Be Careful What You Ask For??
Wow, BC fires their coach (and wastes millions of dollars of U money) because he interviewed the Jets.
Maybe we could make coaches "slaves".
This will just result in coaches not telling anyone when they interview for another job.
Should all coaches be fired if they ever interview for another job that gives them the opportunity to improve their careers?
Huh, how will U/M (or anyone else) ever hire another coach (or DC)???????
Dumb, dumb, dumb.
January 7th, 2009 at 6:32 PM ^
the reason that this guy got fired is b/c he DIDN'T tell the AD that he was interviewing with the jets. the AD found out through a reporter...
January 7th, 2009 at 6:37 PM ^
So, DiFilippo fired a good coach because his (DiFilippo) feelings were hurt?
Isn't that worse?
Do all coaches tell the AD every time they go on an interview?
January 7th, 2009 at 7:27 PM ^
Do all coaches tell the AD every time they go on an interview?
Many do. But many aren't explicitly told not to.
January 7th, 2009 at 8:59 PM ^
So, every time you interview for a different job, you tell your boss?
January 8th, 2009 at 10:14 AM ^
In any other business, if you have a contract and you pull this type of stunt, you get fired. For some reason college football has turned a blind eye to this. THE AD had the nads to do something that no other AD had done before. The coach is a jerk for not telling his AD, if true. But I wouldn't expect you to realize this as it doesn't sound you have much experience with "life."
January 7th, 2009 at 7:16 PM ^
DiFilippo warned Jag that interviewing with the Jets would get him fired. Jag called his bluff. He got fired. Pretty simple chain of events, really. And in general, when your boss issues you an ultimatum that is not illegal, you listen. Unless you don't value your job. Which may have been the case here, eh?
January 7th, 2009 at 8:51 PM ^
does this give their AD the right to waste severance pay on Jags and lose a top coach?
What does BC gain by doing this?
January 7th, 2009 at 8:51 PM ^
According to the Boston Globe, Jagodzinski was specifically asked by the AD if he was interviewing with another team. Jags said no. Reporter told AD otherwise. I'd be furious too.
January 7th, 2009 at 8:58 PM ^
Uh, yeah, believe what you read??
Also, was the AD "MILLION OF DOLLARS" furious??
Really???
Sure, I'd spend millions of SOMEONE ELSE's money to sooth my ego.
This to TOTAL BULL SHIT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
January 7th, 2009 at 9:13 PM ^
Why shouldn't I believe it?
January 7th, 2009 at 9:28 PM ^
Apparently you missed Brian's recent (January 7 @ 11:56 am) post on the reporter Rob Parker.
Nuf said!!!
January 7th, 2009 at 9:36 PM ^
Rob Parker is Rob Parker. He's that way because he's spectacularly bad at what he does and makes shit up at the drop of a hat, and it got mentioned here because Parker is so bad it's newsworthy. When Bob Wojnowski ceases to work at the News, it will likely not be mentioned because Wojnowski is like 99% of reporters and columnists: he does not make shit up and present it as factual. Should I refuse to believe anything I read in any newspaper anywhere simply because Rob Parker is too creative? That's pretty weak.
January 7th, 2009 at 9:41 PM ^
Years (decades) ago, Johnny Carson asked Joe Namath if he was upset with all the negative stuff written about him.
Namath replied that he did NOT read newspapers, magazines, etc.
Johnny said, you don't read articles about yourself, surely you read newspapers and magazines.
NO! replied Joe. Since I KNOW that 90% of everything I have read about me is FALSE, I can only conclude that 90% of everything else that is printed is also FALSE.
So, yes, until I find FACTS that DiFilippo was "lied to" I will believe it is 90% likely to be false.
January 7th, 2009 at 9:47 PM ^
What on earth would you believe then? Does Brian have to post it otherwise it's not true? You seem to be willing to believe any number of other things about this story despite having witnessed exactly none of it with your own eyes, including other stuff that's also in the newspaper. What source do you demand for this part of the story?
January 7th, 2009 at 10:39 PM ^
Being an engineer and a problem solver, I believe in FACTS and other information that is logically consistent.
BC would have us believe that Jag was a successful coach, well liked by all (including the AD) but because of a simple misunderstanding (even if the allegations of not telling the AD ahead of time are true -- and they may not be), he is immediately fired.
Really??
Does that survive the smell test?
Not to me.
So, there may be other reasons for the firing.
