Alert the media

Donate To GopherHole
Unregistered User

Unregistered User

Wild animal with a keyboard
Joined
Jan 17, 2010
Messages
14,756
Reaction score
4,938
Points
113
2...count 'em two new stories on the Gopher's page at the PressPatch from Fuller. Including a Q&A with Brew that starts with a rather douchy intro:

"Tim Brewster asked for a definition of the term "hot seat," as if he didn't know what it meant.

You would think he'd be used to the term by now.

After all, it has been used the past two seasons to describe his status as the University of Minnesota's football coach. Preseason lists from college football magazines to national websites such ESPN.com and CBSSports.com name Brewster among the coaches most likely to be fired if they don't produce at a higher level this year.

Despite going 14-24 overall and 6-18 in the Big Ten Conference in three seasons with the Gophers, Brewster received a two-year extension on his original five-year contract, taking him through 2013 and adding extra incentives. But the university also made it easier to fire him.

Under the terms of Brewster's new deal, Minnesota would owe him only half his $400,000 annual salary for each year left on his contract if he's let go, starting immediately. Previously, the Gophers would have had to pay him the entire remainder of his salary."
 

Douchy opening sentence or not... Did the Star Tribune even cover media days? I'm not seeing anything on their site.
 

Fuller was being douchy or Brewster was? I think we all know what is meant by the term "hot seat" in general, but I think Brewster wanted to answer a different question, or at least be more careful about how to answer it (so you can keep recruiting going well, reengage fans, etc.).

Many people would come up with different specifics if asked to define "hot seat." Does it mean he will be fired if he doesn't win three games? Does he have to go to a bowl game? Does it mean he needs to have a good season or else next season his seat will be really, really hot? Fired in mid-season?

My assumption is that he didn't want to answer a direct question about his being on the "hot seat." My guess is that he wanted Fuller to get to something specific like, "Do you think you need to go to a bowl game?" So that Brewster could say, "I am very confident that we'll go to a bowl game again this season, for the third straight year." Or to answer another question, "I have no question that will exceed three wins this year. We have far too much talent for that (blah, blah, blah)." Or, "I have no doubts that I will be the coach at Minnesota next year."

I don't think this was Bill Clinton asking "what the definition of is is."
 

wels0081 said:
Douchy opening sentence or not... Did the Star Tribune even cover media days? I'm not seeing anything on their site.
Click to expand...

Yeah. There was a little blurb in Phil Miller's blog about the Gophers followed by a bigger blurb about Notre Dame not coming to the Big Ten and preceeded by a bigger blurb about Wisconsin.
 

Hates Monikers said:
Fuller was being douchy or Brewster was?
Click to expand...

Fuller was being douchy.

Tim Brewster asked for a definition of the term "hot seat," as if he didn't know what it meant. I think it is reasonable to assume that he started the Q&A with a Q or comment about being on the hot seat. To what end? How does that engage the reader or further the story?

You would think he'd be used to the term by now. Douchy by any measure.

...Brewster among the coaches most likely to be fired if they don't produce at a higher level this year. Thanks for the frame of reference. What constitutes a higher level this year? By who's definition? Douchy

Despite going 14-24 overall and 6-18 in the Big Ten Conference in three seasons with the Gophers, Brewster received a two-year extension... Uber douchy.

But the university also made it easier to fire him. Douchy and unnecessary.
 


"Tim Brewster asked for a definition of the term "hot seat," as if he didn't know what it meant.
Click to expand...

It is somewhat evasive. But such questions don't indicate not knowing what the term means, but trying to figure out what the person asking it thinks it means. It's a rhetorical technique, if the person asking doesn't have a firm understanding of the term, it can undermine the interviewer.

I don't think Brewster's seat is nearly as hot as the pundits seem to think. The question that mattesr is just how high is the risk actually is that Maturi will fire him? The pundits can speculate all they want, but they need to deal with that question. A related question is how much pressure there really is from the boosters. Those are the only questions that really matter. It's possible that if this season is really awful that Brewster will be fired, but I think he will be given at least one more year.
 

Unregistered User said:
Fuller was being douchy.

Tim Brewster asked for a definition of the term "hot seat," as if he didn't know what it meant. I think it is reasonable to assume that he started the Q&A with a Q or comment about being on the hot seat. To what end? How does that engage the reader or further the story?

You would think he'd be used to the term by now. Douchy by any measure.

