Should coach firings in D1 occur more frequently? Topic

Posted by gillispie1 on 5/27/2013 9:03:00 PM (view original):
Posted by stinenavy on 5/27/2013 3:31:00 PM (view original):
Oh good lord, emy the cheater talking about doing the right thing the first time, when he chose to ignore the rules for a year because they were to his detriment.
emy, if its any consolation, if you saw a picture of this guy... he looks like JUST as big a douchebag as he comes across here. i dont know about you, but that made me feel a little better about the whole situation.

I saw the picture......you're right. 

5/28/2013 3:08 PM (edited)
Posted by gillispie1 on 5/28/2013 1:53:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tarvolon on 5/28/2013 12:00:00 PM (view original):
IMO, at any school with baseline prestige that's the same as the rest of the conference, having a consistently winning record in conference should be plenty. If you're coaching Austin Peay, making the PT every three years is unrealistic expectations. Should there still be firings at Peay? If you've been there 10 seasons and have an overall conference record of 64-96, with a peak of 9-7 in your 6th season, then yeah, I'd say you can be fired. But if you're flitting between 8-8 and 12-4 every year, winning the regular season crown every once in a while, that's enough to keep your job, even if you never end up in the postseason. 

Whereas at Memphis, with a baseline prestige higher than anybody else in the conference, the standards should be higher. And at Virginia, with piles of recruiting money every year, they should be even higher than that. 

Again, I'm not a D1 player. I understand that my impressions from real life may not always match up to HD. But I think that, once you've factored in that turnarounds in HD D1 take longer than in real life D1, real life D1 provides a good first approximation for appropriate standards. 
i sort of agree, sort of disagree with this.

i guess to me the point of firings it to open jobs for other guys. whats the point of firing a guy for having a 64-96 record with D prestige, when there are a ton of other D prestige jobs? i guess if d1 was full, i could see it. but with 200 openings in low d1, i cant see how firing a guy in that situation benefits someone else. if nobody gets a benefit from you firing someone, and its a negative for you firing that person, whats the point? 

i suppose if the requirements were low enough, i could support d1 firings across the board. that would basically ensure someone didnt get fired from a low end program in an empty conference (unless they were god awful), because of all the sim games, but if low d1 filled up, people would start to get fired from full low end conferences. 
If low end D1 fills up, then we'll actually need low end D1 firings. If low end D1 doesn't fill up, then low end D1 firings would occur only when the human coaches are doing worse than the Sims. 

At least that's how I envisioned it. I haven't thought about this in huge depth, so I certainly might've missed something
5/28/2013 3:07 PM
Posted by emy1013 on 5/28/2013 3:08:00 PM (view original):
Posted by gillispie1 on 5/27/2013 9:03:00 PM (view original):
Posted by stinenavy on 5/27/2013 3:31:00 PM (view original):
Oh good lord, emy the cheater talking about doing the right thing the first time, when he chose to ignore the rules for a year because they were to his detriment.
emy, if its any consolation, if you saw a picture of this guy... he looks like JUST as big a douchebag as he comes across here. i dont know about you, but that made me feel a little better about the whole situation.

I saw the picture......you're right. 

I too just saw it on facebook...LOFL!
5/28/2013 3:08 PM
Posted by colonels19 on 5/28/2013 3:08:00 PM (view original):
Posted by emy1013 on 5/28/2013 3:08:00 PM (view original):
Posted by gillispie1 on 5/27/2013 9:03:00 PM (view original):
Posted by stinenavy on 5/27/2013 3:31:00 PM (view original):
Oh good lord, emy the cheater talking about doing the right thing the first time, when he chose to ignore the rules for a year because they were to his detriment.
emy, if its any consolation, if you saw a picture of this guy... he looks like JUST as big a douchebag as he comes across here. i dont know about you, but that made me feel a little better about the whole situation.

I saw the picture......you're right. 

I too just saw it on facebook...LOFL!
I didn't even see the Facebook one yet.  Surely it can't be worse......
5/28/2013 3:15 PM
It was just a closeup of his face...I know his first and last name, so I just did a search and voila lol.  Unlike stinenavy though, I won't out him or his information on these boards...I'll sitemail you a link though if you want lol
5/28/2013 3:17 PM
Posted by emy1013 on 5/28/2013 3:15:00 PM (view original):
Posted by colonels19 on 5/28/2013 3:08:00 PM (view original):
Posted by emy1013 on 5/28/2013 3:08:00 PM (view original):
Posted by gillispie1 on 5/27/2013 9:03:00 PM (view original):
Posted by stinenavy on 5/27/2013 3:31:00 PM (view original):
Oh good lord, emy the cheater talking about doing the right thing the first time, when he chose to ignore the rules for a year because they were to his detriment.
emy, if its any consolation, if you saw a picture of this guy... he looks like JUST as big a douchebag as he comes across here. i dont know about you, but that made me feel a little better about the whole situation.

I saw the picture......you're right. 

I too just saw it on facebook...LOFL!
I didn't even see the Facebook one yet.  Surely it can't be worse......
what picture did you see? are there pictures on HD somewhere? i had to take 5 minutes and find his full name & address before i was able to find a picture... there were pretty many, the one in my mind is the crossed-arms mega-deuchey pose standing in front of a boat. if you didnt see that one, then yes, it can be worse :)
5/28/2013 3:18 PM
LMAO! Sounds like I'm missing out lol...I'm googling ahora.
5/28/2013 3:19 PM
Enough with the threats of real-life harassment.
5/28/2013 9:26 PM
This nonsense has nothing to do with the poll. Feel free to start your own thread for this.
5/28/2013 9:30 PM
i wasnt aware there was a rule about staying on topic? please, mr forum police, please direct me to that rule. what a joke. i suggest you redline this one too. joking about fedexing a guy dog crap has to be the sorriest excuse for a threat of real life harassment ive ever heard. 
5/28/2013 9:34 PM
Posted by gillispie1 on 5/28/2013 9:34:00 PM (view original):
i wasnt aware there was a rule about staying on topic? please, mr forum police, please direct me to that rule. what a joke. i suggest you redline this one too. joking about fedexing a guy dog crap has to be the sorriest excuse for a threat of real life harassment ive ever heard. 
That's for WIS to decide, I guess.

I'd like you to stop using this thread to promote hatred and stalking of a dude you have a personal gripe with. But I'm not going to babysit the thread all night, so I guess if you're not gonna stop, then you're not gonna stop.
5/28/2013 9:40 PM
well, now that you asked nicelyish, ill happily keep future posts in this thread on topic. there really was no promoting of hatred or stalking though... and i for one cant see how anything i said was as bad as the negative, condescending, and derogatory comments that coach has made about others. but i dont have a problem with you wanting this thread to stay on topic.
5/28/2013 9:51 PM (edited)
in retrospect, sorry for taking your thread off topic 
5/29/2013 9:30 AM
There needs to be more firings so more Big 6 jobs open up for up-and-comer coaches who want to move up. The Big 6 schools in my World hardly ever have any turnover.
5/29/2013 9:52 AM
◂ Prev 123
Should coach firings in D1 occur more frequently? Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.