The unofficial online home for fans of the Western Michigan University Broncos. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

Is it possible that Martin wasn't ready at the time the WMU job opened up? That maybe he hadn't given the idea a thought and was enjoying his role with ND? That maybe this last year when the Miami(OH) job opened up he had prepared himself long enough for the idea that he was finally ready to take that step in his career? That maybe he hadn't finished or gotten enough out of his time at ND to feel comfortable moving on professionally at the time the WMU job became an option?

It's not always about WMU...

(07-31-2014 09:50 AM)WheresWaldo42 Wrote:  Here is where I will disagree with you Liam. Our job ISNT an average/good MAC job. That's the point. When the coaching search happened, we were fed another bill of goods and how great and desirable our job was. And nobody wanted it.

Excluding UMass this is objectively a better job in terms of facilities, budget, recruiting territory, etc... than Eastern, Central, Kent State and Buffalo. In my opinion we are at least on par with Bowling Green, Miami and Ball State. NIU, Toledo, Ohio, and Akron are arguably better positioned than we are to be successful long term. I'm not one of these that believes we are a sleeping giant either but being a good/average MAC job to me means having a fan base, descent facilities, and there not being an active conversation on campus to drop down to FCS.

Miami is one of the best academic schools around, and agree the campus is nicer than most MAC schools. It is in the middle of no where and its football facilities are awful. One of the only MAC schools that don't have indoor turf facility, until approval/funds of just recently.
Martin has a lot of work to do, the cupboard is bare in almost every position and even with a solid "coach" there wont be much there for awhile. Talked to a parent of a current player down there and he said they had like 500-1000 people at home games last year. Maybe Martin has "put some butts in the seats" incentive in his contract, like I believe Fleck has in his.

I know I am stating the obivious here, but the proof of how desirable/attractive WMU seemed to candidates during the 2012 search can be explained by what we ended up settling for - a positions coach with no coordinator,assistant or HC experience.

(07-31-2014 09:32 AM)Liam9903 Wrote:  

(07-31-2014 09:26 AM)EA3 Wrote:  

(07-31-2014 09:07 AM)Liam9903 Wrote:  

(07-31-2014 08:26 AM)WheresWaldo42 Wrote:  I also think that the way that the Cubit firing was handled didn't help with their perception around the coaching profession. Many of those guys have connections.

Once again Bill Cubit was given 7 years here thats an above average tenure for a FBS coach. In this profession there is massive turnover, lawsuits are filled, stories are leaked to the press, etc... If you thought that Bill Cubit being fired after a 4-8 season was so harsh that you just can't work at WMU then there is almost no place in college football you could work.

Doesn't matter if it was justified or not. Doesn't matter what WE think. It matters what the coaching community thinks about the matter. Like it or not, BC is pretty well respected in the coaching community AND wmu hasn't had a long successful history in football. Rather, one could argue that BC brought WMU consistency and an offense that was consistently rated in the top 20 every year.

WMU fired BC and the coaching community collectively shook their heads because he graduated kids and won more than he lost. Throw in the fact that BC asked for facility improvements and a bigger budget, failed to get them, and was still competitive....these things are not a positive for WMU's image in the coaching community when we fired BC.

The coaching community can shake their head but a coach wants to be a head coach and a FBS opening is still pursued. Joe Paterno had lots of respect from the coaching community and he was fired, stripped of his records, and died a few months later. Coaches lined up for the Penn State job. I know this isn't Penn State but our job is an average/good MAC job and there are coaches who are revered by their peers that get fired. That perception and applicant pool that it attracts is not significantly impacted by firing a coach who won more than he lost. Now I could see a guy like Scott Schaffer not wanting the WMU job because he had options and Bill Cubit was a close friend but I think its naive to think that there were dozens of coaches who we could have had under normal circumstances that were so impressed by Bill Cubit that they could not in good conscience deal with an administration that fired him.

It's been rumored that WMU inquired and/or offered 10-12 coaches before they landed on Fleck. How do you explain ALL of them turning the job down or not being interested then? One or two guys...I can buy the excuses or circumstances. 10-12 though...it's a trend. And our perception in the coaching community is a variable in that trend IMO.

Martin replaced Treadwell right? After 2 years wasn't it...and I heard about all the rumblings at MSU when he got fired about how he wasn't even given a chance to be successful.

(07-31-2014 11:02 AM)Broncobelt Wrote:  I know I am stating the obivious here, but the proof of how desirable/attractive WMU seemed to candidates during the 2012 search can be explained by what we ended up settling for - a positions coach with no coordinator,assistant or HC experience.

If he succeeds will his previous resume matter? Miami's previous coach had a fine resume, people thought he was a great hire. At first glance Akron's hire looked great, but what has he produced----and don't give me the bs excuse that he didn't inherit any talent and hasn't had enough time. I haven't seen that same metric applied to Fleck.


