http<span style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow">://www.gatorsports.com/article/20081215/COLUMNISTS/812150908/1044?Title=SEC_superiority_just_took_a_hit</span>
Check out this article by Pat Dooley
- Thread starter 4MSU2007
- Start date
http<span style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow">://www.gatorsports.com/article/20081215/COLUMNISTS/812150908/1044?Title=SEC_superiority_just_took_a_hit</span>
That sounded like the typical crap I'd expect from any writer that is trying to appeal to a particular school's fanbase. Notice how he didn't want to outright dig on Mullen, so he took a swipe at Hudspeth. Also notice that he pretty much left it open-ended, and not saying absolutely that any of the three hires would fail.
So I guess Mullen didn't have anything to do with Florida's success? Sure sounds like he's not worth a damn or something, according to this douche.
Also, I wonder if anyone might point out to the douche that while he's on his high horse about black coaches(when's the last time Florida hired a black coach?), he showed his own bigotry towards Bulldog fans and their "accents."
Also, I wonder if anyone might point out to the douche that while he's on his high horse about black coaches(when's the last time Florida hired a black coach?), he showed his own bigotry towards Bulldog fans and their "accents."
they talk about how a program hired so and so white guy when they should have hired so and so black guy. How do these people know if this black coach wasnt offered and declined? How do they know that Charlie Strong at Florida hasnt been offered a head coaching job and declined? I know we interviewed him back when we hired O, but I have no idea if it was a dog and pony show or if we actually gaged his interest and saw there really wasnt any. These so called "journalists" try to make everything about the hotbutton topic of the day instead of why it really is a good or bad decision. These jobs had nothing to do with the poor showing for AA head coaches, but all it does for the first half is say how stupid it was not to hire one of the aforementioned AA coaches. I really wish the guy would have just said, "Damn those were some piss poor hires at UT and AU, and a questionable hire at MSU". That would have made a hell of a lot more sense then to tell us why they should have hired Gill or Strong.
Just want to say I dont necessarily think Mullen is a questionable hire, but he seemed to go that direction in his blog.
Just want to say I dont necessarily think Mullen is a questionable hire, but he seemed to go that direction in his blog.
maybe we didn't hire strong because he's a defensive guy and our defense hasn't been too horrible lately while our offense was almost the worst in the country. and maybe his defense finishing 3rd in the conference this year and 7th last year while mullen's offense finished first both years had something to do with it. but that would make too much sense
LSU, Georgia, and Florida are lauded for making "power" hires in Miles (white), Richt (whiter), and Meyer (whitest) but they were the best hire available. Yet when MSU makes the best hire available to us, we are bringing down the conference. He is basically saying "MSU, you test the minority candidates and if they work out, we will steal them and if not, no skin off our back." I also like how this jackass is probably one of the guys saying MSU is a coaching graveyard and that a candidate like Strong would be an idot to come here, but when we don't hire Strong we are racist.The fact of the matter is the SEC is hard enough for the "Big Boys" without schools like MSU, UM, Vandy, and Kentucky being competitive. The hiring of Mullen represents potential for MSU and folks are upset that we would let a great guy like Croom go and possibly threaten the natural order of the SEC.
Kissinger, you are correct. This is just bad journalism. He made a broad statement about none of the three hires being African American coaches. He used Charlies Strong as his example of a qualified AA that once again was passed over for all white boys. This implies that we used race in our decision process. Hello, we were looking for an offensive guy. In case you forgot "Mr. Journalist" we made news about 5 years ago by hiring the first black coach in the SEC. I'm sure Charlie Strong is a fine man and good coach, he just did not fit what State was looking for in a candidate. Also a cheap shot with the obligatory stereo type about Mississippi, hell ever tried to communicate with a coon ***? Talk about butchering the English language, geez.
