Jump to content

sloan1919

Member
  • Posts

    198
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by sloan1919

  1. Maybe not say anything but they would be thinking it. If Deion had an all black staff everyone here (including me) would be giving him the side eye. There are white players too. I bet their parents would notice.
  2. Sure they would. It would be statistically impossible if that happened and there was no bias.
  3. Yes. That is what I’m suggesting. Hence why diversity sometimes needs to be considered. If not, you may end up with a group that looks exactly like you even though that was not the intention.
  4. Never sad anything about racism. You did. I simply said there was a lack of diversity in the coaching staff that has been announced SO FAR. That’s a fact that is easily verified through the athletics USF website. Anything more than that is just speculation. I don’t think that everyone who doesn’t value diversity is racist. That just isn’t true. There could be 100 reasons why the coaching staff is what it is. My point was, parents, donors, etc. expect diversity and if it isn’t there things like recruiting will be hard. As a parent, I wouldn’t send my kid to a school that was not diverse or have want him in sports that wasn’t diverse. Some parents may not care but I would.
  5. That is true. Remember USF was founded during the civil rights movement so I would argue that at one point they weren’t eligible. There have been too few presidents since to observe a trend.
  6. Not talking about it isn’t the answer. Honestly, it’s just a way to avoid it. It’s like the phrase “I don’t see color”. At the end of the day, there is either diversity or there isn’t.
  7. I don’t. Never said I did. YOU made the assertion. I simply pointed out an observation. A trend that is somewhat odd. You (and others here) assumed they must be the best people for the job. If you walked into an authentic Chinese restaurant and everyone was Mexican no one would question why you thought it was odd. When I pointed out that all announced coaches were white, people automatically, with no backing said they were the best people for the job. Including you.
  8. How do you know that’s what happened?
  9. I clearly said “coaching staff”. Not “staff”. There is a significant difference between the two.
  10. Fair position. However I did say “trend”, “so far”. Maybe diversity is coming, only reacting to what has been announced “so far”. He is recruiting now BTW so needs to happen soon if it’s going to.
  11. USF has an official channel that they do announcements of staffing through. Not PeteThamel.
  12. Going by what has been announced so far. Not saying that there aren’t rules to fill.
  13. It wouldn’t be the best person for the job if parents won’t send their kids. In your mind you clearly see it as “disqualifying people”, in mine I question if black people were even considered. Additionally, how is he going to handle the same exact situation with the students.
  14. Minorities. Parents of potential players. Players. White people who actually care about diversity and inclusion.
  15. Am I the only one seeing the trend? So far, it’s all white guys. If this is the coaching staff he is assembling, how is he going to convince black parents to send him their kids? IMO this doesn’t appear to be an inclusive coaching staff especially since he is planning on leading a team full of black players.
  16. This is unfair. Money is fungible. The administration is of no obligation to spend their entire football budget. Furthermore if you donate money specifically marked for football, there is nothing that requires them to spend that money in the same year. So, if the admin decides that the total investment in football is $XX million dollars per year, that is what they will spend. If they want to increase the football budget above and beyond where it is now and they want the fans to pay. They should create a specific fundraiser outlining how and when the money will be used. USF also would need to guarantee that they won't just use this for the normal operations and move matching funds to other programs (e.g., every $1 given moves $1 football revenue to soccer).
  17. They still aren't. We are not matching their speed. Instead we hype people up with meaningless catch phrases. They should match or exceed UCF's spend on football period. No more hype and BS. Unless the pocketbook opens it is just hot air.
  18. Where did UCF get the money? We have more revenue than them and a larger endowment. Why are they able to muster up enough but we can't. Interesting thing is that after they started investing in football, it actual is starting to make money.
  19. What are you even talking about? That's not how surveys work. US News and World Reports would be the ones to ask. I'm sure they publish their methodologies.
  20. It's a toss up. However, the numbers don't lie. People are willing to pay more for UCF and their average exit salary is slightly higher.
  21. Arguably better. More selective and they charge higher tuition. They also have a slightly higher average exit salary for students.
  22. It’s public info. quick summary USF total budget: $2.3b UCF total budget: $2.1b; USF endowment: $900m UCF endowment: $200m Total athletics USF: $60m UCF: $75 football ops: USF $15.5m UCF $23.5 basically they outspend us in dollars and in percentage of football of overall budget.
  23. Forgot the stadium. Look at budgets. Compare there’s to ours. We aren’t investing like they are, period regardless of how we spend it.
×
×
  • Create New...

It appears you are using ad blocking tools.  This site is supported through ads.  Please disable in order to enjoy full access to The Bulls Pen.  Registration is free and reduces ads.