Fact is you GR guys think any guy with GVSU on his resume is Gold. Who besides BK has done anything of note?

(07-31-2014 09:50 AM)WheresWaldo42 Wrote:  Our job ISNT an average/good MAC job. That's the point. When the coaching search happened, we were fed another bill of goods and how great and desirable our job was. And nobody wanted it.

We are lead to believe that WMU is a sleeping giant waiting to take college football by storm. Its just isn't the case. Never has been, never will be.

Our Athletic Dept and many of our teams supporters have an infinitely higher opinion of our program than ANYONE else does. Do we want to be great? Of course. Do we want to win? Of course. But we aren't and really haven't so stop pissing on my leg and telling me its raining.

Great post by EA3 earlier there... lot's of good points.

But to your point WW42... what do you really expect WMU to say? You know they're going to beef up the job description and paint a pretty picture for everyone. You would do it for your business too. Otherwise, who is going to want to take an "unattractive" job?

That's pretty basic stuff as far as Employee Recruitment 101. Every business looking to attract talent has to sell a bill of goods to a certain extent if they want to stay competitive.

(07-31-2014 11:33 AM)EA3 Wrote:  

(07-31-2014 09:32 AM)Liam9903 Wrote:  

(07-31-2014 09:26 AM)EA3 Wrote:  

(07-31-2014 09:07 AM)Liam9903 Wrote:  

(07-31-2014 08:26 AM)WheresWaldo42 Wrote:  I also think that the way that the Cubit firing was handled didn't help with their perception around the coaching profession. Many of those guys have connections.

Once again Bill Cubit was given 7 years here thats an above average tenure for a FBS coach. In this profession there is massive turnover, lawsuits are filled, stories are leaked to the press, etc... If you thought that Bill Cubit being fired after a 4-8 season was so harsh that you just can't work at WMU then there is almost no place in college football you could work.

Doesn't matter if it was justified or not. Doesn't matter what WE think. It matters what the coaching community thinks about the matter. Like it or not, BC is pretty well respected in the coaching community AND wmu hasn't had a long successful history in football. Rather, one could argue that BC brought WMU consistency and an offense that was consistently rated in the top 20 every year.

WMU fired BC and the coaching community collectively shook their heads because he graduated kids and won more than he lost. Throw in the fact that BC asked for facility improvements and a bigger budget, failed to get them, and was still competitive....these things are not a positive for WMU's image in the coaching community when we fired BC.

The coaching community can shake their head but a coach wants to be a head coach and a FBS opening is still pursued. Joe Paterno had lots of respect from the coaching community and he was fired, stripped of his records, and died a few months later. Coaches lined up for the Penn State job. I know this isn't Penn State but our job is an average/good MAC job and there are coaches who are revered by their peers that get fired. That perception and applicant pool that it attracts is not significantly impacted by firing a coach who won more than he lost. Now I could see a guy like Scott Schaffer not wanting the WMU job because he had options and Bill Cubit was a close friend but I think its naive to think that there were dozens of coaches who we could have had under normal circumstances that were so impressed by Bill Cubit that they could not in good conscience deal with an administration that fired him.

It's been rumored that WMU inquired and/or offered 10-12 coaches before they landed on Fleck. How do you explain ALL of them turning the job down or not being interested then? One or two guys...I can buy the excuses or circumstances. 10-12 though...it's a trend. And our perception in the coaching community is a variable in that trend IMO.

I don't believe that a dozen people were OFFERED the HC job and declined. I could see some refusing interviews or something but I don't think that report has any credibility. If that were the case some of it could be attributed to going after unattainable coaches. At the time we were hiring, Chuck Martin was preparing for a BCS championship game. This season he was coming off a the pinstripe bowl. Timing matters, context matters. Both are lost when we talk about it in terms of mystery coaches 1-12 turning it down.

IF he succeeds it probably won't matter. Doo came to WMU as a positions coach at Army. His only HC experience was at the high school level.

But in 2012 a positions coach was a far cry from what the university said they wanted to hire - which was a coach with previous HC experience.

(07-31-2014 11:02 AM)Broncobelt Wrote:  I know I am stating the obivious here, but the proof of how desirable/attractive WMU seemed to candidates during the 2012 search can be explained by what we ended up settling for - a positions coach with no coordinator,assistant or HC experience.

How does that work with the other narrative of the meddling President big footing everyone to hire this guy instead of an as of yet unnamed mystery candidate?

(07-31-2014 11:50 AM)Chipdip2 Wrote:  

(07-31-2014 11:02 AM)Broncobelt Wrote:  I know I am stating the obivious here, but the proof of how desirable/attractive WMU seemed to candidates during the 2012 search can be explained by what we ended up settling for - a positions coach with no coordinator,assistant or HC experience.

