Sports Illustrated college football columnist Stewart Mandel wrote the following in his mailbag column last week:
“Sure, other successful programs have survived the loss of their architect just fine. Miami kept winning national titles long after Howard Schnellenberger put the Hurricanes on the map, starting with Jimmy Johnson. It took two tries, but Florida eventually found a worthy heir (Urban Meyer) to the legacy left by Steve Spurrier. And Les Miles has obviously kept the ball rolling at LSU since Nick Saban bolted.
But notice, all those schools went out and hired an experienced, sought-after head coach. West Virginia hired Bill Stewart. He seems like a good enough fellow, and he did lead the Mountaineers to that big win over Oklahoma (though with Rodriguez's now-departed offensive coordinator, Calvin Magee, calling the plays), but the chances of him maintaining the program's recent level of success are about as high as leaving a party at Lindsay Lohan's place with your fur coat in tact.
As I wrote at the time, Stewart's hiring was a foolishly impulsive decision made by an already suspect set of West Virginia administrators still high off the emotional Fiesta Bowl win just hours earlier. They took a now-nationally prominent program and put it in the hands of a guy whose only head coaching experience was a three-year, 8-25 stint at VMI that ended in his resignation over the use of a racial slur; and a guy who, of the nine assistants on West Virginia's staff, was the only one Rodriguez did not feel compelled to offer a job at Michigan. (As a result, the only remaining holdovers from Rodriguez's regime are Stewart and defensive coordinator Jeff Casteel.)
I'm sorry to say it, but this is not going to end well.”
I actually don’t think Mandel is sorry to say it; I think he enjoys saying it. But we’ll get to that later. Let’s look at the facts first:
—VMI has not had a coach with a winning overall record since John McKenna left in 1965. End of story. It’s a red herring to even bring this up.
—The stories on what Stewart said to his black player differ. No one argues that he used "the n-word." I can’t think of a situation where it’s socially and politically acceptable for a white person to use that word, but context here is key.
Stewart should have used another word; the lesson he was trying to impart to his showboating player—“Don’t give anyone the chance to call you a [n-word]”—should have already been imparted to this player by an older black man.
Here’s what Stewart was saying: “As a young black man, the deck is already stacked against you. Many white people are afraid of you. Those that aren’t may ridicule you. When they see a white player doing what you’re doing, they chalk it up to exuberance and style. When they see a black player do it, they say he’s acting like a [n-word]. You will have to work twice as hard because of the color of your skin. This is wrong and unfair but it is the truth.”
So to say only that Stewart “used a racial slur” without this context does him a disservice.
—Mandel has ignored the highly-regarded recruiting class Stewart has assembled out of the wreckage Rich Rodriguez left behind for this year, and the blue-chip class he already is putting together for 2009.
How is he able to do this? By taking a tiny slice of the coaching salary pot and using the rest to lure high-level recruiters, such as Doc Holliday from Florida and Chris Beatty, who already is luring top talent from his Hampton Roads area.
Stewart has something Rodriguez never developed: humility, the sign of an educated mind. Stewart knows he doesn’t have to be the smartest man in the room—he just has to fill the room with them, which he has done.
He knows he’s not an innovator so he hires a virtuoso of the spread-option zone-read offense (Wake Forest’s Jeff Mullen), who just happens to have a better passing attack than Rodriguez did. This just might come in handy when defenders are putting eight men on the line of scrimmage against WVU, like Pitt did last year.
Now, on to my surmises.
Mandel is a fan of Rodriguez and his youthful, in-charge, high-octane, charming ways. To Mandel, Rodriguez is the future and Stewart is the past. Rodriguez is an innovator; that is true. And he was a good enough recruiter to see talent that others didn’t in Pat White and Steve Slaton—but it’s worth noting that the innovator’s offense didn’t really take off until White and Slaton started playing regularly in 2005.
Great talent can make a coach look like a genius.
But like most innovators, Rodriguez has a huge ego, and it hurt his team. I feel pretty confident saying that Stewart’s ego will never hurt his team. Rodriguez’s ego and inflexibility, I believe, lost the Pitt game last year.
Put in business terms, Rodriguez is an product-developer and Stewart is a manager, much like an adaptable CEO. You don’t put the product-developer in charge of the company. He believes in his product, and should, and believes it is the best application for every situation, even if it isn’t. He cannot think otherwise; he has too much of himself invested in the product.
In Rodriguez’s terms, this means trying to win games with his system to prove its, and his, superiority.
The CEO, meanwhile, is product-agnostic. It is his or her obligation to find the correct application for a problem, regardless of who invented it. His interest is not himself; his interest is his obligation to the shareholders.
In Stewart’s terms, this means trying to win games any way he can.
Because of Rodriguez’s controlling ways, which have become evident in the depositions over the $4 million buyout owed WVU by Rodriguez, there was never any space in the room for anyone else. He had to be the smartest guy in the room.
Mandel notes that Stewart was the only coach Rodriguez didn’t ask to accompany him to Michigan. Mandel interprets that as a sign that Stewart is sub-standard. Sure, if you’re only taking Rodriguez’s word for it, as Mandel seems to.
I have said it before and I will say it again: When Rodriguez left and Stewart took over the team, it was like the windows had been flung open in a musty, tension-filled, claustrophobic house and fresh air could flood in for the first time in years.
