Looks like Mark Coyle has quite the mess at Minnesota

[TheCusian]

I didn't get the impression that he "blindly" supported his players.

He publicly supported the right of the players to protest - at least that's how I understand it.

Doing it publicly was the key ingredient to the leadership he showed. Doing it privately would have been the safe thing to do, but it would not have meant as much to his players who themselves had already taken a public position that was certainly not in their best interests politically - based upon their principles.

When your subordinates show courage you as a leader should do your best to support it.

Just my opinion.

Saying it publicly was the key ingredient in getting him fired and showed the university that he lacked the nuance required to do his job well.

 

[RF2044]

Saying it publicly was the key ingredient in getting him fired and showed the university that he lacked the nuance required to do his job well.

There's more to it than that, too. They hired him when Kill abruptly had to go away, striving to maintain a semblance of continuity*. I don't think that anybody there considered him to be the long term guy for that job--and when this stuff happened, it just made it more clear that he was the wrong fit. Plus, a new AD who wants to put his own stamp on the program, plus the scandal, etc.

No brainer to let this guy go.


*Kill was a perfect coach for this type of program. He had a good system, he excelled taking lower rated recruits and making them into program fits, etc. They were never going to compete with OSU, PSU, Mich, Nebraska, or even Wisconsin head-to-head on the recruiting trail, so a guy with a proven track record of success like Kill was perfect for this program to go from being generally lousy to being a consistent winner [albeit at the 7-8 wins per season level... and even that took some beneficial scheduling to get there]

 

[TheCusian]

There's more to it than that, too. They hired him when Kill abruptly had to go away, striving to maintain a semblance of continuity*. I don't think that anybody there considered him to be the long term guy for that job--and when this stuff happened, it just made it more clear that he was the wrong fit. Plus, a new AD who wants to put his own stamp on the program, plus the scandal, etc.

No brainer to let this guy go.


*Kill was a perfect coach for this type of program. He had a good system, he excelled taking lower rated recruits and making them into program fits, etc. They were never going to compete with OSU, PSU, Mich, Nebraska, or even Wisconsin head-to-head on the recruiting trail, so a guy with a proven track record of success like Kill was perfect for this program to go from being generally lousy to being a consistent winner [albeit at the 7-8 wins per season level... and even that took some beneficial scheduling to get there]

Agreed. His time there was going to be limited, barring a miracle.

I get standing with the players publicly IF the cause it just and it's pretty clear who is in the wrong. He stood up very publicly for his players who were supporting something that was not cut and dry... lots of moral ambiguity.

 

[OttoMets]

Yikes

That's what a certain emotional poster (who's since disappeared from this site) insisted would happen at SU last year.

It's not apples and apples, but people always make these extreme claims. When the dust settles, most of the kids have usually calmed down and realized it's in their best interest to stay.

 

[Ringostar57]

Thank whomever that we don't have to suffer from Coyleitis!

 

[JHarris44]

Kiffen would be perfect, hasn't even unpacked at FAU, I can see him slinking around with a cell phone behind closed doors right now. He loves to run the ball ala B1G style as well.

I don't see a Kiffen, that of USC and Alabama heritage, leave Boca and go up to the way north of a non domed stadium in the frozen tundra. If i were a betting man, Kiffen is in place at FAU for 2-3 years before moving on to a USC or Oregon (albeit a bit cold) or ACC (southern team- maybe when Richt has had enough at The U) or SEC team.

 

[OrangePA]

Saying it publicly was the key ingredient in getting him fired and showed the university that he lacked the nuance required to do his job well.

Yes, I think is pretty obvious - that going public precipitated the firing - at least it was the excuse for the firing.

I didn't read anywhere that Coyle felt that the coach "lacked the nuance required to his job well."

That's your judgment.

And that judgment really misses the point I was making.

 

[OrangePA]

Agreed. His time there was going to be limited, barring a miracle.

I get standing with the players publicly IF the cause it just and it's pretty clear who is in the wrong. He stood up very publicly for his players who were supporting something that was not cut and dry... lots of moral ambiguity.

I'm interested in what you think.

What "cause" was the coach advancing?

What was not "cut and dry"?

What was the "moral ambiguity"?

 

[RF2044]

do they have any recruits we would want???

Isaiah Washington.

 

[bcubs9497]

That's what a certain emotional poster (who's since disappeared from this site) insisted would happen at SU last year.

It's not apples and apples, but people always make these extreme claims. When the dust settles, most of the kids have usually calmed down and realized it's in their best interest to stay.

