USF Names Oliver, Woolard Finalists

[Markeymark]

(Just trying to present another viewpoint here:)

I'm just curious - what is everyone's knock on Wollard? What exactly is it about a non-football school that turns people off? We are already in the BCS, so what skillset exactly does the AD need, in your mind, that this guy is lacking? If you read through the Trib articles, it's clear this guy is a seasoned AD who has sat on numerous committees and is a "known commodity", a solid guy.

And what is it about Oliver that puts him head-and-shoulders above Woolard? Does the fact that UVa has football mean that somehow Olver has obtained this god-like "football" quality through the process of osmosis? Or is there some tangible things that Oliver brings to the table as the "Associate AD for Administration" - or whatever his title is.

Inquiring minds want to know!

[Velcro]

I think you are right on MM... The only candidate that stood out to me was Hollis, from Mich State, due to his creative marketing and the fact that i am a basketball junky and Mich State is such a good basketball program.

[Guest S.  Bien]

Everyone is a little ridiculous on ripping Woolard.  While I agree that my position is Oliver I wouldn't cry over Woolard.  For goodness sakes folks he has almost 10 years of experience as an AD.  He's moved St. Louis to three conferences, and much like USF each was an advancement, and a school choice, not being forced out.  He went from the Great MW, to C-USA, to the A-10.  That, in and of itself, demonstrates a guy that has heavy manuevering abilities, and is a deal maker.

Also, if you have any clue, SLU, is a small private Catholic University that obviously deals with severe budgetary constraints (every Catholic College does except ND, and BC).   He knows how to get a lot out of a little, you must as an AD at a small private Catholic University.  Also, despite the limited budget, and small school in a big market, he managed to make SLU a big name for fans.  SLU was top 30 in the nation for men's B-Ball attendance, with over 9000 avg.  They had 11,250 for UL, they had 9,600 when USF visited, they had 8100 for UNC A&T for goodness sakes.  Also, SLU has just about every sport USF has, with one or two exceptions, they don't have track or football, but field hockey, and swimming and diving.  SLU has a full athletic program, plays in a city that is very similar to USF, and yet is very competitive for fans, and attendance despite being a small private catholic school dwarfed in a giant city like SL.

Third, the guy is well respected among the AD community. Much like Paul Griffin did, Woolard sits on a number of major AD panels.  AD's know him, and respect him.  

Woolard's knock is not having BCS and football experience.  While it might be valid, he was exposed to football, and those decisions at WSU.  He's just as equiped in that arena as Oliver, not to mention Woolard has hired, and fired four men's basketball coaches at SLU, and they are still very competitive.  

Although, I see Woolard as a safe bet, and Oliver a rising star.  I think Woolard would be a strong pick, and hardly someone to sneeze at.  Just because he isn't running around pumping up stuff, doesn't mean he isn't valid.  Our school already has a master fundraiser in LRS, and a strong marketer in Veit.  We need an AD that can help get them the resources they need to be successful.  At the present time Veit runs around on a shoe-string budget, and all we do is complain.   Step up and give some money so we can actually market then worry later.  

Both of the finalists would be very good picks, and there isn't a wrong one.  For me, I think Oliver is an unknown commodity but one of those that you get the feeling he has star written on him, BUT USF is at a very critical juncture and Woolard has all the requisite skills, contacts, and knowledge.  Its tough to ignore those aspects, and Woolard might be better just because he's the proven commodity.

[Guest BasketBull.]

We've had two excellent ADs in Mr. Paul Griffin and then Mr. Selmon; I just want our next AD to be that much better.

1) We have been financially strapped for a long time, and after this next year things are going to get very expensive. We need answers and big answers, which spells the need for an innovator.

2) USF has always been a family-like atmosphere with the coaching staff: people stay because they are committed and not because of the pay... Therefore, the new AD has to embrace the atmosphere, and then take our athletics department into the next phase: the BIG TIME.

3) AD Selmon (and company) made great strides in bridging the gap between USF athletics and the Tampa Bay community, and that has to continue if USF athletics is to move forward in the black financially. We need somebody with the charisma to continue the mission.

4) And then everything else that USF athletics needs to become a contender in the Big East...

Everything requires a person who can do what it takes, which means a dynamic leader with talents beyond the normal AD of a standard university.

St. Louis is nothing special. And unless Woolard has shown something spectacular during the during the interview, he would not be my choice: What has he done to prove that he can take USF to the next level?

Frankly, I like Oliver because of his great attitude. But I'm concerned about his ability to get us financially prepared for the Big East.

It's a toss up for me. But I like the coaches' vote; they know what they and USF need. And I'd rather go with an inspired and motivated person (Oliver) than some AD who is looking to jump ship with an average track record ---who said USF called him and so on, like he didn't need us.

[Guest S.  Bien]

I think you are right on MM... The only candidate that stood out to me was Hollis, from Mich State, due to his creative marketing and the fact that i am a basketball junky and Mich State is such a good basketball program.

It might surprise you to know, and it was just conveyed to me, that despite of Hollis' self-proclaimed marketing skills he's not even the number 2 guy at MSU.  Furthermore, everyone had expected a high energy guy and when he arrived from the selection committee to coaches, to casual observers were sort of perplexed because the guy was anything but high energy.  Actually rather subdued, maybe intimidated slightly.  He didn't come off good at all, and his only plus was his self-proclaimed contacts, and skills.  