Here’s the irony to what Mandel writes: I actually think WVU has a higher upside now with Stewart than it had with Rodriguez. I think the Pitt loss was Rodriguez’s ceiling. In the biggest game of his career at WVU, an opposing coach devised a game plan that flummoxed Rodriguez.
Instead of conceding temporary defeat and adapting, Rodriguez stuck to his game plan and his system he invented, which he rode all the way down to defeat.
comments (43) write a comment »
write a new comment
4 months ago
Nice article Frank
In your closing, you mention that the Pitt game was a ceiling RR bumped his head on. I agree with you that Rich's ego was the major contributor to his failure to adapt in that game. However I would suspect that RR blamed everyone but himself for that game. Did Stewart get left behind when RR left because RR viewed him as part of the forces against him, or was Stewart the only coach who refused to be part of the entourage of yes men that Rod has obviously surrounded himself with?
In any case, WVU does owe a debt of gratitude to RR for his developing a more dynamic team from the solid traditions that Nehlen had left him. Nehlen depended on solid (if boring) strategy and one or two star players every year. Rodriguez brought dynamic innovations in strategy AND worked on building depth on the roster. Let us hope that Stewart can take the excitement RR built into WVU, and mentor it into a mature and enduring program where talented players want to be part of a team.
4 months ago
Rodriguez improved WVU's status in the recruiting wars. That will be his greatest 'good' legacy at WVU.
However, he did not invent WVU football. In fact, it can be argued that he didn't even have much to do with his own successes at WVU:
*His inability to adjust his game plan in-game nearly cost WVU the Sugar Bowl. A 28 point lead was almost gone when Pat White decided to put the team on his shoulders. A fake punt (credit to RR for that one) was needed to secure the win....but it shouldn't have come to that.
*Pat White nearly singlehandedly brought WVU back from a 17 point deficit in the Gator Bowl vs. Ga Tech after the RR gameplan failed. PW started freewheeling out of the called plays and won the MVP...and the game...himself.
*Anyone who has watched WVU over the last 7 years knows that the team that played Oklahoma in the Fiesta Bowl was not playing the same style as we had under RR. The long TD pass to Tito would have NEVER happened had RR been calling the plays (Magee may have called the plays in the Fiesta for the first and last time...RR called everything prior since 2000.)
It can also be argued that Rich Rodriguez was the greatest beneficiary of the ACC raid on the Big East. Until that happened, RR had blown his only opportunity for the BCS (2004 - lost consecutive season ending games to BC and Pitt) and prior to that had a horrible record against VPI and Miami. Those teams leave and all of the sudden, Rich Rodriguez is a genius....
...that is, he became a genius on the kismet ankle injury to Adam Bednarik whom he started for several games including Louisville in 2005. Not until AB went down and Pat White came in was Rich Rodriguez considered anything but a coach who couldn't win the big games. He had, after all, gotten blown out by Virginia, Maryland, and Florida State in the only three bowl games he had been to with WVU up to that moment.
I will go as far as saying that Pat White and the ACC raid is what made Rich Rodriguez, not his coaching ability. He wasn't even that great at evaluating the talent that he had - remember, Pat White and Steve Slaton both were down the depth chart until injuries to other players forced them into service.
4 months ago
"VMI has not had a coach with a winning overall record since John McKenna left in 1965. End of story. It’s a red herring to even bring this up."
It's a red herring to bring this up? The fact that Stewart's ONLY head coaching experience is as the coach of a TERRIBLE program, where he performed terribly? That's a red herring? The fact that he was subsequently hired as the head coach at a multiple-BCS-winning program makes this bit of information extremely relevant. It's not a red herring. It's a legitimate concern. CEO's have years and years of high-level achievement. This guy's no "CEO".
from 4 months ago
Many, many CEO's work as COO's, CFO's, etc for many years before the right circumstances arise. There isn't a magical CEO bootcamp and there isn't a preferred path where an individual is a CEO for smaller firms prior to jumping to the Fortune 500.
I'm afraid the red herring accusation is on point. Mandel wants WVU to fail even if the facts get in his way. It is true that Stewart has a lot to prove. But it is more interesting to look at the situation objectively and draw reasoned conclusions based on what we know right now.
from 4 months ago
Ok, let's look objectively and draw a reasoned conclusion.
Stewart has very little head coaching experience.
In his only stint as a D-I head coach, he performed very poorly at a terrible program.
He gets hired as head coach at a major BCS school.
My conclusion: Based on the facts of the case, he was unqualified for the job.
That wasn't objective?
Sounds to me like you WVU fans have some sort of history with this Mandel fella - kinda like Ohio State fans and Mark May/Trev Alberts - you're gonna have to find a way to cope with that. But to suggest that his comments were somehow inaccurate shows me how objective and reasonable you are.
from 4 months ago
"But to suggest that his comments were somehow inaccurate shows me how objective and reasonable you are."
Wow Jeff... first off, an opinion can neither be accurate nor inaccurate simply because it is just an OPINION. Secondly, I'm not going to lose any sleep tonight because we WVU fans failed to show you just how objective and reasonable we are because some of us failed to agree with Mandel... and now you.
May I suggest you take a look at what Stewart has done during his 32 years of continuous coaching? Here's a link to his stats.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Stewart_(football_coach)
Stewart has been with WVU since 2000 and has worked for both Don Nehlen and Rodriguez. Previous to that, he coached in the pro canadian leagues. He is friends with Coach Mike Tomlin (in fact he gave Tomlin his start in coaching), and Tomlin threw his support behind Stewart by calling WVU and recommending him for the head coach position at WVU.
