Bulls AD Harlan About to Sign an Extension

[Ionbull]

The times I’ve talked to Harlan have been very positive. He seems personable and I’m frankly a nobody. I hear he’s rubbed some major donors the wrong way, which isn’t great, but my question is how? Asking for too much? Too persistent? Money going to the wrong places? Not as personable to them? Maybe not sincere? How much is out of his control? 

His moves have been fine, COA being the glaring miss. CBG at least appears to be the right hire for perception and growth; it’s not like there were other candidates banging down the door to get in and I’m sure you think twice before going down the assistant route again.

The only program that seems to be consistently terrible is cross country, track and field. But I’m not entirely sure that’s a coaching thing or a facility thing. 

From where I’m standing keeping consistency is the best policy. Unless of course there are donors who will not donate a penny unless there’s a new AD. 

 

[Brad]

What would be the correct categories for evaluation on an AD scorecard?

 

1. Has there been greater success in athletics competition (W/L)?
2. How have the coaching hires turned out?
3. Have facilities improved (looking at you IPF, OCS)?
4. Are student-athletes holding up the student part (GPA achievements)?
5. Community buy in (game attendance to fundraising)?
6. Has the program been positioned well enough to potentially climb into a P5 conference?
7. Scheduling successes?
8. Relationships and goodwill?

 

Those come to mind for me, what else?

[Ionbull]

14 minutes ago, Brad said:

What would be the correct categories for evaluation on an AD scorecard?

 

1. Has there been greater success in athletics competition (W/L)?
2. How have the coaching hires turned out?
3. Have facilities improved (looking at you IPF, OCS)?
4. Are student-athletes holding up the student part (GPA achievements)?
5. Community buy in (game attendance to fundraising)?
6. Has the program been positioned well enough to potentially climb into a P5 conference?
7. Scheduling successes?
8. Relationships and goodwill?

 

Those come to mind for me, what else?

Outreach.

Staff and Donor Relations. 

Media presence. 

[Brad]

A quick google news search doesn't turn up a whole lot of immediate interest in Harlan, although this Maryland report suggests he's a possibility:

Quote

Maryland can also look to a rising star from a smaller school, as Auburn did in hiring Allen Greene away from Buffalo. Other athletic directors from Group of 5 schools who might attract interest are Central Florida’s Danny White and South Florida’s Mark Harlan. Another name that has been mentioned is Rutgers deputy athletic director Sarah Baumgartner.    Story

 

[Fold FB Invest in BB]

35 minutes ago, Brad said:

What would be the correct categories for evaluation on an AD scorecard?

 

1. Has there been greater success in athletics competition (W/L)?
2. How have the coaching hires turned out?
3. Have facilities improved (looking at you IPF, OCS)?
4. Are student-athletes holding up the student part (GPA achievements)?
5. Community buy in (game attendance to fundraising)?
6. Has the program been positioned well enough to potentially climb into a P5 conference?
7. Scheduling successes?
8. Relationships and goodwill?

 

Those come to mind for me, what else?

9. Unilateral National Championship self-proclamations. 

[Brad]

"Life is just a fantasy, can you live this fantasy life?"

-Aldo Nova,  1982

-Danny White, 2018

[charsibb]

53 minutes ago, Brad said:

What would be the correct categories for evaluation on an AD scorecard?

 

1. Has there been greater success in athletics competition (W/L)?
2. How have the coaching hires turned out?
3. Have facilities improved (looking at you IPF, OCS)?
4. Are student-athletes holding up the student part (GPA achievements)?
5. Community buy in (game attendance to fundraising)?
6. Has the program been positioned well enough to potentially climb into a P5 conference?
7. Scheduling successes?
8. Relationships and goodwill?

 

Those come to mind for me, what else?

Good list.

Your number 4 needs to be number 1, BTW.

 

[gibbsak]

6 hours ago, Brad said:

A quick google news search doesn't turn up a whole lot of immediate interest in Harlan, although this Maryland report suggests he's a possibility:

 

So, not only are we good enough for our coaches to be taken, they want to take our ADs too?

But, we don't belong?

[Brad]

8 hours ago, Brad said:

1. Has there been greater success in athletics competition (W/L)?
2. How have the coaching hires turned out?
3. Have facilities improved (looking at you IPF, OCS)?
4. Are student-athletes holding up the student part (GPA achievements)?
5. Community buy in (game attendance to fundraising)?
6. Has the program been positioned well enough to potentially climb into a P5 conference?
7. Scheduling successes?
8. Outreach: Donors, Relationships and Goodwill?
9. Impact on Bulls media presence

Okay, we use a typical 1-5 rating system with 5 being superior.  Perfect score is 45 points - how many points in your assessment, does AD Harlan earn?

[JTrue]

9 hours ago, Brad said:

What would be the correct categories for evaluation on an AD scorecard?

 

1. Has there been greater success in athletics competition (W/L)?
2. How have the coaching hires turned out?
3. Have facilities improved (looking at you IPF, OCS)?
4. Are student-athletes holding up the student part (GPA achievements)?
5. Community buy in (game attendance to fundraising)?
6. Has the program been positioned well enough to potentially climb into a P5 conference?
7. Scheduling successes?
8. Relationships and goodwill?
9. Impact on Bulls media presence.

 

Those come to mind for me, what else?

1. Unless every AD has to have "greater" success than the one before him, I'd say Harlan is doing just fine here. Football has had it's two best seasons under his watch W/L. Only two ranked finishes. Other sports seem to be doing the same or better. Basketball is still a dumpster fire, so it's not like he's doing worse.

2. COA wasn't a bad hire, just a bad result. We can only get two kinds of coaches. Retreads or up and comers. Up and comers carry risk, retreads you get what you pay for. We did the up and comer and it blew up, but I can't say he made a bad hire. If you want to pin the Masiello fiasco on him, I guess that's a thing, But it's not like he showed up and declared, "Mark don't do background checks, bitches!" He probably followed the exact same protocol UCLA did and USF did before him. They found a guy, interviewed, threw some numbers around, worker out the specifics, then did their background check and it bit us on the ass. He did what 99.99% of employers do and we caught it in time. 

Other hires, look to be fine. No complains about Mohl and Butehorn. Points off for the result of xCOA, but the hire I can't knock. I like Gregory so far.

3. Facilities are looking like they're on the upswing if the IPF pans out and OCS seems to be on some sort of track.

4. Definitely.

5. Attendance sucks, but if the facilities pan out, fundraising seems to be in order.

6. Unless there's someone ahead of us I don't know about, we're in as good a shape as anyone else in the minors.

7. Football scheduling doesn't look to good and I don't like it, but I don't know how much that's him and how much football scheduling has changed. 

8. If Vinik counts as relationships, he's good here.

9. Don't really know how to gauge this. I live in Tampa and have employment ties to USF, so I never feel like I'm out of the loop, but others disagree. Our media seems appropriate for where we are.

So to answer your later question... 4, 3, 4, 5, 4, 4, 3, 4, 4 - 35/45

Edited April 22, 2018 by JTrue