Ed Daniels

The main discussion board for everything Tulane athletics related.
Wave755
Tsunami
Posts: 6225
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 4:04 pm
Status: Offline

jonathanjoseph wrote:
golfnut69 wrote:
tpstulane wrote:
winwave wrote:He was talking about how the two pro teams have come back strong after Katrina but that Tulane and UNO haven't. He talked about how marketing can help but that ultimately you have to win to get fans to come out.
Ok. Thanks!
if Tulane could "draft" it's players like the Saints, not be encumbered by "Presidents, BOA's and Tenured Prof's" with an agenda, or worry about SAT scores, I would put some type of faith into Ed's editorial.
Well, to be fair, Tulane has less barriers to getting the players it wants than the Saints, which have to both wait their turn to pick players and fit their roster under a set budget.
Reliable sources tell me we can now sign anyone eligible to play under NCAA general rules and requirements.


golfnut69
Wild Pelican
Posts: 14229
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 9:38 am
Status: Offline

Wave755 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
golfnut69 wrote:
tpstulane wrote:
winwave wrote:He was talking about how the two pro teams have come back strong after Katrina but that Tulane and UNO haven't. He talked about how marketing can help but that ultimately you have to win to get fans to come out.
Ok. Thanks!
if Tulane could "draft" it's players like the Saints, not be encumbered by "Presidents, BOA's and Tenured Prof's" with an agenda, or worry about SAT scores, I would put some type of faith into Ed's editorial.
Well, to be fair, Tulane has less barriers to getting the players it wants than the Saints, which have to both wait their turn to pick players and fit their roster under a set budget.
Reliable sources tell me we can now sign anyone eligible to play under NCAA general rules and requirements.
Hmmmm...not exactly...when the Saints draft a player, that player has to play for the Saints, the only recruiting the saints do, is when their is a "free agent" they want on the roster.... so I do not get it when U say tulane has an easier time than the Saints...budget, the saints have an unlimited budget, but a payroll limit...not exactly the same thing as Tulane, which is giving less per player than the P5 conferences
Be a Hero Today.... Adopt a Shelter Pet... The Beatles once sang "Can't Buy Me Love"... I disagree, unconditional Love can be bought, for the nominal adoption fee at your local Pet Shelter !
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

golfnut69 wrote:
Wave755 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
golfnut69 wrote:
tpstulane wrote:
winwave wrote:He was talking about how the two pro teams have come back strong after Katrina but that Tulane and UNO haven't. He talked about how marketing can help but that ultimately you have to win to get fans to come out.
Ok. Thanks!
if Tulane could "draft" it's players like the Saints, not be encumbered by "Presidents, BOA's and Tenured Prof's" with an agenda, or worry about SAT scores, I would put some type of faith into Ed's editorial.
Well, to be fair, Tulane has less barriers to getting the players it wants than the Saints, which have to both wait their turn to pick players and fit their roster under a set budget.
Reliable sources tell me we can now sign anyone eligible to play under NCAA general rules and requirements.
Hmmmm...not exactly...when the Saints draft a player, that player has to play for the Saints, the only recruiting the saints do, is when their is a "free agent" they want on the roster.... so I do not get it when U say tulane has an easier time than the Saints...budget, the saints have an unlimited budget, but a payroll limit...not exactly the same thing as Tulane, which is giving less per player than the P5 conferences
The limits you are referring to are self inflicted. Like not giving out as much COA money or not having competitive facilities are Cowen/Dickson's choices. If Tulane solved those problems, they could get every qualified athlete they wanted. The Saints can't do anything about the salary cap or the structure of the draft, which stipulates that they can only draft 1 of the first 32 players selected.

It's actually the opposite. It's Tulane with the theoretically unlimited budget, it's just that they've chosen not to utilize it.
golfnut69
Wild Pelican
Posts: 14229
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 9:38 am
Status: Offline