January 7th, 2009 at 10:22 PM ^
You, sir, have an uncanny knack for latching on to the smallest sample size possible (Namath, Parker, Pat White, all today alone) and then extrapolating that to the rest of the world while completely ignoring the literally millions of examples that don't match your absurd viewpoint. Congratulations on denying reality and crafting your own bizarre little world.
January 7th, 2009 at 10:34 PM ^
So, if you were being sarcastic, I offer an apology for what follows. If not.
At least I provided some sample -- you provided NONE.
So, a sample size of -O- is better than a small sample size?
I hereby defrock you of your six sigma black belt.
January 7th, 2009 at 10:45 PM ^
Relaying a terrible joke that a drunk QB told on the Johnny Carson show is not proof that 90% of what is reported in newspapers is false.
Did I really just have to type that?
January 7th, 2009 at 10:48 PM ^
This is all pointless as it's 90% probable that Joe Namath can't read anyways.
January 7th, 2009 at 10:54 PM ^
Dex, the last resort of the doomed is to try to blame the messenger rather than actually deal with the message.
OK, are some more -- What % of the reporting about Will Campbell decommitting was correct?
How about RR shredding all the WVU documents?
etc.
etc.
January 8th, 2009 at 11:37 AM ^
"I'm not [committed] anymore. I'm going to go ahead and de-commit right now" -- William Campbell
I'm pretty sure the reporting about Will Campbell decommitting was correct.
In addition, the shredding accusations were primarily perpetrated by WVU officials, iirc. Not to say that the media, namely Dave Hickman, didn't gleefully run with it, but the accusations initially rest with the WVU officials, not the reporter. However, for the sake of argument, I'll give this one to you. Now you've got Parker and Hickman. Who else?
January 7th, 2009 at 10:59 PM ^
Columnists and reporters in the print media who are not known pathological liars:
Bob Wojnowski
Angelique Chengelis
Mitch Albom
Jerry Green
Michael Rosenberg
Ansar Khan
Larry Lage
John Niyo
Dave Dye
Chris McCosky
Lynn Henning
Tom Gage
Nicholas Cotsonika
Krista Jahnke
Mark Snyder
Jamie Samuelsen
Carlos Monarrez
And here's your sample, "proving" that not one single thing you read in the paper can be trusted:
Rob Parker
Yep, that ought to do it.
Of course, I limited my selection to Detroit/Michigan media. I didn't include all the non-liars from Boston, New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Houston, Denver, Buffalo, Philadelphia, Atlanta, Miami, St. Louis, Kansas City, San Francisco, San Diego, Seattle, Milwaukee, Minneapolis, Washington, Baltimore, Nashville, Charlotte, Pittsburgh, Indianapolis, New Orleans, El Paso, Phoenix, Sacramento, Tucson, etc. etc. etc.
Is that a big enough frickin' sample size?
By the way: the Boston Globe has printed quite a bit about the Jags firing. Can you tell us which 10% is true?
January 7th, 2009 at 11:14 PM ^
So, I will obviously take your word that all those reporters are "not known to be pathological liars".
Not one shred of evidence did you provide.
Not one anecdotal example of a story that any of them wrote (that was not merely recording what was said in a public interview) did you give.
So, you dismiss all of my examples as folly but give no examples or evidence of your own.
January 8th, 2009 at 3:17 AM ^
"My assertion must be true because there is no proof that it is false." That is essentially what you are arguing, i.e., 90% of reporters must be pathological liars because there is no proof that they are not. That is called a negative proof and it is a logical fallacy.
If you are an engineer that believes in "FACTS and other information that is logically consistent," you should recognize the weaknesses in your own logic. You should also recognize the logical weakness in relying on a single, decades old statement on a late night television show by a former NFL quarterback. Even the statement itself is factually and logically inconsistent, if you examine it.
In addition, I would not be so quick to dismiss the opposing arguments for lack of examples or evidence. When making an accusation on 90% of the media that includes hundreds, if not thousands, of reporters and countless articles or other work product, you better have a sample size or evidence greater than Rob Parker, a statement from Joe Namath and a false assertion from disgruntled WVU personnel, the latter two not even being members of the media. When compared to the body of work and personnel that you are indicting, the quantity of your "evidence" and "examples" is essentially zero.
And for the record, I have a (not so) healthy mistrust of the media based on personal experience, but even I find the errors in your arguments to be glaring. You're losing this one, buddy. But keep arguing for the sake of arguing, if you wish. It's very entertaining.
January 8th, 2009 at 7:10 AM ^
Notwithstanding the fact that there's a Mitch Albom story right here on the forums which isn't taken from any press conferences, you're basically asking me to find all the stories all these people wrote and prove them true. It's such an egregious logical fallacy that I hardly know why I'm bothering to respond.
