Comparing ADs

[PlayerRep]

I'll take a quick stab. There are so many variables you're leaving out. In regards to football, I'll beat the same drum I've been beating. NCAA SANCTIONS. Why in god's name do people think UM should be different than other programs who have gone through an NCAA sanction period? Miami, slipped, Penn State, slipped, Alabama, slipped, USC, slipped, Oklahoma, slipped. Why in the hell should UM be exempt somehow from NCAA sanction hurting the football program? The answer is, it's NOT. The NCAA probation is officially over last month. Now, let's see what happens. If, in two years, things aren't trending back up, then I'll start to really worry.

Basketball, the men don't have a real big this season. They'll have three of them next year. If the Griz are terrible next year, then I'll worry. The women are going through a season in which their two best players blew out their knees, and, the only person in charge of the program for over 30 years retired. If the Lady Griz lose 20 games next year, then I'll worry.

I know, I know, variables, who cares right? The only thing thing anyone cares about is W's right?

Being down a few schollies, of course, didn't help, but I wouldn't rate ncaa sanctions in the top 5 of reasons that UM football has declined. All or most of those other schools you mentioned are much more severe sanctions that UM did. Apples to oranges. I agree on men's and women's basketball. I still thing the men's team could make a run.

Well I'd love to hear your top 5 reasons then.

Firing Pflu. Starting the coaching carousel, and led to an "interim" coach and uncertainty.

Firing O'Day. Great AD. Supported coaches and players, raised a ton of money, and well-liked by most big boosters.

Suspending JJ for a year. Completely killed what should have been a great season.

Insinuating that football players and athletes were involved with sexual assault, when virtually none were. Didn't support UM in the sexual assault allegations and insinuations, and as as result make thing much worse. Supporting a totally out to lunch old age dean, who unfairly pursued athletes--but fortunately was eventually pushed out.

Engstrom pushing for the academic center, instead of more important things like the performance center.

Support for Jean Gee, the totally bad news compliance officer. She should have been moved along years ago. Did I saw bad news. Don't know a single coach who ever liked or respected her. Rumor has it that she turned in UM to start the ncaa investigation.

Engstrom and Gee pushing Pflu and O'Day under the bus with the ncaa. Unnecessary bad press.

All this resulted in a small downturn in donations for a bit, and lots of boosters questioning UM.

This remains to be seen. But a new younger AD hiring a DII coach who had no connections to UM.

New AD is afraid to stand up to a spineless and sport-unknowledgeable President.

Sorry that I went over 5.

 

[AZGrizFan]

I'll take a quick stab. There are so many variables you're leaving out. In regards to football, I'll beat the same drum I've been beating. NCAA SANCTIONS. Why in god's name do people think UM should be different than other programs who have gone through an NCAA sanction period? Miami, slipped, Penn State, slipped, Alabama, slipped, USC, slipped, Oklahoma, slipped. Why in the hell should UM be exempt somehow from NCAA sanction hurting the football program? The answer is, it's NOT. The NCAA probation is officially over last month. Now, let's see what happens. If, in two years, things aren't trending back up, then I'll start to really worry.

Basketball, the men don't have a real big this season. They'll have three of them next year. If the Griz are terrible next year, then I'll worry. The women are going through a season in which their two best players blew out their knees, and, the only person in charge of the program for over 30 years retired. If the Lady Griz lose 20 games next year, then I'll worry.

I know, I know, variables, who cares right? The only thing thing anyone cares about is W's right?

Being down a few schollies, of course, didn't help, but I wouldn't rate ncaa sanctions in the top 5 of reasons that UM football has declined. All or most of those other schools you mentioned are much more severe sanctions that UM did. Apples to oranges. I agree on men's and women's basketball. I still thing the men's team could make a run.

Well I'd love to hear your top 5 reasons then.

Firing Pflu. Starting the coaching carousel, and led to an "interim" coach and uncertainty.