jonathanjoseph wrote:
golfnut69 wrote:
Wave755 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
golfnut69 wrote:
tpstulane wrote:
winwave wrote:He was talking about how the two pro teams have come back strong after Katrina but that Tulane and UNO haven't. He talked about how marketing can help but that ultimately you have to win to get fans to come out.
Ok. Thanks!
if Tulane could "draft" it's players like the Saints, not be encumbered by "Presidents, BOA's and Tenured Prof's" with an agenda, or worry about SAT scores, I would put some type of faith into Ed's editorial.
Well, to be fair, Tulane has less barriers to getting the players it wants than the Saints, which have to both wait their turn to pick players and fit their roster under a set budget.
Reliable sources tell me we can now sign anyone eligible to play under NCAA general rules and requirements.
Hmmmm...not exactly...when the Saints draft a player, that player has to play for the Saints, the only recruiting the saints do, is when their is a "free agent" they want on the roster.... so I do not get it when U say tulane has an easier time than the Saints...budget, the saints have an unlimited budget, but a payroll limit...not exactly the same thing as Tulane, which is giving less per player than the P5 conferences
The limits you are referring to are self inflicted. Like not giving out as much COA money or not having competitive facilities are Cowen/Dickson's choices. If Tulane solved those problems, they could get every qualified athlete they wanted. The Saints can't do anything about the salary cap or the structure of the draft, which stipulates that they can only draft 1 of the first 32 players selected.

It's actually the opposite. It's Tulane with the theoretically unlimited budget, it's just that they've chosen not to utilize it.
hmmm again... If the Saints draft a player he has to sign with the Saints unless he sit's out or is traded, even if the Saints are training at Mike Miley Playground...The Player can sit...maybe play in the CFL, or he can sign with the Saints....In college it is a facilities arm race, I get it but you and Ed do not seem to understand that pro franchises stocking a roster is different than college ..in College the player has choices, in the pro's he does not
Be a Hero Today.... Adopt a Shelter Pet... The Beatles once sang "Can't Buy Me Love"... I disagree, unconditional Love can be bought, for the nominal adoption fee at your local Pet Shelter !
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

golfnut69 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
golfnut69 wrote:
Wave755 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
golfnut69 wrote:
tpstulane wrote:
winwave wrote:He was talking about how the two pro teams have come back strong after Katrina but that Tulane and UNO haven't. He talked about how marketing can help but that ultimately you have to win to get fans to come out.
Ok. Thanks!
if Tulane could "draft" it's players like the Saints, not be encumbered by "Presidents, BOA's and Tenured Prof's" with an agenda, or worry about SAT scores, I would put some type of faith into Ed's editorial.
Well, to be fair, Tulane has less barriers to getting the players it wants than the Saints, which have to both wait their turn to pick players and fit their roster under a set budget.
Reliable sources tell me we can now sign anyone eligible to play under NCAA general rules and requirements.
Hmmmm...not exactly...when the Saints draft a player, that player has to play for the Saints, the only recruiting the saints do, is when their is a "free agent" they want on the roster.... so I do not get it when U say tulane has an easier time than the Saints...budget, the saints have an unlimited budget, but a payroll limit...not exactly the same thing as Tulane, which is giving less per player than the P5 conferences
The limits you are referring to are self inflicted. Like not giving out as much COA money or not having competitive facilities are Cowen/Dickson's choices. If Tulane solved those problems, they could get every qualified athlete they wanted. The Saints can't do anything about the salary cap or the structure of the draft, which stipulates that they can only draft 1 of the first 32 players selected.

It's actually the opposite. It's Tulane with the theoretically unlimited budget, it's just that they've chosen not to utilize it.
hmmm again... If the Saints draft a player he has to sign with the Saints unless he sit's out or is traded, even if the Saints are training at Mike Miley Playground...The Player can sit...maybe play in the CFL, or he can sign with the Saints....In college it is a facilities arm race, I get it but you and Ed do not seem to understand that pro franchises stocking a roster is different than college ..in College the player has choices, in the pro's he does not
Right. That's why the college has it easier than the pro team. It's Tulane that insists on making it hard on itself.
golfnut69
Wild Pelican
Posts: 14229
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 9:38 am
Status: Offline