After giving Croom a shot at being the first black coach in the SEC, we should get a pass on our next few coaching hires without catching hell from the media for hiring white guys. Now I'm not saying only hire white guys. If the best availiable candidate is black we should hire him but if we choose a white guy who we think is best no one should say anything.
coach again. Remember? It's an "impossible situation" so they don't want a black candidate to go into that situation. USC needs to be under fire to hand over the reigns to any black candidate so that the vast media majority can get their candidate in the "right" situation. Hey..even better...how great would it be for Urban Meyer to jump to Notre Dame and then Florida be under pressure to name Strong their Head Coach. Oh, that would be sweet irony!
these two statements made me the most angry and shows his lack of research:
1. They'll give Dan Mullen a chance but not Charlie Strong.
2. Mullen to Mississippi State was odd because he has no ties to the state of Mississippi
For the first one: Charlie Strong is a DC and we wanted an offensive guy. Has he not seen our offense in the last 5 years under Croom?
For the second: Charlie Strong nor Turner Gill have direct ties to the state of MS. Yeah, Strong was born in and played ball in Arkansas but he has never coached in the state. Gill was born in Texas, played at Nebraska, coached in Texas, Nebraska, Wisconsin, and New York. He could never make a case for Gill on this one and could maybe make a case for Strong but refer to #1 on Strong.
This guy is a moron.
Last night that Mayock prick was on ESPN discussing the same topic. He was on the side of Barkley. Even after the black commentator made the comment that we should be wondering about the hires based on fit, winning record, and philosophy rather than skin color, he still went back and made some sort of BS comment about it being racist. They are all morons.
1. They'll give Dan Mullen a chance but not Charlie Strong.
2. Mullen to Mississippi State was odd because he has no ties to the state of Mississippi
For the first one: Charlie Strong is a DC and we wanted an offensive guy. Has he not seen our offense in the last 5 years under Croom?
For the second: Charlie Strong nor Turner Gill have direct ties to the state of MS. Yeah, Strong was born in and played ball in Arkansas but he has never coached in the state. Gill was born in Texas, played at Nebraska, coached in Texas, Nebraska, Wisconsin, and New York. He could never make a case for Gill on this one and could maybe make a case for Strong but refer to #1 on Strong.
This guy is a moron.
Last night that Mayock prick was on ESPN discussing the same topic. He was on the side of Barkley. Even after the black commentator made the comment that we should be wondering about the hires based on fit, winning record, and philosophy rather than skin color, he still went back and made some sort of BS comment about it being racist. They are all morons.
Turner Gill has no ties to the state of Mississippi. He isn't known as a recruiter (whatever the hell that vague statement means). He's also not the best guy to deal with the accents of the Bulldog fans (yea for insulting southerners! they talk so funny cuz they're stupid).
MaroonInNashville said:
He did take a dig @ Mullen; he went with the prevailing media narrative concerning Mullen & claimed Mullen is a poor recruiter.
Both Kiffin & Mullen were solid hires; the Auburn hire was ****. That is the objective reality of the situation.
Miss. State has done their part to allow a black coach to succeed in the SEC.
Guess what? That black man failed.
Some people are going to have to come to terms with the fact that Miss. State didn't victimize Sly Croom; Sly Croom victimized Miss. State.
I agree that Mullen and Kiffin were both good hires. As far as I'm concerned, we're exempt from the charge because we really did get the best guy we could get. Auburn did not.
But there's one simple thing that throws this whole racism argument out the window for the Tigers: if it really was racism that caused them to pass over Gill, they would've hired a <span style="font-style: italic;">better</span> white guy than they did. I'm convinced that Gill did not want the job, and that no one else did either.
But there's one simple thing that throws this whole racism argument out the window for the Tigers: if it really was racism that caused them to pass over Gill, they would've hired a <span style="font-style: italic;">better</span> white guy than they did. I'm convinced that Gill did not want the job, and that no one else did either.
Also, I went to school with Darryl's mom and have at least a little insight on how screwed up the 'Cuse situation is right now. Turner Gill probably told them no thanks because rebuilding Syracuse is probably going to be a tough as making Buffalo a respectable program. Gross was having trouble even getting guys to talk to him, let alone bringing in a "winner."