gobulls83

 

If I'm reading this thread right, Cincinatti has gotten lucky with their football hires, while Jurich has been brilliant.  This, even though Jurich once hired a dud.

 

The Jurich man crush is amazing.  Sure the guy is a good AD.  But the Louisville budget has been higher than all of the other non-power conference schools for a long time.  Eventually that pays off unless you are incompetent.

 

The problem is, you're attributing every argument in this thread to everyone in it.

I'm the only one who has said Cincinnati has gotten lucky with their football hires - though I also said it wasn't entirely luck. I've also not said anything about Jurich other than he has a great reputation.

Here's a thought, maybe everything's not as black-and-white as you're trying to reduce it to?

Definitely not literally a coin flip. Hiring Urban Meyer at Florida, after he had had success at Utah and Bowling Green, was much more likely to succeed than hiring Zook, who I believe had no head coaching experience. But not every coaching hire can be someone with that kind of experience, of course - every coach has to have his first job sometime. But the hiring of Meyer could have very well been a flop under different circumstances. Same with Cincy. But I don't mean to totally discount the role of the AD either - Cincinnati's administration should be proud of the hiring record regarding football coaches.

They also made the apparently wise decision to let go of Joe Tresey at the right time.

Agreed that Cincinnati has made good hires - but that's as much luck as it is sound management. Any college football head coach hiring is approximately a coin flip - some are more likely to succeed than others, but you can't really believe that Cincinnati is more likely to make a sound hire than any other school. It's a small sample size. It's possible to make the best hire available to you at the time and just not have it work out.

But in terms of athletics budget, Cincinnati were certainly the overachievers of the former Big East. They were the only football school in the conference to spend less per year than USF. At least, in the last few years of the league that was the case.

 

Five or six schools having achieved it before does change your point that FGCU were the first team to achieve it. Remember when I explained to you what missing the bigger picture means? Six schools having done it instead of five does not change the point that FGCU were not the first team to achieve it.

The point was ITS RARE, not how many. BEING FIRST OF A SMALL NUMBER IN THIS CASE WASNT THE POINT AT ALL, IT WAS BEING PART OF A SMALL NUMBER. It's not expected or done every time. I guess it's beyond your grasp though so I'll add you as #5 on my ignore list. I'm giving you the number of this small percent of the TBP because you like to dwell on the unimportant trivia. The important thing is bye bye.

 

You said he must be a great coach and that FGCU could hang in the Big East because his team accomplished something that is done every single year, win one game against a bigger-conference foe. Is it always a 15-seed? No, but who cares? The fact that they even were a 15-seed is a pretty good reason to doubt they could hang in the best basketball conference in the country at that time. You also ignored the question of why USC's AD is suddenly so infallible, but you ignore things you can't answer all the time - it makes it easier to present your nonsensical arguments.

Anyway, you sure did use a lot of capital letters. I'll certainly give you that much.

No team stays stagnant. You're either getting better or you're getting worse. What team goes 6-6 every single year?

Every team gets worse sometimes, and gets better sometimes. No team stays on an upward trajectory 100 percent of the time, it is totally unrealistic to expect that.

(Sorry, got confused about which thread this was and included a bunch of irrelevant stuff.)

There is no formula for always making good hires. Consider Florida: Two of their past three football head coaching hires have been Ron Zook, who was an unequivocal failure, and Will Muschamp, who, while it's too early to call him a total failure, has certainly produced one mediocre and one really, really terrible season in his three years in charge. And this is with Jeremy Foley, who may be one of the few athletic directors in the country with a reputation even better than that of Jurich. Foley did not hire Spurrier, so he's 1-for-3 in the football coach hiring lottery - but boy did he hit the jackpot with the one good hire.

Skip Holtz seemed to many like a good hire at the time, and it flopped horribly. It happens, even to the best. One major difference is, both Louisville and Florida are in much better positions to recover from that flop than USF is. This is because they have MUCH larger budgets - to say the budgets don't make a difference is absurd. And Louisville and Florida both certainly draw better-qualified candidates for their coaching vacancies than USF does, and they still made these bad hires. It happens.

Note that I'm making no excuse for the contract extension given to Holtz though. That is inexcusable. That contract extension alone should have cost Woolard his job. I'm just saying, no AD has the golden touch and always hires guys who go on to win tons of titles and stuff.

He won't get a "big fat contract" unless he performs first. The structured contracts put in place by the most recent NFL collective bargaining agreement prevent the obscene contracts given to bums like Jamarcus Russell. He'll be a wealthy man with his first contract, but it will be modest compared to contracts given out to first-round quarterbacks in the past.

I'm not saying Bortles, Bridgewater or Manziel will be a bust like Russell - though I would bet on at least one of the three being a total flop, probably Manziel because of his ****** attitude. I look at Manziel, and I see Ryan Leaf with a slightly better college career. But I think the best-case scenario for any of them is a career like that of Alex Smith - a No. 1 pick who has had a long career, but at no point has he been anywhere near an elite quarterback.

Also, sick, your deferring to the USC AD is very bizarre. Since when is USC such a basketball powerhouse that getting hired there means a coach is suddenly unquestionable? The USC AD is the same guy who hired Lane Kiffin, a guy who has won nothing anywhere he has gone. Seems odd to tie your credibility up with his, though in your case it might still be an improvement.