If he succeeds will his previous resume matter? Miami's previous coach had a fine resume, people thought he was a great hire. At first glance Akron's hire looked great, but what has he produced----and don't give me the bs excuse that he didn't inherit any talent and hasn't had enough time. I haven't seen that same metric applied to Fleck.


Fact is you GR guys think any guy with GVSU on his resume is Gold. Who besides BK has done anything of note?

Jim Harkema won a MAC championship and Cal Bowl at Eastern after conference was trying to kick school out.

GVSU has only had five coaches since, including Kelly and Martin and current Matt Mitchell.

Tom Beck, who hired Kelly and is in CFB HOF, went directly from Allendale to OC at ND under Holtz and then Illinlois.

An NFL positions coach pays more than a MAC coordinator's does. Wonder why.

(07-31-2014 11:59 AM)Liam9903 Wrote:  

(07-31-2014 11:33 AM)EA3 Wrote:  

(07-31-2014 09:32 AM)Liam9903 Wrote:  

(07-31-2014 09:26 AM)EA3 Wrote:  

(07-31-2014 09:07 AM)Liam9903 Wrote:  Once again Bill Cubit was given 7 years here thats an above average tenure for a FBS coach. In this profession there is massive turnover, lawsuits are filled, stories are leaked to the press, etc... If you thought that Bill Cubit being fired after a 4-8 season was so harsh that you just can't work at WMU then there is almost no place in college football you could work.

Doesn't matter if it was justified or not. Doesn't matter what WE think. It matters what the coaching community thinks about the matter. Like it or not, BC is pretty well respected in the coaching community AND wmu hasn't had a long successful history in football. Rather, one could argue that BC brought WMU consistency and an offense that was consistently rated in the top 20 every year.

WMU fired BC and the coaching community collectively shook their heads because he graduated kids and won more than he lost. Throw in the fact that BC asked for facility improvements and a bigger budget, failed to get them, and was still competitive....these things are not a positive for WMU's image in the coaching community when we fired BC.

The coaching community can shake their head but a coach wants to be a head coach and a FBS opening is still pursued. Joe Paterno had lots of respect from the coaching community and he was fired, stripped of his records, and died a few months later. Coaches lined up for the Penn State job. I know this isn't Penn State but our job is an average/good MAC job and there are coaches who are revered by their peers that get fired. That perception and applicant pool that it attracts is not significantly impacted by firing a coach who won more than he lost. Now I could see a guy like Scott Schaffer not wanting the WMU job because he had options and Bill Cubit was a close friend but I think its naive to think that there were dozens of coaches who we could have had under normal circumstances that were so impressed by Bill Cubit that they could not in good conscience deal with an administration that fired him.

It's been rumored that WMU inquired and/or offered 10-12 coaches before they landed on Fleck. How do you explain ALL of them turning the job down or not being interested then? One or two guys...I can buy the excuses or circumstances. 10-12 though...it's a trend. And our perception in the coaching community is a variable in that trend IMO.

I don't believe that a dozen people were OFFERED the HC job and declined. I could see some refusing interviews or something but I don't think that report has any credibility. If that were the case some of it could be attributed to going after unattainable coaches. At the time we were hiring, Chuck Martin was preparing for a BCS championship game. This season he was coming off a the pinstripe bowl. Timing matters, context matters. Both are lost when we talk about it in terms of mystery coaches 1-12 turning it down.

You can keep believing that....but I think it's more likely than not. The length of the search suggests it. Again, calling Martin and him declining an interview isn't necessarily "offering" him a job....but would be included in that 10-12 number.

(07-31-2014 12:08 PM)EA3 Wrote:  

(07-31-2014 11:59 AM)Liam9903 Wrote:  

(07-31-2014 11:33 AM)EA3 Wrote:  

(07-31-2014 09:32 AM)Liam9903 Wrote:  

(07-31-2014 09:26 AM)EA3 Wrote:  Doesn't matter if it was justified or not. Doesn't matter what WE think. It matters what the coaching community thinks about the matter. Like it or not, BC is pretty well respected in the coaching community AND wmu hasn't had a long successful history in football. Rather, one could argue that BC brought WMU consistency and an offense that was consistently rated in the top 20 every year.

WMU fired BC and the coaching community collectively shook their heads because he graduated kids and won more than he lost. Throw in the fact that BC asked for facility improvements and a bigger budget, failed to get them, and was still competitive....these things are not a positive for WMU's image in the coaching community when we fired BC.

