I figure we have a new problem......SMU was probably our only chance for another win this year.......but they actually came alive this week under their new coach and, at least, they are now equally as bad as us......and if they are getting better, there goes are only chance for another win this year.

Goldenhurricane2 - Not trying to disparage anyone particular like Gragg, but this was another problem that was created by the AD's office imo. I think the most important hire a school can make is the AD. I'm not sold on anything that has happened so far from that end. The spending of resources at a school like TU is always a major issue. We spent a lot on an unproven MBB staff. MBB is not the #1 sport at TU as far as revenue potential. I'm not sure he'll have the revenue left to hire a competent staff in FB now - after committing so much to MBB. That plus the hire of the marketing director with no legitimate success at any other school. Why would he make that hire other than as a friend who needed to step up as well? The flag "tradition" isn't going to work now or in the future - another example. You couldn't say that he was a success at EMU, a large public university with 5 times the enrollment of TU but averaged about 4,000 (yes thats correct) attendence in FB during his tenure there and in their last FB game against a top 25 team - No Illinois Univ drew less than 2,000. And the marketing director was marketing for him at that time at EMU as well.

IMO an AD can do more harm than any employee of an Athletic Dept. Scheduling is a component, but so is his vision of the program. I thought the idea that we had to jack up the ticket prices for the OU game was a catastrophe (the first OU game I can remember that wasn't sold out here and in a smaller 30,000 seat arena than the years prior) and will cost us a lot of fans down the line. A lot of our fans just can't afford to buy $120 single seat tickets when they can sit comfortably at home and watch it. If he'd checked the facts, he'd have known that same thing happened the last time OSU played here. But of course he wasn't here then.

So just scheduling MAC teams at the first opportunity is only one on that list.

I won't go on, but those are a few of my concerns with how this is falling into place.

An AD never gets blamed when things go bad, but IMO they should be held to as high a standard as the coach. Ultimately they are in complete control. I've never seen TU fire an AD - at least within the last 30 years. Who hired Keith Burns? Who painted Skelly Stadium yellow?

I hope I'm wrong too.

(10-05-2014 12:38 PM)jfisher Wrote:  I figure we have a new problem......SMU was probably our only chance for another win this year.......but they actually came alive this week under their new coach and, at least, they are now equally as bad as us......and if they are getting better, there goes are only chance for another win this year.

That was my first thought too. They look much better than before. I just don't see us being favored in any remaining game.

Oh come on when we play it's going to be like Alabama versus Auburn

(10-05-2014 01:19 PM)rabidTU2 Wrote:  Goldenhurricane2 - Not trying to disparage anyone particular like Gragg, but this was another problem that was created by the AD's office imo. I think the most important hire a school can make is the AD. I'm not sold on anything that has happened so far from that end. The spending of resources at a school like TU is always a major issue. We spent a lot on an unproven MBB staff. MBB is not the #1 sport at TU as far as revenue potential. I'm not sure he'll have the revenue left to hire a competent staff in FB now - after committing so much to MBB. That plus the hire of the marketing director with no legitimate success at any other school. Why would he make that hire other than as a friend who needed to step up as well? The flag "tradition" isn't going to work now or in the future - another example. You couldn't say that he was a success at EMU, a large public university with 5 times the enrollment of TU but averaged about 4,000 (yes thats correct) attendence in FB during his tenure there and in their last FB game against a top 25 team - No Illinois Univ drew less than 2,000. And the marketing director was marketing for him at that time at EMU as well.

IMO an AD can do more harm than any employee of an Athletic Dept. Scheduling is a component, but so is his vision of the program. I thought the idea that we had to jack up the ticket prices for the OU game was a catastrophe (the first OU game I can remember that wasn't sold out here and in a smaller 30,000 seat arena than the years prior) and will cost us a lot of fans down the line. A lot of our fans just can't afford to buy $120 single seat tickets when they can sit comfortably at home and watch it. If he'd checked the facts, he'd have known that same thing happened the last time OSU played here. But of course he wasn't here then.

So just scheduling MAC teams at the first opportunity is only one on that list.

I won't go on, but those are a few of my concerns with how this is falling into place.

An AD never gets blamed when things go bad, but IMO they should be held to as high a standard as the coach. Ultimately they are in complete control. I've never seen TU fire an AD - at least within the last 30 years. Who hired Keith Burns? Who painted Skelly Stadium yellow?

I hope I'm wrong too.

Appreciate the detailed response.

Just curious, who would you have rather seen Gragg bring in for basketball?

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(10-05-2014 01:32 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  Oh come on when we play it's going to be like Alabama versus Auburn

If you are talking about the cheerleaders, you might have something......but the ineptness of these two teams might be a comedy of errors!!!!!

(10-05-2014 01:49 PM)goldenhurricane2 Wrote:  

(10-05-2014 01:19 PM)rabidTU2 Wrote:  Goldenhurricane2 - Not trying to disparage anyone particular like Gragg, but this was another problem that was created by the AD's office imo. I think the most important hire a school can make is the AD. I'm not sold on anything that has happened so far from that end. The spending of resources at a school like TU is always a major issue. We spent a lot on an unproven MBB staff. MBB is not the #1 sport at TU as far as revenue potential. I'm not sure he'll have the revenue left to hire a competent staff in FB now - after committing so much to MBB. That plus the hire of the marketing director with no legitimate success at any other school. Why would he make that hire other than as a friend who needed to step up as well? The flag "tradition" isn't going to work now or in the future - another example. You couldn't say that he was a success at EMU, a large public university with 5 times the enrollment of TU but averaged about 4,000 (yes thats correct) attendence in FB during his tenure there and in their last FB game against a top 25 team - No Illinois Univ drew less than 2,000. And the marketing director was marketing for him at that time at EMU as well.

IMO an AD can do more harm than any employee of an Athletic Dept. Scheduling is a component, but so is his vision of the program. I thought the idea that we had to jack up the ticket prices for the OU game was a catastrophe (the first OU game I can remember that wasn't sold out here and in a smaller 30,000 seat arena than the years prior) and will cost us a lot of fans down the line. A lot of our fans just can't afford to buy $120 single seat tickets when they can sit comfortably at home and watch it. If he'd checked the facts, he'd have known that same thing happened the last time OSU played here. But of course he wasn't here then.

So just scheduling MAC teams at the first opportunity is only one on that list.

I won't go on, but those are a few of my concerns with how this is falling into place.

An AD never gets blamed when things go bad, but IMO they should be held to as high a standard as the coach. Ultimately they are in complete control. I've never seen TU fire an AD - at least within the last 30 years. Who hired Keith Burns? Who painted Skelly Stadium yellow?

I hope I'm wrong too.

Appreciate the detailed response.

Just curious, who would you have rather seen Gragg bring in for basketball?

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

I think there is a "cost to benefit" that should be analyzed when we hire anyone including a FB coach. MBB isn't and can't be the #1 sport at TU as long as we are playing in a conference like the AAC. So paying a MBB coach almost three times the amount of money as the FB coach doesn't add up in my mind. And at a school the size of TU that will always be a stepping stone, it isn't a good business decision IMO.

As far as who that coach is - who should be hired, I'd hope we wouldn't just go out and hire someone who would have probably been replaced at a school with huge resources like one in the SEC. We have to remember its not "our" money thats being spent, but the universities dollars.

I'm a big believer right now in facility building. We need those first and foremost if we are going to have sustained growth in athletics. Facilities remain in place while coaches and ADs leave and move on after a short stay. TU needs this more than a coach and staff that'll be here for a couple of years and be gone to a better gig and leaving someone else to redo the program. That forces us into becoming a yo-yo program. A coach wins and he has a short stay, a coach loses and he is fired and bought out at an enormous contract cost - then another is hired for even greater dollars. Thats the way the game is played at some schools like TU. And its also the game thats played with ADs who use up resources to further "their" careers instead of enriching the programs they head in a long term manner.

I want an AD who has a long term vision. That should be part of the hiring process. TBH, and I hate to admit I was wrong, but the best AD we've had in a long while was Judy M. I'll bet her salalry as AD wasn't 1/5 as much as Gragg's.

http://www.conferenceusa.com/genrel/macleod_judy00.html

This is looking like a one win season. Tulsa gets blown out every game from here on out.

(10-06-2014 10:27 AM)rabidTU2 Wrote:  http://www.conferenceusa.com/genrel/macleod_judy00.html

Having Robert Lawless as President was a huge benefit for Judy, IMO. Lawless loved sports & was the driving force behind our sports facility improvements.

We are not a good team at all, but I don't think we'll get blown out every game. I still think we'll have a close game with SMU & compete with USF. However, ECU, @ Temple, @ UCF, @ Houston & @ Memphis could all get ugly !

The bigger question for me is how/when the coaching change will occur. I think a late season resignation is most likely.

(10-07-2014 04:07 PM)Tulsafanzz Wrote:  

(10-06-2014 10:27 AM)rabidTU2 Wrote:  http://www.conferenceusa.com/genrel/macleod_judy00.html

Having Robert Lawless as President was a huge benefit for Judy, IMO. Lawless loved sports & was the driving force behind our sports facility improvements.

Bingo!

With the way Tulsa has been playing they could make the bottom ten look like good teams seriously.