Firing O'Day. Great AD. Supported coaches and players, raised a ton of money, and well-liked by most big boosters.

Suspending JJ for a year. Completely killed what should have been a great season.

Insinuating that football players and athletes were involved with sexual assault, when virtually none were. Didn't support UM in the sexual assault allegations and insinuations, and as as result make thing much worse. Supporting a totally out to lunch old age dean, who unfairly pursued athletes--but fortunately was eventually pushed out.

Engstrom pushing for the academic center, instead of more important things like the performance center.

Support for Jean Gee, the totally bad news compliance officer. She should have been moved along years ago. Did I saw bad news. Don't know a single coach who ever liked or respected her. Rumor has it that she turned in UM to start the ncaa investigation.

Engstrom and Gee pushing Pflu and O'Day under the bus with the ncaa. Unnecessary bad press.

All this resulted in a small downturn in donations for a bit, and lots of boosters questioning UM.

This remains to be seen. But a new younger AD hiring a DII coach who had no connections to UM.

New AD is afraid to stand up to a spineless and sport-unknowledgeable President.

Sorry that I went over 5.

:lol: Yeah. You started out strong, but fell off quickly trying to think of 5. I'm sure that insinuating football players were involved in sexual assaults, bad press, reduced donations and Jean Gee had WAY more to do with the team's performance over the past 4 years than the loss of scholarship football players did.

 

[kemajic]

I'll take a quick stab. There are so many variables you're leaving out. In regards to football, I'll beat the same drum I've been beating. NCAA SANCTIONS. Why in god's name do people think UM should be different than other programs who have gone through an NCAA sanction period? Miami, slipped, Penn State, slipped, Alabama, slipped, USC, slipped, Oklahoma, slipped. Why in the hell should UM be exempt somehow from NCAA sanction hurting the football program? The answer is, it's NOT. The NCAA probation is officially over last month. Now, let's see what happens. If, in two years, things aren't trending back up, then I'll start to really worry.

Basketball, the men don't have a real big this season. They'll have three of them next year. If the Griz are terrible next year, then I'll worry. The women are going through a season in which their two best players blew out their knees, and, the only person in charge of the program for over 30 years retired. If the Lady Griz lose 20 games next year, then I'll worry.

I know, I know, variables, who cares right? The only thing thing anyone cares about is W's right?

Being down a few schollies, of course, didn't help, but I wouldn't rate ncaa sanctions in the top 5 of reasons that UM football has declined. All or most of those other schools you mentioned are much more severe sanctions that UM did. Apples to oranges. I agree on men's and women's basketball. I still thing the men's team could make a run.

Well I'd love to hear your top 5 reasons then.

Firing Pflu. Starting the coaching carousel, and led to an "interim" coach and uncertainty.

Firing O'Day. Great AD. Supported coaches and players, raised a ton of money, and well-liked by most big boosters.

Suspending JJ for a year. Completely killed what should have been a great season.

Insinuating that football players and athletes were involved with sexual assault, when virtually none were. Didn't support UM in the sexual assault allegations and insinuations, and as as result make thing much worse. Supporting a totally out to lunch old age dean, who unfairly pursued athletes--but fortunately was eventually pushed out.

Engstrom pushing for the academic center, instead of more important things like the performance center.

Support for Jean Gee, the totally bad news compliance officer. She should have been moved along years ago. Did I saw bad news. Don't know a single coach who ever liked or respected her. Rumor has it that she turned in UM to start the ncaa investigation.

Engstrom and Gee pushing Pflu and O'Day under the bus with the ncaa. Unnecessary bad press.

All this resulted in a small downturn in donations for a bit, and lots of boosters questioning UM.

This remains to be seen. But a new younger AD hiring a DII coach who had no connections to UM.

New AD is afraid to stand up to a spineless and sport-unknowledgeable President.

Sorry that I went over 5.

