Do you mean loyalty as in assistant coaches that never leave? Or assistant coaches that move on and keep their former HC in their hearts and minds, and reflect what they learned into their coaching methods?

Skip Bertman is the person that comes to mind, based on the loyalty of former players.

Buford T. Justice said:

---

Do you mean loyalty as in assistant coaches that never leave? Or assistant coaches that move on and keep their former HC in their hearts and minds, and reflect what they learned into their coaching methods?

---

Assistants leave. Mainly talking about head coaches.

Yes, the same RC who was looking at the NFL as a next step.

True loyalty there.

That's just not the world we live in.

Why in the world would a coach be loyal to an institution if that same institution (as pushed by its fans… ie you) would fire that same coach for a losing season?

There isn't a school in the country that is that loyal to a coach, why do you expect the same in return?

AggieArchitect04 said:

---

Of course. But we fired those kind of coaches. Mike Sherman was very committed to A&M and his vision for a "football village" pushed us into the forefront nationally in the arms race for best facilities.

On the field; however, his results were mostly lackluster. And we really botched that termination.

RC had one of the winningest records at A&M, won multiple conference championships, never had a losing season; and did all this despite being handcuffed by Wally Groff for facility upgrades, and he lost ground in recruiting.

Even though we showed him the door (and have not brought any hardware home since his exit) he remained at A&M and devoted much of his life in service of our university. He's an excellent ambassador for Texas A&M.

---

Sleepy

We didn't deserve him

An institution builds loyalty by doing more than it has to for its employees. An employee who is treated right is not always looking for the next job. Employees usually have families and that should be their highest priority

Tex117 said:

---

That's just not the world we live in.

Why in the world would a coach be loyal to an institution if that same institution (as pushed by its fans… ie you) would fire that same coach for a losing season?

There isn't a school in the country that is that loyal to a coach, why do you expect the same in return?

---

Agree. This topic is always interesting in that we want a coach to be loyal to us, but we will only be loyal to them if he is winning. I would contend that nothing has actually changed. Coaches have left programs forever. We just get concerned when it happens to us.

Hutch would be a great example.

Buford T. Justice said:

---

Skip Bertman is the person that comes to mind, based on the loyalty of former players.

---

Didn't he ruin about 20 pitchers?

Gufstason did.

This thread is confusing

From Tony V's perspective, Tennessee committed almost 100 million to a stadium which Tony was given design latitude to build it how he saw it best suiting his teams/plans.
He has also received (unofficially) a remarkably lucrative contract which should be announced soon. Couple this with the adoration he has/is/will receive from the fan base and it appears a strong level of "loyalty" has been forged from a college poaching perspective.
All bets are off if the MLB comes calling.
I believe A&M hit a home run with Earley. He is very similar in so many ways to Tony and could very well enjoy the same success.

Hey Vol

Don't know if you watched Earley's interview from yesterday but he notes he's modeling his coaching approach on the way Tony V did it.

You can't have loyalty unless you commit to not firing. And at the eve of the day both sudes want agency and coaches need to be able to respond to a deteriorating political environment by making choices.

RC retired in place as an ambassador. You may give him as much credit for that as you wish, but in effect for minimal visible job performance he was offered some kind of meaningful compensation to be an ambassador and he performs well at being supportive.

He only rocked the boat to try to convince Groff to fund those upgrades and we honored that effort with naming the nutrition center that was funded and built well after his coaching years were over. I have zero doubt he also is a positive influence when he participates in interactions with student athletes, coaches, and staffs.

That implies a bit of an old school commitment from the school to him and from him to the school. For the most part that ship has sailed and it implies a level of control over employees that isn't coming back unless accompanied by defined benefit pensions that make one wealthy.

I mean, for about 18 years there, you could argue that Schloss was pretty damn loyal to TCU. We all know he turned down jobs like TX and State, and who knows where all else to stay there.

Loyalty is created from the top down. If you have trust and mutual respect, loyalty can follow.

How may bosses have you been loyal to?

aeon-ag said:

---

AggieArchitect04 said:

---

Of course. But we fired those kind of coaches. Mike Sherman was very committed to A&M and his vision for a "football village" pushed us into the forefront nationally in the arms race for best facilities.

On the field; however, his results were mostly lackluster. And we really botched that termination.

