forums

USC To Retain Helton

craval85 said:
The only ones who actually believe that are delusional alumni of the university. Real/True fans of MIA realize the issues plaguing the football program have to do with institutional & systemic failure and go much deeper than simple HC or AD hires. Saying MIA paid $4 mil for a HC and $1 mil for an OC doesn't prove that "Miami has plenty of money." Maybe compared to the avg fan, but definitely not compared to the elite & most successful programs in CFB. In fact MIA is even getting outspent by teams in it's own division, but yet the delusional fans continue to expect coastal division championships & domination. I'm not disputing that MIA has more $ than it used to. My pt is that other programs do to because CFB is currently a winner take all, arms race, and the teams that spend the most $ are the most successful. This isn't the NFL where there's a salary cap, and every team has the same amount of $. Small private universities with less than 1B endowment can longer compete in this CFB landscape and that's the main problem.
Click to expand...
I think our endowment is a little over $1B but when you look at the list of endowment rankings, Auburn, Clemson and L$U all rank behind us so it’s more than that, it’s commitment and booster network too.
 
Advertisement
RVACane said:
I think our endowment is a little over $1B but when you look at the list of endowment rankings, Auburn, Clemson and L$U all rank behind us so it’s more than that, it’s commitment and booster network too.
Click to expand...

The endowment for 19' decreased- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Miami

You can't compare public schools to MIA because they get funding from tax dollars. For private schools to compete in this CFB landscape they have to have huge endowments like ND & USC. Those are the only 2 examples
 
craval85 said:
The endowment for 19' decreased- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Miami

You can't compare public schools to MIA because they get funding from tax dollars. For private schools to compete in this CFB landscape they have to have huge endowments like ND & USC. Those are the only 2 examples
Click to expand...
Ok. But you said over $1B and we’re somewhere around that. There are a lot of private non-football schools that have bigger endowments. I think the biggest problem we have is the a lack of the right commitment from the school and the makeup of our fanbase/boosters when it comes to spending money on athletics.

Our priorities and commitment just don’t come close to competing with many of these schools. USC is even worse bc they have 5x our endowment and they’re still a mess. They really have similarities to us and I think that City also has similarities.
 
Awsi Dooger said:
Everybody thought Helton was gone. I mean everybody. Two weeks ago I attended an LPGA event in Naples. On Sunday the USC alum Lizette Salas saw me wearing a USC visor so she approached the ropeline while walking down the 7th fairway. We talked about the big win over UCLA the night earlier. Then I said loudly and mockingly, "How about that Clay Helton?" Lizette laughed out loud. We both knew what that meant. We both assumed Helton would be gone within a week.

The new athletic director Bohn is being attacked on USC forums. He is receiving the brunt of it. Fans are saying it was the shortest honeymoon and quickest plunge to hated status in USC history. Everyone waited for Pat Haden to be gone, then Lynn Swann even moreso, so there was great hope for the new guy. There had been a theme that USC needed to go outside the program for athletic director after so many years of '70s alumni like Haden and Swann.

I don't care about Harrell one way or the other. The head coach dictates the priorities. How can anyone believe that Clay Helton will suddenly wake up and make USC a rugged team on defense that legitimately contests every play, to Ohio State or Clemson or Georgia level? I posted years ago that it was obvious what the Pac 12 was turning into, once there were a string of cupcake hires like Rich Rodriguez, Mike Leach and Chip Kelly. You don't have to play much defense to defeat those guys so the entire conference became soft, albeit not nearly to the degree of the Big 12. Washington, Utah and now Oregon have advanced to the top of the league simply by emphasizing defense and physical football more than anyone else. USC has birthright and talent acquisition potential to take it beyond those teams but Clay Helton is going to continue to try to win games 52-35, just like his dad's philosophy.
Click to expand...

I live in LA and at my office Holiday party last night I was talking to USC people and they were saying that they need to do something because attendance is plummeting at the games and the big money donors are getting fed up.
 
RVACane said:
I think our endowment is a little over $1B but when you look at the list of endowment rankings, Auburn, Clemson and L$U all rank behind us so it’s more than that, it’s commitment and booster network too.
Click to expand...
Endowments are often extremely misleading. You have to look at where the endowment goes. Often, the funds go to many, many other entities that have nothing to do with the University itself.
 
Advertisement
nystateofmind said:
Click to expand...


This was a business decision. USC did not want to fork over $20m to buyout Helton (yes, I just said $20m) and his staff. Meyers is filled with controversy, and SC is currently ongoing 2 federal charges against them regarding education.

The knee-jerk thought by the new AD was go after hard after Meyers, but once the BOT came together and sent out some feelers, apparently Meyers didn't want to touch that situation under it's current state, and neither did Franklin. Helton was kept b/c there was no other choice once they weighed the pros and the cons.
 