Now, does all this time and experience mean a damned thing? Nope, because the proof will be in what kind of performance Stewart has drawn from his players by the end of the 2008 season. In the mean time, I hope our giving the guy the benefit of the doubt doesn't spoil your days and nights. Come january 2009, we may be wishing we had a different coach, but then again we may not. Worst case scenario is we have another Dave Wannstedt in the Big East... oh, wait a second... yeah, we aren't paying Stewart anywhere near as much as Pitt has been paying Wannstedt since December of 2004. Great for us and great for Stewart because if he does perform, WVU will do everything they can to reward him.
from 4 months ago
Lars, I think you confused yourself in that first paragraph. I didn't call anybody's opinion inaccurate - but you sure seem to think I did. The WVU fans on this board seem to be calling Stewart Mandel's opinion inaccurate and I was merely pointing it out. If you re-read the excerpt that you quoted, I think you'll see that.
For the author to suggest that bringing up Stewart's tenure at VMI is just a "red herring" to distract the public from Mandel's alleged WVU hatred is silly and absurd. It's his only experience as a head coach, and he did a terrible job at it. Now an alleged big-time BCS program is handing him the keys to the Rolls Royce? It doesn't mean that Mandel *doesn't* hate WVU - I wouldn't know - but the questions he raised are valid in this instance.
He's friends with Mike Tomlin? Um..ok. You sold me.
4 months ago
I have to side with Jeff--and Mandel--on this one.
Slow decline for the Mountaineers...
from 4 months ago
Mandel cannot even get his facts right on the story.
Stewart was not the only coach who was offered a job a Michigan. D-Coordinator Jeff Casteel was offered, and declined because he felt he already had top-notch athletes to run the 3-3-stack defense.
Mandel also does not point out that the next two incoming recruiting classes, put together by Coach Stew and his staff, are better than any class that RR brought in. On the college level, it's 80% talent and 20% coaching that wins you games.
As for Stewart's experience, Mark Richt was never a head coach before going to UGA. Larry Coker was never a head coach before taking over at Miami. RR had only been a head coach at the NAIA level. Those seemed to work out pretty well.
from 4 months ago
yeah..the next two recruiting classes are coming to play for the great bill stewart...LOL, that's why they chose WVU.
80% talent, 20% coaching...lol, i'd love to see the statistical analysis to back that shit up.
mark richt also had an excellent track record of success and resume before being hired at georgia. larry coker..uh..how'd he do once he was playing with his own players that he personally recruited? yeah, uh not so good. larry coker was a TERRIBLE example to bring up.
4 months ago
Stewart Mandel might well be right about WVU declining as a national power. Rich Rodriguez, despite his clear lack of real-world intelligence, is a brilliant coach. Those don't come along every day. But Mandel also clearly has a huge man-crush on Rodriguez (who has given him unusual access at Michigan) and he clearly has been bombarded by some of WVU's lower-IQ fans, which would be enough to turn anybody against the Mountaineers. As I said, he might be right about WVU. But he also might just as easily be wrong -- for these reasons:
1) Look at Ed Pastilong's record of hiring coaches -- Rodriguez, Beilein, Huggins and a handful of minor coaches all have been highly successful.
2) As Frank said, Stewart and his highly paid staff are recruiting uncommonly well for WVU, especially the 2009 class. On paper, Stewart's commitments for 2009 might turn out to be better than any Rodriguez assembled.
3) Again as Frank suggested, anybody who thinks Stewart's record at VMI means squat knows zero about college football.
Beyond that, Mandel never acknowledges (as far as I've seen) that if Rodriguez had simply begun paying the $4 million demanded by his written contract, he would have been in WVU's rear-view mirror 30 seconds after the Fiesta Bowl. The on-going nature of this dispute is Rodriguez's fault. In fact, Rodriguez's immaturity and ego have been astonishing -- as evidenced not just by his whining quotes about everything from the inflatable helmet to the academic scandal but also by his remarkably self-centered deposition. Not that WVU doesn't bear some of the blame for his departure. It appears the administration didn't have the people skills -- or maturity -- to stroke Rodriguez's unquenchable ego. No doubt Rodriguez was getting petty in his demands, and I'm guessing WVU was getting tired of squeezing donors over and over, but just showing him a little love probably would have kept him at West Virginia and ensured that the Mountaineers would have remained a Top 10 program.
Finally, Mandel's book on college football sucked -- unless you were a kindergartener and knew nothing about the sport.
4 months ago
Mandel is the best college football writer out there right now. His views on Stewart are reasonable conclusions that most uninvested parties would come to. I'm with Jeff on this one.
Though it might be a bit presumptive of Mandel to assume directly that Stewart will fail, I think it's clear that Stewart is not even close to being the most qualified man for the job. There are several young, proven coaches out there who could almost certainly have come right in and maintained WVU's current success level or better. Hiring Stewart was simply a gamble that WVU officials needn't have made. As Mandel has stated multiple times, it seemed that Stewart's only plus was that he was part of the West Virginia family already.
