caliGopher
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2008
- Messages
- 2,615
- Reaction score
- 157
- Points
- 63
What's your point? Most college staffs lose assistants every year.
I had two points. The first is about a third of the staff may not have been on the same page as the OP suggested. All were guys that were new to the U and PJ Fleck. I don't know what the case was in any of them, but if it was all Kumbaya chances are there is no or lower turnover. Friction and turnover is not necessarily a bad thing, however, I agree and said nothing to the contrary.
My second is, when you change out 100% of the non-coordinator coaches on any one side of the ball, that might reasonably be met with the raise of an eyebrow.
Why raise an eyebrow?
-Did they not buy into the "culture" and therefore were encouraged to look elsewhere?
-Where they good coaches that had better opportunities?
-Were they bad coaches/a bad fit for the schemes we want to run and thus bad hires?
-Or Did PJ Fleck like the guys coming in this year, but they were already committed last year and came available this year?
-We upgraded significantly?
-It was just the normal order of things, nothing to be seen here?
Could be any one of or a combination of those things. I know exactly what PJ Fleck thinks of things he didn't do - as evidenced by his repeated comments about the roster. I don't know how he really feels about this other than glossing over it by saying when people want your coaches that's a good thing.
I'm guessing there isn't a single coach that heads into the first year at a new school and says: Gee, I hope I lose 100% of the assistants on defense after this season. But somewhere, somehow I'm sure this was a pot shot at PJ Fleck, and reason #1 is something that never occurred to you as a reasonable response to someone commenting that all of the assistants were on board.