I was with you until the last item. Way too harsh; rather than by fear, I suspect Haslam's strategy was to outlast Engstrom. Haslam won. Very brave ADs have poor survival rates at UM. You can't get your projects done if you're down the road (Hogan, O'Day). Haslam is getting his projects done; the academics are good; the newspapers are not so full of UM players getting busted; the W/L's now need to improve. He's a professional, looking forward to a new President/AD relationship.

 

[kemajic]

I'll take a quick stab. There are so many variables you're leaving out. In regards to football, I'll beat the same drum I've been beating. NCAA SANCTIONS. Why in god's name do people think UM should be different than other programs who have gone through an NCAA sanction period? Miami, slipped, Penn State, slipped, Alabama, slipped, USC, slipped, Oklahoma, slipped. Why in the hell should UM be exempt somehow from NCAA sanction hurting the football program? The answer is, it's NOT. The NCAA probation is officially over last month. Now, let's see what happens. If, in two years, things aren't trending back up, then I'll start to really worry.

Basketball, the men don't have a real big this season. They'll have three of them next year. If the Griz are terrible next year, then I'll worry. The women are going through a season in which their two best players blew out their knees, and, the only person in charge of the program for over 30 years retired. If the Lady Griz lose 20 games next year, then I'll worry.

I know, I know, variables, who cares right? The only thing thing anyone cares about is W's right?

Being down a few schollies, of course, didn't help, but I wouldn't rate ncaa sanctions in the top 5 of reasons that UM football has declined. All or most of those other schools you mentioned are much more severe sanctions that UM did. Apples to oranges. I agree on men's and women's basketball. I still thing the men's team could make a run.

Well I'd love to hear your top 5 reasons then.

Firing Pflu. Starting the coaching carousel, and led to an "interim" coach and uncertainty.

Firing O'Day. Great AD. Supported coaches and players, raised a ton of money, and well-liked by most big boosters.

Suspending JJ for a year. Completely killed what should have been a great season.

Insinuating that football players and athletes were involved with sexual assault, when virtually none were. Didn't support UM in the sexual assault allegations and insinuations, and as as result make thing much worse. Supporting a totally out to lunch old age dean, who unfairly pursued athletes--but fortunately was eventually pushed out.

Engstrom pushing for the academic center, instead of more important things like the performance center.

Support for Jean Gee, the totally bad news compliance officer. She should have been moved along years ago. Did I saw bad news. Don't know a single coach who ever liked or respected her. Rumor has it that she turned in UM to start the ncaa investigation.

Engstrom and Gee pushing Pflu and O'Day under the bus with the ncaa. Unnecessary bad press.

All this resulted in a small downturn in donations for a bit, and lots of boosters questioning UM.

This remains to be seen. But a new younger AD hiring a DII coach who had no connections to UM.

New AD is afraid to stand up to a spineless and sport-unknowledgeable President.

Sorry that I went over 5.

I was with you until the last item. Way too harsh; rather than by fear, I suspect Haslam's strategy was to outlast Engstrom. Haslam won. Very brave ADs have poor survival rates at UM. You can't get your projects done if you're down the road (Hogan, O'Day). Haslam is getting his projects done; the academics are good; the newspapers are not so full of UM players getting busted; the W/L's now need to improve. He's a professional, looking forward to a new President/AD relationship.

 

[kemajic]

I'll take a quick stab. There are so many variables you're leaving out. In regards to football, I'll beat the same drum I've been beating. NCAA SANCTIONS. Why in god's name do people think UM should be different than other programs who have gone through an NCAA sanction period? Miami, slipped, Penn State, slipped, Alabama, slipped, USC, slipped, Oklahoma, slipped. Why in the hell should UM be exempt somehow from NCAA sanction hurting the football program? The answer is, it's NOT. The NCAA probation is officially over last month. Now, let's see what happens. If, in two years, things aren't trending back up, then I'll start to really worry.

