The CardBoard
It's time for Muir to go - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: It's time for Muir to go (/thread-22073.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5

It's time for Muir to go - winflop - 07-02-2021

I saw today where the streak of Director's Cups has ended. For me this was the last straw with Muir. Results matter. Actions matter. The list of his failures has gotten too long for me. I won't bother to list them here, we know what they are.

I hope some of you will join me in writing to Drell and Tessier-Lavigne. Our beleaguered Athletic Department needs new leadership

RE: It's time for Muir to go - Bruce Wang - 07-02-2021

Muir has done the impossible.  He has made an even more negative impact on Stanford athletics than Robin Mamlet.

Stanford should do what the Celtics did and "promote" Shaw to AD.

RE: It's time for Muir to go - OutsiderFan - 07-02-2021

If not Stanford, who won the Director's Cup?

RE: It's time for Muir to go - 82lsju - 07-02-2021

(07-02-2021, 04:47 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote:  If not Stanford, who won the Director's Cup?

https://gostanford.com/news/2021/7/2/athletics-directors-cup-runner-up.aspx

RE: It's time for Muir to go - BobK - 07-02-2021

Sorry I like his hires. Haase iffy almost all others very good

RE: It's time for Muir to go - teejers1 - 07-02-2021

(07-02-2021, 04:04 PM)winflop Wrote:  I saw today where the streak of Director's Cups has ended. For me this was the last straw with Muir. Results matter. Actions matter. The list of his failures has gotten too long for me. I won't bother to list them here, we know what they are.

I hope some of you will join me in writing to Drell and Tessier-Lavigne. Our beleaguered Athletic Department needs new leadership

Hmm.

I've been a critic of Muir for a while now - primarily due to his handling of football/Shaw, sprinkled in with Athletic Department mismanagement of fan base for various sports . . . and of course, apparently not having a clue about a $500K donation via Sailing team.

But not winning the Directors' Cup in this Covid year doesn't move the needle for me at all, particularly given the fact that Stanford student-athletes were hindered by the County's Health Bureaucrat like no other competitors in the country.  On the list of "demerits" for Muir, not winning the Cup isn't really even on it.

Of course, I also don't buy Bob's effusive praise of Muir's hiring.  How hard is it to get THE BEST non-major sports coaches to come to Stanford?  I would think it incredibly easy, given (a) recruiting pool, and (b) $$ Stanford has to offer head coahces.  Haase remains a ?? to me (I haven't given up on the guy like many here have), and he is the only major hire Bernie has made.   The rest?  Largely good to great (I like the women's softball coach), but they really seemed like easy pulls.  At least from this vantage point.

RE: It's time for Muir to go - Papa John - 07-02-2021

I, too, don't fault Muir for the runner-up in the Director's Cup. Everyone gets a mulligan for 2020-21. The whole debacle with the eliminated/reinstated sports is much more troubling to me. Talk about unforced errors.

RE: It's time for Muir to go - CompSci87 - 07-02-2021

(07-02-2021, 06:15 PM)Papa John Wrote:  I, too, don't fault Muir for the runner-up in the Director's Cup. Everyone gets a mulligan for 2020-21. The whole debacle with the eliminated/reinstated sports is much more troubling to me. Talk about unforced errors.

+1 on all of this.

RE: It's time for Muir to go - BostonCard - 07-02-2021

Guy presided over the first major violations.  And yeah, the whole dropping and re-adding sports was awful.  And not being able to keep costs under control. And I don’t know how you give him a mulligan over Haase; if we wanted Dawkins like results, maybe we should have just kept Dawkins. MBB is only his highest profile hire.

Like others, losing the directors cup doesn’t really change things.

BC

RE: It's time for Muir to go - winflop - 07-02-2021

(07-02-2021, 05:25 PM)BobK Wrote:  Sorry I like  his hires.  Haase iffy almost all others very good

I hear you on COVID. I guess I had already wanted to get rid of him and this was my knee-jerk reaction to yet another disappointment without thinking about the cause. However, this is a trophy that we typically RUN AWAY with.

Bad coaching decisions are made both by making bad hires as well as not firing underperformers. So it's not just Haase, it's also Dawkins. Rachel Hanson (sp?) comes to mind as well. Paul Goldstein hasn't done great although men's tennis did win Pac-12s this year (finally).