Rellyrell said:
This was a business decision. USC did not want to fork over $20m to buyout Helton (yes, I just said $20m) and his staff. Meyers is filled with controversy, and SC is currently ongoing 2 federal charges against them regarding education.

The knee-jerk thought by the new AD was go after hard after Meyers, but once the BOT came together and sent out some feelers, apparently Meyers didn't want to touch that situation under it's current state, and neither did Franklin. Helton was kept b/c there was no other choice once they weighed the pros and the cons.
Click to expand...
Local media is claiming USC spent much of the last week or so negotiating with Bob Stoops. An agreement on salary and an assistants salary pool fell apart and the Trojans chose to stick with Helton.

USC is notoriously cheap. The local media noted all the recent HC hires in all sports make less than their predecessor. The ‘We are SC’ mentality searches for coaches who want to coach as SC for the privledge of coaching at SC.
 
Thommy30w said:
I live in LA and at my office Holiday party last night I was talking to USC people and they were saying that they need to do something because attendance is plummeting at the games and the big money donors are getting fed up.
Click to expand...

That is an accurate assessment. The Harrell offense was hyped here but nobody was fooled at USC. They wanted Helton gone. Keep in mind he was elevated from interim coach to head coach, after USC refused to do the same with Ed Orgeron a couple of seasons earlier. That comparison does not fare well. Orgeron was always considered more of a gamble but someone who could pay off big if everything worked perfectly. while Helton was a balding dishwater guy.

Then Lynn Swann somehow gives the dishwater guy a huge extension through 2023. That was lambasted at the time. It was kind of like the Dolphins extending Reshad Jones for so many seasons at absurd rate. You are stuck. You either keep him around with zero expectations, or take a huge hit to get rid of him.

I still think USC will close strong in recruiting. That is the tendency, exactly opposite of the Canes. But with Helton it seems like a cable TV contract that you are counting the months and days to get out of.
 
Advertisement
TemplarCane said:
Local media is claiming USC spent much of the last week or so negotiating with Bob Stoops. An agreement on salary and an assistants salary pool fell apart and the Trojans chose to stick with Helton.

USC is notoriously cheap. The local media noted all the recent HC hires in all sports make less than their predecessor. The ‘We are SC’ mentality searches for coaches who want to coach as SC for the privledge of coaching at SC.
Click to expand...

I read that. Hardy confirmed. But if true that Bob Stoops was demanding full control of everything at Heritage Hall and Carol Folt refused to grant that, causing everything to fall apart, then Stoops has only himself to blame. How does he have that type of bargaining power these days?
 
Awsi Dooger said:
I read that. Hardy confirmed. But if true that Bob Stoops was demanding full control of everything at Heritage Hall and Carol Folt refused to grant that, causing everything to fall apart, then Stoops has only himself to blame. How does he have that type of bargaining power these days?
Click to expand...
One NC in 2000 and 0-2 against USC and UF in other NC games over a decade ago does not give you that kind of power.
 
RVACane said:
Ok. But you said over $1B and we’re somewhere around that. There are a lot of private non-football schools that have bigger endowments. I think the biggest problem we have is the a lack of the right commitment from the school and the makeup of our fanbase/boosters when it comes to spending money on athletics.

Our priorities and commitment just don’t come close to competing with many of these schools. USC is even worse bc they have 5x our endowment and they’re still a mess. They really have similarities to us and I think that City also has similarities.
Click to expand...

I don't think USC & MIA are comparable at all. There is a huge difference between the two schools when it comes to their on field performance and success, which again proves that finances matter in CFB. Just as recent as 16' USC won a Rose Bowl against PSU, and in the last 10 yrs they've had numerous 9 & 10 win seasons. Thats with a 2 yr postseason ban & 30 lost scholarships starting in 2010.

The institutional commitment that you alluded to is a product of the overall financial situation of the university because I don't think any university's administration would willingly choose to be a football dumpster fire. Particularly an administration that has been the beneficiary of 5 NCs. It just doesn't make sense. I actually think MIA boosters relative to the size of the alumni network are pretty good because without them there is no way the IPF would've gotten built.

The reason why I continue to talk about finances is because I honestly don't believe most fans understand the role & impact it has on CFB today. If MIA fans did they wouldn't insist on maintaining unrealistic expectations. The unrealistic expectations are causing a perpetual negative & toxic cloud to swirl around the university & football program. This cloud affects everything from recruiting and hiring coaches to overall enrollment. Trust me when I tell you that I am not a CMD apologist nor am I trying to espouse corch worship. I am only trying to implore the fanbase to become less delusional and start to look at things from a macro level.
 
