• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

THE HOME RUN HIRE POLL

Who is a home run hire

  • Total voters
    138
  • Poll closed .
WFU Lurker said:
That's because you were fundamentally wrong about how bad he was. You saw Y3 as a trajectory year, and Y4 as an outlier year when it was clearly the opposite.
Click to expand...

It wasn’t clearly anything. Unless you have access to the alternate universe where Crawford and Moore are on this year’s team. And for the record I don’t think my answer to that question changes this year if Wellman hadn’t retired.
 
RChildress107 said:
And . . .?

When you fire one coach I was under the impression that you typically hire another one. I didn’t want Wellman to hire another coach, therefore I didn’t want Manning to be fired. It’s pretty simple BS.
Click to expand...

FIFY
 
RChildress107 said:
It wasn’t clearly anything. Unless you have access to the alternate universe where Crawford and Moore are on this year’s team. And for the record I don’t think my answer to that question changes this year if Wellman hadn’t retired.
Click to expand...


Nah, it was pretty clear. We had three years at the same level. One year at a much higher level. Pretty clear which one was the outlier.

Y2, which you ignore in all of your analysis, set what trajectory actually was. That team did have Crawford and Moore on it (+ Collins + Devin + CMM) and stunk just as much as the Y1 and Y4.
 
RChildress107 said:
And . . .?

When you fire one coach I was under the impression that you typically hire another one. I didn’t want Wellman to hire another coach, therefore I didn’t want Manning to be fired. It’s pretty simple logic.
Click to expand...

Except that wasn’t your logic above.
 
RacerDeac said:
His argument has been consistent. He has the highest of high standards for Wake Forest. Higher than anyone else here. Which is why he argued that we needed to give Manning more time. It makes complete sense to the bipolar amongst us.
Click to expand...

RChildress107 said:
You keep saying this. I never have.

And even if I did, the two aren’t inconsistent. I do have higher standards here than most, apparently (can’t say if I have higher standards than you because you either don’t have any or refuse to tell anyone what they are). #5-7 in the ACC isn’t good enough. I’m also not going to pitch a fit if we aren’t #1-4, or even #5-7, within three years. As 93-94 points out, it’s a decade or longer process.
Click to expand...

RChildress107 said:
And . . .?

When you fire one coach I was under the impression that you typically hire another one. I didn’t want Wellman to hire another coach, therefore I didn’t want Manning to be fired. It’s pretty simple logic.
Click to expand...

Saying you have NEVER said we should give manning more time is not the same as your last point. Just take the L.
 
PhDeac said:
You specifically said he shouldn’t be fired.
Click to expand...

Also, hindsight being 20/20, I was right.

This was about the best case scenario for Wake basketball at this point last year. Hoard was just bad enough that it looks like he’ll stay another year, Manning was bad enough to force Wellman out, and the team doesn’t look like they hate each other.

So in year 6 we have the coach of our choice (assuming Currie is any good) with a reasonably talented roster. The most likely alternative was being locked into year 2 of shitty coach #3 with a depleted roster.
 
RChildress107 said:
Also, hindsight being 20/20, I was right.

This was about the best case scenario for Wake basketball at this point last year. Hoard was just bad enough that it looks like he’ll stay another year, Manning was bad enough to force Wellman out, and the team doesn’t look like they hate each other.

So in year 6 we have the coach of our choice (assuming Currie is any good) with a reasonably talented roster. The most likely alternative was being locked into year 2 of shitty coach #3 with a depleted roster.
Click to expand...

Holy shit. Legit just started laughing out loud in the middle of the office. Thanks RChill...RJ can't come close to that kind of comedy.
 
Let's just ignore the fact that Danny Manning is the reason Craw, DM and Woods all left, and then make an argument that we would have been better with more talent. But, but... come on man! You shift the parameters of your arguments like the wind. Danny Manning is NOT a good coach. End of story. Thank God the BoT or PTB stepped up and pushed out Wellman. The program now has a modicum of hope of turning things around.

You on the other hand, keep diggin' your grave deeper. Not gonna get any support for sticking around.

I apologize, I was wrong, no reason to reconsider NoChill's fate. See, that wasn't hard to do now was it? You can say it...I was wrrrr....wrrrroong.
 
RacerDeac said:
Holy shit. Legit just started laughing out loud in the middle of the office. Thanks RChill...RJ can't come close to that kind of comedy.
Click to expand...

I’m here to serve.

Honest question though, which scenario do you think leaves Wake better off:

A. Wellman fires Manning after year 4, pays the full buyout amount, and then hires the coach of his choice among the options available to Wellman.

B. Currie fires Manning next week, pays the buyout amount minus 1 year, and then hires the coach of his choice among the options available to Currie.

Would anyone seriously choose A, now knowing that B is available?
 
