The Jim Hofher era is over.
And Hofher's Monday firing as UB's football coach means the Ward Manuel era begins in earnest now. Manuel has the opportunity to put his indelible stamp on a squad that's gone 7-47 in five years under Hofher.
UB's next coach should first and foremost be a leader whose primary qualification resides in motivation. The last thing UB needs is another football technician similar to Hofher in leading the team. The program needs a coach with the persona of a field general. While Xs and Os certainly matter, a motivator is more important for UB's underachieving team. In fact, great college coaches tend to leave teaching to their assistants and focus on the bigger picture, much like successful CEOs.
College football programs can be turned around quickly. Kansas State was horrible for years but is a perennial bowl team now. This year, Charlie Weis at Notre Dame, and Steve Spurrier in South Carolina showed football programs can be markedly improved one year from the next.
Funding problems within UB's athletic program prevent coaches of Weis and Spurrier's caliber from coming here, but there are candidates cut from the same mold. Rick Neuheisel's available, as is Dennis Erickson, though there is surely also coaching talent to be had within the MAC or Manuel's old stomping ground, the Big Ten. A coach along those lines would create excitement and momentum for the program and, more importantly, for UB fans, teams that never quit under motivated leadership.
Torture 'R' Us
Bush's recent denial of U.S. torture practices doesn't match with the record
"We do not torture."
Come again? President Bush made the above statement at a news conference in Panama responding to questions about secret CIA prison camps and U.S. torture policy. Granted, one man's definition of torture may vary from another's, but news reports have made clear that the Bush administration condones and pushes for the use of torture.
If what Bush says is true, why has Dick Cheney actively attempted to stop Congress, the Pentagon and the State Department from imposing rules restricting the use of torture on suspected terrorists in custody? If true, why has Colonel Wilkerson, who was Colin Powell's chief of staff during Bush's first term, pointed to Cheney as having initiated the torture policies implemented by U.S. forces? If true, why did the administrations memorandum on Feb. 7, 2002, signed by President Bush, seek to reclassify terms of treatment within the Geneva Convention pertaining to al Qaeda and Taliban detainees? Because Bush's declaration isn't true, that's why.
The ACLU determined at least 21 detainees in Iraq and Afghanistan have died as a result of homicide while in U.S. custody, many after or during interrogations. Strangulation and "blunt force trauma" are cited as the cause of death on autopsy reports. This points to systemic policies of torture, which are in line with administration directives.
Sadly enough, it's possible no one in Bush's administration has informed the president of his role in U.S. torture policies. He has proudly stated that he doesn't follow the news, preferring to get information vetted by his staff. But it is undeniable U.S. forces have tortured suspected terrorists. Someone should tell Bush the truth.
