• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

DID ENGSTROM DO THE RIGHT THING?

greasewood

greasewood

Well-known member
How's this for a different view on the situation? Maybe Engstrom firing Phlu & O'Day will make the NCAA's decision more lenient against us, that is if they do find fault. For him to fire the head coach & AD shows UM's intent to make things right. I'm not saying I support what he did, but I don't know the facts like he does.
What do all you experts think?
 
greasewood said:
How's this for a different view on the situation? Maybe Engstrom firing Phlu & O'Day will make the NCAA's decision more lenient against us, that is if they do find fault. For him to fire the head coach & AD shows UM's intent to make things right. I'm not saying I support what he did, but I don't know the facts like he does.
What do all you experts think?
Click to expand...

I still wonder if Engrstom even knew what he was doing when he fired Pflu. I agree with O'Day...but I felt that Pflu was on the right track. Especially by practically ending the rookie party. Aw well. More skepticism to ensue. haha.
 
Nope, by firing them RE handed the NCAA a reason to need to find something
that may likely not even be there
 
As no one has come forward with new facts yet, who can make an informed judgement. Doubt it would make a difference to the NCAA but there are only unknowns so far.
 
Bear Axed said:
Nope, by firing them RE handed the NCAA a reason to need to find something
that may likely not even be there
Click to expand...

This is my view too. I think the firings increased the chances of a more adverse result from the ncaa.
 
I previously posted about hypocrisy and hidden agendas with this whole incident.

Some reporter quotes a law professor of the Sports Law Institute at University of the Peoples Republic of Vermont comparing Montana to Penn State.

I wonder if the reporter or professor can spell or know the meaning of the word - hyperbole.
 
The NCAA investigation was announced months before the firing or the DOJ or the DOE investigation. RE had already taken proactive steps in terms of the alleged sexual assaults and rumors around them.

There has been waaaaaaaaaaaay to much talk about the kids and way to little talk about a program that had its priorities way out of wack and the leadership that put it that way. When they start selling sponsorships to the stall doors, the writing was on the wall. I can't think of much except jock straps that they hadn't hawked a sponsorship for (and I'm not sure about those) Anyone who doesn't believe that winning and maintaining an "image" became paramount to maintaining the cash flow. Group junkets to the final four (JOD wasn't paying his own expenses nor were the donors paying for the "parties) $500.00 a seat "association fees" on so on aren't present in losing programs.....

The only thing that saved PSU was the proactive measures the administration had taken. The NCAA wasn't here because the program was winning. The NCAA was here because all too often winning programs are rift with "corruption" and ambition from the "adults" Its a fine line I'm guessing RE either accidently or knowingly stopped things in the program before it got to far over the line.
 
tnt said:
The NCAA investigation was announced months before the firing or the DOJ or the DOE investigation. RE had already taken proactive steps in terms of the alleged sexual assaults and rumors around them.

There has been waaaaaaaaaaaay to much talk about the kids and way to little talk about a program that had its priorities way out of wack and the leadership that put it that way. When they start selling sponsorships to the stall doors, the writing was on the wall. I can't think of much except jock straps that they hadn't hawked a sponsorship for (and I'm not sure about those) Anyone who doesn't believe that winning and maintaining an "image" became paramount to maintaining the cash flow. Group junkets to the final four (JOD wasn't paying his own expenses nor were the donors paying for the "parties) $500.00 a seat "association fees" on so on aren't present in losing programs.....

The only thing that saved PSU was the proactive measures the administration had taken. The NCAA wasn't here because the program was winning. The NCAA was here because all too often winning programs are rift with "corruption" and ambition from the "adults" Its a fine line I'm guessing RE either accidently or knowingly stopped things in the program before it got to far over the line.
Click to expand...

Your not very truthfull Gwen every program in the coutry has tickets via the coaches to the final four and I don't remember seeing sponsorships on stall doors in Washington Griz? Universities market themselves.
 
Yup they all have tickets and they market, and you still don't have a clue. But you better look at those doors and the urinals. You may need one one of those DUI attorneys before this is all over.
 
Great we have FINALLY made it to the urinals...........I was wondering how long it would take!
 
Where is the evidence that self-imposed "sanctions" deters the NCAA in any way? Every school seems to do its own thing before the NCAA weighs in. It doesn't seem to matter. Penn State fired Joe Paterno in mid season. That alone is pretty big move in college athletics. Didn't matter.
 
tnt said:
The NCAA investigation was announced months before the firing or the DOJ or the DOE investigation. RE had already taken proactive steps in terms of the alleged sexual assaults and rumors around them.

