sloan1919

16 minutes ago, Bull Nut said:

Then why didn't you title the thread "lack of diversity" instead of "all white coaching staff". You immediately brought race in play with the title of the thread. Practice what you preach big guy. 

My point was about race. 

1 minute ago, WhoRUSF said:

There is an absolute zero percent chance anybody makes a thread on this board about a mostly black coaching staff and complaining about it. You're so delusional

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 minutes ago, WhoRUSF said:

There is an absolute zero percent chance anybody makes a thread on this board about a mostly black coaching staff and complaining about it. You're so delusional

2 minutes ago, WhoRUSF said:

I don't think anybody was going to have a problem if dieon sanders brought a mostly black staff... but leave it to this guy to have a problem with a mostly white staff. The only issue will be if they don't win enough. 

Sure they would. It would be statistically impossible if that happened and there was no bias. 

9 minutes ago, CycleBull said:

What you’re saying is potentially unconscious bias. 

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.

16 minutes ago, JTrue said:

This is a stupid thread and I love imagined racism AND making stupid posts.

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 minutes ago, Triple B said:

smh ..... How many more generations is it going to be before nobody even notices stuff like this. There's been a huge difference between my generation and my kids when it comes to this kind of thing but I guess there'll always be some that don't recognize people just as people ....... hopefully there will be fewer and fewer as time goes on.

When it stops being an issue?

5 minutes ago, JTrue said:

Guys… USF has never hired a black president. I’m just pointing something out, stop making it seem like I’m saying USF only hires white people to be president.

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.

1 minute ago, jchem1995 said:

Few years back, Willie Tagget and Ruffin McNeil coached the first fcs game with two black coaches. NOT ONE MEDIA OUTLET spoke nor pointed out or did what you did, that’s bring up race. Just two dudes coaching a football game. Keep it up.

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. 

2 minutes ago, Bull Nut said:

How do you know that's not what happened? Are you insinuating that CAG is a racist? 

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.

3 minutes ago, Bull Nut said:

Isn't getting a job based on skin color, gender, sexual orientation more racist than getting a job based on merit? I never understood diversity initiatives within corporations as they seem counterintuitive. Maybe it's just me... 

How do you know that’s what happened?

10 minutes ago, jjlovecub said:

The ridiculousness of this comment cannot be understated. Also if you look at his staff there are minorities on the staff so your point is pointless and this post should be taken down as it is meant only to stir up trouble where none exists

I clearly said “coaching staff”. Not “staff”. There is a significant difference between the two. 

3 minutes ago, Sk00b said:

Yikes. This is one of those slippery slope conversations. 

I believe you're looking into it too much though. As others stated, let's get the best guys to do job. Also, why jump the gun when the full staff isn't official?

I'm sure their reputation with their recruits would tell a different story. At least i would hope so. 

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.

Just now, bulloni said:

they've both been announced

USF has an official channel that they do announcements of staffing through. Not PeteThamel.

3 minutes ago, JTrue said:

But, those guys are black. If he mentioned them, he wouldn't be able to say the staff is all white.

Going by what has been announced so far. Not saying that there aren’t rules to fill. 

2 minutes ago, MSBulls said:

I want the best staff we can get. Don't care about race, gender or orientation. If you're the best for the job and best we can get give me them. Just get the best person for the position we can. Disqualifying people from an opportunity no matter the identification is so, so stupid. 

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. 

9 minutes ago, Bull Awakening said:

Who cares? We are all just people. People of God. 

Minorities. Parents of potential players. Players. White people who actually care about diversity and inclusion. 

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.

1 hour ago, Ricky the Bull said:

USF Fans: I can't believe we don't spend the money in order to make athletics successful!

Also USF Fans:  I'm not giving another dime until I see improvement in the athletic program!

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).

1 hour ago, Bull Awakening said:

Which is probably why USF finally awakened. 

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.

On 12/10/2022 at 4:35 PM, slick1ru2 said:

The administration just said they’ve spent more on the football program the  last 2 years than the previous 25. I imagine they’re mostly talking the IPF but that’s the problem. Where the op wants the program to be takes not millions but hundreds of millions. Where was that money supposed to have originated? 

 

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. 

31 minutes ago, bulloni said:

seriously, i've graduated in the last decade and I can confirm nobody has followed up to find out what my salary is. No numbers on that can be more than someones guess

What are you even talking about? That's not how surveys work.

52 minutes ago, Triple B said:

I would be curious to see that data and how it was compiled ....

US News and World Reports would be the ones to ask. I'm sure they publish their methodologies. 

On 12/5/2022 at 2:42 PM, CousinRicky said:

You would get an argument from many on that.

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. 

1 hour ago, Peatearpan said:

How are UCFs academics? We are a university first, football is just a function of it not the end goal.

Arguably better. More selective and they charge higher tuition. They also have a slightly higher average exit salary for students.

6 minutes ago, Triple B said:

Please link so we can ....

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.

3 minutes ago, puc86 said:

Someone please show me where anyone said anywhere that an OCS was a requirement by anyone for anything or where a single game was won by an OCS. An OCS is discussed as a mythical thing for three reasons 1) ucf built one and they eventually got in and we did not build one and then we didn’t get back in but it completely ignores that they have been consistently winning and relevant while he have not and back when we got in last time we were consistently winning and relevant. 2) we just don’t have one so people always think that’s the difference maker and 3) because it’s expensive and takes a long time so it allows a forever excuse to be able to be developed that will eventually be someone else’s problem when it solves exactly zero things 

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.