Triangle Split Over Cutcliffe Hire

#1
Business

Business

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2006
Messages
7,210
Likes
1
#1
I never really thought people around here cared about the Duke football hire but I guess I was wrong. I was driving around this morning listening to "The Fanatics" which is the Raleigh version of Doc and Jeff, except for these guys actually know sports and question things instead of telling about how they text message the coaches.

Anyway, they started a big discussion on the following article.

Duke's decision spineless By: Barry Saunders

After hearing the jest of the article and the other coaching canidates going up against Cutcliffe I thought after they opened up the phone lines people were going to be killing this guy. They didn't it was tit-for-tat on people that wanted Cutcliffe and a split between people that wanted the Broadway fellow and Karl Dorrell.

It was really weird listening to about an hour and half segment on Duke Football but it happened.

Thoughts?

Sorry Mods if this belongs in the "Sports" section I just figured it was still relevent to UT since Cut is still there.
 
#2
#2
Nothing new under the sun. We bicker back and forth about Cut leaving/wish he would stay...TT as OC/TT as chest bumping buffoon. Looks like the Dukies also are split about their hire/search. Impossible for everyone to be happy...
 
#3
#3
Having went to undergrad at UNC, and working in Durham for a year and a half, I'm familiar with the N&O and Barry Saunders. The guy pulls the race card just about anytime he can find a time to do it. It is just another example here in the article. I actually wrote him an e-mail telling him I was in 100% disagreement with the article and that Cutcliffe is a fantastic hire for Duke. I can't believe Duke would be able to get a coach the caliber of Cutcliffe really. There's no doubt the Broadway guy is a solid coach who has had success at smaller programs, but he hasn't had the success that Cutcliffe has had in the best conference in the country.

In reality, the majority of the people in the Triangle couldn't care less about Duke football. Even Duke fans kind of laugh about it while discussing their basketball squad. NC State fans are the most passionate about football in the area, followed by UNC, and Duke a distant third.
 
#4
#4
why would anyone want karl dorrell? at least cut put up a pretty decent record at ole miss. Dorrell's record was among the worst in UCLA history.
 
#5
#5
drewwes01 said:
Having went to undergrad at UNC, and working in Durham for a year and a half, I'm familiar with the N&O and Barry Saunders. The guy pulls the race card just about anytime he can find a time to do it. It is just another example here in the article. I actually wrote him an e-mail telling him I was in 100% disagreement with the article and that Cutcliffe is a fantastic hire for Duke. I can't believe Duke would be able to get a coach the caliber of Cutcliffe really. There's no doubt the Broadway guy is a solid coach who has had success at smaller programs, but he hasn't had the success that Cutcliffe has had in the best conference in the country.

In reality, the majority of the people in the Triangle couldn't care less about Duke football. Even Duke fans kind of laugh about it while discussing their basketball squad. NC State fans are the most passionate about football in the area, followed by UNC, and Duke a distant third.
Click to expand...

The two guys hosting the show made sure to make the point that Saunders pulls the race card a lot.
 
#9
#9
droski said:
why would anyone want karl dorrell? at least cut put up a pretty decent record at ole miss. Dorrell's record was among the worst in UCLA history.
Click to expand...

I have to 100% agree with these sentiments. My USC friend tells me Dorrell was an absolute joke. UCLA was consistently inconsistent during his tenure and mediocre at best.
 
#13
#13
Business said:
The only pro about Dorrell was his 10 win season in 2005.
Click to expand...

the pac-10 was horrible in 05. they got blown out by SC and a 3 win arizona team, didn't play a 10 win oregon team, and came from behind in 6 of their victories (with 3 victories over Cal, Stanford, and WSU where the teams completely choked the games to them). without jones-drew that was a 6 win team.
 
#14
#14
droski said:
the pac-10 was horrible in 05. they got blown out by SC and a 3 win arizona team, didn't play a 10 win oregon team, and came from behind in 6 of their victories (with 3 victories over Cal, Stanford, and WSU where the teams completely choked the games to them). without jones-drew that was a 6 win team.
Click to expand...

Don't disagree with you, just relaying what I heard on the show.
 