It's possible that these kids will bolt from Minnesota. Lots of D2 and G5 programs would take them. They do have options, and they could conclude that their best option is to not play for that dbag Coyle.

And, it was dicey when Coyle fired Shafer; lots of people were pissed, mostly in the way Coyle fired him. Wouldn't have been so bad had Coyle done it respectfully. My guess is he fired Claeys in the same manner in which he fired Shafer.

 

[bcubs9497]

Coyle strikes again: Embattled Claeys out as Minnesota football coach

"Leidner said the team also learned of the news on social media. Shortly after, Claeys sent a text to the team: "The school decided to fire me. I wouldn't change anything in the world. I love and support all of you. Best of luck.""

What a bastard.

 

[SU68]

I didn't get the impression that he "blindly" supported his players.

He publicly supported the right of the players to protest - at least that's how I understand it.

Doing it publicly was the key ingredient to the leadership he showed. Doing it privately would have been the safe thing to do, but it would not have meant as much to his players who themselves had already taken a public position that was certainly not in their best interests politically - based upon their principles.

When your subordinates show courage you as a leader should do your best to support it.

Just my opinion.

If you are a mid-level manager in a company and the employees go on strike, do you publically support the strike or support the CEO and Board of Directors? If you want to keep your job and feed your family, you'd better do the latter.

 

[orangeinjersey]

That's what a certain emotional poster (who's since disappeared from this site) insisted would happen at SU last year.

It's not apples and apples, but people always make these extreme claims. When the dust settles, most of the kids have usually calmed down and realized it's in their best interest to stay.

#istandwithClaeys

 

[oldpinepoint]

Coyle strikes again: Embattled Claeys out as Minnesota football coach

"Leidner said the team also learned of the news on social media. Shortly after, Claeys sent a text to the team: "The school decided to fire me. I wouldn't change anything in the world. I love and support all of you. Best of luck.""

What a bastard.

Clearly learned nothing from the HCSS firing. Was probably to chicken shiznit to face the players

 

[bcubs9497]

Jerry Kill despises Coyle: Jerry Kill: I'll never step foot back on University of Minnesota campus

 

[Guy Fawkes]

Jerry Kill despises Coyle: Jerry Kill: I'll never step foot back on University of Minnesota campus

I wonder what he will do when Rutgers plays at Minnesota in the near future.. I assume it is just coach speak and emphasizing a point that he stands with the former coach not the administration.

 

[bcubs9497]

I wonder what he will do when Rutgers plays at Minnesota in the near future.. I assume it is just coach speak and emphasizing a point that he stands with the former coach not the administration.

According to that article, Rutgers won't be taking a trip to Minnesota for at least several years. Their game in 2019 is to be played in New Jersey, and there are no games between the two scheduled after that.

 

[Orangello]

According to that article, Rutgers won't be taking a trip to Minnesota for at least several years. Their game in 2019 is to be played in New Jersey, and there are no games between the two scheduled after that.

Coyle should be back in Idaho by that point, as in Idaho State.....

 

[TheCusian]

Yes, I think is pretty obvious - that going public precipitated the firing - at least it was the excuse for the firing.

I didn't read anywhere that Coyle felt that the coach "lacked the nuance required to his job well."

That's your judgment.

And that judgment really misses the point I was making.

The other side of coin in taking it public, is keeping it private. So if he got fired in part for going public, I don't think it's a jump to suggest he'd be better served to keep it private... which is the more nuanced leadership that allows one to stay employed and battle for your subordinates.

You disagree?

 

[TheCusian]

According to that article, Rutgers won't be taking a trip to Minnesota for at least several years. Their game in 2019 is to be played in New Jersey, and there are no games between the two scheduled after that.

Not to mention Rutgers is where OC's go to die. Unless, Ash poops the bed so bad they give the job to Kill.

 

[OrangePA]

If you are a mid-level manager in a company and the employees go on strike, do you publically support the strike or support the CEO and Board of Directors? If you want to keep your job and feed your family, you'd better do the latter.

I don't necessarily disagree with what you're saying.

Some may recall many years ago when the NFL players went on strike - 1986? - and the NFL clubs utilized replacement players, Buddy Ryan of the Eagles told his team "either come back together or stay out" - he refused to actively coach the replacements, and made clear publicly his support for the players.

What he did infuriated the team owner, Norman Braman.

But it had an amazing impact on the players. They would do anything for Buddy. After the strike they were united and became the best young team in football.

The Cowboys on the other hand did not stay united during the strike and that really was the end of Tom Landry's time in Dallas.

So, Buddy showed tremendous leadership - he led his guys - but Braman never forgave him and at the end of the contract fired him without discussion.

