Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="A Clockwork Orange, post: 2659090, member: 16"]
That's a great question, and I wonder it myself. What I think personally is we should give Dino the Cutcliffe treatment. Duke gave him a long leash, in part because they knew he was a good coach, and they knew their team wasn't going to find better if they fired him. Duke had been a football doormat for years, and Cutcliffe with time, has given them a national reputation.

I firmly believe athletic departments give coaches that have been demonstrably good in other situations a very small window for success. Specifically when we're talking about a team like ours, that hasn't been truly relevant on a national scale since 1998.

I say five to six years is important for this type of rebuild. It breeds continuity and a natural buy in to the system. In Cutcliffe's third and fourth year at Duke, the team went 3-9. In year 5 they went 6-7 with a bowl appearance. In year 6, they go 10-4. That's not a fluke. That's a school that needed a complete football reorganization. We're closer to them than we are a Maryland or a UCLA in terms of talent available.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?