Last edited:
I don’t believe the Admin/BOT explicitly chooses to field a bad football program. I believe those in a decision making position are not competent in the area of athletics. Sam Jankovich knew good coaches when he evaluated them. Miami hasn’t had anyone like him in the AD position since he left. Dee retired, Holcutt and Einhorst left to continue mediocre careers at other schools, and Blake is...Blake.

Miami may get lucky with the right HC hire next time. Maybe, likely, not.

The program will continue to flounder until someone or a group on the BOT has the interest and the power to rebuild the athletic department.
 
Advertisement
CaneSince4Ever said:
Stop it man, you're arguing with a dude that thought Whipple was a great OC.
Click to expand...

Yes for that 1st yr-he was. It's not my problem that you don't know how to look at advanced metrics, and choose to blame Japicky's turnover prone play on the OC.
 
Last edited:
Awsi Dooger said:
That is an accurate assessment. The Harrell offense was hyped here but nobody was fooled at USC. They wanted Helton gone. Keep in mind he was elevated from interim coach to head coach, after USC refused to do the same with Ed Orgeron a couple of seasons earlier. That comparison does not fare well. Orgeron was always considered more of a gamble but someone who could pay off big if everything worked perfectly. while Helton was a balding dishwater guy.

Then Lynn Swann somehow gives the dishwater guy a huge extension through 2023. That was lambasted at the time. It was kind of like the Dolphins extending Reshad Jones for so many seasons at absurd rate. You are stuck. You either keep him around with zero expectations, or take a huge hit to get rid of him.

I still think USC will close strong in recruiting. That is the tendency, exactly opposite of the Canes. But with Helton it seems like a cable TV contract that you are counting the months and days to get out of.
Click to expand...

Most of the USC fans I know are as mad about Helton as we are mad about Manny.
 
JeddTheFisch said:
Endowments are often extremely misleading. You have to look at where the endowment goes. Often, the funds go to many, many other entities that have nothing to do with the University itself.
Click to expand...

The 1st thing that you need to understand is that endowments are much more important & vital for private universities than they are for public universities. That is a fundamental difference between the two. Their sole purpose is to provide additional income for investing & non-essential expenditures. What kind of expenditure do you think football qualifies as? If you're willing to be objective & unbiased, there is absolutely nothing misleading about endowments because you can't name a single example of another private university in a similar financial situation as MIA that routinely contends for divisional, conference or national championships.
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
craval85 said:
I don't think USC & MIA are comparable at all. There is a huge difference between the two schools when it comes to their on field performance and success, which again proves that finances matter in CFB. Just as recent as 16' USC won a Rose Bowl against PSU, and in the last 10 yrs they've had numerous 9 & 10 win seasons. Thats with a 2 yr postseason ban & 30 lost scholarships starting in 2010.

The institutional commitment that you alluded to is a product of the overall financial situation of the university because I don't think any university's administration would willingly choose to be a football dumpster fire. Particularly an administration that has been the beneficiary of 5 NCs. It just doesn't make sense. I actually think MIA boosters relative to the size of the alumni network are pretty good because without them there is no way the IPF would've gotten built.

The reason why I continue to talk about finances is because I honestly don't believe most fans understand the role & impact it has on CFB today. If MIA fans did they wouldn't insist on maintaining unrealistic expectations. The unrealistic expectations are causing a perpetual negative & toxic cloud to swirl around the university & football program. This cloud affects everything from recruiting and hiring coaches to overall enrollment. Trust me when I tell you that I am not a CMD apologist nor am I trying to espouse corch worship. I am only trying to implore the fanbase to become less delusional and start to look at things from a macro level.
Click to expand...
We’re getting there. 18 years or so of this has started to make me believe that we’re back to who we were when I was a really young kid in the 70’s. I think my goal was a 7 win season so maybe we could play in a bowl game.
 
TemplarCane said:
Local media is claiming USC spent much of the last week or so negotiating with Bob Stoops. An agreement on salary and an assistants salary pool fell apart and the Trojans chose to stick with Helton.
Click to expand...

How could USC be negotiating with Bob Stoops when FSU already hired him last month?
 
Rellyrell said:
This was a business decision. USC did not want to fork over $20m to buyout Helton (yes, I just said $20m) and his staff. Meyers is filled with controversy, and SC is currently ongoing 2 federal charges against them regarding education.

The knee-jerk thought by the new AD was go after hard after Meyers, but once the BOT came together and sent out some feelers, apparently Meyers didn't want to touch that situation under it's current state, and neither did Franklin. Helton was kept b/c there was no other choice once they weighed the pros and the cons.
Click to expand...


Add to this there’s strong belief the Feds aren’t done with their Varsity Blues investigation. Expecting more charges to come affecting athletic personnel
 
Advertisement
Back
Top