Football has also slid downhill under Muir. Some of that is on Shaw - probably a lot of it. But a better AD would be leaning on his head coach to make changes to his staff that Shaw hasn't made. When one of your managers' teams isn't doing well, as the director you need to counsel them about making changes and not letting them continue to struggle.

RE: It's time for Muir to go - akiddoc - 07-02-2021

I also don't see how losing the Director's Cup has any weight in looking at Muir's job performance. 

I don't understand the argument that hiring good coaches is of no consequence because anyone asked would come to Stanford. According to that argument, there is no athletic director who could be successful at Stanford. It's also a false argument. Coaches who come to Stanford (outside of 2 or 3) don't have a great standard of living due to the cost of existing in the Bay Area. Muir has to sell the job. 

I think the main objections to Muir with validity are that he isn't willing to lean on Shaw to get a modern OC and he was duplicitous with whoever else in the Stanford administration planned the cutting of 11 sports. Then he looked totally foolish when they were reinstated. A Sandy Barbour moment.

RE: It's time for Muir to go - bnarver - 07-02-2021

I don't know anything about Muir, whether he is any good or not.  But, if you are going to blame him for the Directors' Cup results this year, are you going to give him any credit for the 3 NCAA team championships Stanford won in 2019-20 in the Fall before COVID shut everything down, the 6 in 2018-19, and the 4 in both 2017-18 and 2016-17?  Mississippi St. won the baseball CWS this week for their first NCAA title.  Ever.  Stanford hasn't won one since .............. April.  Stanford's sports programs, by and large, are incredibly good.

Stanford participated in only 23 team championship tournaments this year.  This was the fewest since 2012-13 when Stanford beat Florida by 16.5 points. Stanford didn't make the tournaments in women's soccer or volleyball, 2 sports in which they won the titles in 2019-20.  I don't know what happened in those sports.  No points for football. Or men's basketball (but, that's par for the course).  Or women's gymnastics.  Or either men's or women's indoor T&F.  Are those all Muir's fault?

This was the perfect storm for Texas.  They had their best year ever.  The last year they came in as high as 2nd was 2004-05. They only participate in 9 women's sports and 11 men's sports.  They scored in all but 3 of those.  Stanford had their worst year ever and still managed to come in 2nd.

I think congratulations are in order to both Texas for rising well above past results and to Stanford for overcoming almost everything that the pandemic threw at them.

RE: It's time for Muir to go - gailtate - 07-03-2021

I would eagerly trade the next ten years' worth of Directors Cups for a decade in which Stanford football and basketball was front-and-center in national relevance in those sports' National Championships. Never grasped the holy reverence for the DC.

RE: It's time for Muir to go - BobK - 07-03-2021

Gail you don’t get to trade

We couldn’t therefore did not complete in indoor T&F because of the pandemic

Thanks akiddoc for some facts

RE: It's time for Muir to go - winflop - 07-03-2021

(07-02-2021, 10:43 PM)akiddoc Wrote:  I also don't see how losing the Director's Cup has any weight in looking at Muir's job performance. 

I don't understand the argument that hiring good coaches is of no consequence because anyone asked would come to Stanford. According to that argument, there is no athletic director who could be successful at Stanford. It's also a false argument. Coaches who come to Stanford (outside of 2 or 3) don't have a great standard of living due to the cost of existing in the Bay Area. Muir has to sell the job. 

I think the main objections to Muir with validity are that he isn't willing to lean on Shaw to get a modern OC and he was duplicitous with whoever else in the Stanford administration planned the cutting of 11 sports. Then he looked totally foolish when they were reinstated. A Sandy Barbour moment.

There's more than just the football staff - which goes well beyond Fanboy Hero OC to include Anderson, position coaches, and S&C which has been an abject disaster since Turley left - and cutting the sports. There's the complete financial mismanagement of the department, continuing to grow spending, while revenues - especially from the conference/P12N - were going the other direction. This contributed significantly to the decision to cut the sports. The awful communication, obfuscation, and adversity toward 36 Sports Strong is a completely separate - and equally damning - set of issues.

There's also Varsity Blues, which at a minimum he owns for the lack of oversight and sufficient controls/scrutiny when someone out of the blue donates half a million dollars to the sailing team. I don't know whose story to believe, but the portrayal of Muir in the movie is certainly plausible.

