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.