Basketball, the men don't have a real big this season. They'll have three of them next year. If the Griz are terrible next year, then I'll worry. The women are going through a season in which their two best players blew out their knees, and, the only person in charge of the program for over 30 years retired. If the Lady Griz lose 20 games next year, then I'll worry.

I know, I know, variables, who cares right? The only thing thing anyone cares about is W's right?

Being down a few schollies, of course, didn't help, but I wouldn't rate ncaa sanctions in the top 5 of reasons that UM football has declined. All or most of those other schools you mentioned are much more severe sanctions that UM did. Apples to oranges. I agree on men's and women's basketball. I still thing the men's team could make a run.

Well I'd love to hear your top 5 reasons then.

Firing Pflu. Starting the coaching carousel, and led to an "interim" coach and uncertainty.

Firing O'Day. Great AD. Supported coaches and players, raised a ton of money, and well-liked by most big boosters.

Suspending JJ for a year. Completely killed what should have been a great season.

Insinuating that football players and athletes were involved with sexual assault, when virtually none were. Didn't support UM in the sexual assault allegations and insinuations, and as as result make thing much worse. Supporting a totally out to lunch old age dean, who unfairly pursued athletes--but fortunately was eventually pushed out.

Engstrom pushing for the academic center, instead of more important things like the performance center.

Support for Jean Gee, the totally bad news compliance officer. She should have been moved along years ago. Did I saw bad news. Don't know a single coach who ever liked or respected her. Rumor has it that she turned in UM to start the ncaa investigation.

Engstrom and Gee pushing Pflu and O'Day under the bus with the ncaa. Unnecessary bad press.

All this resulted in a small downturn in donations for a bit, and lots of boosters questioning UM.

This remains to be seen. But a new younger AD hiring a DII coach who had no connections to UM.

New AD is afraid to stand up to a spineless and sport-unknowledgeable President.

Sorry that I went over 5.

I was with you until the last item. Way too harsh; rather than by fear, I suspect Haslam's strategy was to outlast Engstrom. Haslam won. Very brave ADs have poor survival rates at UM. You can't get your projects done if you're down the road (Hogan, O'Day). Haslam is getting his projects done; the academics are good; the newspapers are not so full of UM players getting busted; the W/L's now need to improve. He's a professional, looking forward to a new President/AD relationship.

 

[PlayerRep]

Being down a few schollies, of course, didn't help, but I wouldn't rate ncaa sanctions in the top 5 of reasons that UM football has declined. All or most of those other schools you mentioned are much more severe sanctions that UM did. Apples to oranges. I agree on men's and women's basketball. I still thing the men's team could make a run.

Well I'd love to hear your top 5 reasons then.

Firing Pflu. Starting the coaching carousel, and led to an "interim" coach and uncertainty.

Firing O'Day. Great AD. Supported coaches and players, raised a ton of money, and well-liked by most big boosters.

Suspending JJ for a year. Completely killed what should have been a great season.

Insinuating that football players and athletes were involved with sexual assault, when virtually none were. Didn't support UM in the sexual assault allegations and insinuations, and as as result make thing much worse. Supporting a totally out to lunch old age dean, who unfairly pursued athletes--but fortunately was eventually pushed out.

Engstrom pushing for the academic center, instead of more important things like the performance center.

Support for Jean Gee, the totally bad news compliance officer. She should have been moved along years ago. Did I saw bad news. Don't know a single coach who ever liked or respected her. Rumor has it that she turned in UM to start the ncaa investigation.

Engstrom and Gee pushing Pflu and O'Day under the bus with the ncaa. Unnecessary bad press.

All this resulted in a small downturn in donations for a bit, and lots of boosters questioning UM.

This remains to be seen. But a new younger AD hiring a DII coach who had no connections to UM.

New AD is afraid to stand up to a spineless and sport-unknowledgeable President.

Sorry that I went over 5.