The more I thought of Hollis the more I did research.  He talked about his attendance records for hockey at MSU.  Well when you research it becomes clear that these weren't much of stretches.  The opponents were no frickin brainers.  I mean MSU already gets over 15k a game in hockey, and 20k for basketball.  Their hockey opponent was Michigan, and Michigan gets 20k for their hockey games.  Jeez put them together, throw a few billboards up, and its obvious a no-brainer to draw a huge crowd.  

Ditto for the basketball game against UK of all teams.  DUH, the **** Wildcats have a traveling back of about 3k fans already, and that was during MSU's big seasons.  

Hollis looked great but most of the great marketing events he employed were actually an MSU Departmental thing, that really wasn't that difficult considering MSU athletics in those sports already draws real, real, real well, and frankly the opponents were no-brainers.  I mean, I believe Michigan leads the nation in Hockey attendance, a real stretch for in-state rivals.

[Guest BasketBull.]

I just really want USF to make the right choice and get the person that we need... Everything has been so right up to this point, and if we make a blunder, we could send everything in the wrong direction...

We were already on foodstamps while in C-USA. Going to the Big East is going to make things that more strapped.

I've got my fingers crossed on this whole thing.

[Guest S.  Bien]

basketbull,

Actually SLU has done a lot of good things, more during the span of Woolard's presence then USF has accomplished- four NCAA Tourney Visits, three NIT visits....

You wanted Jurich or somebody to come down from UL, and it wasn't going to happen.  We are still a non-BCS school that has a very shallow budget even by non-BCS standards, preparing to make a jump to BCS.  Although, the opportunities are huge, so are the challenges.  For instance, if an AD can't get the donations, attendance, and interest to improve, and we become the laughing stock of the BCS- what then.  Trust me guys are asking themselves that before sending resumes.

Further, I am a friend of LRS's, and think he's a great guy but he was hardly a fantastic Athletic Director, and LRS will be the first one to tell you that if you ask.  He was a work in progress, and it was a daunting job, and one that he decided wasn't his style- and obviously health issues played a part.  LRS was moving to someday become a great AD before his pre-mature departure, but for all his great stuff there were quite a few blunders, and somethings that went overlooked.  The guy loves USF, and we love him, and he was great for USF, and again I don't think I can add up on one hand the number of truly great men in this world that possess the character and integrity of LRS, but he wasn't a great AD.

As for Griffin, the silent leader.  The guy did good, but he also hung himself in the end.  Talk about a guy that was difficult to warm-up to....  Griffin was very good, and getting better.  Hard to find a mistake, the firing was wrong, but then again Griffin ran a loose ship, and tried to cover-up some wrongs.  The athletic department was growing faster than he could keep pace, ditto for LRS.  Griffin was the guy to take us where-ever we needed to go, but it didn't happen that way, and LRS was put in a position that was difficult and one he will admit he wasn't completely prepared for.

The point I am making is our last two AD's were not spectacular as measuring Athletic Directors go.  They might have been spectacular people, or leaders, but they had their drawbacks either from a lack of experience (LRS), or a flaw in leadership methods (Griffin).  We haven't had our Jurich, or Pat Richter at UW, or Paul Dee at Miami.  USF hasn't had a shining star.  We've had some really good guys that had yet to reach their potential for two different reasons.  

I think Woolard has all the skills we need.  He has personnel resources like LRS, and Veit at his disposal.  If he can help manage, and create opportunity these two men can help raise funds, and awareness.  Conversely, they would also be valuable resources to Oliver.

Frankly, there isn't a wrong choice with these two, nor a bad choice.  Woolard gives us the sure thing, a solid guy through and through with impeccible credentials, and connections.  Oliver is younger, a little raw, a little more high energy, but lacks experience. That's both exciting and scary all in the same.  We already went down that road with LRS, why not try the savvy veteran road with Woolard.  I can almost guarantee it is a decision that certainly WON'T HURT US.  AND it may turn out to be a blessing.

[BULLheaded]

In this day and age 90% of the ADs out there look the same to me as Woolard. So he has been the AD of a small school that has shifted around from conference to conference and had to deal with budget constraints. How many ADs don't have that experience?

On the other hand he is coming from a small school with no football much less BCS so he has never had to deal with the environment we are getting into with the big east. Give me an assistant with the proper experience over an AD without it. Its funny how going into this search all I heard was how this was a top priority and they are preferring the one candidate without any of it.  :-/

From what everyone is posting it sounds like he is the most likely choice so I'll support him if chosen, however up front I'm disappointed in this one which I feel is a weak choice and mostly even in the running due to his personal relationship with the head of the search comittee.

OK, end of rant. Now I'll just sit back and hope for the best.

[TyBull]

Oliver

Oliver

Oliver......

[BULLheaded]

Matt-- he has that football experience from his days working at WSU.  He may have just as much if not more than the other finalist in that regard. So I'm not sure I see that USF has gone a different route exactly from the original intent. While his more recent experience was NOT at a football school, I'm not convinced he doesn't have the necessary skills. If you focus on that side too much, you might overlook the connections he has in the AD community itself.

PS-- I'm not picking one over the other. I'll be happy with whoever they get in there.

He was an assistant at Washington State over 10 years ago. There was no BCS then and the football environment is nothing even remotely similar these days. Aside from that I'm not even sure how much I would count experience from that long ago as we all know how hard it is to take something back up after being away even for a couple of years much less over a decade.

Maybe I am focusing too much on this so I'll just trust that those making the decisions see something more then I do and hope he can deliver. I'm not quite as trusting as you and bien but if he is the pick I'll keep an open mind.