The coaching community can shake their head but a coach wants to be a head coach and a FBS opening is still pursued. Joe Paterno had lots of respect from the coaching community and he was fired, stripped of his records, and died a few months later. Coaches lined up for the Penn State job. I know this isn't Penn State but our job is an average/good MAC job and there are coaches who are revered by their peers that get fired. That perception and applicant pool that it attracts is not significantly impacted by firing a coach who won more than he lost. Now I could see a guy like Scott Schaffer not wanting the WMU job because he had options and Bill Cubit was a close friend but I think its naive to think that there were dozens of coaches who we could have had under normal circumstances that were so impressed by Bill Cubit that they could not in good conscience deal with an administration that fired him.

It's been rumored that WMU inquired and/or offered 10-12 coaches before they landed on Fleck. How do you explain ALL of them turning the job down or not being interested then? One or two guys...I can buy the excuses or circumstances. 10-12 though...it's a trend. And our perception in the coaching community is a variable in that trend IMO.

I don't believe that a dozen people were OFFERED the HC job and declined. I could see some refusing interviews or something but I don't think that report has any credibility. If that were the case some of it could be attributed to going after unattainable coaches. At the time we were hiring, Chuck Martin was preparing for a BCS championship game. This season he was coming off a the pinstripe bowl. Timing matters, context matters. Both are lost when we talk about it in terms of mystery coaches 1-12 turning it down.

You can keep believing that....but I think it's more likely than not. The length of the search suggests it. Again, calling Martin and him declining an interview isn't necessarily "offering" him a job....but would be included in that 10-12 number.

Then we're having a semantic argument because I have no problem believing they contacted at least that number of people who declined consideration. When I think they were offered the job to me that invokes them going through the process of interviewing and learning about the institution and then not being willing to sign on.

(07-31-2014 12:01 PM)Liam9903 Wrote:  

(07-31-2014 11:02 AM)Broncobelt Wrote:  I know I am stating the obivious here, but the proof of how desirable/attractive WMU seemed to candidates during the 2012 search can be explained by what we ended up settling for - a positions coach with no coordinator,assistant or HC experience.

How does that work with the other narrative of the meddling President big footing everyone to hire this guy instead of an as of yet unnamed mystery candidate?

I don't think any of us really know what happened behind the scenes for sure. That said there have been numerous reports of Dunn riding roughshod over the AD and selection committee. So most likely the story has some real legs. Regardless, the end result was significantly less than what the stated goal was at the beginning of the search.

That's the only point I was trying to make. Today, we are where we are. Just hope the staff is up to the challenge once fall camp starts.

(07-31-2014 12:08 PM)EA3 Wrote:  You can keep believing that....but I think it's more likely than not. The length of the search suggests it. Again, calling Martin and him declining an interview isn't necessarily "offering" him a job....but would be included in that 10-12 number.

Hate to keep getting into the "he said, she said" stuff, but to add onto the discussion one step further... one person told me that there was a candidate who interviewed for the job and held out as long as possible, only to decline the job offer in a gesture of support to Cubit.

(07-31-2014 02:06 PM)Hoekjeness Wrote:  

(07-31-2014 12:08 PM)EA3 Wrote:  You can keep believing that....but I think it's more likely than not. The length of the search suggests it. Again, calling Martin and him declining an interview isn't necessarily "offering" him a job....but would be included in that 10-12 number.

Hate to keep getting into the "he said, she said" stuff, but to add onto the discussion one step further... one person told me that there was a candidate who interviewed for the job and held out as long as possible, only to decline the job offer in a gesture of support to Cubit.

Name please.

Not the name of your source, but the name of the candidate.

I personally hate when people say they know something, but leave out the details.

If a person held out, thus putting WMU at a disadvantage, I think it is important to know who the culprit is.

(07-31-2014 12:17 PM)Broncobelt Wrote:  

(07-31-2014 12:01 PM)Liam9903 Wrote:  

(07-31-2014 11:02 AM)Broncobelt Wrote:  I know I am stating the obivious here, but the proof of how desirable/attractive WMU seemed to candidates during the 2012 search can be explained by what we ended up settling for - a positions coach with no coordinator,assistant or HC experience.

How does that work with the other narrative of the meddling President big footing everyone to hire this guy instead of an as of yet unnamed mystery candidate?

I don't think any of us really know what happened behind the scenes for sure. That said there have been numerous reports of Dunn riding roughshod over the AD and selection committee. So most likely the story has some real legs. Regardless, the end result was significantly less than what the stated goal was at the beginning of the search.

That's the only point I was trying to make.

Well it matters if we are discussing how attractive of a job this is. If the President micro managed the hire then perhaps the premise of PJ Fleck and his record as representative of the "quality" of coach we can aspire to is off?

I wish I knew too... you don't think I begged this person to tell me? They wouldn't give me a name. That's called "snitching".