EagleOutsider.com

Endless Mike {l Wrote}:

b0mberMan {l Wrote}:If Rogers really is out for medical reasons, he should go see our own Dr. English in order to get back to coaching ASAP. If she can get a knee-less Momah out there with a brace, then I'm sure she'd have no problem fixing what ails Rogers.

I think it's fairly obvious what's going on here- Dr. English is digging up corpses in the cemetery near campus and harvesting them for spare parts, making our players and coaching staff walking ghouls. This has NCAA death sentence written all over it.

How do you kill what is already dead?

Endless Mike {l Wrote}:

b0mberMan {l Wrote}:If Rogers really is out for medical reasons, he should go see our own Dr. English in order to get back to coaching ASAP. If she can get a knee-less Momah out there with a brace, then I'm sure she'd have no problem fixing what ails Rogers.

I think it's fairly obvious what's going on here- Dr. English is digging up corpses in the cemetery near campus and harvesting them for spare parts, making our players and coaching staff walking ghouls. This has NCAA death sentence written all over it.

How is this any different than digging up dead domers, which the NCAA has allowed us to do for years?

campion {l Wrote}:

bignick33 {l Wrote}:

pick6pedro {l Wrote}:

bignick33 {l Wrote}:

apbc12 {l Wrote}:You heard it here first, folks--BC is committing insurance fraud to take care of Rogers' buyout.

EO breaking news all over this bitch.

I sure hope FBI Investigator isn't reading this thread.

I'm sure he'll get around to it...

Campion's creation of distinct personalities for his aliases is pretty impressive.

No need to kiss my arse. The foot has that one covered.

"A compliment is something like a kiss through a veil."

BC923 {l Wrote}:

bcnyceagle {l Wrote}:So, supposedly when GDF was asked if Rogers would ever coach again at BC, he started defending himself immediately and saying he wouldn't be afraid to admit if they fired someone.

I don't know whether to think that's a blatantly obvious example of a guilty conscience or GDF already knows about all the criticism and saw right through the question... You'd think his answer would be, "Yes, of course, we'll be glad to have him back as soon as he feels better!"

exactly my thought. Something reeks of shit, and it isn't in my pants.

From the horses mouth on ATL's blog:

I was the guy who asked Gene if Rogers would coach at BC again (I was in back, right hand side if you were facing Gene's podium). Before he spoke, I shook his hand and said hello, and completely chickened out asking him to his face. I didn't want to ask "was he fired?" in the event Rogers is really sick - I felt it might be insensitive. I thought asking if he would coach again at BC would be innocent but telling depending on his answer. He was completely defensive. He replied to the effect "I don't know. He has taken a leave of absence due to illness, which is what happened. I wouldn't say it if weren't so. We've fired coaches before, so we wouldn't put something out that wasn't the case." He either is immediately aware of the firing rumors, or very defensive because it was a firing. He brought the notion of firing up himself, without being prompted.

Yup. A+ to whoever this Galvin guy is.

bcnyceagle {l Wrote}:From the horses mouth on ATL's blog:

I was the guy who asked Gene if Rogers would coach at BC again (I was in back, right hand side if you were facing Gene's podium). Before he spoke, I shook his hand and said hello, and completely chickened out asking him to his face. I didn't want to ask "was he fired?" in the event Rogers is really sick - I felt it might be insensitive. I thought asking if he would coach again at BC would be innocent but telling depending on his answer. He was completely defensive. He replied to the effect "I don't know. He has taken a leave of absence due to illness, which is what happened. I wouldn't say it if weren't so. We've fired coaches before, so we wouldn't put something out that wasn't the case." He either is immediately aware of the firing rumors, or very defensive because it was a firing. He brought the notion of firing up himself, without being prompted.

Yup. A+ to whoever this Galvin guy is.

Gene is 110% aware of the firing rumors.

the thing that i hate about this is that i'm worried that this whole thing will make it less likely that gene will make a change after this season. losing rogers provides an excuse and if the offense improves (things could only go up) it could create a small amount of false momentum going into next season. also, i worry that since gene is already on the defensive from the firing rumors, he'll be less likely to go out on a limb and make a change at the end of the season.

BrightonEagle {l Wrote}:the thing that i hate about this is that i'm worried that this whole thing will make it less likely that gene will make a change after this season. losing rogers provides an excuse and if the offense improves (things could only go up) it could create a small amount of false momentum going into next season. also, i worry that since gene is already on the defensive from the firing rumors, he'll be less likely to go out on a limb and make a change at the end of the season.