RC had one of the winningest records at A&M, won multiple conference championships, never had a losing season; and did all this despite being handcuffed by Wally Groff for facility upgrades, and he lost ground in recruiting.

Even though we showed him the door (and have not brought any hardware home since his exit) he remained at A&M and devoted much of his life in service of our university. He's an excellent ambassador for Texas A&M.

---

Sherman didn't have a have a chance. Francone left here with no players, he couldn't recruit and he couldn't win. Sherman needed time to build a team and a program. Fire happy tough man dollar Bill Burn canned him before he could accomplish anything.

---

I knew Sherman growing up and he's a phenomenal OL coach but he was over his head as a HC. He had time but didn't know how to recruit and didn't have the in-game coaching. Or have y'all forgotten all the times in 2011 when we went into half-time with a double-digit lead only to blow those and lose? I think it was 6 games we had 2 TD or more leads at the half and lost them.

Sherman is a good man but wasn't a good head coach. He needed to be let go.

TarponChaser said:

---

aeon-ag said:

---

AggieArchitect04 said:

---

Of course. But we fired those kind of coaches. Mike Sherman was very committed to A&M and his vision for a "football village" pushed us into the forefront nationally in the arms race for best facilities.

On the field; however, his results were mostly lackluster. And we really botched that termination.

RC had one of the winningest records at A&M, won multiple conference championships, never had a losing season; and did all this despite being handcuffed by Wally Groff for facility upgrades, and he lost ground in recruiting.

Even though we showed him the door (and have not brought any hardware home since his exit) he remained at A&M and devoted much of his life in service of our university. He's an excellent ambassador for Texas A&M.

---

Sherman didn't have a have a chance. Francone left here with no players, he couldn't recruit and he couldn't win. Sherman needed time to build a team and a program. Fire happy tough man dollar Bill Burn canned him before he could accomplish anything.

---

I knew Sherman growing up and he's a phenomenal OL coach but he was over his head as a HC. He had time but didn't know how to recruit and didn't have the in-game coaching. Or have y'all forgotten all the times in 2011 when we went into half-time with a double-digit lead only to blow those and lose? I think it was 6 games we had 2 TD or more leads at the half and lost them.

Sherman is a good man but wasn't a good head coach. He needed to be let go.

---

And wasn't Sherman also against the sec

He built a great oline but as we saw, after those seniors on defense graduated the defense was decimated to the point where it became one of the worst units in our entire history

He couldn't recruit defensive players

It was time for him to go

NyAggie said:

---

TarponChaser said:

---

aeon-ag said:

---

AggieArchitect04 said:

---

Of course. But we fired those kind of coaches. Mike Sherman was very committed to A&M and his vision for a "football village" pushed us into the forefront nationally in the arms race for best facilities.

On the field; however, his results were mostly lackluster. And we really botched that termination.

RC had one of the winningest records at A&M, won multiple conference championships, never had a losing season; and did all this despite being handcuffed by Wally Groff for facility upgrades, and he lost ground in recruiting.

Even though we showed him the door (and have not brought any hardware home since his exit) he remained at A&M and devoted much of his life in service of our university. He's an excellent ambassador for Texas A&M.

---

Sherman didn't have a have a chance. Francone left here with no players, he couldn't recruit and he couldn't win. Sherman needed time to build a team and a program. Fire happy tough man dollar Bill Burn canned him before he could accomplish anything.

---

I knew Sherman growing up and he's a phenomenal OL coach but he was over his head as a HC. He had time but didn't know how to recruit and didn't have the in-game coaching. Or have y'all forgotten all the times in 2011 when we went into half-time with a double-digit lead only to blow those and lose? I think it was 6 games we had 2 TD or more leads at the half and lost them.

Sherman is a good man but wasn't a good head coach. He needed to be let go.

---

And wasn't Sherman also against the sec

He built a great oline but as we saw, after those seniors on defense graduated the defense was decimated to the point where it became one of the worst units in our entire history

He couldn't recruit defensive players

It was time for him to go

---

Sherman and Sumlin has very narrow views in which positions win ballgames. Sherman was an OLine guy and Sumlin was a skill position guy.

Neither put together sustainable success here. But Jimbo was a QB guy and he didn't either.

I'm guessing we are hoping Elko is a whole team guy but remembers what defense does for the offense and vice versa…