You talk in circles.
But ok. Whatever you say.
I think it is ok for an AD to not follow boosters orders if they know what the hell they are doing. They get hired and paid for a reason. A wise AD listens to a booster considers it and then makes their own decision to move forward. If they win more than lose, based on those decisions the boosters will fall in line. If they go against the big donors AND lose then there is an issue and the donors will probably force them out. My issue is our donors don’t know anything about athletics and they tell Judy what they want. Judy for the most part does it, mostly because they are all friends and then we lose. They don’t really care about winning though so no big deal. Judy, at least it appears to me, has no back bone to stand up to administration or to donors. She just does as she is told. Actually is probably why she doesn’t like coaches with big personalities and egos. Now that I am typing this our entire situation might just come down to her management style.
Good point.
Maybe oversimplifying a bit, but I’d have to mostly agree. I think guys like Gene Johnson do care about winning, and the big alumni were behind the push to get Mark Price hired. But no one in that groups of whales seems to represent what should be our core alumni - or at least the way we think. It really bothers me that Phil checks to see how much you gave before addressing an alum. He cannot ignore it, but it shouldn’t be the sole measure to the point where he ignores anyone who hasnt cut a five figure check recently.
Good point.
Maybe oversimplifying a bit, but I’d have to mostly agree. I think guys like Gene Johnson do care about winning, and the big alumni were behind the push to get Mark Price hired. But no one in that groups of whales seems to represent what should be our core alumni - or at least the way we think. It really bothers me that Phil checks to see how much you gave before addressing an alum. He cannot ignore it, but it shouldn’t be the sole measure to the point where he ignores anyone who hasnt cut a five figure check recently.[/quote]
Yeah should have phrased it differently. I do think Gene and Dale, etc care about winning - but that desire doesn’t trump their love for Judy.
Good point.
Maybe oversimplifying a bit, but I’d have to mostly agree. I think guys like Gene Johnson do care about winning, and the big alumni were behind the push to get Mark Price hired. But no one in that groups of whales seems to represent what should be our core alumni - or at least the way we think. It really bothers me that Phil checks to see how much you gave before addressing an alum. He cannot ignore it, but it shouldn’t be the sole measure to the point where he ignores anyone who hasnt cut a five figure check recently.[/quote]
Yeah should have phrased it differently. I do think Gene and Dale, etc care about winning - but that desire doesn’t trump their love for Judy.[/quote]
GENE JOHNSON does not care about winning.
their M.O. is 100% having a clean program with “right kind of kids”
You talk in circles.
But ok. Whatever you say.[/quote] Care to clarify? I’m just feeding you back your own words. I believe you have a problem with Dale and Gene. Am I wrong?
Only a rumor, but it looks like it’s Gene Chizik’s job
Someone should tell ECU fans that Cam Newton isn’t walking through that door.
Someone should tell ECU fans that Cam Newton isn’t walking through that door.[/quote]
You don’t need Cam Newton in the AAC.
The point of firing Ruffin was ECU wants national relevance.
The point of firing Ruffin was ECU wants national relevance.[/quote]
You can make the argument that any coach with a NC isn’t going to bring “Insert Player Name” to ECU… Chizick got canned after a 3-8 season, but also left the cupboard plenty full for a team that went to the BCS Champ game the following season, the guy can obviously recruit
I’m curious who has more cache that ECU can get?
The point of firing Ruffin was ECU wants national relevance.[/quote]
Not going to get that in the AAC.
Houston, Memphis, Navy, and Temple were all ranked this year. A good year for the AAC combined with their OOC, it would be attainable getting to the CFP if they went undefeated.
AAC is what CUSA 1.0 was prior to 2005 - much of the best of the rest. We could do a lot worse. Wish we were there now.
The AAC has much more relevance than the current version of CUSA. And to think this board used to make fun of ECU when they tried to move to the Big East/AAC.
we shouldn’t be making fun of anybody…
I’d give my left you know what to get where they are one day athletically in stature and fanbase
clt is hearing chuck amato.
or will wade.
Someone should tell ECU fans that Cam Newton isn’t walking through that door.[/quote]
They could do much worse. Ask the Gamecocks.
Someone should tell ECU fans that Cam Newton isn’t walking through that door.[/quote]
They could do much worse. Ask the Gamecocks.[/quote]
LOL
I (I wager) follow USC closer than anyone here. Go to 3-4 games a year. At first was against Muschamp, but after seeing him speak and ridiculous staff that follows him. I predict next decade far superior to Spurrier. The head winds at UF are not at USC.
But as always Mullins Maniac knows more I’m sure. Just like Major hire.
One thing about USC. They will do anything this side of death penalty to win. It’s refreshing.