RSS
Facebook
Twitter
E-PrinceFootball head coach Roger Hughes was fired Sunday afternoon, less than 24 hours after the football team finished its third consecutive season with a 4-6 overall record.
Hughes was “relieved of his duties” as head coach by Director of Athletics ...
(back to the article)
The opinions expressed here are those of the individual commenters and do not necessarily represent the views of The Daily Princetonian Publishing Company, Inc. We do not take responsibility for the opinions, facts, or claims presented by individual commenters, and reserve the right to moderate or delete inappropriate comments.
FINALLY.
what does "relieved of duties" mean......
I think it's a euphemism for when a medical technician pulls stool from a patient who's been constipated for a really long time.
It means he's fired as the football coach, but since Princeton still owes him money on his contract, they will find something else for him to do while he's still under contract.
I hope the Prince does more than a superficial job in reporting this. For example, just how much slower has the Admissions Office been than some of our competitors like Penn in acting on applications of football players the coaches want? Why not do an analysis of the role transfer athletes have played in the success of our competitors in football? Even the year we shared the title under Hughes, we would not have done so without the contribution of a transfer from Purdue that we called a deferred admit. Foran's example tells you right away that this is a key disadvantage any Princeton football coach has in the one sport in which every Ivy school tries its utmost to have a winning program.
Finally, from 1956-1969, Princeton won or shared 5 Ivy titles in 14 years, came in second 4 times, and had 1 losing Ivy season. We then had 9 straight losing Ivy seasons, did not win or share an Ivy title for 20 years, and, at par, our record in the Ivies in the 40 years since 1969 has been 3-4. Why? This is all because of 40 years of inadequate head coaches? Why doesn't the Prince do an in-depth review of why we are not successful in football? When Tosches and Hughes had good stretches, why was that the case? Why wasn't it sustained? And talk to defenders of Princeton administrators and their critics, to supporters of the coaches let go, and their critics. T defenders of the Admissions Office and its critics. They are all out there.
Sounds like a great article. But does anyone care enough about football to spend all that effort writing this? I don't.
Mr.Hughes may want to consider painting dorm rooms for the
housing dept since it has become a lucrative revenue source
Have a little Christian Charity!
Roger has a family and 13 year old daughter.
He won 2006 Ivy Championship
Happy Thanksgiving
@Alum
Football coaches should have no role in the admissions process. University policy should not be based on what improves our chances at football. And I'll go one step further than "@Alum" and say that I *hope* no one cares enough about football to do such an in depth investigation. The football program—indeed, all of varsity athletics—is a shameful waste of resources that should be eliminated in order to divert funds to academic programs.
@Geek
Your comment demonstrates a narrow-mindedness about what is "education." I was not an athlete at Princeton, but I knew several pretty well, and I think the leadership, discipline, and time-management skills that student-athletes gain from their experiences on the varsity squads are just as, if not more, valuable than the things they learn in the classroom.
Your comment also demonstrates your ignorance to the fact that alumni giving at universities nation-wide can be positively linked to the success of the athletics teams during any given alumnus' time in school, and that varsity athlete alumni typically make more money after college than non-athletes (and I'm not talking about those few that go professional).