And you totally ignored what I asked you to do. Go to the Boston Globe, find the stories about Jeff Jagodzinski, and tell me which 10% is the truth, since you're so fixated on that number and finding examples and such. Another question you ignored: What source would you require in order to believe the tidbit about Jags lying.....especially since that tidbit is printed right alongside other stuff you do believe?
January 8th, 2009 at 8:31 AM ^
Furthermore, you are cherry-picking information.
In your previous thread, you claimed recruiting rankings are worthless because only 45% of 5-star players get drafted by the NFL. What you omitted is that LESS THAN 1% of 2-star players get drafted, and less than 5% of 3-star players get drafted. So, sure - Pat White was a 2-star player who succeeded. Argument by anecdote ignores the mountain of evidence (cited in the Athlon piece) and obsesses over the exception.
January 7th, 2009 at 9:07 PM ^
This is a tricky situation. I don't blame the AD for being upset but at the same time, firing Jagodzinski might've been an overreaction. I remember being surprised that Minnesota didn't fire Glen Mason back in 2001 when he openly lusted after the OSU job opening. But they seemed to shove that under the rug and he had several productive years after that.
January 7th, 2009 at 10:02 PM ^
It seems a bit harsh, but I remember when Larry Brown was canned after he alienated everyone on the Pistons by interviewing for a position with the Cavs late in the playoffs.
January 7th, 2009 at 11:27 PM ^
....man uses franchise QB followed by one of the more experienced teams in program history to basically equal the winning percentage of the previous coach....and he becomes a hot commodity.
Hmmmm, sounds like he was using BC to advance his career as much as BC was using him to maintain their football success.
OH.MY.GAWD. I AM SOOOOO SHOCKED!!!!!
I'm a little confused at who exactly I should be cross at as well as why this is even a cautionary tale.
Jags will get another job. BC will hire another coach. Both will be better by parting ways since it doesnt sound like either really wants the other.
January 7th, 2009 at 11:47 PM ^
How many of us would turn down an interview with another company offering a significant career advancement at many times our current salary?
How many would turn down that same interview, even if your current employer said they would fire you (knowing that you would receive several years severance pay if you were fired)?
Apply the golden rule (and, no, I don't mean "the person that has the gold rules).
January 8th, 2009 at 9:44 AM ^
.....my post?
I dont think either side is really in the wrong here.
I'll repeat, I am having a hard time being cross at either side on this issue.....they both used each other to forward their own cause.
This happens all the time in the sports/coaching world, not to mention the business world.
I wont waste my time trying to manufacturing rage.
Oh, to answer your question, nobody would turn down the interview. I would also know the risk I'm taking and expect to be fired or reprimanded by my current employer.
January 8th, 2009 at 8:59 AM ^
if we found out that Rich Rodriguez had put out feelers for other jobs this offseason wouldn't everyone here say "to hell with him. fire him and lets move on?"
So I don't see why its such a big deal for BC to do the same. Jags was supposedly also putting out feelers for NFL offensive coordinator job openings. I don't blame BC at all.
January 8th, 2009 at 11:48 AM ^
It is perfectly reasonable, and I think desirable, that a person should put his long term interests ahead of that of his employer. That's all Jags is doing. Until BC becomes an elite football school or joins the NFL, they may expect that as their coach succeeds it will be increasingly likely he will move on. This is reality for most schools.
BC has no legal recourse to force Jags to stay. Consequently, they may hope he doesn't get a better offer or induce him to stay using carrots. Since Jags seems to be doing an excellent job, firing him only deprives BC of his services prematurely.
Since my assumptions do not explain observation, it is reasonable to assume we do not know the full story. Possibly, the BC AD is unreasonable or values loyalty over preformance. Possibly, Jags was dishonest or just horribly botched this whole thing. Since it is likely to be a he said/he said situation the media is not a good avenue to determine fault.
January 8th, 2009 at 12:28 PM ^
I have a good friend who works in my building who played football at BC in college. I talked with him about this for our hour bus ride home form work yesterday, and he threw most of the blame on Coach Jags (as he called him). Apparently this guy in an asshole. He wasn't fired for this situation only, it was merely the last straw.
Also - remember how pissed we were when so many facts where left out during the whole RR hiring situation? We are all hypocrites if we blast the media during that "scandal" and then believe everything they say in this case. There are A LOT of facts being left out of this, and from what I've been told, the AD is doing the right thing.