[1L]

>>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).

[Hank All-American]

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.

[Hank All-American]

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.