Hobokane
Redshirt Freshman
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2012
- Messages
- 238
I'll get this started with what I believe to be some hard facts:
The current administration has:
* made 3 straight inept hires, two of which have had no NC experience before being handed the job
* a penchant for hiring on the cheap, looks for diamonds in the rough rather than pay for experienced, or known quantities at HC
* presided over 3 different AD's with each successive hire being more inept/ball-less than the previous
* made at least 2 ill-advised or poorly conceived contract extensions
* one extension was made to an older coach who just won the NC almost by default & wasn't a highly sought commodity, and following a loss to open the season to F$U- the other, at the end of a gun and for far too many years despite the leverage Fat Al thought he had.
The common denominator's here are money, ineptitude-- and from what I can tell: INDIFFERENCE.
Why is it that everyone assumes that UM cannot pay-- cannot afford a buyout, plus paying a new HC? I know they have a long & undeniable record which screams "cheap" and "stupid" but what I'm not understanding is WHY?
Why is it we could hire reasonably talented coaches with HC experience in the 80's & 90's, and suddenly we've become the sisters of the poor, and have to settle for scraps and projects? There are a lot of other schools who do much more-- with a lot less.
At this point, doesn't the administration have to look in the mirror? Doesn't the BOT have to intervene here? Someone has to talk some sense into these people. No one knows the dynamics on the inside, but this seems so preventable, yet no one does anything to stop this runaway train.
I just don't see how this university & this program have to endure this-- it strikes me as a "choice" that Donna's made.
The current administration has:
* made 3 straight inept hires, two of which have had no NC experience before being handed the job
* a penchant for hiring on the cheap, looks for diamonds in the rough rather than pay for experienced, or known quantities at HC
* presided over 3 different AD's with each successive hire being more inept/ball-less than the previous
* made at least 2 ill-advised or poorly conceived contract extensions
* one extension was made to an older coach who just won the NC almost by default & wasn't a highly sought commodity, and following a loss to open the season to F$U- the other, at the end of a gun and for far too many years despite the leverage Fat Al thought he had.
The common denominator's here are money, ineptitude-- and from what I can tell: INDIFFERENCE.
Why is it that everyone assumes that UM cannot pay-- cannot afford a buyout, plus paying a new HC? I know they have a long & undeniable record which screams "cheap" and "stupid" but what I'm not understanding is WHY?
Why is it we could hire reasonably talented coaches with HC experience in the 80's & 90's, and suddenly we've become the sisters of the poor, and have to settle for scraps and projects? There are a lot of other schools who do much more-- with a lot less.
At this point, doesn't the administration have to look in the mirror? Doesn't the BOT have to intervene here? Someone has to talk some sense into these people. No one knows the dynamics on the inside, but this seems so preventable, yet no one does anything to stop this runaway train.
I just don't see how this university & this program have to endure this-- it strikes me as a "choice" that Donna's made.