Hey, don't forget about all the injures, the youth, and were you at Alumni for the NW game? It was pretty damn hot in there!

TobaccoRoadEagle {l Wrote}:

claver2010 {l Wrote}:

bcnyceagle {l Wrote}:From the horses mouth on ATL's blog:

I was the guy who asked Gene if Rogers would coach at BC again (I was in back, right hand side if you were facing Gene's podium). Before he spoke, I shook his hand and said hello, and completely chickened out asking him to his face. I didn't want to ask "was he fired?" in the event Rogers is really sick - I felt it might be insensitive. I thought asking if he would coach again at BC would be innocent but telling depending on his answer. He was completely defensive. He replied to the effect "I don't know. He has taken a leave of absence due to illness, which is what happened. I wouldn't say it if weren't so. We've fired coaches before, so we wouldn't put something out that wasn't the case." He either is immediately aware of the firing rumors, or very defensive because it was a firing. He brought the notion of firing up himself, without being prompted.

Yup. A+ to whoever this Galvin guy is.

Gene is 110% aware of the firing rumors.

i would assume so, since he fired the guy

That, coupled with the fact he reads and posts on these boards. Yup.

Gene may as well have prefaced his answer with: "I've read what that ATL guy wrote and what they're saying on EO, but here's my story and I'm sticking with it . . ."

BrightonEagle {l Wrote}:the thing that i hate about this is that i'm worried that this whole thing will make it less likely that gene will make a change after this season. losing rogers provides an excuse and if the offense improves (things could only go up) it could create a small amount of false momentum going into next season. also, i worry that since gene is already on the defensive from the firing rumors, he'll be less likely to go out on a limb and make a change at the end of the season.

Less likely? It's not a matter of that. Just plain unlikely? Not that either. Given the way Gene is playing his cards in this instance and in the past, the chances of him dropping Spaz at season end are somewhere between "extremely remote" and "non-existent, period." I'm convinced the only way Spaz goes is if Gene goes. And the only way Gene goes (short of his own health issues) is that Leahy is awakened from his blissful ignorance/disinterest in athletics by a massive drop in revenues. No one buying tickets or showing up for the games; no one donating to the school, citing the embarrassing football program.

It's been suggested to me that most alums who donate, especially those who donate the big bucks, do so for reasons that have nothing to do with--and are unaffected by--the fortunes of the football team. I disagree. We are not Notre Dame, where the big money is centrally tied to the school's football identity. But nor are we Duke, which obviously doesn't rely on gridiron success to steer alumni support at all. We're somewhere in between. As to which model we lean MORE towards--how sizable a dent in donations a football crash would make--well, there's only one way we'll find out: if Gene's gone all of a sudden, there's our answer.

Saying he was fired weakens Gene's position. It makes BC look like a shit show with a power hungry dictator. It scares off good candidates and makes those at BC but not in Yawkey wonder what is going on.

A leave give Gene an excuse to keep Spaz around and an excuse for a poor season. "Things were going to be great but then Kevin Rogers got sick..."

Is the firing thing getting any pub outside of our circles?

Did FHCRD resign as well, or was that just a rumor that was incorrect?

ATLeagle {l Wrote}:Saying he was fired weakens Gene's position. It makes BC look like a shit show with a power hungry dictator. It scares off good candidates and makes those at BC but not in Yawkey wonder what is going on.

A leave give Gene an excuse to keep Spaz around and an excuse for a poor season. "Things were going to be great but then Kevin Rogers got sick..."

Less tin-foil hat-edly, leave makes BC look like less of a shitshow with a power neutral dictator. It comforts good future candidates and those at BC but not in Yawkey, giving them no reason to wonder what is going on.

I keep reading elsewhere (ATLs Blog and TOS): How could they fire Rogers after keeping Tranquill for 2 years.

I'd suggest the following: 1)Tranquill's tenure counts. His hiring is probably the most obvious, difficult to argue against, objective black mark on Spaz' head coaching resume. He was "retired" and had spent time banished in NFL Europe prior to his time at BC. He was almost universally disparaged by UNC and Virginia fans who remember his play calling as dated and unimaginitive in the early '00s. He was too old, and probably never all that great to begin with. His tenure was brutal to watch, predictable, boring and the outcome was rarely in doubt. In short it was 2 years of program damaging misery. Spaz doesn't get to disassociate from that terrible decision because he eventually fired the man. Rather those 2 years count. So 2 miserable games of Rogers playcalling following 2 miserable years of Tranq playcalling are a whole lot different than if Spaz had hired Rogers 1st. 2) It is likely that many football coaches would be turned off by the sheepfaced moaning of our head coach and its reflection in the way he does everything from setting the depth chart to clock management to game execution. I'm sure Tranquill put up with it because he had nowhere else to go and because he had a long history with the HC. Rogers will likely have a coaching job post BC if he is healthy enough. He may not have been willing to have his legacy, such that it is, tarnished by knees before every half time and the prospect of designed clock killing should we ever have a lead. He may have, in short, been difficult to work with for Spaz relative to his predecessor. Certainly stranger things have happened.

