously in over his head and by the second year I knew we wouldn't be winning the SEC with him at the helm. I want the school to rectify their mistake, and Spurrier just happens to be available and interested. He's a proven winner, with a tradition and mystique at UF that removes a lot of question marks. If he turns out to be no longer capable of producing, then of course I'd want to see a change. You think I want him around because I like his visors?
Bottom line is, I care about Florida football, because I want that program to be everything it is capable of being. That means winning SEC championships and having a shot at Number One. I have no idea what your interest is, but I suspect it has a lot less to do with Florida winning than it does with your being quite content to see Florida settle back into the ranks of the unexceptional so as not to make other programs look bad.
You can't answer my question because:
1. You obviously know absolutely NOTHING about football. If you had any clue about it, you could likely give at least a few reasons. I watched about 2.5 quarters of the Georgia game and I could probably give you a few reasons why Zook isn't doing well -- if yesterday's game is any indication. You haven't stated one thing Zook is doing wrong, except for the fact that he isn't winning as much as you'd like. Why are you continuing to try and shift the focus of this discussion?
2. Attack is the surest sign you are losing the argument. You refuse to answer my question/challenge and start attacking me. Trying to tell me how much smarter you are than I (even though you know nothing about me, which is the height of stupidity) am because you went to some law school and got some stupid ass award. What the hell does that have to do with Florida football? I know it changes the subject and tries to get me off topic, but it won't work.
As far as this other idiocy, talk is cheap. I could make up a whole bunch of stuff as well. There's no one reading this thread that doesn't know who the one who's completely lost it is.
You were the one who called me a fool, so don't pretend I'm the one distracting by pointing out my CV. And review the posts if you want to argue about who started attacking whom. And I notice you didn't rush to volunteer the source of your J.D. Whatever Close-Cover-Before-Striking law school you went to can't have very high admission standards if you never even heard of an American Jurisprudence Award. They're given to the person who received the highest final grade in a qualifying class. I got four of them, in classes ranging from 90 to 120 students.
I've forgotten more about college football than you'll ever know. I didn't list ten things Zook has done wrong simply because by responding to such a bullsh*t challenge I'd be granting it a patina of legitimacy (as if the burden of proof is on me to establish ten things Zook did wrong for me to be justified in wanting him out after the lackluster performances he's delivered). And I could give a hell of a lot more than a few reasons, from specific examples of lack of focus when the game was on the line, lack of discipline off the field, poorly disguised coverages, to poor patterns being run by his receivers. But it is still irrelevant. Most of what matters in coaching takes place outside the public eye. That is where players are motivated, minds are focused, philosophies are instilled. I'm not privy to what he's doing in that regard. I just know it is not working and has never shown any sign it will. Spurrier wasn't perfect, but he raised expectations, consistently had the program functioning on a high level, and was the bane of the rest of the conference. There was a reason everybody hated us so much.
This is, frankly, a stupid argument. We're trading barbs, insulting each other, over something I have an infinitesimal amount of influence over, being an alum and donor, and over which you have zero influence, and which ultimately is inconsequential outside the world of sports. The vast majority of UF alumni feel the way I do. Why you care is beyond me, but this has escalated into a vitriolic debate despite the fact no one could possibly prove the other wrong. You have your opinion, I have mine. The only objective point that gives me an edge is I have more of a dog in this fight than you do, so I care about the outcome and want what's best for the school, rather than what is "fair" in the abstract. Other than that, only time will tell if Spurrier does come back and if he does bring Florida back into the uppermost echelon.
>>You were the one who called me a fool<<
I called you a fool because you ASSUMED that 1L meant I was in law school THIS YEAR. You know what 1L means, but you should know that MySQL (or whatever database backbone they are running on here) doesn't know to update that to 2L or graduate like the registrar (hopefully) does, even if screen names were variable. At the very least, you should have asked instead of assuming. I sure hope you give your clients better service. You have to be honest and admit that was a foolish move on your part.
>>so don't pretend I'm the one distracting by pointing out my CV.<<
That's exactly what you are doing and you still are. What does you supposed accomplishments in law school have to do with football? How would they disprove you made a foolish statement?
