Some thoughts following Charlie Strong's Monday presser

[texbound]

Plus, it puts the pressure clearly on the players to put up or shut up. They don't do it, they can't cry about it.

 

[longhorn_mig]

F it, if Charlie beats TCU then give the man thev4th year. That's not what any of us want, but give it to him with the stipulation that he must get to a New Years 6 bowl. If not, he will be gone. This would all but guarantee D'onta comes back, a lot of 2017 recruits would be talked into coming in for him, and there would be NO EXCUSES. I know this isn't the sentiment of this or any other board out there and we miss out on Herman this year. Herman may very well be available next year as well. I'm just tired of this and what's one more year? Plus it makes that much harder for kids to transfer that are Jr's and starting sophomores. I say F it.

Not at a shot at you. Just made me think of the quote:

 

[texbound]

Not at a shot at you. Just made me think of the quote:

That was perfect

 

[Randolph Duke]

F it, if Charlie beats TCU then give the man thev4th year. That's not what any of us want, but give it to him with the stipulation that he must get to a New Years 6 bowl. If not, he will be gone. This would all but guarantee D'onta comes back, a lot of 2017 recruits would be talked into coming in for him, and there would be NO EXCUSES. I know this isn't the sentiment of this or any other board out there and we miss out on Herman this year. Herman may very well be available next year as well. I'm just tired of this and what's one more year? Plus it makes that much harder for kids to transfer that are Jr's and starting sophomores. I say F it.

Exactly what about LOSING TO KANSAS makes anyone think we are seeing improvement?

Texas just isn't a good fit for Charlie Strong. he isn't getting it done. First it was supposed to be eight wins and he keeps his job. Then it because seven wins. Now it's six wins.

UT Austin just has horribly weak leadership from the president to the AD. Nothing has been done to clean up the waste and bloat inside Bellmont, they can't manage the coaching issue with the football team and there is a very real possibility the coaching situation gets FAR worse in the very near future.

It's amazing how rudderless the athletics program is.

 

[utb040713]

F it, if Charlie beats TCU then give the man thev4th year. That's not what any of us want, but give it to him with the stipulation that he must get to a New Years 6 bowl. If not, he will be gone. This would all but guarantee D'onta comes back, a lot of 2017 recruits would be talked into coming in for him, and there would be NO EXCUSES. I know this isn't the sentiment of this or any other board out there and we miss out on Herman this year. Herman may very well be available next year as well. I'm just tired of this and what's one more year? Plus it makes that much harder for kids to transfer that are Jr's and starting sophomores. I say F it.

The administration has put UT in a position where this almost (not quite, but almost) makes the most sense.

There's 3 scenarios at this point, assuming Charlie is fired:

1) They reverse course and fire Charlie before TCU. This would be an embarrassment to the program, the players, and most of all to Charlie, and would be viewed as extremely disrespectful.

2) UT beats TCU, and they still fire Charlie. This could actually be the worst scenario of the bunch, as it will give the impression that the decision was already made. This will almost certainly piss off the players enormously.

3) UT loses to TCU, and the administration has even more justification for firing Charlie.

This whole situation should've been given the "Band-Aid" treatment: rip it off quickly to minimize the pain. Now, we're in a position where I would be willing to bet that the administration wants UT to lose their last game. We should never be in that position. They already have their justification for firing him, but they're not using it.

 

[longhorn_mig]

Exactly what about LOSING TO KANSAS makes anyone think we are seeing improvement?

Texas just isn't a good fit for Charlie Strong. he isn't getting it done. First it was supposed to be eight wins and he keeps his job. Then it because seven wins. Now it's six wins.

UT Austin just has horribly weak leadership from the president to the AD. Nothing has been done to clean up the waste and bloat inside Bellmont, they can't manage the coaching issue with the football team and there is a very real possibility the coaching situation gets FAR worse in the very near future.

It's amazing how rudderless the athletics program is.

I think texbound's comment had more to do with a complete lack of confidence in the administration and leadership. It stems from some shared sentiment that the administration and leadership is going to find some way to f@#$ this up.

 

[Embrey]

4) We are following up with some sources today, but there is a concentrated effort to control the narrative after having several leaks yesterday. Today's events turned Strong into a sympathetic figure advocating for his job with a strong show of support from his players. Our sources were pretty adamant that a decision had been made, and several key people were notified yesterday. That said, all bets are off with this administration. If things stick to the way they were yesterday we expect an announcement to be made following the TCU game, but again the door is open a crack for a comeback.

5) This is what happens when you don't have an experienced AD presiding over things. Texas has a potential PR nightmare on their hands for the 2nd time in 3 years. That's not a great look leading into a potential job search. Texas needs to make a move on the AD front as quickly as they can to establish some stability at the upper level of the program.

Mr. Roach, I am going to make some assumptions and ask some questions. You are welcome and encouraged to answer as well as correct me where I am wrong.