#16
#16
drewwes01 said:
That's pretty much why he gets paid.
Click to expand...

After reading it after I had heard about it I got the feeling he's given a voice by the N&O to stir the pot a little bit.

With that being said there is stiring the pot in a classy well thought out way then there is using the line, "Duke didn't do the right thing, they did the white thing."
 
#18
#18
They should be thrilled---their last few coaches usually lose every game! If Cutcliffe wins 2, he's a hero!
 
#19
#19
drewwes01 said:
Having went to undergrad at UNC, and working in Durham for a year and a half, I'm familiar with the N&O and Barry Saunders. The guy pulls the race card just about anytime he can find a time to do it. It is just another example here in the article. I actually wrote him an e-mail telling him I was in 100% disagreement with the article and that Cutcliffe is a fantastic hire for Duke.
Click to expand...

Well, I read Saunders' column every time it comes out, and I disagree 100% with your assessment. Unless, of course, by "pulls out the race card" you mean "discusses race." By and large that's what he's hired to do, but if people actually read his articles they'd see he's pretty balanced. Here's just one of many examples where he "pulls the race card" against leaders within his own race:

newsobserver.com | Celebrate the best, not worst

Put yourself in his shoes. Duke interviewed 3 African-American candidates, one (Broadway) who was more than qualified for the position (he even coached at Duke before and has been very successful as a HC). If I were an African-American, looking for other African-American leaders, I'd be just as disappointed and just as skeptical of the hire. I'd be mad. It takes balls to hire an AA coach - that's why there are so few of them. And Saunders, like many others, was let down.

I'm no Duke fan, and I think Cutcliffe will do a great job at Duke (better than the previous 3-4 coaches at least). And Saunders is not dissing Cutcliffe. He's dissing the AD NOT hiring a guy he thought was perfect for the job, and losing the opportunity for his community to gain another high-profile leader and role model.
 
#20
#20
So if there are 2 highly qualified candidates in which one is white and the other is black, the AD should automatically choose the black coach in order for there to be a role model? The success of the program should be secondary to hiring a leader?

AD's hire coaches who they believe will give them the best chance to succeed. I believe Cutcliffe is a more qualified and experienced candidate, therefore I believe Duke made a great decision. It is not their responsibility to see to it that people's feelings about race are soothed. The AD is hired and fired for how well the athletic programs perform. Cutcliffe gives Duke a fantastic opportunity to succeed.

I think Mr. Saunders viewpoint of the situation is jaded.
 
#21
#21
drewwes01 said:
AD's hire coaches who they believe will give them the best chance to succeed. I believe Cutcliffe is a more qualified and experienced candidate, therefore I believe Duke made a great decision. It is not their responsibility to see to it that people's feelings about race are soothed. The AD is hired and fired for how well the athletic programs perform. Cutcliffe gives Duke a fantastic opportunity to succeed.

I think Mr. Saunders viewpoint of the situation is jaded.
Click to expand...

Just like yours is probably jaded. Saunders believed a member of his community was the best person for the job. It sounds as if you also believed a member of your community (UT) was the most qualified person to get the job.

You're right - it's not Duke's job to soothe our feelings about race. But it is Barry Saunders' job to illuminate racial disparity where it exists. If you don't agree with him, that's fine - but I think it's unfair to say it's just another example of him "pulling the race card" - that oversimplifies the issue and undermines the work Saunders does.

Who's the best person for the job? That's subjective, and you're right, the only opinion that really matters is Alleva's. All Saunders is pointing out is that Duke has never hired an African-American, here was a guy he thought was the perfect candidate, and they didn't hire him. It's no different than UT fans who thought Peyton got robbed when he didn't win the Heisman.
 
#22
#22
My opinion is definitely jaded, but not by social reasons, but rather success. I'm not looking at the situation through any lens accept which coach I believe has a better chance of leading Duke to success. Looking at the resumes of the coaches, Cutcliffe achieved great success at Tennessee as the OC and was successful at Ole Miss as the head coach leading them to I believe 5 bowl games in 6 years all while competing in the toughest conference in the nation. He also coached Peyton and Eli Manning. Coach Broadway has coached NC Central to 2 CIAA championships and is now at Grambling. Maybe my opinion is jaded, but I believe success at the SEC level and success at the CIAA level cannot be compared.
 