:lol: Yeah. You started out strong, but fell off quickly trying to think of 5. I'm sure that insinuating football players were involved in sexual assaults, bad press, reduced donations and Jean Gee had WAY more to do with the team's performance over the past 4 years than the loss of scholarship football players did.

All that crap and related press, and coaching carousel, allowed other schools to use it against UM in recruiting. Gave the other schools an edge, or more, in recruiting. Gee has impacted recruiting by not allowing certain transfers and recruits. Another example is that the incredible athlete now playing for the US Eagle 7's and 15's did not get on the field at UM because of Gee, I was told. Coaches have said that the lower number of schollies impacted the recruiting of MT kids more than out of state recruits, because of how UM allocated the scholarships. If you lived in Missoula and followed the team more closely, you would know more of this.

 

[PlayerRep]

Being down a few schollies, of course, didn't help, but I wouldn't rate ncaa sanctions in the top 5 of reasons that UM football has declined. All or most of those other schools you mentioned are much more severe sanctions that UM did. Apples to oranges. I agree on men's and women's basketball. I still thing the men's team could make a run.

Well I'd love to hear your top 5 reasons then.

Firing Pflu. Starting the coaching carousel, and led to an "interim" coach and uncertainty.

Firing O'Day. Great AD. Supported coaches and players, raised a ton of money, and well-liked by most big boosters.

Suspending JJ for a year. Completely killed what should have been a great season.

Insinuating that football players and athletes were involved with sexual assault, when virtually none were. Didn't support UM in the sexual assault allegations and insinuations, and as as result make thing much worse. Supporting a totally out to lunch old age dean, who unfairly pursued athletes--but fortunately was eventually pushed out.

Engstrom pushing for the academic center, instead of more important things like the performance center.

Support for Jean Gee, the totally bad news compliance officer. She should have been moved along years ago. Did I saw bad news. Don't know a single coach who ever liked or respected her. Rumor has it that she turned in UM to start the ncaa investigation.

Engstrom and Gee pushing Pflu and O'Day under the bus with the ncaa. Unnecessary bad press.

All this resulted in a small downturn in donations for a bit, and lots of boosters questioning UM.

This remains to be seen. But a new younger AD hiring a DII coach who had no connections to UM.

New AD is afraid to stand up to a spineless and sport-unknowledgeable President.

Sorry that I went over 5.

I was with you until the last item. Way too harsh; rather than by fear, I suspect Haslam's strategy was to outlast Engstrom. Haslam won. Very brave ADs have poor survival rates at UM. You can't get your projects done if you're down the road (Hogan, O'Day). Haslam is getting his projects done; the academics are good; the newspapers are not so full of UM players getting busted; the W/L's now need to improve. He's a professional, looking forward to a new President/AD relationship.

I agree with those positives on Haslam. My comment on standing up to the president was intended to be focused more on the early part of the tenure. See resolution of ncaa investigation. See academic center project slowing down the academic center, or at least siphoning off funds. Consider rumors regarding tailgating and alcohol policies. We will see how the coach hire turns out. At a minimum, it was risky compared to the alternatives.

 

[AZGrizFan]

All that crap and related press, and coaching carousel, allowed other schools to use it against UM in recruiting. Gave the other schools an edge, or more, in recruiting. Gee has impacted recruiting by not allowing certain transfers and recruits. Another example is that the incredible athlete now playing for the US Eagle 7's and 15's did not get on the field at UM because of Gee, I was told. Coaches have said that the lower number of schollies impacted the recruiting of MT kids more than out of state recruits, because of how UM allocated the scholarships. If you lived in Missoula and followed the team more closely, you would know more of this.

Pure speculation. Doesn't matter HOW close you live to Missoula.

 

[EverettGriz]

And the comparison as to facilities upgrades is?.............

Some projects completed under H were started under O. If not mistaken, O's relationship with Washingtons had a lot to do with that money coming in. Last stadium addition was done under O. I know there was a budget surplus under O.
Great points GF.
I hope you are right Griz till I die.

