Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="OrangePA, post: 1504111, member: 204"]
It just seems that successful programs keep coaches - they do not fire coaches in the middle of a season. And they forgive bad years or disappointing years.

I am convinced that too much turnover can hurt a program - a college program or a professional program.

Players, administrators, coaches do not find unstable programs - programs with heavy turnover - appealing. Unstable programs tend not to attract high quality personnel.

The best example of the kind of stability that leads to success is of course the Pittsburgh Steelers who have had three head coaches since 1969.

The decision to fire the Fridge was a mistake. Just like the decision to fire Frank Solich at Nebraska after a nine win season was a mistake. It doesn't seem that the Huskers have ever really recovered what they had after that was done. Michigan pushing out Lloyd Carr - the program is still trying to recover. Pitt pushed out Walt Harris even though he was having success - I think he made the Fiesta Bowl that year - and a few years later they pushed out Dave Wannstedt despite winning a fair number of games and despite the success he was having recruiting western PA.

I am not necessarily comparing RE to the above situations, but I do think that administrators should value stability far more than they do these days.

The problem at MD is not coaching in my opinion. It's much more institutional. It is not now and has never been a football school. These things take time.

So, if it were me, I would keep Randy and I certainly would not fire him mid-season.

Anyway, interesting discussion.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?