jonathanjoseph wrote:
golfnut69 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
golfnut69 wrote:
Wave755 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
golfnut69 wrote:
tpstulane wrote:
winwave wrote:He was talking about how the two pro teams have come back strong after Katrina but that Tulane and UNO haven't. He talked about how marketing can help but that ultimately you have to win to get fans to come out.
Ok. Thanks!
if Tulane could "draft" it's players like the Saints, not be encumbered by "Presidents, BOA's and Tenured Prof's" with an agenda, or worry about SAT scores, I would put some type of faith into Ed's editorial.
Well, to be fair, Tulane has less barriers to getting the players it wants than the Saints, which have to both wait their turn to pick players and fit their roster under a set budget.
Reliable sources tell me we can now sign anyone eligible to play under NCAA general rules and requirements.
Hmmmm...not exactly...when the Saints draft a player, that player has to play for the Saints, the only recruiting the saints do, is when their is a "free agent" they want on the roster.... so I do not get it when U say tulane has an easier time than the Saints...budget, the saints have an unlimited budget, but a payroll limit...not exactly the same thing as Tulane, which is giving less per player than the P5 conferences
The limits you are referring to are self inflicted. Like not giving out as much COA money or not having competitive facilities are Cowen/Dickson's choices. If Tulane solved those problems, they could get every qualified athlete they wanted. The Saints can't do anything about the salary cap or the structure of the draft, which stipulates that they can only draft 1 of the first 32 players selected.

It's actually the opposite. It's Tulane with the theoretically unlimited budget, it's just that they've chosen not to utilize it.
hmmm again... If the Saints draft a player he has to sign with the Saints unless he sit's out or is traded, even if the Saints are training at Mike Miley Playground...The Player can sit...maybe play in the CFL, or he can sign with the Saints....In college it is a facilities arm race, I get it but you and Ed do not seem to understand that pro franchises stocking a roster is different than college ..in College the player has choices, in the pro's he does not
Right. That's why the college has it easier than the pro team. It's Tulane that insists on making it hard on itself.
?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!??
Be a Hero Today.... Adopt a Shelter Pet... The Beatles once sang "Can't Buy Me Love"... I disagree, unconditional Love can be bought, for the nominal adoption fee at your local Pet Shelter !
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

golfnut69 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
golfnut69 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
golfnut69 wrote:
Wave755 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
golfnut69 wrote:
tpstulane wrote:
winwave wrote:He was talking about how the two pro teams have come back strong after Katrina but that Tulane and UNO haven't. He talked about how marketing can help but that ultimately you have to win to get fans to come out.
Ok. Thanks!
if Tulane could "draft" it's players like the Saints, not be encumbered by "Presidents, BOA's and Tenured Prof's" with an agenda, or worry about SAT scores, I would put some type of faith into Ed's editorial.
Well, to be fair, Tulane has less barriers to getting the players it wants than the Saints, which have to both wait their turn to pick players and fit their roster under a set budget.
Reliable sources tell me we can now sign anyone eligible to play under NCAA general rules and requirements.
Hmmmm...not exactly...when the Saints draft a player, that player has to play for the Saints, the only recruiting the saints do, is when their is a "free agent" they want on the roster.... so I do not get it when U say tulane has an easier time than the Saints...budget, the saints have an unlimited budget, but a payroll limit...not exactly the same thing as Tulane, which is giving less per player than the P5 conferences
The limits you are referring to are self inflicted. Like not giving out as much COA money or not having competitive facilities are Cowen/Dickson's choices. If Tulane solved those problems, they could get every qualified athlete they wanted. The Saints can't do anything about the salary cap or the structure of the draft, which stipulates that they can only draft 1 of the first 32 players selected.

It's actually the opposite. It's Tulane with the theoretically unlimited budget, it's just that they've chosen not to utilize it.
hmmm again... If the Saints draft a player he has to sign with the Saints unless he sit's out or is traded, even if the Saints are training at Mike Miley Playground...The Player can sit...maybe play in the CFL, or he can sign with the Saints....In college it is a facilities arm race, I get it but you and Ed do not seem to understand that pro franchises stocking a roster is different than college ..in College the player has choices, in the pro's he does not
Right. That's why the college has it easier than the pro team. It's Tulane that insists on making it hard on itself.
?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!??
As you note, in college a player has choices. Which means if all of the top 25 recruits in a given class want to play at Tulane, they can. Conversely, the Saints were only allowed to pick 1 of the top 31 choices in the draft. So a college has less barriers to getting the players they want, as Alabama and LSU prove regularly. So Tulane could have done whatever it wanted to make itself attractive to recruits, but Rick Dickson is too smart for that.
golfnut69
Wild Pelican
Posts: 14229
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 9:38 am
Status: Offline

