Poll: Testing the 90% theory. | Page 2 | The Boneyard
.-.

Poll: Testing the 90% theory.

Have you reached the conclusion that BD was a bad hire?

  • Total voters
    178
Status
Not open for further replies.
I wonder who else seriously considered taking this job that it ended up being Diaco.... but until I know for sure if they are bowl eligible or not next year I reserve judgement on the hire. We know two that would have taken it.... Weist and Hughes. Who else wanted it would be interesting to know.

I give a pass to the D this year. Many times the offense put too much on their shoulders to realistically overcome. I'm liking the recruiting effort so far and that could be Diaco's saving grace. The "this is great, everybody's great", "lets do things the right way" car salesman spiel I'm not 100% fond of but I figure he has to do it to generate revenue any way he can.

My vote is no.....for now.
 
Last edited:
O Leary was 0-11 his first year. He has 2 more wins than that. My guess is that he will turn it around big time. Playing all of these young guys will pay off.

But, he is quickly wearing me out with the It's a mess thing. Just suck it up and stop whining. You are getting $2 million per year.
 
No he was not a bad hire, he inherited a program that was ruined player development wise by 2 a**holes, he will win here!
 
whaler11 said:
Isn't that just 'no'.
Expand ...
I interpreted choosing A or B meant that you thought Diaco was a good hire or not a good hire. I think that was the intent.

But I do see your point in that the question specifies the "conclusion" as the point of the question not on the "result" of the conclusion.
 
I have ignored the other 90% thread because it was such an overly dramatic statement that it didn't warrant acknowledging.
 
.-.
I voted NO - however there is a TON to question and scratch my head at - I would pull out my hair but I shave my head.
 
Greathusky said:
I interpreted choosing A or B meant that you thought Diaco was a good hire or not a good hire. I think that was the intent.

But I do see your point in that the question specifies the "conclusion" as the point of the question not on the "result" of the conclusion.
Expand ...
Whaler has it right, I meant for "no" to include "the jury's out" - that's a fair position at this point.
 
Voted no as Diaco is going through some on job training as first time head coach and think is smart enough to reflect and adjust in off season. Think he will right the ship but needs to get 5-6 wins next year (Villanova, Army and 3-5 or 4-4 in conference).
 
When you are give the reigns of a train wreck, it takes time to clear the rails & get back on track. Positive results have already been seen in the improvement of offensive play in the last 3 games.
 
.-.
whaler11 said:
Well you can't test the theory here because this is like 2% of the fanbase that is engaged.

He hasn't 'lost' 90%. But the majority has long ago stopped paying attention. Just look at how few people even post here.

And even I voted no.
Expand ...


I think Diaco is the right coach and will continue to improve the program. I know how many wins that translates to for this year or beyond, but I do believe results will come and we will be back to a bowl in the near future.

For the record, I am an avid follower of the all Uconn programs (especially football). I don't post much and find myself less interested in the Boneyard because of the constant complaining and negative chatter by a number of posters. I usually just scour for breaking info (which seems to occur less frequently these days). I prefer not to use my personal entertainment time on clowns who love to criticize everything. Several other BY's that I have come across have cut back on the Boneyard for the same reasons.
 
Way too soon to tell. At this point a definite no, he hasn't lost the fan base and he he isn't a bad hire.
 
Excalibur said:
"I don't know about this guy, he seems a little loopy to me."
Expand ...

It's a common conundrum. If he was 7-2 he would be quirkily brilliant and a coaching savant. If Belichick was a loser over the years he'd be an arrogant non- communicator. Now he's a hoodie wearing brilliant guy who doesn't suffer fools lightly.
 
Excalibur said:
Speaking with my mother, of all people, who came with us to the Army game -- "I don't know about this guy, he seems a little loopy to me."
Expand ...
I'm hearing that in my mom's voice and laughing.
 
.-.
No. I want to see what he does with a full team of his own recruits. I give him at least 3 complete years before making a judgement.
 
the entire p5 knows it is the wrong hire

mgmt just sits on hands

just not serious players

make a statement to p5 now to be p5 with a wow or is it bow wow
 
Would be very interested in seeing how this vote would turn out after the Cincy game.
 
Count me as a "no-for-now" but I could be convinced otherwise if he doesn't show a serious "some-of-this-is-on-me" attitude in tonight's presser. The first step to recovery.....
 
.-.
He's failed this year but for me he gets a chance to make changes in year 2. Right now he doesn't seem inclined to change anything about his "approach" although tonight's presser he seemed (to put it mildly) shaken. Still I want him to succeed but he wasn't ready for this.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Online statistics

Members online
308
Guests online
12,292
Total visitors
12,600
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
165,402
Messages
4,435,792
Members
10,291
Latest member
RelentlessD


p
p
Top Bottom