Academic Center--Haslem
Champions Center--Halsem
New Turf--Haslem
New Washington Griz Scoreboard--Haslem
New Adams Center Scoreboard (by next season)--Haslem
Upgraded visiting team and refs locker facilities--Haslem
Scheduled new BB floor in Adams Center--Haslem
Scheduled upgraded home basketball team locker rooms--Haslem
Scheduled basketball teams lounge--Haslem

Maybe Haslem should have focused more on wins. That's much more important to most fans. Other than the champions center and the related locker room upgrades, I could care less about the other stuff. As for turf, Haslem is hardly the first AD who got new turf.

I couldn't disagree more with this premise. Football only, non-alumni may care only about wins. But the hundreds of thousands of UM Alumni, as well as fans of UM programs other than football, care deeply about the other items discussed; not to mention UM's reputation.

 

[AZGrizFan]

Some projects completed under H were started under O. If not mistaken, O's relationship with Washingtons had a lot to do with that money coming in. Last stadium addition was done under O. I know there was a budget surplus under O.
Great points GF.
I hope you are right Griz till I die.

Academic Center--Haslem
Champions Center--Halsem
New Turf--Haslem
New Washington Griz Scoreboard--Haslem
New Adams Center Scoreboard (by next season)--Haslem
Upgraded visiting team and refs locker facilities--Haslem
Scheduled new BB floor in Adams Center--Haslem
Scheduled upgraded home basketball team locker rooms--Haslem
Scheduled basketball teams lounge--Haslem

Maybe Haslem should have focused more on wins. That's much more important to most fans. Other than the champions center and the related locker room upgrades, I could care less about the other stuff. As for turf, Haslem is hardly the first AD who got new turf.

I couldn't disagree more with this premise. Football only, non-alumni may care only about wins. But the hundreds of thousands of UM Alumni, as well as fans of UM programs other than football, care deeply about the other items discussed; not to mention UM's reputation.

Maybe Haslam should have taken a few college courses in knee surgery to help the womens' team's W/L record. Maybe he shouldn't have fired Pflu or hired Delaney or agreed to those sanctions or hired Gee or...or...or....90% of PR's list had NOTHING to do with Haslam, yet apparently he should have focused more on wins.

 

[UMGriz75]

I was with you until the last item. Way too harsh; rather than by fear, I suspect Haslam's strategy was to outlast Engstrom. Haslam won. Very brave ADs have poor survival rates at UM. You can't get your projects done if you're down the road (Hogan, O'Day). Haslam is getting his projects done; the academics are good; the newspapers are not so full of UM players getting busted; the W/L's now need to improve. He's a professional, looking forward to a new President/AD relationship.

Engstrom initiated the "culture of failure" by the firings. As I noted four years ago, that culture was beginning to take root on campus and programs, such as sports, can't just hermetically seal themselves. It's not just a "problem." Left unchallenged, "cultures of failure" become death spirals.

Our Regents, for whatever unfathomable reasons, refused to acknowledge the problem, until three months ago, when the "death spiral" happened.

UM published that student enrollment declined 6.1%. That wasn't the real news and that wasn't what caused the Regents to go into shock and suddenly fire the guy they've been congratulating the past six years and awarding raises, new slippers and fine wines.

No, freshman resident enrollment dropped 17% for Fall, 2016 over Fall 2015, 756 frosh compared to 914. That's the largest peacetime drop in the history of the school. The average drop over the prior seven years was 5% per year. Just small enough that Engstrom could plausibly ask for more time ... and more raises too please. The 17% drop was a wallop. Engstrom hadn't prepared the Regents for that news, he had no explanation, and he offered no solutions.

The total freshman resident enrollment drop since 2008, when UM registered 1,361 (more than MSU), is a total decline of 55%. UM's freshman resident enrollment is now one-half of MSUs. And of course, that will mean a smaller sophomore class next year, etc etc as that bubble works its way through and UM continues to collapse. That's the "death spiral."