>>And review the posts if you want to argue about who started attacking whom.<<
You said, "you'd better refine your analytical approach if you want a snowball's chance in hell of making law review." I find it fascinating that the one on here with by far the biggest problem analytically -- you -- is attempting to lecture me on this.
>>And I notice you didn't rush to volunteer the source of your J.D.<<
I don't volunteer the source of much of anything online. For the record, my law school is (or has been) ranked higher than Vandy in US News, and my undergraduate school is also ranked higher than Florida in most areas. However, I think both UF and Vandy are terrific schools and I would have had no problem going to either. But I'm not going to get into a tit for tat debate on totally irrelevent things where either or both of us could be lying.
>>if you never even heard of an American Jurisprudence Award. <<
Oh, come on. First of all, I never said I hadn't heard of it. I was making a reference due to it being irrelevent and self promoting. Second, what the hell does this have to do with our discussion?
>>They're given to the person who received the highest final grade in a qualifying class. I got four of them, in classes ranging from 90 to 120 students.<<
Congratulations. Now, what does this have to do with anything?
>>I've forgotten more about college football than you'll ever know.<<
OK, whatever. Another totally ignorant statement made by someone who claims he's got a high IQ.
>>I didn't list ten things Zook has done wrong simply because by responding to such a bullsh*t challenge I'd be granting it a patina of legitimacy (as if the burden of proof is on me to establish ten things Zook did wrong for me to be justified in wanting him out after the lackluster performances he's delivered).<<
Actually, I think the burden is on you, but even if it wasn't, my point in all that was to try and get you above the knee jerk, typical fan reaction of "he didn't win X number of games, he's gone" into an analytical process of why you disrupt your athletic program and what do you gain/lose potentially by making a change.
So, you didn't respond. Not by ignoring a post, but by trying to change the subject into your resume. As if you could actually prove any of this crap you posted; or make any of us care what your IQ is or what grade you made in whatever class you attended.
>>And I could give a hell of a lot more than a few reasons, from specific examples of lack of focus when the game was on the line, lack of discipline off the field, poorly disguised coverages, to poor patterns being run by his receivers.<<
Then why don't you? Lack of discipline? Give me some examples. You can't seriously be suggesting that Steve Spurrier runs a tight ship, discipline wise. Spurrier has done a lot of great things in coaching, but this isn't his strong suit.
As far as coverages, you can't be serious. This statement is laughable, since Zook was the DC for at least 3 years prior to Spurrier leaving, 3 years where Florida won 29 games. Even the most passive college football fan knows Spurrier has absolutely zip to do with the Defense. Zook's defenses were performing at the level you would want then.
>>That is where players are motivated, minds are focused, philosophies are instilled. I'm not privy to what he's doing in that regard. I just know it is not working and has never shown any sign it will.<<
Well, at least we are on productive discussion. But your key statement here is "I'm not privy" and speaks volumes. Motivation isn't the answer to everything. Not counting this year, Zook has lost only 2 games to teams with fewer than 10 wins for the year, and those two teams had 8 and 9 wins. I'll give you MSU this year, but Zook has lost to teams he should have lost to, and by and large beaten teams he should have beaten. Zook has played somewhat stronger schedules the last 2 years than Spurrier did in his last few years. In the mid-90s, the SEC East was basically a two team division with Florida and Tennessee. Georgia struggled for a while and just got back to the top and SC become competitive. That doesn't even mention the West being mediocre overall with one or maybe just two good teams for a big period of the 1990s.
>>There was a reason everybody hated us so much. <<
I wouldn't flatter yourself if you like to be hated. Florida is, at best, third in its own state in that category. Although I pretty much like all Florida teams.
>>We're trading barbs, insulting each other<<
I'm not insulting you. You seem to want to think that an unsubstantiated record is relevent. It isn't.
>>The vast majority of UF alumni feel the way I do.<<
I agree with you, but that's part of the problem.
>>Why you care is beyond me<<
It isn't a matter of caring. I've made my interest known. I'm sick and tired of knee jerk "fire the coach" reactions to seasons that don't go well from fans that, for the most part, have no clue what it takes to be successful.