#23
#23
drewwes01 said:
My opinion is definitely jaded, but not by social reasons, but rather success. I'm not looking at the situation through any lens accept which coach I believe has a better chance of leading Duke to success. Looking at the resumes of the coaches, Cutcliffe achieved great success at Tennessee as the OC and was successful at Ole Miss as the head coach leading them to I believe 5 bowl games in 6 years all while competing in the toughest conference in the nation. He also coached Peyton and Eli Manning. Coach Broadway has coached NC Central to 2 CIAA championships and is now at Grambling. Maybe my opinion is jaded, but I believe success at the SEC level and success at the CIAA level cannot be compared.
Click to expand...

Just for clarification, Cutcliffe won all 4 bowl games Ole Miss played at while he was HC. 2 years they didn't make a bowl game. The first bowl game was his first game coaching (last game of the season in 1998).

Some would argue that Broadway's success as a HC was more impressive than Cutcliffe's. Cutcliffe is 44-29 as a head coach. Broadway is 41-14. Cutcliffe took over a bowl-eligible team at Ole Miss (that Tuberville had built up) and won the western division in his best year. Broadway inherited a 2-8 squad at Central and won 2 national championships in 4 seasons. Cutcliffe spent most of his years as an assistant to Fulmer at UT. Broadway spent his as an assistant to Spurrier at Duke and Florida. Cutcliffe is from Alabama and has coached in the SEC only. Broadway is from NC, has coached at 3 different schools here (including Duke), and has more ACC experience and far deeper ties to the Carolinas and to Duke.

Until a guy like Broadway gets a shot at a HC job at a major conference, we'll never know how great a coach he could be. Cutcliffe got his shot in 1998 with zero HC experience. Many would ask, "Why hasn't Broadway got his yet?" and better yet, "What does it take for him to get that shot?"
 
#24
#24
TennNC said:
Just for clarification, Cutcliffe won all 4 bowl games Ole Miss played at while he was HC. 2 years they didn't make a bowl game. The first bowl game was his first game coaching (last game of the season in 1998).

Some would argue that Broadway's success as a HC was more impressive than Cutcliffe's. Cutcliffe is 44-29 as a head coach. Broadway is 41-14. Cutcliffe took over a bowl-eligible team at Ole Miss (that Tuberville had built up) and won the western division in his best year. Broadway inherited a 2-8 squad at Central and won 2 national championships in 4 seasons. Cutcliffe spent most of his years as an assistant to Fulmer at UT. Broadway spent his as an assistant to Spurrier at Duke and Florida. Cutcliffe is from Alabama and has coached in the SEC only. Broadway is from NC, has coached at 3 different schools here (including Duke), and has more ACC experience and far deeper ties to the Carolinas and to Duke.

Until a guy like Broadway gets a shot at a HC job at a major conference, we'll never know how great a coach he could be. Cutcliffe got his shot in 1998 with zero HC experience. Many would ask, "Why hasn't Broadway got his yet?" and better yet, "What does it take for him to get that shot?"
Click to expand...

I respect your opinion but couldn't disagree more. I live in Durham, too. I've read all of Saunders' stuff and have to disagree that he is usually objective. Sometimes, perhaps, but not always. This particular article was anything but thoughtful and objective. It was bitter and full of sour grapes and maligns people who were just trying to do their job to the best of their ability.

I have nothing against Broadway or Dorrell, but it's an absolute joke to think that ANY of the other candidates for the Duke job had anything close to as impressive a resume as Cut.

1. Cut won over 60 percent of his games at one of the lesser schools in the best conference in the country. He beat LSU, Auburn UF, among others. Broadway won most of his games in Division II with the help of some IA and IAA transfers. And the vast majority of his years as a position coach at Duke were miserable, losing seasons. Duke won when Spurrier was there because of Spurrier, period. You can say Broadway is a better fit in Durham because of his local ties; others might say he was part of the losing culture at Duke and therefore not a great choice for a new beginning for Duke football;
2. Why go out of your way to minimize Cut's bowl victories? The fact is he went to bowls and won most years he was at Ole Miss;
3. As head coach at Ole Miss and OC at UT, he recruited, coached, and developed some #1 NFL draft choices. Have Broadway and Dorrell done that?