Campus coffee conversations are wargaming a University of Montana with fewer than 7,000 students in four years time.

So the Athletic Director has to navigate the collapse of the institution around him, at the same time realizing that the poster program, football, is now coached by one of the least experienced coaching staffs in the Big Sky Conference. Many rumblings. The Football GPA dropped a full tenth of a point Fall semester while most of the other sports improved. Is that a problem or an anomaly? The curse of "interesting times."

Think Haslam might be looking for a way out?

 

[PlayerRep]

Some projects completed under H were started under O. If not mistaken, O's relationship with Washingtons had a lot to do with that money coming in. Last stadium addition was done under O. I know there was a budget surplus under O.
Great points GF.
I hope you are right Griz till I die.

Academic Center--Haslem
Champions Center--Halsem
New Turf--Haslem
New Washington Griz Scoreboard--Haslem
New Adams Center Scoreboard (by next season)--Haslem
Upgraded visiting team and refs locker facilities--Haslem
Scheduled new BB floor in Adams Center--Haslem
Scheduled upgraded home basketball team locker rooms--Haslem
Scheduled basketball teams lounge--Haslem

Maybe Haslem should have focused more on wins. That's much more important to most fans. Other than the champions center and the related locker room upgrades, I could care less about the other stuff. As for turf, Haslem is hardly the first AD who got new turf.

I couldn't disagree more with this premise. Football only, non-alumni may care only about wins. But the hundreds of thousands of UM Alumni, as well as fans of UM programs other than football, care deeply about the other items discussed; not to mention UM's reputation.

You disagree with the premise that it's important for an AD to be concerned about winning, especially at a school like UM which has had a huge tradition of winning in the last couple decades and has a fairly demanding fan base? You don't think it's important for an AD, or the UM AD, to hire a coach with a high likelihood of winning games? You think winning and these other things are mutually exclusive? You must have low expectations and low standards.

 

[PlayerRep]

Academic Center--Haslem
Champions Center--Halsem
New Turf--Haslem
New Washington Griz Scoreboard--Haslem
New Adams Center Scoreboard (by next season)--Haslem
Upgraded visiting team and refs locker facilities--Haslem
Scheduled new BB floor in Adams Center--Haslem
Scheduled upgraded home basketball team locker rooms--Haslem
Scheduled basketball teams lounge--Haslem

Maybe Haslem should have focused more on wins. That's much more important to most fans. Other than the champions center and the related locker room upgrades, I could care less about the other stuff. As for turf, Haslem is hardly the first AD who got new turf.

I couldn't disagree more with this premise. Football only, non-alumni may care only about wins. But the hundreds of thousands of UM Alumni, as well as fans of UM programs other than football, care deeply about the other items discussed; not to mention UM's reputation.

Maybe Haslam should have taken a few college courses in knee surgery to help the womens' team's W/L record. Maybe he shouldn't have fired Pflu or hired Delaney or agreed to those sanctions or hired Gee or...or...or....90% of PR's list had NOTHING to do with Haslam, yet apparently he should have focused more on wins.

You don't think that hiring a coach who has a high likelihood of getting wins is important, and should not be focused on? Man, some of you have low standards and expectations.

Assume you think Haslam hired the right, or best, coach for UM? Are you satisfied with the results so far?

 

[EverettGriz]

Academic Center--Haslem
Champions Center--Halsem
New Turf--Haslem
New Washington Griz Scoreboard--Haslem
New Adams Center Scoreboard (by next season)--Haslem
Upgraded visiting team and refs locker facilities--Haslem
Scheduled new BB floor in Adams Center--Haslem
Scheduled upgraded home basketball team locker rooms--Haslem
Scheduled basketball teams lounge--Haslem

Maybe Haslem should have focused more on wins. That's much more important to most fans. Other than the champions center and the related locker room upgrades, I could care less about the other stuff. As for turf, Haslem is hardly the first AD who got new turf.