I personally predict the situation to somewhat mirror Miami, when Butch Davis left them and Larry Coker took over. Coker's teams slowly got worse each year as the program became further and further removed from Davis' regime. If that happens to West Virginia, well, they earned it.
from 4 months ago
That's all I've been trying to convey - that the man would NEVER have been hired anywhere else....yet an alleged big-time program give him the keys to the Rolls? It just doesn't make sense. The WVU faithful have come out of the woodwork to defend their program, which I can respect, but all I ever stated was that Stewart's resume is desperately lacking and that his hiring is a BIG question mark.
from 4 months ago
All I would say is this. Every coaching hire is a huge risk. You don't have a some guarantee of great success even if you hire a "big time" name. Several "proven" coaches have been hired at other schools over the years and had lower levels of success at their new place. (Spurrier and Holtz come to mind, just to name a couple). Also there have plenty of occasions where a school has hired an assistant on staff to take over for a departed head coach and had great success doing so. Only time will tell, but lets give Stewart a chance. He will be the first one to admit it if he can't do the job, because he is a man of character.
from 4 months ago
exactly my point. As Shawn says and the reason for my mentioning Dave Wannstedt above in my post to Jeff... there is no guarantee that a coach will be successful in any new position (or even from year to year). Sports pundits can go far in helping the fan understand the nuances of a sport and the potential of players and coaching staff. Mandel, can make his predictions and Frank can make his own. What blows me away is not the criticisms made... but the obvious glee from Mandel - and certain other folk - when discussing every possible discomfiture WVU may suffer for their choices. Was WVU's choice in line with conventional wisdom? No. However, there are certain positives in Stewarts background that belay his performance at VMI. Positives that Mandel fails to mention in his hurry to paint a dismal future for WVU.
4 months ago
Was Coach Stew the big name winner that many WVU fans wanted to replace RR and take WVU to the next level? Maybe not, but he did things as a leader (things a CEO would do) by hiring exceptional coaches and recruiters onto his staff that will continue our tradition and actually take results to the next level.
RR regularly lost to teams he should have beaten...and he let his ego get in the way by not altering his gameplan when his own assistants suggested audibles that could take advantage of weaknesses. If you keep heading in the direction you're going...you might just end up there! And RR should have taken better advantage of his talent to extend his innovative system and broaden their use of the field. He'll have to do that in the future as many teams run the spread now, but they've taken the base that RR suggested and perfected it to suit the personnel involved. It will be interesting to see how it goes for him at Michigan without a Pat White at QB. Clearly they should win games with their talent, but when they lose to the teams they should beat...well that's when the sportswriters should take notice.
Coach Stew isn't an ego guy and he did everything I could expect of any big name coach...brought on the right people, highlighted character versus characters, and lets his people do what they do best. Time will tell, but even Notre Dame brought in Charlie Weis...perhaps the best combination of tradition, resources and money...and they win 3 games last year. Anything is possible, but I like our chances because of the actions Coach Stew has taken in advancing our program. Does his pedigree match the expectations of the experts? Maybe not, but those experts predicted WVU would get killed by Oklahoma too...and we saw what happened there. Ask top recruits Boyd and Heastie where they're going in 2009...well that's WVU...and in the meantime they're recruiting other great athletes for us! Our 2009 recruiting class looks to be better than any class RR ever brought in...and Coach Stew's staff made this happen. It's the tip of the iceberg!
This is the future of our program and while I was scratching my head when Coach Stew was selected...I'm quite pleased in the direction we're going! Do I understand the comments Mandel made...absolutely! But he was addressing Stew himself...not Stew AND the staff and recruits he's bringing on. He's got a solid supporting cast and from what I've seen and read he's gonna get out of their way and let them get things done! Exciting times in Morgantown!
4 months ago
Stewart has something Rodriguez never developed: humility, the sign of an educated mind. Stewart knows he doesn’t have to be the smartest man in the room; he just has to fill the room with them, which he has done.
That segment of the article speaks VOLUMES of what has transformed at WVU.
Coach "Stew" doesn't want the big $$$ and is as happy and humble a man as you'll ever meet.
He has surrounded himself with coaches who will manage their respective "fields" under the watchful eyes of coach stewart. He has said himself he will let them do the jobs they were hired for, so its not like we have turned the keys of the "Rolls" over to an inept person. It is of the opinion of a LOT of people that the staff he has assembled is MUCH greater than the one that slithered to Ann Arbor.
4 months ago
I think any WVU fan will tell you we were all scratching our heads when Stewart was hired. I think a lot of us were looking to Jimbo Fisher like myself or another big name coach. But, you can't argue with results. WVU looked unstoppable against one of the best defenses' in the country against OU and the staff he has put together is incredible. Not to mention the recruiting class of 08 that he was able to salvage and the 09 class looks to be a top 20, which I don't recall ever having a top 20 class. Mandel has every right to question the hiring of Coach Stew as does anyone, but don't label him a failure before he has had a chance to prove it on the field first. I for one think that some of our best football is ahead of us, but only time will tell.
4 months ago
Jeff what do you think of this situation?
You have worked as a writer in a major magazine for 7 years. A few weeks before your main issue of the year is due, your editor (an creator of the magazine) resigns and the owner appoints you as interim editor. Despite low office moral, chaos regarding who is responsible for what, and basic confusion caused the discontinuity, you are able to produce an amazing product.
Would the magazine owner be justified in hiring you as editor? Obviously, the magazine owner considered your experience when assigning you as editor. Should the magazine owner hire someone only with editing experience?
