|
|
Post by DOOMS on Dec 6, 2013 12:22:15 GMT -5
I dont think Dooms' theory holds water. I believe this was just a list of people that Grambling may have been considering for their vacant head coaching position. Some of those people may have formally applied; some may have been names that a fan on a message board suggested. The fact is that Mach promoted this as a list of people who applied for the current Grambling head coaching job and posted in on various places on the Internet. He did not initially state who it was provided by; he just said this was the list. It was his responsibility to verify if it was true or not before posting. If he believes the list is accurate, he is basically saying that Broadway is a liar and that his previous quotes in the News & Record were all false. That my friends is a big deal. That is character assassination against a coach who didn't do anything wrong in this entire situation. Kind of like posting a picture of Art Shell on an internet forum when somebody asks who's getting the A&T job? Please. The title of the thread is "Names of the applicants for the Grambling coach job." Period. He was trying to be cute. People ran with it. Mission accomplished. For example, back in 1998 when Doug first got the job, Charlie Strong was a position coach at Notre Dame. I'll bet money he applied. He may have very well interviewed, and wanted more money than Grambling was able to pay. Besides, they were horny for Doug so nobody else was going to get that job. There is simply no way in hell that Grambling was going to go after Charlie Strong NOW. Or anybody else for that matter, since the prez's mind was made up a while ago that he wanted Broderick. Now if you want to pretend to do a thorough search, you get a list of the people who have applied in the past and start there. Right? Wait, didn't Broadway have a back and forth before we finally got him here? He was coming here, he was staying in Grambling, then he was leaving because somebody said something about his momma or something? How quickly we forget. Mach slyly never once stated this was a list of current applicants. And you fell for it. Get over it. There is no character assassination whatsoever. It's just folks running wild and becoming the butt of somebody's childish unfunny joke. |
|
|
|
Post by Bornthrilla on Dec 6, 2013 12:23:34 GMT -5
It is not what the title of the pdf says; it is what the title of the thread says.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bornthrilla on Dec 6, 2013 12:29:56 GMT -5
Dooms when you talk about things you don't have information about, you make yourself look silly. Didn't we go through this on the last thread when Ragsdale was named interim coach? Stop trying in engage in debates before your take time to do the minimal research on a topic.
Here is what Mach posted about the subject:
I made the SPECIFIC request to Grambling for "the COMPLETE list of names of the people WHO APPLIED for the Grambling job three times. I didn't ask for the names of the people who Grambling was "interested in". I have the emails to substantiate it. The president of the search committee/VP of Finance at Grambling State emailed me the list. I didn't not make up the list. I stated everywhere it was posted that the list was obtained through an open record or FOIA act request. If the NY Times would have made the same request they would have gotten the same list from Grambling State. The responsibility of the accuracy of my request falls on Grambling State University. I have requested other items from Grambling in the past such as game contracts and employee contracts and Grambling has honored my requests. It is my and everyone right to request information that is public information if we choose to. It is Grambling's responsibility under the law to respond and grant they request if it falls under the open records or Freedom of Information Act. Questions of the accuracy and legitimacy of the list should be addressed towards Leon Sanders head of the search committee sandersl@gram.edu.
Mach was not trying to be sly. You are the only one here coming up with wild theories and trying to connect invisible dots to help him save face.
|
|
|
|
Post by DOOMS on Dec 6, 2013 12:53:40 GMT -5
Again, where does it say applied for the CURRENT job opening?
I'll wait...
It is spelled out right there in what you quoted. Try reading it yourself instead of arguing with me because I figured it out.
I mean hell, he said he requested the COMPLETE list of names of the people WHO APPLIED for the Grambling job." Except for Doug himself, I'm betting that's the complete list of people who applied for the Grambling job, EVER.
I'm not trying to help that dude save face. I'm trying to help the rest of y'all that ran all over the place save face. It appears at least one of you is beyond saving.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bornthrilla on Dec 6, 2013 13:03:32 GMT -5
Based on your theory, which is asinine by the way, Eddie Robinson himself would be on the list. Or did he just show up at Grambling one day and start coaching?