There has been waaaaaaaaaaaay to much talk about the kids and way to little talk about a program that had its priorities way out of wack and the leadership that put it that way. When they start selling sponsorships to the stall doors, the writing was on the wall. I can't think of much except jock straps that they hadn't hawked a sponsorship for (and I'm not sure about those) Anyone who doesn't believe that winning and maintaining an "image" became paramount to maintaining the cash flow. Group junkets to the final four (JOD wasn't paying his own expenses nor were the donors paying for the "parties) $500.00 a seat "association fees" on so on aren't present in losing programs.....

The only thing that saved PSU was the proactive measures the administration had taken. The NCAA wasn't here because the program was winning. The NCAA was here because all too often winning programs are rift with "corruption" and ambition from the "adults" Its a fine line I'm guessing RE either accidently or knowingly stopped things in the program before it got to far over the line.
Click to expand...


I can think of a few posters on this board who might have tried to get this endorsement.
 
DID ENGSTROM DO THE RIGHT THING?

Well that's the $64,000 question, no? I shook my 8 ball and it read "It seems impossible to answer with what is publicly known at this time."
 
tnt said:
There has been waaaaaaaaaaaay to much talk about the kids and way to little talk about a program that had its priorities way out of wack and the leadership that put it that way. When they start selling sponsorships to the stall doors, the writing was on the wall. I can't think of much except jock straps that they hadn't hawked a sponsorship for (and I'm not sure about those) Anyone who doesn't believe that winning and maintaining an "image" became paramount to maintaining the cash flow. Group junkets to the final four (JOD wasn't paying his own expenses nor were the donors paying for the "parties) $500.00 a seat "association fees" on so on aren't present in losing programs......
Click to expand...

Really? You think sponsorship was the rotten apple in the barrel? Who the hell told you that? Do you have any idea how UM athletics ad revenue compares to revenue for the rest of the college football world? Any idea how association fees are applied in the rest of the college football world?
Ever watch a Griz game on TV? The three biggest advertisers are the University itself and Montana departments of Transportation, Labor and Industry. If advertising was the issue, UM wouldn't even be on the radar.
 
griz4life said:
tnt said:
There has been waaaaaaaaaaaay to much talk about the kids and way to little talk about a program that had its priorities way out of wack and the leadership that put it that way. When they start selling sponsorships to the stall doors, the writing was on the wall. I can't think of much except jock straps that they hadn't hawked a sponsorship for (and I'm not sure about those) Anyone who doesn't believe that winning and maintaining an "image" became paramount to maintaining the cash flow. Group junkets to the final four (JOD wasn't paying his own expenses nor were the donors paying for the "parties) $500.00 a seat "association fees" on so on aren't present in losing programs......
Click to expand...

Really? You think sponsorship was the rotten apple in the barrel? Who the hell told you that? Do you have any idea how UM athletics ad revenue compares to revenue for the rest of the college football world? Any idea how association fees are applied in the rest of the college football world?
Ever watch a Griz game on TV? The three biggest advertisers are the University itself and Montana departments of Transportation, Labor and Industry. If advertising was the issue, UM wouldn't even be on the radar.
Click to expand...

The promotion is only the tip of one horn of a beast called money. If you are so naive as to believe Money doesn't drive athletics think again. And I know the revenue, They are still Far short (on paper) of turning a profit. And while you are at the UM bookstore is a seperate for profit business. Why wouldn't they advertize
 
tnt said:
griz4life said:
tnt said:
There has been waaaaaaaaaaaay to much talk about the kids and way to little talk about a program that had its priorities way out of wack and the leadership that put it that way. When they start selling sponsorships to the stall doors, the writing was on the wall. I can't think of much except jock straps that they hadn't hawked a sponsorship for (and I'm not sure about those) Anyone who doesn't believe that winning and maintaining an "image" became paramount to maintaining the cash flow. Group junkets to the final four (JOD wasn't paying his own expenses nor were the donors paying for the "parties) $500.00 a seat "association fees" on so on aren't present in losing programs......
Click to expand...

Really? You think sponsorship was the rotten apple in the barrel? Who the hell told you that? Do you have any idea how UM athletics ad revenue compares to revenue for the rest of the college football world? Any idea how association fees are applied in the rest of the college football world?
Ever watch a Griz game on TV? The three biggest advertisers are the University itself and Montana departments of Transportation, Labor and Industry. If advertising was the issue, UM wouldn't even be on the radar.
Click to expand...

The promotion is only the tip of one horn of a beast called money. If you are so naive as to believe Money doesn't drive athletics think again. And I know the revenue, They are still Far short (on paper) of turning a profit. And while you are at the UM bookstore is a seperate for profit business. Why wouldn't they advertize
Click to expand...
Did you actually think as you wrote this? It is a nearly perfect non sequitur (at least the part of it that is comprehensible) to the post it apparently rebuts.
 
A better question might be: would Engstrom stand up to the NCAA and fight for UM and UM athletics, or would he just roll over and accept whatever the NCAA may say or suggest?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top