Why the Deac Not said:
Let's just ignore the fact that Danny Manning is the reason Craw, DM and Woods all left, and then make an argument that we would have been better with more talent. But, but... come on man! You shift the parameters of your arguments like the wind. Danny Manning is NOT a good coach. End of story. Thank God the BoT or PTB stepped up and pushed out Wellman. The program now has a modicum of hope of turning things around.

You on the other hand, keep diggin' your grave deeper. Not gonna get any support for sticking around.

I apologize, I was wrong, no reason to reconsider NoChill's fate. See, that wasn't hard to do now was it? You can say it...I was wrrrr....wrrrroong.
Click to expand...

He has been a horrible coach at Wake. I’ve said so repeatedly. Not sure I ever claimed he was a good coach, and I certainly haven’t the last couple of years.
 
RChildress107 said:
If this is Clawson’s peak (I don’t think it is) then at some point we should move on. Football is different, but the same principles apply. Clawson needs to establish Wake as the clear best program in North Carolina and be ready to take advantage if Clemson has a down year or falls off in the future.
Click to expand...

I agree. And I think that is absolutely what I am saying about basketball too. If football we should aspire to be the best program in this state and in a position to challenge Clemson when that down year potentially happens. Agreed. But you would agree that means that Clemson is the "blue blood" in this scenario and we are outside that but in a position to knock them off once in a while. Right? That's all I'm saying for bball too. In this case, we are better than everyone else consistently than maybe the blue blood programs. But when they're vulnerable, we pick up an ACC Championship here and there. I think that is a lofty, but reasonable goal. I still contend that we should shoot to be the best of the rest as our first step.
 
Why the Deac Not said:
Let's just ignore the fact that Danny Manning is the reason Craw, DM and Woods all left, and then make an argument that we would have been better with more talent. But, but... come on man! You shift the parameters of your arguments like the wind. Danny Manning is NOT a good coach. End of story. Thank God the BoT or PTB stepped up and pushed out Wellman. The program now has a modicum of hope of turning things around.

You on the other hand, keep diggin' your grave deeper. Not gonna get any support for sticking around.

I apologize, I was wrong, no reason to reconsider NoChill's fate. See, that wasn't hard to do now was it? You can say it...I was wrrrr....wrrrroong.
Click to expand...

I’ve already admitted where I was wrong, repeatedly, across several threads.
 
Deacs9394 said:
I agree. And I think that is absolutely what I am saying about basketball too. If football we should aspire to be the best program in this state and in a position to challenge Clemson when that down year potentially happens. Agreed. But you would agree that means that Clemson is the "blue blood" in this scenario and we are outside that but in a position to knock them off once in a while. Right? That's all I'm saying for bball too. In this case, we are better than everyone else consistently than maybe the blue blood programs. But when they're vulnerable, we pick up an ACC Championship here and there. I think that is a lofty, but reasonable goal. I still contend that we should shoot to be the best of the rest as our first step.
Click to expand...

Got it. And I’m saying fuck that. There’s no reason we can’t be to ACC basketball what Clemson currently is to ACC football. Like I said, football is different.
 
RChildress107 said:
Got it. And I’m saying fuck that. There’s no reason we can’t be to ACC basketball what Clemson currently is to ACC football. Like I said, football is different.
Click to expand...

That seems to be a bit of a stretch. I think we'd all be happy with an occasional win over Clemson. But we're NEVER going to be on their level for any length of time. Even with Clawson. We might as well just put that thought out of our heads...life's too short for such unrealistic expectations. We don't have to be "LOWF" but we can be freakin' reasonable.
 
RChildress107 said:
I’ve already admitted where I was wrong, repeatedly, across several threads.
Click to expand...

Perhaps so, but you keep doubling down on a lot of pointless debate, but then again, you already thumbed your nose at ITC reversing course on letting you "welch" on your bet. As if that was really such an honorable hill to die on. I do believe it's much more than that which caused us to arrive here, at the crossroads of your message board life.
 
RChildress107 said:
I’m here to serve.

Honest question though, which scenario do you think leaves Wake better off:

A. Wellman fires Manning after year 4, pays the full buyout amount, and then hires the coach of his choice among the options available to Wellman.

B. Currie fires Manning next week, pays the buyout amount minus 1 year, and then hires the coach of his choice among the options available to Currie.

Would anyone seriously choose A, now knowing that B is available?
Click to expand...

You're not in the field of Economics are you? These are hindsight scenarios that we didn't have the luxury of considering. We can only consider what we have at the time. And you kept choosing Manning, even though nothing about his coaching fit into the formula of criterion you kept trying to calculate.

Also, in scenario A, without knowing the actual God's honest truth about Manning's buyout, it's hard to really say one way or another. In a normal situation, both Bzdoofus and Manning probably would never have been hired to begin with. So I will agree with you that Wellman has been as much a problem as Manning. But does scenario also include proof that Dino slept with co-eds or banged somebody he shouldn't have? We could play that sort of game all day, but what's the point?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top