I couldn't disagree more with this premise. Football only, non-alumni may care only about wins. But the hundreds of thousands of UM Alumni, as well as fans of UM programs other than football, care deeply about the other items discussed; not to mention UM's reputation.

You disagree with the premise that it's important for an AD to be concerned about winning, especially at a school like UM which has had a huge tradition of winning in the last couple decades and has a fairly demanding fan base? You don't think it's important for an AD, or the UM AD, to hire a coach with a high likelihood of winning games? You think winning and these other things are mutually exclusive? You must have low expectations and low standards.

No, but thanks for giving me an opportunity today to use: "Alternative Facts!!!!!".

I believe, like any sane person, that winning is important. But to suggest that fans care ONLY about winning (or even that it's the most important aspect of the program) as you stated is, at best, woefully short-sighted. Okay, I'll just call it as it is: it's complete bullshit.

And your final sentence is so laughably ironic as to need absolutely no comment from me.

 

[kemajic]

Sorry about the post in triplicate. I keep getting a screen saying the site was down; must have been a false screen as they all went through. And no X to erase them....

 

[PlayerRep]

Maybe Haslem should have focused more on wins. That's much more important to most fans. Other than the champions center and the related locker room upgrades, I could care less about the other stuff. As for turf, Haslem is hardly the first AD who got new turf.

I couldn't disagree more with this premise. Football only, non-alumni may care only about wins. But the hundreds of thousands of UM Alumni, as well as fans of UM programs other than football, care deeply about the other items discussed; not to mention UM's reputation.

You disagree with the premise that it's important for an AD to be concerned about winning, especially at a school like UM which has had a huge tradition of winning in the last couple decades and has a fairly demanding fan base? You don't think it's important for an AD, or the UM AD, to hire a coach with a high likelihood of winning games? You think winning and these other things are mutually exclusive? You must have low expectations and low standards.

No, but thanks for giving me an opportunity today to use: "Alternative Facts!!!!!".

I believe, like any sane person, that winning is important. But to suggest that fans care ONLY about winning (or even that it's the most important aspect of the program) as you stated is, at best, woefully short-sighted. Okay, I'll just call it as it is: it's complete bullshit.

And your final sentence is so laughably ironic as to need absolutely no comment from me.

You just made up your facts. Here's what I said, not most of what you just tried to say I said. I didn't say fans care "only" about wins, and didn't even suggest that

"Maybe Haslem should have focused more on wins. That's much more important to most fans."

Everett, if you don't think wins for Griz football are critically important to the program, fans and school, you don't understand Griz football and its fans. And if you think stuff like an academic center is more important than wins, then you must have low expectations and standards.

By the way, I assume you know that the funds for the academic center were lined up before Haslam became the AD?

 

[EverettGriz]

Great! So we agree. Wins are important; to the majority of fans, not the most important. Our apologies to the rest of the board for taking ten posts to clear up the matter.

 

[PlayerRep]

Great! So we agree. Wins are important; to the majority of fans, not the most important. Our apologies to the rest of the board for taking ten posts to clear up the matter.

No, I don't think we agree. I said this:

"Maybe Haslam should have focused more on wins. That's much more important to most fans."

You then said this:

"I couldn't disagree more with this premise."

This tells me that you don't think wins are particularly important.

Do you think Haslam should have focused on hiring a coach who had a high likelihood of getting alot of wins?

Do you think the first 2 years have had enough wins?

 

[EverettGriz]

ALTERNATIVE FACTS!!!!!!!!!!

 

[kemajic]

We're rolling along at 5 losses per year. That is different Montana Football than the dedicated fanbase is familiar with. Franchise erosion becomes a big risk as a lot of money flows from football revenue to other areas of the University. Not to mention the impact on the community of Missoula. So it is pretty damn important.