Two or three days in and nothing definitive on why this happened?? With all the insider info and secret sources "broken" on this site, no one knows why?? Certainly makes dumping Spaz more difficult in the near term, unless the BOT force a directed change, and then follow up the new coaching announcement with dumping Gene. The biggest debacle in all this is the apparent lack of any "due diligence in coaching selection since the demise of TOB.

eagle9903 {l Wrote}:I keep reading elsewhere (ATLs Blog and TOS): How could they fire Rogers after keeping Tranquill for 2 years.

I'd suggest the following: 1)Tranquill's tenure counts. His hiring is probably the most obvious, difficult to argue against, objective black mark on Spaz' head coaching resume. He was "retired" and had spent time banished in NFL Europe prior to his time at BC. He was almost universally disparaged by UNC and Virginia fans who remember his play calling as dated and unimaginitive in the early '00s. He was too old, and probably never all that great to begin with. His tenure was brutal to watch, predictable, boring and the outcome was rarely in doubt. In short it was 2 years of program damaging misery. Spaz doesn't get to disassociate from that terrible decision because he eventually fired the man. Rather those 2 years count. So 2 miserable games of Rogers playcalling following 2 miserable years of Tranq playcalling are a whole lot different than if Spaz had hired Rogers 1st. 2) It is likely that many football coaches would be turned off by the sheepfaced moaning of our head coach and its reflection in the way he does everything from setting the depth chart to clock management to game execution. I'm sure Tranquill put up with it because he had nowhere else to go and because he had a long history with the HC. Rogers will likely have a coaching job post BC if he is healthy enough. He may not have been willing to have his legacy, such that it is, tarnished by knees before every half time and the prospect of designed clock killing should we ever have a lead. He may have, in short, been difficult to work with for Spaz relative to his predecessor. Certainly stranger things have happened.

Spaz kept Tranq because Tranq was his guy. Rogers was not his guy. Now he got what he supposedly wanted all along: Dave Brock to succeed Tranq.

ATLeagle {l Wrote}:

eagle9903 {l Wrote}:I keep reading elsewhere (ATLs Blog and TOS): How could they fire Rogers after keeping Tranquill for 2 years.

I'd suggest the following: 1)Tranquill's tenure counts. His hiring is probably the most obvious, difficult to argue against, objective black mark on Spaz' head coaching resume. He was "retired" and had spent time banished in NFL Europe prior to his time at BC. He was almost universally disparaged by UNC and Virginia fans who remember his play calling as dated and unimaginitive in the early '00s. He was too old, and probably never all that great to begin with. His tenure was brutal to watch, predictable, boring and the outcome was rarely in doubt. In short it was 2 years of program damaging misery. Spaz doesn't get to disassociate from that terrible decision because he eventually fired the man. Rather those 2 years count. So 2 miserable games of Rogers playcalling following 2 miserable years of Tranq playcalling are a whole lot different than if Spaz had hired Rogers 1st. 2) It is likely that many football coaches would be turned off by the sheepfaced moaning of our head coach and its reflection in the way he does everything from setting the depth chart to clock management to game execution. I'm sure Tranquill put up with it because he had nowhere else to go and because he had a long history with the HC. Rogers will likely have a coaching job post BC if he is healthy enough. He may not have been willing to have his legacy, such that it is, tarnished by knees before every half time and the prospect of designed clock killing should we ever have a lead. He may have, in short, been difficult to work with for Spaz relative to his predecessor. Certainly stranger things have happened.

Spaz kept Tranq because Tranq was his guy. Rogers was not his guy. Now he got what he supposedly wanted all along: Dave Brock to succeed Tranq.

This version creates more problems for me than it solves. Did GDF just give in on his forced hire after 2 games? That really is confusing to me.

eagletx {l Wrote}:Two or three days in and nothing definitive on why this happened?? With all the insider info and secret sources "broken" on this site, no one knows why?? Certainly makes dumping Spaz more difficult in the near term, unless the BOT force a directed change, and then follow up the new coaching announcement with dumping Gene. The biggest debacle in all this is the apparent lack of any "due diligence in coaching selection since the demise of TOB.

