I did not make this headline up
There's about a 0% chance that actually happened.
Terry Foster likes to make things up. He does it quite often.
This is the same guy that said that Michigan fired Lloyd Carr. He says and writes stupid things. Luckily for the rest of humanity his newspaper is cutting back, so that mean less Foster, less Sharp, less Parker and less Albom. WIN!
In fairness to Terry Foster, he NEVER said that Lloyd Carr was fired. In fact, he had always stated that Lloyd could've stayed on as head coach for as long as he wanted. I'm not sure where you got that from, Chris. It just isn't true. In regards to the English issue, I'd like to see someone else confirm this. It does seem kind of wacky, but, who the fuck knows? One thing seems fairly certain and that is Jay Hopson will NOT be our next defensive coordinator.
Let me rephrase that, you're right he didn't say "fired" I mis-remembered (is that a word?). Anyway, I've defiantly heard him say that Lloyd was "forced out". I listen to 97.1 a lot.
Foster writes for the News, whereas Sharp and Albom write for the Free Press. I have no idea if the News is cutting back but I know that the Freep is. The Freep is pretty good, if you don't read Sharp's columns haha.
They're both cutting back to 3 deliveries per week.
forced out=fired last time i checked
I think the implication was that retirement was not his choice, hence he was "forced out". But again, we're talking about Terry Foster, so who the F knows.
I listen to Foster and Valenti quite often and have never heard him even infer that Lloyd was somehow forced out as head coach. Foster, like other media figures, has always said that Lloyd could have coached for as long as he wanted to.
It seems to be a poorly researched and vaguely made claim about English. Was English offered the job? Or did he once have that position and, in Foster's mind, have the opportunity to take it again?
I would have to agree alabluema
Maybe English said it happened?
'The major question is can English shake up a dead program and how much financial assistants will he get from boosters and the school.'
As an English major it is my duty to point out some poor work by the editors at the News.
Also: is it true Loeffler was up for the job as well?
as an English major... it's 'assistance'
I'm pretty sure that's the error he was pointing out in his post. Hence the quotations marks.
There is no error in using the word "assistants" in the above-mentioned article. The point being conveyed by the sentence is very clear: can English gather enough accountants, financial planners and the like from among the boosters and the school. I believe this is a valid query, given that the amount of financial expertise among the EMU boosters and school is an unknown quantity.
With that said, the editors of the article did do a sloppy job. The sentence should have read "The major question is can English shake up a dead program and how MANY financial assistants will he get from boosters and the school." At this point in time, the answer is unpossible to know.
If that were the case, the word "many" should have been used instead of "much" in the first place.
Obviously, the implication is he meant to use "assistance."
The sentence also has faulty parallelism. It should read:
"The major questions are can English shake up a dead program and can he get adequate financial assistance from boosters and the school."