There are arguments in favor of retaining Embree another year.
1. The Coaches Association downgrades a job if the school has terminated before 3 years on the job.
2. Embree inherited a difficult situation and 2 years is not enough time to fix it (talent, culture, facilities that lag behind peers, difficulty for a quick fix when CU can't get many JUCOs through admissions, etc.).
3. Administrative fear of racial politics since Coach Mac opened that can of worms when Embree was hired and there could be blowback of firing him after 2 years when Hawkins was given 5 years.
4. Financial considerations. It costs money to fire coaches and hire new ones. The CU AD has been in financial difficulty for a while and it's tough to fight the easy sound byte from opposition that says tuition rates are out of control but the university can come up with $2+ million to change coaches.
5. Studies that show that firing a coach quickly more often results in a cycle of hirings/firings without improvement than it does in a new level of success achieved by the new coach.
But as you saw in my email, things are historically bad. Much of the above goes out the window when it reaches this level.
On #1, it's not like CU has a bad track record. It's likely that CU is looked at as a better job by finally showing a commitment to winning.
On #2, all true but the facts say he has made matters worse.
On #3, it's already an awful situation with the % of black head coaches in football. If we send the message to universities that hiring a black coach means they can't evaluate him based on job performance but have to hang on longer than is appropriate due to the color of his skin, that will only make the situation worse.
On #4, 38k people showed up last week. Season tickets were down this year. 35 suites are up for renewal next year. The financial cost of keeping Embree dwarfs the actual termination fees. Cal understood this and fired Tedford today.
On #5, I agree on face value. But there are certainly cases where termination for poor performance is justified. We can't say that no coach should ever be fired for losing and poor recruiting. So we have to acknowledge that there are times you have to go against the statistical probabilities. Embree's performance is historically bad. Probably unprecedented. If that doesn't justify it, what does? But it's also important that CU does the right things to improve administrative support, financial support and facilities in order to do the other things necessary to avoid a long-term cycle of being awful.
********************
Anything else on the "Pro" side that I may have missed?
Possibly, as what was brought up on Mile High Sports tonight, that the backlash from former players in the local media would be huge and that them along with other Buffs4Life guys would permanently drop their support for CU football.
Is that really a risk?
1. The Coaches Association downgrades a job if the school has terminated before 3 years on the job.
2. Embree inherited a difficult situation and 2 years is not enough time to fix it (talent, culture, facilities that lag behind peers, difficulty for a quick fix when CU can't get many JUCOs through admissions, etc.).
3. Administrative fear of racial politics since Coach Mac opened that can of worms when Embree was hired and there could be blowback of firing him after 2 years when Hawkins was given 5 years.
4. Financial considerations. It costs money to fire coaches and hire new ones. The CU AD has been in financial difficulty for a while and it's tough to fight the easy sound byte from opposition that says tuition rates are out of control but the university can come up with $2+ million to change coaches.
5. Studies that show that firing a coach quickly more often results in a cycle of hirings/firings without improvement than it does in a new level of success achieved by the new coach.
But as you saw in my email, things are historically bad. Much of the above goes out the window when it reaches this level.
On #1, it's not like CU has a bad track record. It's likely that CU is looked at as a better job by finally showing a commitment to winning.
On #2, all true but the facts say he has made matters worse.
On #3, it's already an awful situation with the % of black head coaches in football. If we send the message to universities that hiring a black coach means they can't evaluate him based on job performance but have to hang on longer than is appropriate due to the color of his skin, that will only make the situation worse.
On #4, 38k people showed up last week. Season tickets were down this year. 35 suites are up for renewal next year. The financial cost of keeping Embree dwarfs the actual termination fees. Cal understood this and fired Tedford today.
On #5, I agree on face value. But there are certainly cases where termination for poor performance is justified. We can't say that no coach should ever be fired for losing and poor recruiting. So we have to acknowledge that there are times you have to go against the statistical probabilities. Embree's performance is historically bad. Probably unprecedented. If that doesn't justify it, what does? But it's also important that CU does the right things to improve administrative support, financial support and facilities in order to do the other things necessary to avoid a long-term cycle of being awful.
********************
Anything else on the "Pro" side that I may have missed?
Possibly, as what was brought up on Mile High Sports tonight, that the backlash from former players in the local media would be huge and that them along with other Buffs4Life guys would permanently drop their support for CU football.
Is that really a risk?
