|
|
Post by sweep on May 27, 2022 5:52:36 GMT -6
And those supposedly debilitating financial constraints suddenly vanished 12 months later ? That's bullshit. The money was always there to terminate Whitford. I don't know if it was Goetz or Mearns, but someone f'ed that situation up. No. Two things. New money was there and they waited until the buyout was smaller. The buyout was roughly identical. What "new money" are you talking about ? |
|
|
|
Post by sweep on May 27, 2022 5:55:43 GMT -6
And those supposedly debilitating financial constraints suddenly vanished 12 months later ? That's bullshit. The money was always there to terminate Whitford. I don't know if it was Goetz or Mearns, but someone f'ed that situation up. There was not enough there this year for a two year buyout. Why would they have done a two year buyout after 2020-2021, Whitford only had a single year left on his contract ? You are so confused. |
|
|
|
Post by sweep on May 27, 2022 5:59:33 GMT -6
That's because some of you guys are overrating Neu and the Covid year football championship. Sorry but at this point that looks like a circumstantial fluke, kind of like IU almost winning the Big Ten that year. So a BSU program loses, the AD is to blame. A program or multiple programs win, no credit to AD and coaches, just a fluke? I am not blaming anyone. Pull your head out of your ass, do you think Neu is going to win another championship ? I don't. |
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on May 27, 2022 6:36:44 GMT -6
So a BSU program loses, the AD is to blame. A program or multiple programs win, no credit to AD and coaches, just a fluke? I am not blaming anyone...do you think Neu is going to win another championship ? I don't. You are not giving credit to the AD either. And you do blame the AD for losses...
You can't have it both ways when you saty we are overestimating the state of the Department. You are not only discounting that win but all the other successful programs.
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on May 27, 2022 6:42:15 GMT -6
There was not enough there this year for a two year buyout. Why would they have done a two year buyout after 2020-2021, Whitford only had a single year left on his contract ? You are so confused. Really?
Not only do you need a buyout of whatever is on a contract, but need to know you can offer a competitive salary for the right successor. The contract obligation is typically a 5 year one, and there was great uncertainty about budget at that time. Besides, as I said we did not have the money for a buyout of one year for 2021.
At worst the very short extension with revised buyout set up conditions to make a better choice later.
|
|
|
|
Post by JacksonStreetElite on May 27, 2022 6:43:28 GMT -6
Negatives: Readily plays the stupid woke game While it wouldn't surprise me if this is true since she's a university administrator and anyone who wants advancement in that world has to at least keep their head down, I think when it comes to grading her job performance you should tie this to how playing the stupid woke game has hindered her job performance. and the stupid, money-wasting MAC football game. How do you know this? |
|
|
|
Post by sweep on May 27, 2022 6:47:11 GMT -6
I am not blaming anyone...do you think Neu is going to win another championship ? I don't. You are not giving credit to the AD either. And you do blame the AD for losses...
What are you talking about, I gave her a freaking B ? Goetz didn't hire Neu, and it's to be seen if his latest extension will be successful. Get a grip............ |
|
|
|
Post by sweep on May 27, 2022 6:51:38 GMT -6
Why would they have done a two year buyout after 2020-2021, Whitford only had a single year left on his contract ? You are so confused. Really?
Not only do you need a buyout of whatever is on a contract, but need to know you can offer a competitive salary for the right successor. The contract obligation is typically a 5 year one, and there was great uncertainty about budget at that time. Besides, as I said we did not have the money for a buyout of one year for 2021.
At worst the very short extension with revised buyout set up conditions to make a better choice later.
No, it just kicked the can and required an unnecessary extension for no reason. It's funny how you pretend to be an expert on the available budget, yet you also told us they couldn't afford a buyout after the 21-22 season. |
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on May 27, 2022 7:51:40 GMT -6
No. Two things. New money was there and they waited until the buyout was smaller. The buyout was roughly identical. What "new money" are you talking about ? You are thicker than usual this morning. Two things are true.
A major commitment of new money coming in was made in February of this year. It was arranged that the gift be spent on "Athletic Excellence" which made it possible to make the buyout and have enough money to make an attractive offer for a new coach and staff.
The year earlier , the University faced uncertainty about budget and possible need for other priorities. Only by neglecting that would they have been able to make a buyout, and the budget for a new coaching contract with staff would have been constrained.