Five or six schools having achieved it before does change your point that FGCU were the first team to achieve it. Remember when I explained to you what missing the bigger picture means? Six schools having done it instead of five does not change the point that FGCU were not the first team to achieve it.

 

What gives us, the USF students / alums / fans, the right or even the thought to expect anything better than average results in conference play over the long run?

 

The sum of all conference play is average, so for every conference member above average there must exist a conference member below average.. If all conference members demanded above-average results in conference play across all sports, by definition there could be no conference.

 

Why should we be so arrogant as to think we are better than our conference mates? Is it our history of success? Our rich and generous alumni donors? Our long record of sellout ticket sales? The huge group of advertisers beating down our doors to sell advertising at our sporting events? What?

 

Because we have expended considerably more capital than most our conference mates on sports.  Every University decides where to allocate its resources and based on our spending, we have prioritized sports greater than certainly most of our new conference mates and really more than most of our Big East mates.

Additionally I think sports is regional.  Football is huge in the south, basketball not so much, and baseball/soccer/golf not at all.  So one would expect we are more football focused than many of our conference mates.  In general though, as this thread is about AD salaries, if we are receiving average (or below average) results then our compensation and expenditures need to be in-line with those results!

 

USF spent more than most if its Big East mates on athletics? That's not even close to true.

Here are the figures for the 2010-11 season (the first one that came up in a Google search): http://csnbbs.com/showthread.php?tid=562319

Louisville more than double the spending. Rutgers, Syracuse, West Virginia, Pitt and UConn all well ahead of USF. Several of the non-FBS schools (the Big East basketball-only schools) almost outspent USF.

That's not the point. It's of course fine to want your team to get better, to be competitive, to win titles. But the fact is, USF has NEVER been that team. One conference tournament title in basketball, no conference titles in football, where does the sense of entitlement come from? It takes time. Woolard has had time, so it's time for him to go, but to expect his successor to come in and turn things around immediately, or even with in a couple of years, would be incredibly stupid.

Even the bad hire of Skip Holtz can be forgiven (though not the contract extension), because USF hardly has the pedigree to choose from elite, can't-miss coaches. Even the Floridas, Alabamas, and Notre Dames of college football make bad hires.

What gives us, the USF students / alums / fans, the right or even the thought to expect anything better than average results in conference play over the long run?

 

The sum of all conference play is average, so for every conference member above average there must exist a conference member below average.. If all conference members demanded above-average results in conference play across all sports, by definition there could be no conference.

 

Why should we be so arrogant as to think we are better than our conference mates? Is it our history of success? Our rich and generous alumni donors? Our long record of sellout ticket sales? The huge group of advertisers beating down our doors to sell advertising at our sporting events? What?

It's the fact that a message board exists and some people love to hear their own voices.

Isn't this the same thing they ran with the word "manscaping" in place of the word "bromance"? Pretty sure it's literally exactly the same commercial.

Brett McMurphy for AD!

Eh, the worst USF team ever took the best UCF team ever to the wire, even with him at quarterback. Who cares. Overhyped and overrated, he is not an NFL quarterback. He's making the right choice though, coming back for another year would only hurt his stock, which will never be higher than it is right now.

I don't think any of the top quarterbacks in this draft - Bortles, Bridgewater and Manziel - are likely to be franchise guys as pros. The best quarterbacks for value in this draft will come in the second or third round, strictly because guys drafted there carry lower expectations and are likely to land on better teams.

I never fault anyone for getting the best deal possible for themselves.

 

If you don't like DW's contract, don't blame him, blame the person who gave it to him.

I don't blame Woolard for getting the contract. I do blame him for failing to live up to it.

Well, since Selmon is so popular, we should hire another Bucs legend. Here are some suggestions:

Trent Dilfer

Martin Gramatica

Vinny Testaverde

Bert Emanuel

Brian Kelly (not the Notre Dame coach)

Corey Ivy

Somebody should start an Internet petition, those always work, right?

The only bright side I can say is, there's basically no chance of Woolard collecting any sizable portion of that bonus, which makes those figures WAY closer then you are probably assuming. And I wouldn't have much of a problem if Woolard collected those bonuses, because it means the teams are winning.

Anyway, playing devil's advocate here. I think Woolard needs to be gone yesterday.

Well, they say a million monkeys at typewriters will one day turn out Shakespeare. Smazza doesn't do much to inspire confidence in that theory.

I was obviously joking. But if USF won a national title in every sport in one year, I'm pretty sure we would all be in a more forgiving mood, Brad.

Lee Roy did more for us when he was not an AD than as AD. 

Absolutely right. Selmon's most meaningful contributions to USF did not come as an administrator.

Or make 2014 the year he finally unveils his super secret weapon that leads to USF winning national titles in every sport.

I really hope Woolard leaves soon, I don't even care who replaces him.

I guess I have to agree with you, Trip.

Actually, out of curiosity, I polled those family members I mentioned about Meyer, and I was mostly wrong. There's still some appreciation for him, but it was about 50/50 when asking people if they would be happy to have Meyer back as coach. I'm sure it would be even lower if the team weren't so terrible under their current coach.

It's still true that Petrino is a loser (who wins, but still a loser of a person), I guess maybe Meyer just belongs in the same category, or just one tier below.