...Brewster among the coaches most likely to be fired if they don't produce at a higher level this year. Thanks for the frame of reference. What constitutes a higher level this year? By who's definition? Douchy

Despite going 14-24 overall and 6-18 in the Big Ten Conference in three seasons with the Gophers, Brewster received a two-year extension... Uber douchy.

But the university also made it easier to fire him. Douchy and unnecessary.
Click to expand...

See this is why the Twin Cities media has such a bad name. It's really unexcusable.

14-24?? How about 13-13 over the last two seasons. I'm not sure why painting an accurate picture is so difficult for these guys. It's not like there isn't alot to talk about and consider using the truth. What is so difficult in helping your audience understand the situation as it truly is and then discussing that. It's just so unprofessional, it's embarassing.

I understand columnists need to have an opinion, but can we please quit trying to create the news and talk about how things actually are.
 

Schnoodler said:
See this is why the Twin Cities media has such a bad name. It's really unexcusable.

14-24?? How about 13-13 over the last two seasons. I'm not sure why painting an accurate picture is so difficult for these guys. It's not like there isn't alot to talk about and consider using the truth. What is so difficult in helping your audience understand the situation as it truly is and then discussing that. It's just so unprofessional, it's embarassing.

I understand columnists need to have an opinion, but can we please quit trying to create the news and talk about how things actually are.
Click to expand...

We all get that the 2007 season was terrible. That was three years ago, what about now. The Gophers have been 7-6 overall, 3-5 in the Big Ten, and 6-7 overall 3-5 in the Big Ten the last two seasons. While that's not good, it's not terrible either. It's mediocre. There is just too much axe grinding in the local media.

I think the local media knows full well that it is very likely that Brewster will be back in 2011. They just want to grind axes that to push for him to be fired. But they hide behind claiming that they are just asking questions, but they don't ask the important questions: what will Maturi do?
 

For those who asked about the Star Tribune, there were two pieces in the paper this morning.

The first was about Delany wanting nine games that also addressed Nebraska. The second was a notebook in which there was some stuff about the Gophers.
 



wels0081 said:
Douchy opening sentence or not... Did the Star Tribune even cover media days? I'm not seeing anything on their site.
Click to expand...

Phil Miller from the Strib was in Chicago covering the media days.

Marcus Fuller of the PP was not. The PP can't even afford to send their beat writer to Chicago.
 

I am not sure if I am the minority in believing that people are trying to push Brewster out to soon. I don’t see why we can’t wait and give his 2011 class a chance and beyond, I really think his recruiting has improved (I love the OL verbal commits so far). I think that fans can be so quick to want to kick a head coach out after not seeing enough results initially. Although I am definitely not trying to really compare Brewster and Joe Paterno. Joe had a 26-33 record from 2000-2004 not exactly the best stretch. The point I am trying to make is that we need to give new head coach’s a bit of cushion before we try and run them out of town a little like people give some well-known coach’s.
 

Certainly a three year coach with a 6 and 18 conference record must be on some sort of hot seat, yes?
 

Hot Seat

Gopherhurrin said:
Certainly a three year coach with a 6 and 18 conference record must be on some sort of hot seat, yes?
Click to expand...

I would think that depends upon whether the Gopher football team competes and improves this year. If they do, he deserves the opportunity of trying to capitalize on his vision the next year
with all of his recruits for the first time.
 



He should by no means feel relaxed, but to give a guy only three years to make the gophs a champion contender is a little too much. Lets give his guys and his system at least this and next year. By then his first real recruit class will be seniors, and Grey will have a chance to prove himself with a really good senior wideout crew. I think 2011 will be a good year for the gophers and dont want to see Brewster gone before then.......But I am just as tired as everyone else here in watching us lose rivalry games. I really think he needs one or two of those this year.
 

Gopherhurrin said:
Certainly a three year coach with a 6 and 18 conference record must be on some sort of hot seat, yes?
Click to expand...

How about 6-10 over the past two years. The first season you pretty much have to ignore. His seat may be getting warm, but it's not on fire yet. "hot seat" is awfully ill-defined. Barring a complete disaster this season, I think he needs to get one more season just so potential coaches won't think "If I take that job, they won't give me a chance." Lou Holtz was the first Gophers coach to have a head coaching job after leaving Minnesota since Crisler in 1931. An established coach might say "I'm 50, if I take this job, and get fired after 4 years, I will be too old to get another job."
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom