Recruiting Forum Football Talk LVIII

Status
Not open for further replies.
#1,802
#1,802
jakez4ut said:
really? i don't mind the grad transfer rule as it is today. the guy did the work, got the degree. he fulfilled his part. he should be able to do what he wishes with that last year of eligibility....

i tend to agree with you on the regular transfer rules. lots of muddy water in allowing immediate transfers for underclassmen/non graduates.
Click to expand...

I don't feel as strongly about grad transfers and you make a valid point. It seems like that there are more and more every year. It is going to get more difficult to manage.
 
#1,806
#1,806
drvenner said:
I am with you on this one. People should want to come to watch a game because we're good and not because we have nicer bathrooms than any other team in the league.
Click to expand...

I agree with that but neither having good bath rooms or not effect winning or losing
 
#1,807
#1,807
orangeblood79 said:
Being a UT fan is like being in a marriage with someone you love unconditionally, that keeps breaking your heart...over and over and over.
Click to expand...
Eventually fans are going to need to make a coordinated effort to make a change. Empty Neyland will have to become a year long thing. Once we have their attention we make our demands clear. No more Haslams. Those that live in Tennessee need to call their local legislators as well and need to vote Haslam out of office. It’ll be hard work but change can happen
 
#1,808
#1,808
drvenner said:
I am with you on this one. People should want to come to watch a game because we're good and not because we have nicer bathrooms than any other team in the league.
Click to expand...

they don't. and they didn't. it's all for recruiting, and so rich guys can have their names on buildings. which i'm fine with. and i'm not against better venues and nice bathrooms at the stadiums either.:)

i am against doing it at the expense of giving up control of the university to a single family.

and that's the issue here (i know you know that.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#1,809
#1,809
BruinVol said:
Lol

If it Causes losing like you say then it effects winning.

Carry on
Click to expand...

I realize that you're trying to take the "Haslams aren't actually the boogeyman" stance.

I get that. That's your thing. You've ignored everything I've said and are just trying to be contrarian as usual.

Problem is that you are not viewing this in the context of UT. Building buildings isn't a problem at other places like it is here. Also, nobody else tries to have the best swimming pool and soccer field like we do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#1,811
#1,811
BruinVol said:
I agree with that but neither having good bath rooms or not effect winning or losing
Click to expand...

It can, indirectly. Instead of putting that money into other places, such as hiring analysts or paying more for a competent AD or his assistants, it could go to the bathrooms. These decisions can effect winning and losing.

It's all about an allocation of resources. We will need to upgrade facilities from time to time, but our program has shown they care about allocating more for materials than people. Once you allocate more for people and start succeeding, then more will come in for the shinier materials.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#1,813
#1,813
VolGee4 said:
It can, indirectly. Instead of putting that money into other places, such as hiring analysts or paying more for a competent AD or his assistants, it could go to the bathrooms. These decisions can effect winning and losing.

It's all about an allocation of resources. We will need to upgrade facilities from time to time, but our program has shown they care about allocating more for materials than people. Once you allocate more for people and start succeeding, then more will come in for the shinier materials.
Click to expand...

If it's an either or thing I agree. I have seen no evidence it's been that way
 
#1,815
#1,815
BruinVol said:
If it's an either or thing I agree. I have seen no evidence it's been that way
Click to expand...

Well, we hire a coach under Saban, and miraculously, we start spending money on more people because we have an AD who gets it.

We also could have spent more money on hiring a coach back in 2010 instead of going cheap. The signs are there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#1,816
#1,816
Bev stuff sucks but she was really bad at pressers and public speaking. Seems like they could have seen that in interviews.

At least we have our Fulmer, football and basketball coaches in place so as long as they win and stay Haslam doesn't have a coaching search to mess with.
 
#1,817
#1,817
BigZiti09 said:
UT sports. 2002-present.
Click to expand...

And again

Kiffin, Dooley, and jones Shoulder much of the blame


If the $ spent on buildings kept us from hiring a better coach in either of Those searches then I agree with you

I Have seen no evidence saying we choose buildings over hiring a higher $ coach
 
#1,818
#1,818
BruinVol said:
And again

Kiffin, Dooley, and jones Shoulder much of the blame


If the $ spent on buildings kept us from hiring a better coach in either of Those searches then I agree with you

I Have seen no evidence saying we choose buildings over hiring a higher $ coach
Click to expand...

And it's not necessarily about the "money being there." It's about priority. The program never made it a priority to hire a big time coach. As Ziti referred to it- the culture.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#1,819
#1,819
VolGee4 said:
It can, indirectly. Instead of putting that money into other places, such as hiring analysts or paying more for a competent AD or his assistants, it could go to the bathrooms. These decisions can effect winning and losing.

It's all about an allocation of resources. We will need to upgrade facilities from time to time, but our program has shown they care about allocating more for materials than people. Once you allocate more for people and start succeeding, then more will come in for the shinier materials.
Click to expand...

Money donated for renovations doesn't come from the staff pool.

That's not the problem.

The problem is a cultural one. I've said it multiple times today. What do we prioritize? Facilities and comfort.

Is it possible to build buildings and win? Sure. Is it possible at UT? Nope. We don't want to win like our opponents want it. We want to be comfortable.

Facility upgrades and renos that don't directly impact winning should be put on the back burner. South endzone needs some work? Just keep the recruits away from the south end zone. Soccer team needs a new training facility? Sorry. Gotta wait til football is fixed.
Weight room needs an overhaul cause the last guy was running a night club/yoga center? Lets spend what it takes to get it right.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#1,820
#1,820
BigZiti09 said:
It's about culture. What do we prioritize?

Bama prioritizes winning. So does Auburn. So does Florida.

We prioritize comfort and facilities.

I think Hammy was put in charge in 2001. At that point our focus became facilities. Under Dickey we were focused on winning big in football. After Hammy took over we started taking on these massive facility projects that required booster contributions. Who was the biggest giver? Haslam. So their influence and power grew.

Things went belly up and we had to hire Hatchet Man Dave Hart to come in and clean house. After that we returned to facilities and Haslam puppet John Currie. Again our focus went back to facilities. Namely the stadium renovation.

We don't need contributions to win at football. We need big donors to help build buildings.

The UTAD needs to focus on winning and stop worrying about facilities. If you win, you will have people lining up to throw money our way. The stadium renovation should start after we hoist a trophy in Atlanta.

It's a culture thing.
Click to expand...

I’d be okay if the football profits were spent on football (80% at least) people (culture, development and leadership) and football facilities (important for recruiting and fans). I’m with you that less needs to pour into other areas until football is fixed.
 
#1,822
#1,822
VolGee4 said:
Well, we hire a coach under Saban, and miraculously, we start spending money on more people because we have an AD who gets it.

We also could have spent more money on hiring a coach back in 2010 instead of going cheap. The signs are there.
Click to expand...

Take me back to 2010. Who could we have hired with more $?
 
#1,823
#1,823
BigZiti09 said:
Money donated for renovations doesn't come from the staff pool.

That's not the problem.

The problem is a cultural one. I've said it multiple times today. What do we prioritize? Facilities and comfort.

Is it possible to build buildings and win? Sure. Is it possible at UT? Nope. We don't want to win like our opponents want it. We want to be comfortable.

Facility upgrades and renos that don't directly impact winning should be put on the back burner. South endzone needs some work? Just keep the recruits away from the south end zone. Soccer team needs a new training facility? Sorry. Gotta wait til football is fixed.
Weight room needs an overhaul cause the last guy was running a night club/yoga center? Lets spend what it takes to get it right.
Click to expand...

Yea, I get that the pools for expenses are different, and you start a capital campaign for certain upgrades. But do you not think some big donors wouldn't give you money if you told them that it was time to invest in people?

I agree that donors want their names on things, but there are many others who want to support a winning product. There is a certain allocation of resources involved, and I agree that culture is very much important.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#1,824
#1,824
BruinVol said:
If it's an either or thing I agree. I have seen no evidence it's been that way
Click to expand...

then you're either intentionally being obtuse on this topic, or you've not been paying attention. cause that's exactly how it's been. you can go back and read the articles how how Jones wasn't allowed to hire who he wanted for certain spots on his staff cause he wasn't given the money for it. creating a winning environment, it was not a priority.

that's not an excuse for jones, as much as it is an accurate reflection on where the priorities were top down. and only now, with the changes that have been made, has that changed.
 
New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.

VN Store



Back
Top