Oh come on now, tell me one thing that is more fun than the rumor mill right now when it comes to BC football?

After digesting the news for a few days, the only argument I can think of that makes any of this even plausible is that Spaz and GDF are now inextricably linked. In other words, GDF would have to believe that if Spaz fails now, then he fails too. Rogers as the fall guy after two freaking games is still a bit paranoid for my liking, but I'll grant that it's not logically impossible. Am I correctly understanding the argument of ATL and others for how this could have happened?

On another note, if a move needs to made, it should be made after year three and not year four. If the above theory is valid, then GDF is probably banking on a more talented and experienced (we hope) team in 2012 that faces an easier schedule that would be successful enough to justify year five, six, etc. After four or five years, his ass would no longer be on the line to the degree that it is now (I actually disagree with this line of thinking, because I don't think the higher-ups care about wins and losses; rather that care about the $$ that the program generates, and unless Spaz were to do the impossible for him and win the ACC, I don't see the downward trend of support and lack of excitement reversing). In any event, if a move were made after a failed year four, the rebuild job would be substantially bigger than if were made after this year. While the Skinner situation is not totally apt because he had had a much longer and accomplished tenure at BC than Spaz does, I think that situation was butchered in a few different ways. While Donahue appears to be great hire, he could not have been given a bigger rebuild job. Had the move been made the prior year (or subsequent year, for that matter), then whatever coach would have been hired would have been able to hit the ground running. Instead, we essentially had two consecutive empty recruiting classes. My point is that unless this year is improbably turned around, the coaching change should be made this year and not next so as to minimize the size of the rebuild job. I would hope that this type of long-term thinking, which is been conspicuously absent in BC athletics over the last few years, would be exercised.

eagle9903 {l Wrote}:I keep reading elsewhere (ATLs Blog and TOS): How could they fire Rogers after keeping Tranquill for 2 years.

I'd suggest the following: 1)Tranquill's tenure counts. His hiring is probably the most obvious, difficult to argue against, objective black mark on Spaz' head coaching resume.

Even the Merrymen were critical of the hire.

eagle9903 {l Wrote}:

ATLeagle {l Wrote}:

eagle9903 {l Wrote}:I keep reading elsewhere (ATLs Blog and TOS): How could they fire Rogers after keeping Tranquill for 2 years.

I'd suggest the following: 1)Tranquill's tenure counts. His hiring is probably the most obvious, difficult to argue against, objective black mark on Spaz' head coaching resume. He was "retired" and had spent time banished in NFL Europe prior to his time at BC. He was almost universally disparaged by UNC and Virginia fans who remember his play calling as dated and unimaginitive in the early '00s. He was too old, and probably never all that great to begin with. His tenure was brutal to watch, predictable, boring and the outcome was rarely in doubt. In short it was 2 years of program damaging misery. Spaz doesn't get to disassociate from that terrible decision because he eventually fired the man. Rather those 2 years count. So 2 miserable games of Rogers playcalling following 2 miserable years of Tranq playcalling are a whole lot different than if Spaz had hired Rogers 1st. 2) It is likely that many football coaches would be turned off by the sheepfaced moaning of our head coach and its reflection in the way he does everything from setting the depth chart to clock management to game execution. I'm sure Tranquill put up with it because he had nowhere else to go and because he had a long history with the HC. Rogers will likely have a coaching job post BC if he is healthy enough. He may not have been willing to have his legacy, such that it is, tarnished by knees before every half time and the prospect of designed clock killing should we ever have a lead. He may have, in short, been difficult to work with for Spaz relative to his predecessor. Certainly stranger things have happened.

Spaz kept Tranq because Tranq was his guy. Rogers was not his guy. Now he got what he supposedly wanted all along: Dave Brock to succeed Tranq.

This version creates more problems for me than it solves. Did GDF just give in on his forced hire after 2 games? That really is confusing to me.

That fits with Gene. Think of how quickly things turned with Jim Turner, Bick JR or FHCRD or even Jags. Jags was talking extension with Gene one day and slammed on ESPN the next.

They put in Rogers. Things look bad and they need a scapegoat. "Sorry, Kevin, you're gone. If you have a convincing limp coming out of this room we will add on another $50k to your severance."

Psychology 101, type A personalities often appear erratic when the results of their actions don't align with their expectations. Making a decision and feeling "decisive" becomes the source of validation, rather than making the "right" decision.

ATLeagle {l Wrote}:That fits with Gene. Think of how quickly things turned with Jim Turner, Bick JR or FHCRD or even Jags. Jags was talking extension with Gene one day and slammed on ESPN the next.

