forums

DAILY DEBATE: What is the biggest reason for Miami’s struggles the past 20 years?

DMoney said:
.
Click to expand...
recruiting ordinary players and not enough 1st rounders. Easy



Look at the pro bowl and the NFL draft our guys go to coaches who develop all over the NFL and are still the same player rarely improving. We developed them but they hit their ceiling and were who they were here. The NFL production doesn't lie thats the only solid proof you have that has value, everything else is guess work/opinions on why we sucked.

Pause
 
Advertisement
CaneinBroward said:
Actually, I think you're making his point with that example. In 1984 (JJ's first year), the Canes didn't contend for a national title like they had in 1983. They lost 5 games.

I do agree with you though Barry would have won in 2001 - as long as the players stayed (and I think most would have since transfer rules weren't as relaxed then as they are now). If a bunch of them jumped ship, maybe then they don't win it all. But just a coaching change and with all that talent? My mother-in-law could have been HC and won the title that year. The same goes for 2002. How Coker let the Suckeyes even compete in that game let alone win it still ****es me off to this day.
Click to expand...
I think it's in The U Part 2 where Bryant McKinnie says, "What Coach Coker did [in 2001] was zero." Lol
 
Advertisement
Leadership in athletics generally and the football program specifically.

The pre-money era (Randy-Diaz) was defined by poor HC choices, but also minimal investment in what it takes to win off the field. The athletics department was run by a revolving door of weak leaders, each of whom chose the path of least resistance in hiring and in supporting those hires. I don’t think any of the ADs wanted to be involved in the flagship programs’ affairs beyond the moment they hired their guy. When you undercut an already weak HC with poor infrastructure, that’s a match made in ****.

Richt had to help fund the IPF with a million of his own dollars, but even he was a path of least resistance hire. One of the rare instances where a legacy, fall-in-your lap coach actually worked out. He’s the high point of the pre-money era.

Mario is a victim of his limitations as a leader and his insecurities. He may just be desperate enough to get Miami into the playoff 1-2 times in the next decade, which would be a new high point. He needed a leadership structure that he trusted enough to work around his weaknesses, but Rad is not that.
 
Advertisement
1739822764003.png
 
Every time we have this debate, people reach for the low hanging fruit, but few rarely point the finger at the people that should be held accountable. The University of Miami athletic department was allowed to rot because the Board of Trustees, the people with ultimate authority ALLOWED IT TO HAPPEN, and didn't do their jobs. There's no way someone like Blake James should have been allowed to hire Manny Diaz, without interviewing a single qualified candidate. There's no way that the players should have been allowed to pressure Paul Dee into hiring Larry Coker. There's no way that following Coker, Randy Shannon should have been hired. It's almost like the people that should be paying attention to the biggest marketing item at the University didn't give a rip.
 
pacusmc said:
Boats
Hoes
Vegas
Admin not realizing how far back we’ve fallen. Dorms, facilities, staff support etc…
the school began revamping the program with cmr. And they’ve been spending since then and even more since Mario.
But the years from clappy to golden was when the real decline began. And it’s precisely when the cfb facilities arms race started. The sec went all in and we focused on being the “Harvard of the south”.
Click to expand...
This is the issue, our fans think that we can't do both at the same time. There's NOTHING wrong with improving the reputation of the University, and making a commitment to providing a world class educational and research experience.

The issue was that the people that should have given a **** about athletics were fat and lazy, and didn't understand that the way Miami had done things was becoming outdated. Once the SEC bought off the NCAA enforcement apparatus and they were free to do whatever they wanted in regards to player acquisition, it was game over. The people that should have been paying attention(Athletically inclined members of the BOT, athletic directors, major donors), weren't and when someone dared talk about this stuff(Kirby Hocutt), they got tired of fighting the battle and moved on(Kirby also had some issues in his personal life, his family was allegedly miserable in Miami).

I wonder that had Hocutt stayed, and people actually listened to him, could the department have turned the corner earlier than they ultimately did. I remember him talking about "We have to make a commitment to facilities and the modernization of our processes", back when he spoke to some of us alumni at the UF tailgate in 08. Think about had Miami gotten serious in 2009 about building, instead of waiting until Golden was midway through his tenure.
 
Advertisement
Caneofcanes said:
Nah. Him having prior HC experience probably saves us from the abyss.
Click to expand...

Alvarez would have been fine, never mind that as an AD, he's had significant success. Worst case scenario, he would have been better than Coker and Shannon, Miami likely ends up regressing to a 8-10 win program, which is something that is better than what ultimately happened.
 
Canedude08 said:
Alvarez would have been fine, never mind that as an AD, he's had significant success. Worst case scenario, he would have been better than Coker and Shannon, Miami likely ends up regressing to a 8-10 win program, which is something that is better than what ultimately happened.
Click to expand...
I agree he leaves us in better condition than Coker did.
 
Advertisement
Not playing more talented underclassmen over JAGs because they’re upperclassman or not benching starters who played poorly and are undisciplined
 
SinisterCane said:
Not playing more talented underclassmen over JAGs because they’re upperclassman or not benching starters who played poorly and are undisciplined
Click to expand...
Add to add the number one reason for the failures at Miami is the **** poor leadership that have no idea what it takes to run a football program. its **** poor hires or having the resources to support the program but won’t do it unless that’s their favorite candidate

The failure starts and ends with the University of Miami board members
 
Advertisement
Back
Top