The decision to extend was prudent, not to make a BB coach the highest priority when it involved both committing funds for a buyout and a commitment longer term.
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on May 27, 2022 7:58:36 GMT -6
Really?
Not only do you need a buyout of whatever is on a contract, but need to know you can offer a competitive salary for the right successor. The contract obligation is typically a 5 year one, and there was great uncertainty about budget at that time. Besides, as I said we did not have the money for a buyout of one year for 2021.
At worst the very short extension with revised buyout set up conditions to make a better choice later.
No, it just kicked the can and required an unnecessary extension for no reason. It's funny how you pretend to be an expert on the available budget, yet you also told us they couldn't afford a buyout after the 21-22 season. The buyout and expenditure for new coach this year was touch and go, as I posted some time ago. The money use was originally intended to be be spent in slightly different other ways. To make this year's decision was no slam dunk, and Beth and the President deserve credit for figuring it out. As it is we can't be clear how it impacts other programs. Without directing the new money almost entirely to BB we certainly would have had potentially severe consequences.
I am not sure it would have been done without confidence they could hire a good coach. If you share Sherman's doubts about this hire, then It comes with risk as it is. Do you have any idea how hard a buyout will be if this hire fails?
I am not sure you understand risk return tradeoff, or maybe you think BB is always the highest university priority, or are sticking to the ridiculous claim the money should always there for a buyout and new hire when a program is merely mediocre by most estimates.
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on May 27, 2022 8:07:18 GMT -6
Negatives: Readily plays the stupid woke game While it wouldn't surprise me if this is true since she's a university administrator and anyone who wants advancement in that world has to at least keep their head down, I think when it comes to grading her job performance you should tie this to how playing the stupid woke game has hindered her job performance. and the stupid, money-wasting MAC football game. How do you know this? Better question is how any MAC AD has the power to significantly cut "waste" in FB.
Sherm can be completely correct that MAC FB is a money pit without long term viability and yet the MAC Presidents have to make that call, not any individual AD. What did he expect or want her to do is the question. |
|
|
|
Post by sweep on May 27, 2022 8:12:46 GMT -6
The buyout was roughly identical. What "new money" are you talking about ?
The year earlier , the University faced uncertainty about budget and possible need for other priorities. That's always going to be true. Do you know they suddenly received a deal changing donation or is that just something you are speculating on ? |
|
|
|
Post by sweep on May 27, 2022 8:19:02 GMT -6
The buyout was roughly identical. What "new money" are you talking about ?
The decision to extend was prudent, not to make a BB coach the highest priority when it involved both committing funds for a buyout and a commitment longer term.
Well I suppose extending was prudent in the sense that they had no real choice when they made the moronic decision to bring him back. The second part of the above sentence is nothing but meaningless word salad that I can't make heads or tails of. |
|
|
|
Post by sweep on May 27, 2022 8:24:50 GMT -6
No, it just kicked the can and required an unnecessary extension for no reason. It's funny how you pretend to be an expert on the available budget, yet you also told us they couldn't afford a buyout after the 21-22 season. The buyout and expenditure for new coach this year was touch and go, as I posted some time ago. The money use was originally intended to be be spent in slightly different other ways. To make this year's decision was no slam dunk, and Beth and the President deserve credit for figuring it out. As it is we can't be clear how it impacts other programs. Without directing the new money almost entirely to BB we certainly would have had potentially severe consequences.
I am not sure it would have been done without confidence they could hire a good coach. If you share Sherman's doubts about this hire, then It comes with risk as it is. Do you have any idea how hard a buyout will be if this hire fails?
I am not sure you understand risk return tradeoff, or maybe you think BB is always the highest university priority, or are sticking to the ridiculous claim the money should always there for a buyout and new hire when a program is merely mediocre by most estimates.
You are fighting really hard, but your post contains nothing that explains why the can was kicked down the road. You are just introducing new talking points in an attempt to cloud the issue. |
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on May 27, 2022 9:07:48 GMT -6
The year earlier , the University faced uncertainty about budget and possible need for other priorities. That's always going to be true. Do you know they suddenly received a deal changing donation or is that just something you are speculating on ? NO.
That is not always true to the same extent. Covid introduced extra budget woes which are still not completely resolved.
Plus, each year the cuts get harder to handle, especially as number of college bound HS students who are qualified and can afford 4 year schools decline and the legislature pushes IVTC.
|
|
