Somebody has to step up

[Skingraft]

↖️ that 

[chapelbull]

16 hours ago, NewEnglandBull said:

Totally agree with you. Usually a HC will not get into the weeds like this when it is about financial support or fundraising (unless they are speaking at a “rah rah” event). This is usually the responsibility of others in the dept. to shake the tree. I wonder what Markus Harlan thinks about CCS statement? Or Judy for that matter. 

They could be using his influence to jump start the fundraising.  He's probably not here for the long haul either way unless fundraising can generate a push to a P5 conference and even then he could be out of here in  few years

[CousinRicky]

Funny thing with CCS mentioning this is that he really hates the hand shaking and doing the things that need to be done to fund raise.  That was part of the issue at UT.  Don't get me wrong, he's a great guy but he'll tell you he is a football coach first.  That is his passion.  The events that he is required to go to he does reluctantly.  Just his personality. At the football preseason event this year for Iron Bulls he wasn't there.  A "scheduling conflict".  Many of the other coaches were there. Got to meet the soccer coach and his wife and will now earmark part of our donation for men's soccer.  Same happened with the men's golf coach a couple of years back and we push some money to that program now. Once we build a connection with a coach we try to help them out.   

[charsibb]

The difference between CEO and COO of a firm is that the CEO recognises (and is good at) the stakeholder schmoozing.

If CCS doesn't or can't, he needs to go back to being a defensive coordinator.

Alas, pride will never allow him.

[Bull Dozer]

4 minutes ago, charsibb said:

The difference between CEO and COO of a firm is that the CEO recognises (and is good at) the stakeholder schmoozing.

If CCS doesn't or can't, he needs to go back to being a defensive coordinator.

Alas, pride will never allow him.

For football "CEOs" just like other CEOs this only matters if you aren't meeting or exceeding shareholder expectations.  Nobody is ousting you for not being a good gladhander if you are delivering record profits/wins.  This can buy you some time when things are rough but if you are doing your job well that stuff isn't particularly important.   CCS would still be at UT if he was winning double digit games every season and winning the B12 and *insert random CEO here* will never get ousted as long as they are beating their forecasted profits.  

[charsibb]

33 minutes ago, Bull Dozer said:

For football "CEOs" just like other CEOs this only matters if you aren't meeting or exceeding shareholder expectations.  Nobody is ousting you for not being a good gladhander if you are delivering record profits/wins.  This can buy you some time when things are rough but if you are doing your job well that stuff isn't particularly important.   CCS would still be at UT if he was winning double digit games every season and winning the B12 and *insert random CEO here* will never get ousted as long as they are beating their forecasted profits.  

Perhaps, for daily operations (also known as the COO responsibilities).

But not for expansion, like launching a new stock issuance, or raising funds for capital projects. If the CEO can't do the glad-handing (or have a right-hand guy to do it REALLY well), the organization will be at a severe competitive disadvantage.

My point still stands. CCS has "peter-principled" himself into a CEO role when he's far better suited to be the COO.

Besides, he needs someone with guts to overrule him when his conservative tendencies come to the fore

 

Edited March 14, 2018 by charsibb

[Bull Dozer]

16 minutes ago, charsibb said:

Besides, he needs someone with guts to overrule him when his conservative tendencies come to the fore

 

 

I heard there's a guy in the athletics office that's great at putting coaches on double secret probation and installing more wide open offenses......

Edited March 14, 2018 by Bull Dozer

[charsibb]

 

[CousinRicky]

1 hour ago, charsibb said:

Perhaps, for daily operations (also known as the COO responsibilities).

But not for expansion, like launching a new stock issuance, or raising funds for capital projects. If the CEO can't do the glad-handing (or have a right-hand guy to do it REALLY well), the organization will be at a severe competitive disadvantage.

My point still stands. CCS has "peter-principled" himself into a CEO role when he's far better suited to be the COO.

Besides, he needs someone with guts to overrule him when his conservative tendencies come to the fore

 

I would think of the AD as CEO.  And it is his responsibility to lead the fund raising.  But you can't have the coach pissin and moanin about the lack of an OCS and then not be ready to be a big factor in helping to raise the funds required.

[Ned A Starr RIP]

1 hour ago, Bourbon Bull said:

I would think of the AD as CEO.  And it is his responsibility to lead the fund raising.  But you can't have the coach pissin and moanin about the lack of an OCS and then not be ready to be a big factor in helping to raise the funds required.

At best, CSS is the manger of USF Football. The AD is the Manger of Athletics Department.  Judy is the CEO, and John Long is the COO.

Edited March 14, 2018 by NAS Gone to Paradise