Early Coach Hot Seat for 2015

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

People saying he has 3 years left? And that Chizik poses no threat because in order to Chizik to succeed, then Fedora succeeds?

So a 4-8 season this year, in which our defense improves to a top 50 defense in the country, but we still lose a bunch of games 17-13 because the rest of the conference figures out Fed's scheme on offense, doesn't spell the end for Fedora - and open the door for Chizik?

I don't even think that scenario is that far-fetched. As an alumni/fan I would be disgusted if Bubba is fine keeping us on the path to mediocrity for 3 years knowing it isn't going to turn around.

Again, I like Fedora.... but I like winning more. If he can't do the job, get someone in there who can. You can make excuses for him all you want (Butch's guys, sanctions, blah blah blah) at some point, you gotta turn the page.

 

[Raising Heel]

Originally posted by Hark_The_Sound_2010:

Maybe Bubba is putting a lot of weight on the sanctions hindering Fed's success, but I would have to imagine that excuse is starting to wear out.

I don't think you've done the math on the impact of three years of scholarship limitations. The cumulative effect is worst in years 3 and 4, which would be the 2014 and 2015 seasons.

 

[Raising Heel]

Originally posted by GoNtheDistance:
He tells you how good he is and how good we are going to be....

I'd like to see a link to either of these claims. Sure, he's talked big about "smart, fast, and physical" but if anything he's been pretty candid about our shortcomings in interviews.

Him seeming cocky and actually saying something cocky are two different things.

 

[Raising Heel]

Originally posted by gunslingerdick:

Well, win 10 games and I won't criticize his visor or his choice of uniforms. Lose by 30 to your biggest rival on your way to a pitiful 6-7 season and it's open season on pretty much anything...including his mom.

That earlier comment about the fanbase's disconnection from reality? Yeah, looking at you.

The problem is that you're unwilling to evaluate Fedora in the context of everything affecting the football program, including the roster issues (academic attrition and scholarship reductions) and the impact on recruiting due to the possibility of further sanctions. Both of those things are completely beyond his control. While 6-7 was disappointing, especially the way the season finished, it was in no way "pitiful" to reasonable fans.

Before somebody bashes me for defending Fedora, I'll go on record stating that I have a lot of issues with his tenure so far. The no-shows against ECU, NC State, and others are inexcusable. Those teams were unprepared to play. I also have grave concerns about player development. I'd have a hard time naming more than 5 players who I think have greatly improved in Fedora's time here. And of course there are the ballsy game-day decisions that look great when they work but put us in a bind when they don't.

Anyway, it's just my opinion but I think it's unfair for people to judge Fedora based on his record alone. And far as personality and wardrobe, well, that just sounds like soap opera drama to me. I don't care about either.

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

Originally posted by Raising Heel:

Originally posted by Hark_The_Sound_2010:

Maybe Bubba is putting a lot of weight on the sanctions hindering Fed's success, but I would have to imagine that excuse is starting to wear out.

I don't think you've done the math on the impact of three years of scholarship limitations. The cumulative effect is worst in years 3 and 4, which would be the 2014 and 2015 seasons.

I mean, I get that the sanctions hurt, after all, why would they impose them if it didn't negatively impact the team they were trying to punish?

But still - do you think an extra 10 (or whatever the number is) players on the team, would have gotten a win instead of the 70-41 beatdown we took from ECU, or the 35-7 whooping at home from our biggest football rival, State? Those games just weren't close enough to give the sanctions argument much credence, IMO.

You're a more knowlegable fan than I, I'm not questioning that, and I enjoy reading your posts. But the "average" UNC fan is less knowlegable than both of us, and they don't really care what the excuse is. If the team's not winning, and not making changes to act like they're trying to win (aka firing a coach that can't get the job done) then people will stop showing up to the games (more than they already have) and send the program in a downward spiral. I realize I'm somewhat advocating "throwing the baby out with the bath water" even if it's not all Fed's fault... but sometimes that needs to be done to save face.

 

[gunslingerdick]

Originally posted by Raising Heel:

Originally posted by gunslingerdick:

Well, win 10 games and I won't criticize his visor or his choice of uniforms. Lose by 30 to your biggest rival on your way to a pitiful 6-7 season and it's open season on pretty much anything...including his mom.

That earlier comment about the fanbase's disconnection from reality? Yeah, looking at you.

The problem is that you're unwilling to evaluate Fedora in the context of everything affecting the football program, including the roster issues (academic attrition and scholarship reductions) and the impact on recruiting due to the possibility of further sanctions. Both of those things are completely beyond his control. While 6-7 was disappointing, especially the way the season finished, it was in no way "pitiful" to reasonable fans.

Before somebody bashes me for defending Fedora, I'll go on record stating that I have a lot of issues with his tenure so far. The no-shows against ECU, NC State, and others are inexcusable. Those teams were unprepared to play. I also have grave concerns about player development. I'd have a hard time naming more than 5 players who I think have greatly improved in Fedora's time here. And of course there are the ballsy game-day decisions that look great when they work but put us in a bind when they don't.

Anyway, it's just my opinion but I think it's unfair for people to judge Fedora based on his record alone. And far as personality and wardrobe, well, that just sounds like soap opera drama to me. I don't care about either.

I want a coach that can win despite being hamstrung by "problems out of his control". Or at the very least, I want close losses. I want to see improvement. Can you say we were a more fundamentally sound team in 2014 than we were in 2013? I can't. Can you say we competed harder in every game in 2014 than we did in 2013? I can't.

 

[Raising Heel]

Originally posted by Hark_The_Sound_2010:

But still - do you think an extra 10 (or whatever the number is) players on the team, would have gotten a win instead of the 70-41 beatdown we took from ECU, or the 35-7 whooping at home from our biggest football rival, State? Those games just weren't close enough to give the sanctions argument much credence, IMO.

No, I don't. We were no-shows for both those games, and as I said above that's inexcusable. But I do think the extra numbers could have made a difference in some close losses like Virginia Tech, Notre Dame, and maybe even Clemson.

Originally posted by gunslingerdick:
I want a coach that can win despite being hamstrung by "problems out of his control". Or at the very least, I want close losses. I want to see improvement. Can you say we were a more fundamentally sound team in 2014 than we were in 2013? I can't. Can you say we competed harder in every game in 2014 than we did in 2013? I can't. [/QUOTE]I've already addressed the issue of fundamentals and player development, so you know I agree there. I've addressed the "competing harder" issue as well. On the other hand, I will argue that UNC's schedule has gotten progressively more difficult during Fedora's tenure here...2015 represents what's likely a reversal of that trend. Otherwise I think those are fair points. I would add to that that there was undoubtedly dissension among the ranks -- players and coaches, coaches and coaches, whatever -- that I hope gets ironed out with the staff changes.

 

[GoNtheDistance]

without getting into the debate about the effects of the scholarship reduction, it's worth noting that Fedora never used that as an excuse when we won, but always seemed to latch onto it recently when we lost. He then backpedals a bit and admits we need to improve in key facets of the game, specifically defense, which have nothing to do with the scholarship reduction. I think Fed and many on this board find the scholarship reduction as a convenient excuse when necessary. Is there some validity to the argument, sure there is, but I don't think the scholarship reduction is the primary contributor to the failures we've had in our program in recent years.

 

[Raising Heel]

Originally posted by GoNtheDistance:
without getting into the debate about the effects of the scholarship reduction, it's worth noting that Fedora never used that as an excuse when we won, but always seemed to latch onto it recently when we lost.

Again, I'm asking you for a link. I don't recall Fedora ever mentioning scholarship limitations, but naturally I haven't followed everything he's ever said.