This situation occurs outside of the college football world all the time. Larry Coker won 1 national championship and played in another. Recruiting was his main problem. It appears that this will not be a problem for Stewart. As for hiring only experienced coaches, that sure has worked out well for Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, and many other schools.
That is what Frank meant with the red herring comment. Only bringing up the lack of head coaching experience is misleading.
from 4 months ago
If that's what he meant, then perhaps he should say that himself. Calling something a red herring dismisses it as unimportant and/or irrelevant. That is *literally* the only thing I have taken any exception to.
4 months ago
Stew did win many more games as a D-I head coach than RR. But I guess we need to look past that!
4 months ago
By Al
Mr. Frank Ahrens
All Points very well taken! I would submit that you missed the most important of all. Let's not forget that Doc Holliday was WVU's leading candidate before the Fiesta began in Morgantown. And Doc Holliday is a capable big name coach, and recruiter. By hiring Stewart WVU has created a win-win situation that is brilliant. We got Holliday and Stewart.
Doc Holliday is a great fall back plan for WVU, if Stewart fails as Mandel has suggested. For Holliday, he does not have to go into a potential hornets nest with the WVU alum split on every thing from who the new coach should be to why Rodriguez (The greatest madman since Frankenstein), left in the first place. Stewart heals a troubled fan base and is an important bridge to the future. I believe this move was brilliant however it turns out.
4 months ago
Records of coaches at VMI since WWII, excluding games ending in a tie:
Jim Reid - 3-19
Cal McCombs - 19-60
Donny White - 0-1
Ted Cain - 1 20
Bill Stewart - 8-25
Jim Shuck - 14-40
Eddie Williamson - 10-33
Bob Thalman - 54-94
Vito Ragazzo - 10-41
John McKenna - 62-60 (1953-1965)
Thomas Nugent - 19-18
A.W. Morton - 9-8
Allison Hubert - 43-45
Since 1953, there's been no coach at VMI with a positive win-loss record. This point is moot.
4 months ago
Oh, so it's completely irrelevant that the ONLY program to ever offer Bill Stewart their head coaching position is one of the WORST DI-AA programs in the country?
You people can spin it any way you want. VMI will never be a "red herring" or a "moot point". Deal with it.
I take that back - Stewart now has the opportunity to render his head coaching experience a "moot point" by maintaining the so-called "top-ten" program that Rich-Rod left him with. And that means more than simply winning 9-10 games this year with Rich-Rod's players. That means doing it consistently for several years, with recruiting classes that he and his staff built by themselves.
Time will tell.
But for now, your cries of "red herring" and "moot point" are just that - crying.
from 4 months ago
"Oh, so it's completely irrelevant that the ONLY program to ever offer Bill Stewart their head coaching position is one of the WORST DI-AA programs in the country?"
Wow. Way to twist facts to reach the conclusion you want. If Bill Stewart doesn't win at VMI, it's proof that he's a bad coach. If NO ONE wins at VMI, then it's proof that Bill Stewart is a bad coach. Nice.
"Time will tell."
If only you believed that. Mandel pronounces WVU football dead, you rush to his defense when someone points out the absolute silliness in the examples he gives, yet when pressed, you fall back to "time will tell".
"But for now, your cries of "red herring" and "moot point" are just that - crying."
No one here is crying. You're the one insisting that VMI is proof of imminent failure, and we're saying how ridiculous that is. You're not convincing us, and I doubt that curt statements like this are moving you closer to that end.
Was hiring Stewart a risk? You betcha. So is hiring virtually any head coach, and you don't know what will happen until you've already had the guy around a few years (see Pitt). So was hiring Rodriguez seven years ago. Even among those who dislike him, few would say it shouldn't have been done in retrospect. As you say, time will tell, so just sit back and let it.
from 4 months ago
"Wow. Way to twist facts to reach the conclusion you want. If Bill Stewart doesn't win at VMI, it's proof that he's a bad coach. If NO ONE wins at VMI, then it's proof that Bill Stewart is a bad coach. Nice."
1. I merely responded to your spin with spin of my own to demonstrate how easy it was to spin something whichever way you want to. It was mostly tongue-in-cheek. I guess I shouldn't have assumed that you would catch on to that.
2. Yes, you were spinning. Stating that Bill Stewart's failure as a head coach at VMI is meaningless because "everyone fails there" is damn near the textbook definition of spinning. Ask Bill O'Reilly, he'll tell ya.
On top of all that, you WVU freaks are practically frothing at the mouth at things I never said. I never said Stewart's a bad coach. All I ever said was that it is fair and valid to question the man's coaching qualifications. That's LITERALLY all I have said about the man. Anything else you think I said is just you jumping to conclusions. You surely won't be able to copy and paste any quote from me stating that Stewart is a bad coach or that WVU is destined to fail with him at the helm. If you can, do it. If you can't, then refrain from telling me what I did and did not say when it's all right here in the comments section for you to see. Trust me, it's really frustrating when people lie about you.
"Mandel pronounces WVU football dead, you rush to his defense when someone points out the absolute silliness in the examples he gives"
Please explain how I "rushed to his defense" when all I have ever said is that he raises fair questions regarding Stewart's qualifications. That is literally all I've said. In fact, here's a direct quote from me, 1 day ago:
"Calling something a red herring dismisses it as unimportant and/or irrelevant. That is *literally* the only thing I have taken any exception to."