So, yes, we are talking about different things.

A manager can be a "company man" and play it safe or he can be a true leader and lead his troops - and perhaps suffer the consequences.

If I had been Norman Braman, way back then, I would have ignored what Buddy did since it ultimately made no difference to me as an owner. I would have kept him because his actions dramatically improved the team and in the process made the Eagles one of the more high profile and valuable franchises in the League. Braman actually made huge money because of what Ryan did.

So, again, I'm not saying that the coach did the politically wise thing. I'm saying that he demonstrated real leadership and Coyle and his president failed to appreciate what a monstrous effect that could have on the football program - in the best sense.

 

[DoctorBombay]

The other side of coin in taking it public, is keeping it private. So if he got fired in part for going public, I don't think it's a jump to suggest he'd be better served to keep it private... which is the more nuanced leadership that allows one to stay employed and battle for your subordinates.

You disagree?

There seem to be so many variables to this story, that applying a "business-as-usual" perspective doesn't really apply.
IMO, agree or disagree, the HC had no choice but to go "public" with his opinion. He was fielding questions everyday about an unprecedented and bold move by his own team- boycotting a bowl game?! Of course folks wanted to know the HC's take on things. The real question is whether he should've just dodged and said he had NO opinion, or copped-out with a "no comment" until clearing it with his bosses.
Considering his job security, and the already tenuous relationship he had with the Minny AD, he probably opted to just speak his mind and stand with his team. I admire him for that aspect of it, if he sincerely believed that the kids were doing the right thing in their eyes.
College demonstrations, whether for student rights, privileges, or varied causes, are not unusual. Its an idealistic time where young adults are learning to question authority and speak their minds. Whether misguided or not, they had the right to voice their opinion and/or utilize whatever leverage they had to make their point.
Claeys obviously felt the cause was just, and its an indication of how much of a dumpster fire Coyle exacerbated with how he reached his banning decision, that even the HC was willing to stand against him. Coyle's track record suggests he's allergic to passing along information to ALL relevant parties, before and after making decisions. He doesn't seem like an open book in communication. I'd bet the players felt blindsided by the banning decision, since they were given no background, context, or input before the decision was made by Coyle. That's BAD management on any level. If your students and/or employees feel they are not part of the decision, the "solution" if you will, they can often become part of the problem. Coyle's somewhat arbitrary management style, appears lacking. JMHO.

 

[tipphill]

The other side of coin in taking it public, is keeping it private. So if he got fired in part for going public, I don't think it's a jump to suggest he'd be better served to keep it private... which is the more nuanced leadership that allows one to stay employed and battle for your subordinates.

You disagree?

there is no such thing as private with that many folks involved. remember they are students as well. there would be more leaks than my garden hose

 

[TheCusian]

I don't necessarily disagree with what you're saying.

Some may recall many years ago when the NFL players went on strike - 1986? - and the NFL clubs utilized replacement players, Buddy Ryan of the Eagles told his team "either come back together or stay out" - he refused to actively coach the replacements, and made clear publicly his support for the players.

What he did infuriated the team owner, Norman Braman.

But it had an amazing impact on the players. They would do anything for Buddy. After the strike they were united and became the best young team in football.

The Cowboys on the other hand did not stay united during the strike and that really was the end of Tom Landry's time in Dallas.

So, Buddy showed tremendous leadership - he led his guys - but Braman never forgave him and at the end of the contract fired him without discussion.

So, yes, we are talking about different things.

A manager can be a "company man" and play it safe or he can be a true leader and lead his troops - and perhaps suffer the consequences.

If I had been Norman Braman, way back then, I would have ignored what Buddy did since it ultimately made no difference to me as an owner. I would have kept him because his actions dramatically improved the team and in the process made the Eagles one of the more high profile and valuable franchises in the League. Braman actually made huge money because of what Ryan did.

So, again, I'm not saying that the coach did the politically wise thing. I'm saying that he demonstrated real leadership and Coyle and his president failed to appreciate what a monstrous effect that could have on the football program - in the best sense.

That's a great story. But getting the players more money is not even in the same country as what the players were accused of.

The admin did what was right by the entire university according to its code of conduct, etc. They were suspended, not kicked out of school. It could have been handled better as far as process and publicity, but it's kind of par for the course.

If you put the safety of your college community after football, you're on the Penn State/Baylor plan for disaster. I wouldn't risk that for a ra-ra moment with yer boys.

 

[TheCusian]

there is no such thing as private with that many folks involved. remember they are students as well. there would be more leaks than my garden hose

There are channels the coach can use that would be private to show his displeasure.