That's a good question for some but not for me. I was fine with him leaving and I get why he did. I just think that a coaching change is a unique chance to hire a guy that is a difference maker from another team. And it always works out for everyone but us.
USC gets Riley
Alabama gets Saban
Ohio State gets Meyer
Michigan gets Harbaugh
LSU gets our coach(I don't care but they really wanted him)
UCLA gets Chip Kelly
Someone is going to get Rhule
We hire a one year DC at Notre Dame. Maybe he works out. I hope do. But for the love of Pete can we for once go out and land a big fish. I mean, it's Notre Dame, not Vanderbilt, right? Can't they land ONE big fish for a change. And he shouldn't have to be spotless. Holtz sure wasn't.
Weird post.
Riley is basically Brian Kelly all over again, just flashier. 10-2 ceiling, teams always have holes and gets outcoached in big games.
Harbaugh lost 3 or more games every year at UM prior to last year, including an 8-5 record in year 3 and going a combined 11-8 in Years 5 and 6.
Chip Kelly was 10-21 his first 3 years at UCLA before putting together his first winning season last year at 8-4. All while the PAC-12 has been the weakest its been in years with Stanford and USC sucking and Oregon being ehhh.
Where do you even come up with this crap.
Funny thing is if we hadnt hired Freeman, when he is superstar HC in 3-4 years everybody would be bitching we let him go, and would probably say its because the school doesnt invest in football and wouldnt pay him. Its a circular conversation with a lot of people on this board just hopping from one thing to the next making bogus points just to have something to complain about and say how everybody else does it better.