To summarize, I said 1 day ago that the *only* thing I take exception to is the author's use of the term "red herring" to excuse Bill Stewart's poor performance as a head coach.
"You're the one insisting that VMI is proof of imminent failure"
Please cite an example. Either that, or retract this sentence. You won't win points with me or any level-headed person by making up bogus things that I never said.
"yet when pressed, you fall back to "time will tell"
....and in the face of any legitimate questioning of WVU's hire, you all seem to fall back to "hiring any coach is a risk"
You're a waste of my time.
from 4 months ago
"I merely responded to your spin with spin of my own to demonstrate how easy it was to spin something whichever way you want to. It was mostly tongue-in-cheek. I guess I shouldn't have assumed that you would catch on to that."
I love it when someone gets hammered for espousing an untenable point of view and then tries to imply that everyone else is stupid because they don't "get it". There was nothing to read between the lines, Jeff.
There's not more to you than what we're seeing. There's less.
You weren't providing an example, or teaching a lesson, or anything of the sort. You were hammering on Bill Stewart, which is fine if that's what you want to do. Just don't sit there and act like you simply can't understand why nobody likes you, or whining about all the stuff that you're "not" saying.
"On top of all that, you WVU freaks are practically frothing at the mouth at things I never said. I never said Stewart's a bad coach. All I ever said was that it is fair and valid to question the man's coaching qualifications. That's LITERALLY all I have said about the man. Anything else you think I said is just you jumping to conclusions. You surely won't be able to copy and paste any quote from me stating that Stewart is a bad coach or that WVU is destined to fail with him at the helm. If you can, do it. If you can't, then refrain from telling me what I did and did not say when it's all right here in the comments section for you to see. Trust me, it's really frustrating when people lie about you."
Ha ha! You're unbelieveable! In the first sentence, you claim that I'm deficient in some way because I'm unable to capture the subtle messages that you deliver, "tongue in cheek". Now you're telling me that if you didn't literally say it, that we're not allowed to assume that you implied something? Talk about spinning! Thanks for using the word "freaks", BTW. Sentences like that really explain the true nature of the whole discussion.
"Please explain how I "rushed to his defense" when all I have ever said is that he raises fair questions regarding Stewart's qualifications."
You're really not this obtuse, are you? Mandel criticizes Stewart by bringing up VMI. Someone points out that VMI is not indicative of his coaching ability, and you say "not so fast". How is that not defending Mandel?
Oh, I see. I can't point to a sentence that you wrote which says, "I'm defending Mandel", so you aren't. Sorry about that. Clearly, if your opinion is not written out word for word (and quite possibly notarized as well), then you're not responsible for it. Nice! I think I'm going to adopt that policy myself, as it is much easier than having character.
"Please cite an example. Either that, or retract this sentence. You won't win points with me or any level-headed person by making up bogus things that I never said."
I love it. Make the implication. Then say, "Unless you can show me where I wrote these exact words, I didn't say it". Classic Internet tough guy routine.
"You're a waste of my time."
Wow. Guess you'd probably better not come back here and post to me any more then, huh? I doubt we could be so lucky.
from 4 months ago
So to summarize your position - it is completely unnecessary and unfair to even consider Bill Stewart's coaching background when discussing WVU's choice for its vacant head coaching position.
Have I paraphrased your position accuately?
Here is me paraphrasing my own position:
When questioning whether or not Bill Stewart was a good hire for head coach of WVU's football team, it is fair to consider (and critique) his previous head coaching experience.
That is the only way in which I have "rushed to Stewart Mandel's defense" - while some people commenting on this article think that it's unfair to consider Bill Stewart's previous head coaching experience, I have come out and said that Mandel is not entirely off-base to question the man's qualifications.
That's where my defense begins and ends. If you had read the entire thread carefully, I even said that it's possible that Mandel has a personal dislike for WVU's administration (which may bias his written opinions)...there certainly seem to be WVU fans who believe that Mandel has a man crush on Rich-Rod and hates WVU - but that doesn't necessarily discredit anything and everything he has to say about WVU. It's still possible for him to hate WVU and raise fair questions, and in this instance I think he has.
from 4 months ago
"So to summarize your position - it is completely unnecessary and unfair to even consider Bill Stewart's coaching background when discussing WVU's choice for its vacant head coaching position."
No. My position is, that you can't base any judgement about Bill Stewart on what happened at VMI, anymore than you can base that judgement on what happened at the Fiesta Bowl. Bill Stewart, as many new head coaches, are unknown quantities, even with head coaching experience. You can't judge them before their first game, or maybe the first few games.
Just look up the names Kragthorpe and Wannstedt if you don't believe me.
Raise all the questions you want...doesn't change the fact that VMI is an indicator of nothing. That particular aspect of his past tells nothing. But, it's one of the key points that Mandel (and subsequently, you) to try to use to prove that Bill Stewart is unqualified.
A good coach? That remains to be seen. But unqualified? I don't buy it. The guy has a coaching resume that goes back over 30 years. So, no Div. 1 program ever gave him a chance to be a head coach...so what? The guy has credentials.
"That is the only way in which I have "rushed to Stewart Mandel's defense" - while some people commenting on this article think that it's unfair to consider Bill Stewart's previous head coaching experience, I have come out and said that Mandel is not entirely off-base to question the man's qualifications."
