Blog, Get Your Facts Straight
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 12:12 pmThe bludgeoning death of Marlin Barnes occurred in 1996--under Butch Davis--and the player was one of Dennis Erickson's recruits. He was a friend of Ray Lewis, another Dennis Erickson recruit.
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=2653361
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article ... 87,00.html
Yes, Coker was the offensive coordinator at the time, but you can hardly blame a second-year offensive coordinator for the death of a player that was the previous coach's recruit. Nor do players dying in car accidents reflect poorly on a coach. Football coaches cannot be responsible for players' driving skills. They are football coaches, not chauffers.
There have been a multitude of player deaths and shooting incidents at UM over the years. Many occurring long before Larry Coker arrived. Many occurring after players had already left UM. The city of Miami is a war zone outside of specific very wealthy areas that most college football players can't afford to live in. Larry Coker cannot be held responsible for that.
I agree that Coker didn't have control of his players. I would actually prefer Gary Barnett if we are going down this road, but I certainly don't think that Larry Coker played any role in the bludgeoning death of Marlin Barnes 11 years ago, so that is one of the stupidest arguments to not interview a coach I have ever heard. You usually have some fairly insightful things to say, but you have lost me on this one.
And again, we don't know what happened in that interview. We don't know that Gary Barnett wasn't interviewed--there was a report last week that he was. We don't know if RN wasn't interviewed--we do know he was at least contacted by the search firm. Maybe RN has since declined an interview after getting some love from GT and UCLA. Personally, I hope we have interviewed all three of these guys, and Steve-O would be derilict in his duty if he didn't.
Why are you upset that Steve-O interviewed a coach who has won a national championship and been ranked in the Top 20 every year that he coached except for one year when a player on his team was killed in the middle of the season? I agree that the others should have been interviewed too, but we don't know that they weren't.
As for their decline, 11-2, 9-3, 9-3 isn't much of a decline. Most teams have similar declines after they win a national championship because it is hard to maintain the same level of recruiting--kids don't think they will get playing time at the bigger program. Pete Carroll has lost to UCLA, Oregon St., and Stanford after winning a national championship. Would you not be willing to interview him because of that? Could you get a bunch of 20 year old kids to win 10 games after one of their buddies had just been killed? Even 7-5 is a season I think we should be willing to take at SMU. While not my first choice, there is no reason we shouldn't be talking to Larry Coker.
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=2653361
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article ... 87,00.html
Yes, Coker was the offensive coordinator at the time, but you can hardly blame a second-year offensive coordinator for the death of a player that was the previous coach's recruit. Nor do players dying in car accidents reflect poorly on a coach. Football coaches cannot be responsible for players' driving skills. They are football coaches, not chauffers.
There have been a multitude of player deaths and shooting incidents at UM over the years. Many occurring long before Larry Coker arrived. Many occurring after players had already left UM. The city of Miami is a war zone outside of specific very wealthy areas that most college football players can't afford to live in. Larry Coker cannot be held responsible for that.
I agree that Coker didn't have control of his players. I would actually prefer Gary Barnett if we are going down this road, but I certainly don't think that Larry Coker played any role in the bludgeoning death of Marlin Barnes 11 years ago, so that is one of the stupidest arguments to not interview a coach I have ever heard. You usually have some fairly insightful things to say, but you have lost me on this one.
And again, we don't know what happened in that interview. We don't know that Gary Barnett wasn't interviewed--there was a report last week that he was. We don't know if RN wasn't interviewed--we do know he was at least contacted by the search firm. Maybe RN has since declined an interview after getting some love from GT and UCLA. Personally, I hope we have interviewed all three of these guys, and Steve-O would be derilict in his duty if he didn't.
Why are you upset that Steve-O interviewed a coach who has won a national championship and been ranked in the Top 20 every year that he coached except for one year when a player on his team was killed in the middle of the season? I agree that the others should have been interviewed too, but we don't know that they weren't.
As for their decline, 11-2, 9-3, 9-3 isn't much of a decline. Most teams have similar declines after they win a national championship because it is hard to maintain the same level of recruiting--kids don't think they will get playing time at the bigger program. Pete Carroll has lost to UCLA, Oregon St., and Stanford after winning a national championship. Would you not be willing to interview him because of that? Could you get a bunch of 20 year old kids to win 10 games after one of their buddies had just been killed? Even 7-5 is a season I think we should be willing to take at SMU. While not my first choice, there is no reason we shouldn't be talking to Larry Coker.