orange79
Internet Sleuth
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2011
- Messages
- 41,836
- Like
- 129,067
Or keep his job with a new sheriff in town.He was reckless with the spending and how the books were kept. An AD doesn't act that way.
Or keep his job with a new sheriff in town.He was reckless with the spending and how the books were kept. An AD doesn't act that way.
You're going to have to be more specific because it sounds like you're upset with his choice of internal accountants. If that's your complaint, then you're stretching.He was reckless with the spending and how the books were kept. An AD doesn't act that way.
AD's play a direct role and an indirect role. UL's entrance into the ACC is a pretty publicized example of an AD playing a direct role. TCU's entrance into the Big XII was also well-publicized.I see Gross getting credit for the ACC move. There have been several Big 12 expansion articles recently and they all seem to quote university presidents and university presidents visiting possible expansion schools. I think that decision may be above his pay grade.
You're going to have to be more specific because it sounds like you're upset with his choice of internal accountants. If that's your complaint, then you're stretching.
If, however, you're upset with his lack of smoothing, then I'm going to have to point to the surrounding area and the end results. The man made money and he did it without having any potential large corporate sponsors in the local area. That's very, very hard to do.
You established that he dipped into the rainy day fund. You haven't established why that's bad. We both agree that SU needed to modernize facilities and I assume that we both agree that SU AD ran very much in the black on the whole (especially towards the end). It sounds like he made the right decision, and it doesn't seem even remotely controversial. Name one large organization without debt.* What would you have done?More specific? Under Cantor, he spent outside the budget and colored outside the lines. There was no accountability as the department lost money. When new management came in and wanted to see the books, there was sheer panic in that office.
So, if you spend what you don't have, show little accountability for what goes on in your department, are sloppy with the records and books, and then are a player in an NCAA academic issue...yea, you're going to lose that job. I could say more, but I'll leave it at that.
I'm just looking at the endorsements by Tirico, McDonough, and Thamel and the resume.
Downside to SU:Syracuse guys will always endorse Syracuse guys. They aren't going to endorse the Bucknell AD.
And each of those guys are also media people who just don't see and truly witness what an AD NEEDS to do to be successful. Tirico has the most insight...but he's not in there either.
Whoever was envolved in the search to find Coyle - which concluded less than a year ago - should be immediately on the clock. If a guy leaves quickly, let's not shrivel to only think only a Syracuse guy would want to be here.
Downside to SU:
*The AD will inherent a fb coach that he can't change for ~3 years
*The AD will be held to a high standard
*The athletic department recently got rocked by the NCAA.
Upside to SU:
*The FB coach is Babers
*The AD is humming along and virtually all of the coaches are great
*ACC membership
*There is a sky-high level of excitement, so year one ticket sales will be high
*Strong general reputation (looks good on a resume)
*New facilities and major stadium renovations in the near future
I'd say that we're a catch. We aren't perfect, but there are many, many worse jobs.
Or keep his job with a new sheriff in town.
Seriously.
Let's find more names of mid level managers to debate!
You established that he dipped into the rainy day fund. You haven't established why that's bad. We both agree that SU needed to modernize facilities and I assume that we both agree that SU AD ran very much in the black on the whole (especially towards the end). It sounds like he made the right decision, and it doesn't seem even remotely controversial. Name one large organization without debt.* What would you have done?
The rest of what you said is a combination of hyperbole and baseless claims.
Like I said in my last post, if you want me to respond to you in a meaningful way, you're going to have to say something specific.
*I can think of one. I don't think that Chipotle carries debt.
Bleeding orange is a dumb and losing criteriaJust go to Axe's list- Gedney, T. Green, Manhertz, Don McPherson...all bleed orange, so let's sign them up
Just go to Axe's list- Gedney, T. Green, Manhertz, Don McPherson...all bleed orange, so let's sign them up
Are those other guys any less qualified than Mike Garrett or Pat Haden. Seemed to work for USC.He's not the guy himself, but the only one on that list remotely qualified is Manhertz.
Just go to Axe's list- Gedney, T. Green, Manhertz, Don McPherson...all bleed orange, so let's sign them up
So...these 2 jobs below were not in actual athletic departments...?
Football Administrator
University of Notre Dame
June 2000 – March 2001 (10 months)
Assistant Director of Football Operations
Syracuse University
January 1992 – July 1994 (2 years 7 months)
No, they weren't.
Oy vey...
So you are saying that both positions below are not part of the Athletic department of either school.
Silly me, I though Football was part of the Athletic Department for both schools. Should have known that they were part of another department...Should have my head examined for thinking such fool things.
Football Administrator
University of Notre Dame
June 2000 – March 2001 (10 months)
Assistant Director of Football Operations
Syracuse University
January 1992 – July 1994 (2 years 7 months)
So to answer, they were not. They were both involved in the domain of one sport, and a specific one, and not the AD department specifically.