First, why only head coaching experience? Nothing else counts? For example:
"Bill served as the offensive line coach for the Montreal Alouettes of the Canadian Football League in 1998. His line blocked for Mike Pringle, the first 2,000-yard (1,800 m) rusher in CFL history. In 1999, he moved on to be the offensive coordinator of the Winnipeg Blue Bombers where he coached two all-conference receivers and a one thousand-yard rusher." (wikipedia)
So, if you're going to consider the past, let's consider all of it, not just the parts we cherry pick to prove our point. When you do otherwise, your agenda shows.
"It's still possible for him to hate WVU and raise fair questions, and in this instance I think he has."
Well, I can pick selected instances from anyones past to prove any point I wish. If Mandel were truly a journalist, he'd have dug a little deeper to paint a balanced picture of what Bill Stewart has done in his coaching career. He didn't, though, so what does that tell you?
from 4 months ago
It seems like a lot of you are having trouble grasping my easy-to-understand stance on this topic. My stance is that head coaching experience (no matter how irrelevant YOU think it may be) is fair to critique. Don't confuse Mandel with me. If Mandel is ONLY focusing on VMI, then he's wrong. But he's still right to factor VMI into the equation. If that means that I'm "rushing to his defense", then I guess that's what I'm doing. But he's wrong to only focus on one thing. And anyone that thinks VMI is irrelevant is also wrong.
from 4 months ago
I am having trouble grasping your not-so-easy-to-understand position, probably because you ignore some issues I brought up in regard to your previous post, which seem to indicate that your position might have holes in it. Why do you believe that no other coaching experience should factor into Mandel's (or your own) consideration?
Not to mention, why does Stewart's excellent recruiting class, which he put together at the last moment, and his top-notch staff, have no bearing on the overall evaluation of Stewart?
I might understand your point of view if you thought everything should be considered. But, you really seem to be hammering the VMI thing and disregarding anything that doesn't fit your agenda.
And yes, you can consider VMI if you want. Anyone who takes it with more than a grain of salt, however, is obviously trying to make something out of nothing.
Nobody wins there.
from 4 months ago
Christopher, you've almost convinced me you can't read. Congratulations.
"Why do you believe that no other coaching experience should factor into Mandel's (or your own) consideration?"
I NEVER said this. If you can find an instance where I said this, copy and paste - or just stop using my words to jump to false conclusions. In my most previous comment (the one you responded to), I said that IF VMI IS ALL THAT HE FOCUSES ON, THEN HE IS WRONG. What the hell is your problem, dude?
"I might understand your point of view if you thought everything should be considered."
I've never stated otherwise. Ever.
You should know by now that I haven't, but you don't seem to care what I've actually said - you're more interested in blindly defending WVU. You jumped to that conclusion because I said that his tenure at VMI is fair to take into account. There's a difference between saying that "VMI is all that matters" and "VMI is fair game". I have taken the latter position.
You're not doing much of a job dispelling the "inbred redneck" stereotype that WVU fans have.
from 4 months ago
"I NEVER said this. If you can find an instance where I said this, copy and paste - or just stop using my words to jump to false conclusions. In my most previous comment (the one you responded to), I said that IF VMI IS ALL THAT HE FOCUSES ON, THEN HE IS WRONG. What the hell is your problem, dude?"
Aw, jeez, not this sh** again. It doesn't matter whether you came out with that exact statement...I can breathe without TELLING people I'm breathing, see? But, let's look at what you DID consider, and when we do, we notice that you haven't taken ANY positive aspects of Stewart's previous experience into consideration. Can you show me where in YOUR posts that you considered anything that might have been a positive for Stewart at all? Did you even look at his other coaching experience? Of course not. That would present a balanced point of view, and that's clearly damaging to your agenda.
"I've never stated otherwise. Ever."
You didn't have to. Actions speak louder than words. Show me where you've considered anything other than the negatives about Bill Stewart.
"You should know by now that I haven't, but you don't seem to care what I've actually said - you're more interested in blindly defending WVU."
You're hilarious. You've approached this from the get go with a foregone conclusion in your mind, then tried to cherry-pick facts to make it so. You're the one who's blind...when I've suggested that you look at the WHOLE picture, you get defensive, but fail to waver from your misguided point of view.
"You're not doing much of a job dispelling the "inbred redneck" stereotype that WVU fans have."
Oh, I get it. I should just shut up, know my place, and go back to my cabin in the woods, huh? Wow. Do you say the same thing to people of a different color? Nice to see that you embrace the last "acceptable" stereotype. You'd probably be racist too if you thought could get away with it.
And, I'm sure it'd be convenient for you if I just went away, but I would like to hear an explanation of how debating with you makes me a redneck? A little elitist, aren't we?
You're hilarious. At this point, I'm just continuing to post so I can see how ridiculous your next statement will be.
from 4 months ago
Chris, I really think that we agree on more things than you believe. From the get-go, I got involved in this thread because I objected to the author calling Bill Stewart's previous head-coaching experience a "red herring". So that's the debate that I started, and that you joined and have since tried to hijack. By continuously bringing up his other coaching experience, you're starting an argument about something we've never disagreed on. The topic was very simple - is Stewart's previous head coaching experience relevant? That's the topic.
If you want to debate Stewart's qualifications as WVU's head coach, then start a new thread. I really couldn't care less whether or not the man is qualified. That's never been the topic of discussion in the debate that I started. The question I posed was quite simple, and I'm going to repeat it for you again - is Bill Stewart's previous head coaching experience relevant? I say it is relevant - not that it's the ONLY thing that's relevant, but that it is one of SEVERAL relevant things....yet you accuse me of many ridiculous things that I never said or did.