>>Other than that, only time will tell if Spurrier does come back and if he does bring Florida back into the uppermost echelon.<<
I agree with you there. For the record, I think he will come back and the other remains to be seen. I just don't think it was worth destroying Ron Zook over, even if he is a jerk (and his recent actions with that frat house thing and handing out suspensions on certain games was troubling).
You still go by the screen name 1L and I'M a fool for thinking you may be one? And the key word here is "may." If you look back, my comment was preceded by a statement establishing it applied "if" you were actually a first-year law student, as your screen name suggested. I'm sure if you asked the people who run this forum they'd let you change it. It's written in silicon, not stone.
The statements about my CV were only relevant as they pertained to your comments about how I was a fool and how you graduated near the top of your class. My response was based on your class standing only being worth mentioning if you went to a good law school. I can prove up my credentials, and rather easily. And I'm pretty sure there isn't any law school in Texas ranked higher than Vanderbilt. UT is the highest ranked, and it is almost always one or two spots behind. Maybe you went out of state, but your reluctance to disclose your law school is perplexing. And it doesn't sound to me like you made law review, either.
As you referenced at the end of your post, a few weeks ago Zook showed up at a frat where his players were involved in a disturbance and he personally got into an altercation that apparently involved threats against the fraternity, threats he indicated that he would carry out using his influence as football coach. It made headlines, and he was forced to issue an apology. Spurrier would never, ever be involved in a situation like that. That is a perfect, timely and relevant example of a lack of discipline off the field. And yes, Spurrier did run a tight ship. His program was squeaky clean, and he did not have anywhere near the kinds of problems FSU and Miami did with his players.
And how the hell is it relevant how Zook's defenses were performing years ago when he was defensive coordinator under Spurrier? I'm not looking to hire him--he's the head coach now, and it's what the team is and has been doing now, under his leadership, that matters. You think because he has a history of being a successful defensive coordinator the defensive schemes he's running now simply must be good? It's precisely because of his defensive background that I hold him even more responsible for defensive lapses. The one thing I held out some hope for when UF hired him was that we'd at least have a tight defense. Our defense has been anything but. Oh, but I'M the ignorant one. We've gone 20-14 since he took over, you're defending his tenure by saying we only lost games we should have lost--as having 14 of those in two seasons doesn't prove my point--and I'm the ignorant one.
And you may never have said you didn't know what an AmJur was, but you sure acted like it by calling it "some stupid award." The statement did not exactly convey a sense of familiarity.
So, let me get this straight--you can make a statement about me knowing "nothing" about college football, strongly implying if not stating that you do, but a purposefully hyperbolic statement by me in response that I've forgotten more about it than you'll ever know is somehow ignorant. I just want to understand the rules here.
You act like I have some bizarre perspective shared only by other UF alums, and one that is hidebound and ignorant. But I have yet to see any sportswriters singing Zook's praises or defending his performance, while I've read countless columns saying Foley did the right thing by firing him, and that Spurrier definitely should come back (and if not Spurrier, somebody of a MUCH higher caliber than Zook). I'm not saying no sportwriter has defended him (even though I haven't seen it), I'm saying that the mountain of opinion written out there favors my perspective. I suppose all of us are just ignorant. If only we could be so enlightened as you.
There is one last thing I want to make clear--you started to criticize me before I made that comment about you needing to refine your analytical approach if you wanted to make law review. Prior to that, I was commenting on what I expected from the school and why people in general who didn't want to see Florida dominant again were in favor of Zook and opposed to Spurrier returning. So don't act like I started this.
To Correct: I just did a quick check and UT is currently ranked two spots higher by U.S. News is in its rankings of the top law schools in the country. This is a reversal from a few years ago, which was the last time I had seen the rankings. I happened to mention this to a friend of mine who just called and it was his understanding that Vanderbilt dropped a spot because of extensive rennovation that was done to its buildings that made it highly inconvenient for students during the construction and negatively impacted its score, and that it is expected to regain a space or two in the next year or so, not that one or two spaces means that much in such a subjective formula (I seem to recall they bounced between 14th and 17th while I was there and immediately thereafter). Even though I didn't necessarily get the impression you went to UT from some of the comments you made, I don't want to make any misstatements.
In my haste I also mistakenly referred to Florida's 14 losses as occurring over the past two years when I meant to say over the past two and a half years.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.