This. Gene is a hothead who makes decisions when he is emotional.

So, Atl, you saying that Rogers was the scapegoat for the season? And what of the rumored RD resignation? Looking for something more than the colorful speculations that this board can be counted on for.....Personally, I'd like the real powers that be at BC come in and effectively blow this whole thing up....I believe BC is committed to athletics, and football is the main potential revenue producing medium...Clearly, losing with mediocrity results in no TV revenues, and I know circumstantially that the $$$ issues are real and support is waning...so there must be real pressure to right the ship.....I wouldn't be surprised to see the BOT set up a committee to make the choice on a new HC, with dictated guidelines that are beyond GDF "discretion" to alter, then follow up coaching change with GDF "buy out".
This coaching carousel in all sports (save for hockey) is clearly a continuing soap opera.

eagletx {l Wrote}:So, Atl, you saying that Rogers was the scapegoat for the season? And what of the rumored RD resignation? Looking for something more than the colorful speculations that this board can be counted on for.....Personally, I'd like the real powers that be at BC come in and effectively blow this whole thing up....I believe BC is committed to athletics, and football is the main potential revenue producing medium...Clearly, losing with mediocrity results in no TV revenues, and I know circumstantially that the $$$ issues are real and support is waning...so there must be real pressure to right the ship.....I wouldn't be surprised to see the BOT set up a committee to make the choice on a new HC, with dictated guidelines that are beyond GDF "discretion" to alter, then follow up coaching change with GDF "buy out".
This coaching carousel in all sports (save for hockey) is clearly a continuing soap opera.

I don't think ATL published the RD resignation rumor. I think that was eagleoutsiderrebel on EI. Also, responding generally, do you have more concrete information or are you just being smug?

eagle9903 {l Wrote}:

eagletx {l Wrote}:So, Atl, you saying that Rogers was the scapegoat for the season? And what of the rumored RD resignation? Looking for something more than the colorful speculations that this board can be counted on for.....Personally, I'd like the real powers that be at BC come in and effectively blow this whole thing up....I believe BC is committed to athletics, and football is the main potential revenue producing medium...Clearly, losing with mediocrity results in no TV revenues, and I know circumstantially that the $$$ issues are real and support is waning...so there must be real pressure to right the ship.....I wouldn't be surprised to see the BOT set up a committee to make the choice on a new HC, with dictated guidelines that are beyond GDF "discretion" to alter, then follow up coaching change with GDF "buy out".
This coaching carousel in all sports (save for hockey) is clearly a continuing soap opera.

I don't think ATL published the RD resignation rumor. I think that was eagleoutsiderrebel on EI. Also, responding generally, do you have more concrete information or are you just being smug?

What is the RD stuff he is talking about?

ATLeagle {l Wrote}:

eagle9903 {l Wrote}:

eagletx {l Wrote}:So, Atl, you saying that Rogers was the scapegoat for the season? And what of the rumored RD resignation? Looking for something more than the colorful speculations that this board can be counted on for.....Personally, I'd like the real powers that be at BC come in and effectively blow this whole thing up....I believe BC is committed to athletics, and football is the main potential revenue producing medium...Clearly, losing with mediocrity results in no TV revenues, and I know circumstantially that the $$$ issues are real and support is waning...so there must be real pressure to right the ship.....I wouldn't be surprised to see the BOT set up a committee to make the choice on a new HC, with dictated guidelines that are beyond GDF "discretion" to alter, then follow up coaching change with GDF "buy out".
This coaching carousel in all sports (save for hockey) is clearly a continuing soap opera.

I don't think ATL published the RD resignation rumor. I think that was eagleoutsiderrebel on EI. Also, responding generally, do you have more concrete information or are you just being smug?

What is the RD stuff he is talking about?

a poster on EI, probably an hour or 2 before you originally posted Rogers was fired here, posted along the lines of: Rogers quit, Day resigned but GDF is trying to get him to change his mind, or something along those lines.

Its here: http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=165&f=4286&t=7922825&p=1

Someone on EA posted that Spaz and Day were seen screaming at each other on the sidelines right before the start of the second half at UCF. Didn't see anything over there about Day resigning, but who knows.

I understand the flight back from UCF was very turbulent.

you hope the RD resigning rumor isn't true, for a few reasons, not the least bit that it look really freaking bad to future employers to have bailed on a program mid-season. This isn't flipping burgers - a lot of people want to coach.

JesuitIvy {l Wrote}:you hope the RD resigning rumor isn't true, for a few reasons

You're a fake punt afficianado, I take it?