1. If your sources were 'pretty adamant' that a decision had been made to fire Charlie, I think it is fair to say your sources are neither Perrin nor Fenves? Why would Perrin or Fenves be 'pretty adamant'? They would know already.

2. If your sources were neither Perrin nor Fenves, how do you know there is a concentrated effort to control the leaks? Do we have a rogue person or persons working for the administration that spilled the beans? Does anybody believe that the administration can control the donors stating their opinions publicly? Is your source for the 'effort to control the leaks' different from your sources about Charlie's firing?

3. In your point #5 above, is that your opinion only or have your source(s) complained about the inexperience of the AD?

4. I have heard that many players said that Charlie told them that he had been fired effective immediately after the TCU game. According to your sources, did Charlie say that or did he let them know that there were forces at play in this matter that were going to have him fired?

I ask this because in his press conference Charlie said he would never lie to his team. He also stated that no, he did not tell them he had been fired.

 

[Mike Roach]

4) We are following up with some sources today, but there is a concentrated effort to control the narrative after having several leaks yesterday. Today's events turned Strong into a sympathetic figure advocating for his job with a strong show of support from his players. Our sources were pretty adamant that a decision had been made, and several key people were notified yesterday. That said, all bets are off with this administration. If things stick to the way they were yesterday we expect an announcement to be made following the TCU game, but again the door is open a crack for a comeback.

5) This is what happens when you don't have an experienced AD presiding over things. Texas has a potential PR nightmare on their hands for the 2nd time in 3 years. That's not a great look leading into a potential job search. Texas needs to make a move on the AD front as quickly as they can to establish some stability at the upper level of the program.

Mr. Roach, I am going to make some assumptions and ask some questions. You are welcome and encouraged to answer as well as correct me where I am wrong.

1. If your sources were 'pretty adamant' that a decision had been made to fire Charlie, I think it is fair to say your sources are neither Perrin nor Fenves? Why would Perrin or Fenves be 'pretty adamant'? They would know already.

2. If your sources were neither Perrin nor Fenves, how do you know there is a concentrated effort to control the leaks? Do we have a rogue person or persons working for the administration that spilled the beans? Does anybody believe that the administration can control the donors stating their opinions publicly? Is your source for the 'effort to control the leaks' different from your sources about Charlie's firing?

3. In your point #5 above, is that your opinion only or have your source(s) complained about the inexperience of the AD?

4. I have heard that many players said that Charlie told them that he had been fired effective immediately after the TCU game. According to your sources, did Charlie say that or did he let them know that there were forces at play in this matter that were going to have him fired?

I ask this because in his press conference Charlie said he would never lie to his team. He also stated that no, he did not tell them he had been fired.

Going to try my best to answer this openly without giving away too much about our sources.

1. What I was trying to convey was that the word we received yesterday indicated the decision was made and communicated. It wasn't an official announcement (which is why they were able to deny it), but more of a writing on the wall type thing.

2. The tone of people we spoke with changed last night. The information didn't, but folks became much more tight lipped. It was almost like someone told them to be quiet.

3. There have certainly been a few complaints, !76 that point was my opinion.

4. Multiple sources inside the team meeting confirmed that the team was told Charlie wouldn't return next season. I'm not here to call him a liar, just telling you what we were told.

 

[longhorn_mig]

Apparently from OB (yes, I know...don't shoot the messenger):

- Strong told the kids last night that he would not be returning next year. It's done, and the players and coaches know that.

- Players were super pissed and said they would not play against TCU without Strong as the coach. If he was fired today and not allowed to finish the season like Fenves promised, they would not show up to the game Friday.

- Players believed Strong was coming back had they just beaten Kansas.

- The PC today was not to try and save his job. It was to communicate why things went wrong, in hopes that it would help him going forward. 

- Believe it or not, as much as the kids love Strong, some offensive players are excited about the potential opportunity to play for a guy like Herman. If Herman does get the job, expect current recruiting concerns to change in a hurry.

- Guys like Malik and Omenihu wanted the team to be there today to support Strong. They feel like they are ultimately responsible for him being fired.

 

[dillohorn]

I didn't see the scoreboards improve any.

 

[Embrey]

First of all, Mike, you just went up about 10 levels in my book. I really appreciate your effort to answer what you could without divulging sources.

Second, I definitely did not surmise from your comments you were calling Charlie a liar so if that is what you thought I implied, forgive me for not being clear.

On that topic, your response to my #4 above states that 'the team was told that Charlie wouldn't return next season'.

1. Did Charlie tell them that?

2. If not, who did?

 

[Mike Roach]

First of all, Mike, you just went up about 10 levels in my book. I really appreciate your effort to answer what you could without divulging sources.

Second, I definitely did not surmise from your comments you were calling Charlie a liar so if that is what you thought I implied, forgive me for not being clear.