I mean he and Doug would both appear on a COMPLETE list of people who applied for the job since the BEGINNING OF TIME right?
Once again you are jumping in a debate that you did not research first and now you are trying to justify your own ignorance.
Mach believed he had a list of applicants for the CURRENT Grambling coaching job and he got excited when he saw Broadway's name on it. Then he decided to post it all over the Internet without even attempting to establish if it was accurate are not.
CBS news did a similar thing with their coverage of the Benghazi story and several people got suspended for not ensuring the information was accurate before they promoted it.
|
|
|
|
Post by DOOMS on Dec 6, 2013 13:12:18 GMT -5
The organization that provided the information most likely was not even in existence when Eddie Robinson first got the job. They most likely provided every name that submitted an application through them.
I'm also willing to bet that Doug never had to submit an application through them, so they wouldn't have his name on the list. I mean, he's Doug. He just calls Grambling and they hire him. If memory serves me correctly, the second time around he had to sue the school to get his contract right. So that's further proof he didn't even apply through the normal channels.
This isn't about Benghazi. This is about the fact that it does not say CURRENT anywhere. It actually doesn't even insinuate current. It says "the COMPLETE list of names of the people WHO APPLIED for the Grambling job." It's beyond me why you can't understand that, other than you simply don't want to. That's fine, we can agree to disagree.
By the way, was the job even posted this time?
|
|
|
|
Post by Bornthrilla on Dec 6, 2013 13:28:46 GMT -5
That is not what Mach asked for in his request. He didn't ask the PR firm, he sent his request to Grambling,
Do you honestly believe that only 100 and some people applied for the last three Grambling head coaching openings?
|
|
|
|
Post by DOOMS on Dec 6, 2013 13:36:01 GMT -5
What Mach asked for and what Grambling sent him to go away are two different things. Not to mention, what he said he asked for wasn't particularly specific or properly phrased if he wanted to know applied this go round.
Was the job posted this time? If not, they wouldn't have anything to give him at all.
Do I honestly believe that only 100 and some people applied for the last three Grambling head coaching openings? Overall, no. Through this particular firm, yes.
|
|
|
|
Post by AggieGroove on Dec 6, 2013 13:40:58 GMT -5
Folks you went to college. The title of the sheet says what it is a "Sourcing" list. Just a list of folks that could serve as a source in the search process (IE: for references, recommendations etc.) This list is not a candidate list. Nothing to see here. Literally. I am creating a Christmas Gift Sourcing list and putting all you down for gifts. Thanks in advance. since i am on your sourcing list, do you need my address?  |
|
|
|
Post by Bornthrilla on Dec 6, 2013 13:58:45 GMT -5
From my understanding this job was never officially posted. At least I heard several people state that.
|
|
|
|
Post by kstone on Dec 13, 2013 10:50:56 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by durhamgsoaggie on Dec 13, 2013 12:14:33 GMT -5
Yep... no Broadway or Charlie Strong...lol
Not surprised by Frazier being a finalist at all. He might be the most talented coach on that list There just hasn't been enough time to clear out what happened at NCCU yet for him.
|
|
|
|
Post by Aggie One on Dec 13, 2013 12:37:54 GMT -5
The fact of the matter is and was, no one of any note was beating down Grambling's door about their coaching opening... thus Broderick Fobbs.
End of story.
|
|
|
|
Post by neighborhoodsuperstar on Dec 13, 2013 13:38:27 GMT -5
Shocking, isn't it (not)......
|
|
|
|
Post by DOOMS on Dec 13, 2013 14:02:13 GMT -5
There were some decent names on that list actually. You'd just have to know who they are. I'd have hired Anthoney Hill in a heartbeat myself, but then that's because I know who he is. His experience is reminiscent of Maynor's. That being typed, Grambling's current financial restrictions would make things difficult. That being typed, Grambling's probably not in much worse shape financially than any other SWAC school, so it's not like you're playing against a bunch of teams that are out-financing you.
|
|