Duke simply was not in any position to be concerned with anything but hiring the best coach. They couldn't afford the luxury of making hiring a minority candidate a top priority at this juncture. They have been so bad for so long they had to get the best hire with the least risk, and that choice was Cut. The AD and pres at Duke have a lot riding on the choice. Do you really think they were out to deny a minority coach a chance? Or did they perhaps have more urgent things to think about? They had to choose the most-qualified, least-risk candidate to bring Duke out of the football wilderness, and that's exactly what they did. Anything else would have been unacceptable.
 
#25
#25
voldurham said:
I respect your opinion but couldn't disagree more. I live in Durham, too. I've read all of Saunders' stuff and have to disagree that he is usually objective. Sometimes, perhaps, but not always. This particular article was anything but thoughtful and objective. It was bitter and full of sour grapes and maligns people who were just trying to do their job to the best of their ability.

I have nothing against Broadway or Dorrell, but it's an absolute joke to think that ANY of the other candidates for the Duke job had anything close to as impressive a resume as Cut.

1. Cut won over 60 percent of his games at one of the lesser schools in the best conference in the country. He beat LSU, Auburn UF, among others. Broadway won most of his games in Division II with the help of some IA and IAA transfers. And the vast majority of his years as a position coach at Duke were miserable, losing seasons. Duke won when Spurrier was there because of Spurrier, period. You can say Broadway is a better fit in Durham because of his local ties; others might say he was part of the losing culture at Duke and therefore not a great choice for a new beginning for Duke football;
2. Why go out of your way to minimize Cut's bowl victories? The fact is he went to bowls and won most years he was at Ole Miss;
3. As head coach at Ole Miss and OC at UT, he recruited, coached, and developed some #1 NFL draft choices. Have Broadway and Dorrell done that?

Duke simply was not in any position to be concerned with anything but hiring the best coach. They couldn't afford the luxury of making hiring a minority candidate a top priority at this juncture. They have been so bad for so long they had to get the best hire with the least risk, and that choice was Cut. The AD and pres at Duke have a lot riding on the choice. Do you really think they were out to deny a minority coach a chance? Or did they perhaps have more urgent things to think about? They had to choose the most-qualified, least-risk candidate to bring Duke out of the football wilderness, and that's exactly what they did. Anything else would have been unacceptable.
Click to expand...

I respect your opinions too but feel we've gone off track a bit.

Saunders' main point was not to disparage Cutcliffe (neither was mine - I was merely comparing what Cut did with what he was given compared to the same for Broadway) - he says that up front in the article. He was saying that Alleva had a great opportunity to hire an equally (in his mind) qualified candidate but used Broadway as a puppet to feign interest in a minority candidate. Do you disagree, even if you believe Cutcliffe's a smarter hire?

Alleva did the safe thing, not the bold thing, and Saunders was pissed not only that he didn't hire Broadway but moreso that he didn't give an explanation why he did NOT hire him. In his opinion, he used Broadway and Dorrell as puppets to feign interest in hiring a minority candidate. Do you disagree? And he's seen this same thing, over and over, and you're right, he's bitter, and he took it out on Alleva. So what? If you or I were in his position I'm sure we'd be pissed as well. Still bitter about Peyton not winning the Heisman? Now multiply that by 1,000 and we start to understand how he might feel.

Also, when has Duke football ever mattered? They hired Ted Roof, who had zero head coaching experience, so Broadway must've been viewed as a safer choice than Roof.

Look - Cutcliffe had zero head coaching experience when Ole Miss hired him. Ole Miss gave him his chance. If Broadway doesn't get this oppy at Duke, with all his ties and experience, where is he supposed to get it? When does he get his chance? What does it take?

Finally, on Saunders' rep and objectivity, I provided some evidence of that. I'd be open to change my mind if you provided some also.

Your floor.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top