#117

JerseyWave · Mon Dec 03, 2012 8:43 am

Tulane's final ranking in USA Today's fbs poll, 117. I am not pointing the finger at this coaching staff, but when will the AD be held responsible?

ajcalhoun · Mon Dec 03, 2012 8:58 am

JerseyWave wrote:Tulane's final ranking in USA Today's fbs poll, 117. I am not pointing the finger at this coaching staff, but when will the AD be held responsible?

At least he's not the bonehead from Louisiana Tech.

IM42lane · Mon Dec 03, 2012 9:36 am

ajcalhoun wrote:
JerseyWave wrote:Tulane's final ranking in USA Today's fbs poll, 117. I am not pointing the finger at this coaching staff, but when will the AD be held responsible?
At least he's not the bonehead from Louisiana Tech.

ONLY because Dickson did not have to make a similar quick decision this time. As I understand it, the LT AD was hopeful of an invite to the Dallas Classic (or whatever they call that bowl that is now held in the old Cotton Bowl stadium now) or the Liberty Bowl. He gambled and lost. Tech only lost to Texas A&M 59-57 this year (at Independence Stadium). La Tech would have made an entertaining entry into any bowl game. Too bad.

sader24 · Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:43 am

The problem is he was gambling with something that wasn't his to gamble. He doesn't own the Athletic Department, he runs it. He cost the University exposure, cost the football staff an extra month in practice time and cost his student athletes (especially the seniors) and oppurtunity to play in a bowl game. All in all he screwed up on a massive level and should be fired.

Ray · Mon Dec 03, 2012 12:18 pm

sader24 wrote:The problem is he was gambling with something that wasn't his to gamble. He doesn't own the Athletic Department, he runs it. He cost the University exposure, cost the football staff an extra month in practice time and cost his student athletes (especially the seniors) and oppurtunity to play in a bowl game. All in all he screwed up on a massive level and should be fired.

YES on all points.

IM42lane · Mon Dec 03, 2012 12:41 pm

Ray wrote:
sader24 wrote:The problem is he was gambling with something that wasn't his to gamble. He doesn't own the Athletic Department, he runs it. He cost the University exposure, cost the football staff an extra month in practice time and cost his student athletes (especially the seniors) and oppurtunity to play in a bowl game. All in all he screwed up on a massive level and should be fired.
YES on all points.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaaf--lou ... 53941.html

winwave · Mon Dec 03, 2012 1:03 pm

sader24 wrote:The problem is he was gambling with something that wasn't his to gamble. He doesn't own the Athletic Department, he runs it. He cost the University exposure, cost the football staff an extra month in practice time and cost his student athletes (especially the seniors) and oppurtunity to play in a bowl game. All in all he screwed up on a massive level and should be fired.

+1

Dave breslin · Tue Dec 04, 2012 3:44 pm

He is genetically related to R D!!!!

AugWave · Tue Dec 04, 2012 9:56 pm

Now THAT'S how you shaft your school!!

Yes! For all that shit their fans talk, acting like they're LSU or something...

Those seniors though.

mbawavefan12 · Wed Dec 05, 2012 9:57 am

sader24 wrote:The problem is he was gambling with something that wasn't his to gamble. He doesn't own the Athletic Department, he runs it. He cost the University exposure, cost the football staff an extra month in practice time and cost his student athletes (especially the seniors) and oppurtunity to play in a bowl game. All in all he screwed up on a massive level and should be fired.

I have no idea what this quote is referring to, it sounds like such a pretentious statement that lacks depth? This has nothing to do with ownership or even ego in my mind. The guy thought LaTech deserved better (frankly I tend to agree) but the individual bowls clearly did not agree + the AD did not appreciate the bowl landscape and how quickly things move. This is a manager making a poor decision and has nothing to do with "ownership". Gambling......no he was doing his job, quit unsuccessfully I might add, but he thought he was doing right by LaTech and he is paid to make decisions not to just take whatever he is offered. This was a huge miscalculation and a firing would be justified but at the same time his management has also resulted in a move up in conference and a top25 FBall program (at least for 2012). My point, obviously he does not own LaTech athletics but he is paid to make decisions on their behalf, in this case he made a poor one, end of story.

Eaglewave · Thu Dec 06, 2012 6:49 pm

sader24 wrote:The problem is he was gambling with something that wasn't his to gamble. He doesn't own the Athletic Department, he runs it. He cost the University exposure, cost the football staff an extra month in practice time and cost his student athletes (especially the seniors) and oppurtunity to play in a bowl game. All in all he screwed up on a massive level and should be fired.

True, but he really didn't want to face ULM.

sader24 · Thu Dec 06, 2012 8:59 pm

mbawavefan12 wrote:
sader24 wrote:The problem is he was gambling with something that wasn't his to gamble. He doesn't own the Athletic Department, he runs it. He cost the University exposure, cost the football staff an extra month in practice time and cost his student athletes (especially the seniors) and oppurtunity to play in a bowl game. All in all he screwed up on a massive level and should be fired.
I have no idea what this quote is referring to, it sounds like such a pretentious statement that lacks depth? This has nothing to do with ownership or even ego in my mind. The guy thought LaTech deserved better (frankly I tend to agree) but the individual bowls clearly did not agree + the AD did not appreciate the bowl landscape and how quickly things move. This is a manager making a poor decision and has nothing to do with "ownership". Gambling......no he was doing his job, quit unsuccessfully I might add, but he thought he was doing right by LaTech and he is paid to make decisions not to just take whatever he is offered. This was a huge miscalculation and a firing would be justified but at the same time his management has also resulted in a move up in conference and a top25 FBall program (at least for 2012). My point, obviously he does not own LaTech athletics but he is paid to make decisions on their behalf, in this case he made a poor one, end of story.

You just bashed my statement and then went on to agree with everything I had to say. You do realize he cost his staff an extra month of football practice right? You took ownership out of context, I'm not saying he thinks he owns it, what I'm saying is that his job is to do right by the football program even if that means taking a lesser bowl. As an AD he has to have a much better grasp on the situation with the Bowls than he obviously did. He gambled that he would get a better bowl even though at the time he didnt realize he was gambling b/c he thought they were a lock no matter what which goes to show that he is incompetent and out of touch. HE IS PAID TO MAKE SURE A 9-3 TEAM WITH THE BEST OFFENSE IN THE COUNTRY GOES TO A BOWL GAME. They didnt. So he shouldn't get paid anymore.