On that topic, your response to my #4 above states that 'the team was told that Charlie wouldn't return next season'.

1. Did Charlie tell them that?

2. If not, who did?

I didn't think you were implying that. I know what he said and I didn't want any confusion over my comments.

From what we were told yesterday, Charlie told the kids at the team meeting.

 

[Embrey]

I didn't think you were implying that. I know what he said and I didn't want any confusion over my comments.

From what we were told yesterday, Charlie told the kids at the team meeting.

Now it is beginning to make sense. Charlie did not lie to his team. It is not his job to tell the truth in the press conference. It is his job to win games.

 

[DMAC]

Exactly what about LOSING TO KANSAS makes anyone think we are seeing improvement?

 

[tejasrulz]

Mike is our football reporter and Senior recruiting analyst.  And yes, he's damn good!

He's aight    

 

[shotime73]

LMAO tejas you had to put Sanford and Son ? Lol I love your taste in TV

 

[java]

What you just summed up is what I got out of the PC.  I didn't think Charlie was lobbying to get his job back.  For one thing, I don't think he's that type of man, and I did think that the team was there in a show of support.  Arms crossed, they looked pretty formidable.  Kirk,  , certainly didn't behave like his typical obnoxious self.

I don't know how many of you heard Paul Boyette say, he would like to beat TCU, because it would give them more time with Coach Strong.  That sounds like they know he won't be here any longer.  I don't think we need to discuss who will coach a bowl game.

I understand that many of us have PTSD, brought on by the botched dealings of our administration over the past few years.  I fervently hope that this time will be different, and I think it will be.  For one thing, Charlie is not like Mack.  For another, the people that they name buildings after darn sure don't want the same thing happening again, and are willing to foot the bill, if and only if, they can make certain that it doesn't.  UT has the Medical School to think about, UT Houston, and a future basketball arena.  I really don't think Fenves wants to screw any of that up.  He darn sure can't ask me to write a check.  Well, he could, but it wouldn't do any good.

Hook 'em!

 

[texbound]

I think texbound's comment had more to do with a complete lack of confidence in the administration and leadership. It stems from some shared sentiment that the administration and leadership is going to find some way to f@#$ this up.

It's about 75% that. I thought the time to fire him was Sunday. They've kind of backed themselves into a corner on this one. That feeling also stems from personal experience. I'm a HS basketball coach and while this isn't the same level of competition, my current situation is kind of similar. I starting coaching at this HS and they were terrible. When I say terrible, that's not doing it justice. I should point out that I'm not the head coach, but he brought me in when he was hired as his assistant HC. Anyway, the upperclassmen were bad and they were extremely hard to coach. We sat down as a coaching staff and decided to cut 5 of them before the season because we thought they would stunt the development of the younger ones with bad habits. We had a good group of freshman (10) coming in and we were excited. Well, we began the season by starting 3 of the freshman with 5 of the others seeing a lot of minutes. We went 3-22 that year. It was brutal.

The next year we were excited about the sophomores only to find out they didn't progress as much as we had hoped. We fared a little better that year, but still terrible. We finished that season 7-18. Much worse than what we anticipated. All we heard from the parents was how great this class was in the 8th grade and how we should be winning our conference. We play in a tough conference and we told the parents that there is only so much we can control.

Their Jr year, we decided to temper our expectations and focused more on team oriented things and not so much individual drills. That year (last year) they dramatically improved and we finished the season, the schools first winning season in 26 years, with a record of 17-8. Bonus that we made it to the regional finals. We lost the regional game to the state of Illinois runner-up.

This year, the players are more mature and we've started the season on fire. We've played 3 perennial playoff teams and 2 average teams and have destroyed them by an avg of 19 points a game (currently stand at 5-0).

I know trying to compare HS basketball to college football is apples to oranges. Point is, it took some time for these players to grow up and become the players we thought they would be. That has also led to more players flocking to the program instead of playing select soccer or whatever else they play. Now we have a solid pipeline into the program. We are not gods gift to coaching, but our patience has worked out so far.

Please don't misread that I'm advocating keeping him. I'm just saying I can somewhat relate to his situation.

 

[Sirhornsalot]

I spoke with a source today, after the presser. The BMDs in that particular circle are pretty ticked. Have no idea how serious this is, but the idea of a double firing was thrown out there. That's pretty ticked.

If both an AD and HC are to be replaced, the HC would be first I was told. AD would have to be good with the HC hire upon accepting the job. Concern is for the ability to field a decent recruiting class.

Gas was thrown on a fire today.

 

[Sirhornsalot]

I'm not real concerned about Charlie being carried off the field. Patterson has our number anyway and we just lost to Kansas. TCU will be playing for a bowl just like we are. So we'll hold no real emotional advantage. If Strong was worth winning for, we'd have beaten Kansas.