RE: It's time for Muir to go - teejers1 - 07-03-2021

(07-02-2021, 10:43 PM)akiddoc Wrote:  I also don't see how losing the Director's Cup has any weight in looking at Muir's job performance. 

I don't understand the argument that hiring good coaches is of no consequence because anyone asked would come to Stanford. According to that argument, there is no athletic director who could be successful at Stanford. It's also a false argument. Coaches who come to Stanford (outside of 2 or 3) don't have a great standard of living due to the cost of existing in the Bay Area. Muir has to sell the job. 

I think the main objections to Muir with validity are that he isn't willing to lean on Shaw to get a modern OC and he was duplicitous with whoever else in the Stanford administration planned the cutting of 11 sports. Then he looked totally foolish when they were reinstated. A Sandy Barbour moment.

Aren't you the one who said the wrestling coach we now have must have contacted Stanford and lobbied for the job?
Do you think McAlester was that hard a sell?
Goldstein?
Esquer?

C'mon now . . .

RE: It's time for Muir to go - BobK - 07-03-2021

Allister said no once. Yes a sell
Geesh

RE: It's time for Muir to go - BostonCard - 07-03-2021

(07-03-2021, 03:18 PM)teejers1 Wrote:  
(07-02-2021, 10:43 PM)akiddoc Wrote:  I also don't see how losing the Director's Cup has any weight in looking at Muir's job performance. 

I don't understand the argument that hiring good coaches is of no consequence because anyone asked would come to Stanford. According to that argument, there is no athletic director who could be successful at Stanford. It's also a false argument. Coaches who come to Stanford (outside of 2 or 3) don't have a great standard of living due to the cost of existing in the Bay Area. Muir has to sell the job. 

I think the main objections to Muir with validity are that he isn't willing to lean on Shaw to get a modern OC and he was duplicitous with whoever else in the Stanford administration planned the cutting of 11 sports. Then he looked totally foolish when they were reinstated. A Sandy Barbour moment.

Aren't you the one who said the wrestling coach we now have must have contacted Stanford and lobbied for the job?
Do you think McAlester was that hard a sell?
Goldstein?
Esquer?

C'mon now . . .

The thing about Esquer was not getting him to sign on the dotted line, but making the offer to begin with.  Many here would not have made that offer, so you have to give Muir credit for seeing something in Esquer that many here did not.

BC

RE: It's time for Muir to go - winflop - 07-04-2021

(07-03-2021, 09:04 PM)BostonCard Wrote:  
(07-03-2021, 03:18 PM)teejers1 Wrote:  
(07-02-2021, 10:43 PM)akiddoc Wrote:  I also don't see how losing the Director's Cup has any weight in looking at Muir's job performance. 



I don't understand the argument that hiring good coaches is of no consequence because anyone asked would come to Stanford. According to that argument, there is no athletic director who could be successful at Stanford. It's also a false argument. Coaches who come to Stanford (outside of 2 or 3) don't have a great standard of living due to the cost of existing in the Bay Area. Muir has to sell the job. 



I think the main objections to Muir with validity are that he isn't willing to lean on Shaw to get a modern OC and he was duplicitous with whoever else in the Stanford administration planned the cutting of 11 sports. Then he looked totally foolish when they were reinstated. A Sandy Barbour moment.



Aren't you the one who said the wrestling coach we now have must have contacted Stanford and lobbied for the job?

Do you think McAlester was that hard a sell?

Goldstein?

Esquer?



C'mon now . . .



The thing about Esquer was not getting him to sign on the dotted line, but making the offer to begin with.  Many here would not have made that offer, so you have to give Muir credit for seeing something in Esquer that many here did not.



BC

At the time Esquer was hired, I remember being skeptical because on paper he didn't look that good.

Yes, some credit to Muir, but more to Marquess who undoubtedly drove the hiring decision for his successor.

Has Muir made a number of good hires? Yes, he has. But for me they are overshadowed by his abject failure to move the needle in MBB, the downward slide of the football program, and the multiple scandals and awful financial management under his watch.

RE: It's time for Muir to go - teejers1 - 07-04-2021

(07-03-2021, 05:05 PM)BobK Wrote:  Allister said no once.  Yes a sell
Geesh

Yeah, and why was that?
Did it have anything to do with the way Muir handled the departure of the softball coach (two coaches ago)?
You can include that cluster on Muir's list.