I've NEVER objected to considering everything else, and I've even said as much - probably more than once by this point. And just for you, I'm going to repeat it - I do not object to considering all prior coaching experience. So perhaps at this point you understand why I question your ability to read. I have only objected to people that label his previous head coaching experience a "red herring" that should be "taken with a grain of salt". Yet you insist on typing stupid sentences like this:
"Can you show me where in YOUR posts that you considered anything that might have been a positive for Stewart at all? Did you even look at his other coaching experience? Of course not. That would present a balanced point of view, and that's clearly damaging to your agenda."
It's comical that you think I have an "agenda". Since you're so hung up on this idea that actions speak louder than words.....answer this for me:
If I've clearly stated (VERY clearly by the way) that I believe Mandel is wrong to ONLY consider VMI, then doesn't that implicitly mean that I think his other experience SHOULD be considered? I mean, you know I'm breathing even if I haven't told you so, right?
For the record: I never said it was a bad hire. I never said he wasn't qualified for the job. I never said they are destined for failure. I never said that his entire body of work shouldn't be taken into account.
My only stance this entire time has been that Stewart's previous head coaching experience should be considered.
from 4 months ago
"For the record: I never said it was a bad hire. I never said he wasn't qualified for the job..."
I'm sorry, but you most certainly did. Here's a direct quote of what you said in an earlier post:
"Ok, let's look objectively and draw a reasoned conclusion.
Stewart has very little head coaching experience.
In his only stint as a D-I head coach, he performed very poorly at a terrible program.
He gets hired as head coach at a major BCS school.
My conclusion: Based on the facts of the case, he was unqualified for the job."
Unless my cutter and paster isn't working correctly, that sound pretty unequivocal to me. Was that post by another Jeff?
And this comment confirms what I've been saying. You're cherry picking to (very quickly) reach the conclusion that you desire. Notice you consider nothing but the evidence that seems the most damning, and lo and behold, pronounce Stewart as unqualified without considering anything else. In your later posts, you criticize Mandel for this and pretend that you're point of view is different, but you've already done the EXACT same thing.
from 4 months ago
Know what? I shouldn't have said that. I don't remember saying it, but I did. And I shouldn't have. Because it's not how I normally feel or think.
from 4 months ago
Fair enough. Just don't get upset with me for arguing about it, then.
The next time you think of West Virginians as inbred hillbillies, remember when this hillbilly had the class to realize you made an honest mistake and just let it go.
Some others might not have been so kind.
Maybe next time we talk, we can actually talk about football. Have a nice day.
4 months ago
You know... sooner or later you have to consider the fact that VMI's record is not only the responsibility of the coaches who have been there... but the players as well.
Stewart's record at VMI was...
1994 1-10
1995 4-7
1995 3-8
for a total of 8 and 25. Not the greatest record by any stretch. 12 years later, one has to ask what, if any, impact does Stewart's tenure at VMI have upon him today. Well... if other articles about Stewart are to be believed, then Stewart's VMI time helped get him the job at WVU. "How in the world did that help him" you might ask? Mike Tomlin, head coach of the Pittsburgh Steelers, got his start in coaching under Stewart at VMI in 1995. Tomlin spent 2 years as an assistant under Stewart and witnessed Stewart's performance. Several possibilities raise their ugly visage here... Tomlin evidently has fond memories of Stewart, he is being black mailed by Stewart, OR was impressed enough by Stewart's coaching that he publicly threw his support behind Stewart for his bid at head coach of WVU.
What lesson might we take from this? Well, people like Mandel, who talk about sports, think that Stewart's time at VMI is a good indicator of job performance. People like Mike Tomlin, who make sports HAPPEN... think Stewart's time at VMI is a good indicator, too.
Mandel started out to make a case against Stewart and WVU. The fact that he found some compelling statistics and other "facts" to support his opinions should hardly be surprising. That is what Mandel gets paid to do. However, other people found compelling evidence that supported Stewart getting the job. Those who want to believe that Mandel can say nothing wrong will go on being outraged that anyone could disagree with "the facts". The reality here is that this is a risky decision on WVU's part, but not necessarily a stooooopid decision, as some would like to characterize it.
4 months ago
VMI? Are we seriously speaking about VMI football? I re-read this last night so I could get a good night's rest...B-O-R-I-N-G....Big East Football......
4 months ago
Hey Jeff, keep thinking and talking like you are. Thats what keeps us winning... I hope everyone keeps saying that we are dead or dying and our program is going downhill. Man what motivation....
from 4 months ago
You created a brand new account to make yourself look stupid with a comment like that? To each his own, I guess..you're a complete fool.
4 months ago
You know the funny part about all this is that RR DID ask Stewart to go to UM with him. This coming from the Grad Asst. that handed in RR's letters of resignation and is currently with RR at UM as a recruiting asst. When he was asked Stewart told him he was making the biggest mistake of his life and that WV was their home and he was staying. Basically said go to hell RR. Wonder how that missed this article.
from 4 months ago
How did it - stewart being asked to go with RR - miss this article?
Maybe because is is not common knowledge that RR asked Stewart to go to MU. It was news to me, and I have followed this saga fairly closely. :)
write a new comment