jonathanjoseph wrote:
golfnut69 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
golfnut69 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
golfnut69 wrote:
Wave755 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
golfnut69 wrote:
tpstulane wrote:
winwave wrote:He was talking about how the two pro teams have come back strong after Katrina but that Tulane and UNO haven't. He talked about how marketing can help but that ultimately you have to win to get fans to come out.
Ok. Thanks!
if Tulane could "draft" it's players like the Saints, not be encumbered by "Presidents, BOA's and Tenured Prof's" with an agenda, or worry about SAT scores, I would put some type of faith into Ed's editorial.
Well, to be fair, Tulane has less barriers to getting the players it wants than the Saints, which have to both wait their turn to pick players and fit their roster under a set budget.
Reliable sources tell me we can now sign anyone eligible to play under NCAA general rules and requirements.
Hmmmm...not exactly...when the Saints draft a player, that player has to play for the Saints, the only recruiting the saints do, is when their is a "free agent" they want on the roster.... so I do not get it when U say tulane has an easier time than the Saints...budget, the saints have an unlimited budget, but a payroll limit...not exactly the same thing as Tulane, which is giving less per player than the P5 conferences
The limits you are referring to are self inflicted. Like not giving out as much COA money or not having competitive facilities are Cowen/Dickson's choices. If Tulane solved those problems, they could get every qualified athlete they wanted. The Saints can't do anything about the salary cap or the structure of the draft, which stipulates that they can only draft 1 of the first 32 players selected.

It's actually the opposite. It's Tulane with the theoretically unlimited budget, it's just that they've chosen not to utilize it.
hmmm again... If the Saints draft a player he has to sign with the Saints unless he sit's out or is traded, even if the Saints are training at Mike Miley Playground...The Player can sit...maybe play in the CFL, or he can sign with the Saints....In college it is a facilities arm race, I get it but you and Ed do not seem to understand that pro franchises stocking a roster is different than college ..in College the player has choices, in the pro's he does not
Right. That's why the college has it easier than the pro team. It's Tulane that insists on making it hard on itself.
?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!??
As you note, in college a player has choices. Which means if all of the top 25 recruits in a given class want to play at Tulane, they can. Conversely, the Saints were only allowed to pick 1 of the top 31 choices in the draft. So a college has less barriers to getting the players they want, as Alabama and LSU prove regularly. So Tulane could have done whatever it wanted to make itself attractive to recruits, but Rick Dickson is too smart for that.
You are assuming the coulda...woulda...shoulda.... I am basing my post on what Tulane HAD, and NOW has as for facilities to attract recruits...
Be a Hero Today.... Adopt a Shelter Pet... The Beatles once sang "Can't Buy Me Love"... I disagree, unconditional Love can be bought, for the nominal adoption fee at your local Pet Shelter !
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

golfnut69 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
golfnut69 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
golfnut69 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
golfnut69 wrote:
Wave755 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
golfnut69 wrote:
tpstulane wrote:
winwave wrote:He was talking about how the two pro teams have come back strong after Katrina but that Tulane and UNO haven't. He talked about how marketing can help but that ultimately you have to win to get fans to come out.
Ok. Thanks!
if Tulane could "draft" it's players like the Saints, not be encumbered by "Presidents, BOA's and Tenured Prof's" with an agenda, or worry about SAT scores, I would put some type of faith into Ed's editorial.
Well, to be fair, Tulane has less barriers to getting the players it wants than the Saints, which have to both wait their turn to pick players and fit their roster under a set budget.
Reliable sources tell me we can now sign anyone eligible to play under NCAA general rules and requirements.
Hmmmm...not exactly...when the Saints draft a player, that player has to play for the Saints, the only recruiting the saints do, is when their is a "free agent" they want on the roster.... so I do not get it when U say tulane has an easier time than the Saints...budget, the saints have an unlimited budget, but a payroll limit...not exactly the same thing as Tulane, which is giving less per player than the P5 conferences
The limits you are referring to are self inflicted. Like not giving out as much COA money or not having competitive facilities are Cowen/Dickson's choices. If Tulane solved those problems, they could get every qualified athlete they wanted. The Saints can't do anything about the salary cap or the structure of the draft, which stipulates that they can only draft 1 of the first 32 players selected.

It's actually the opposite. It's Tulane with the theoretically unlimited budget, it's just that they've chosen not to utilize it.
hmmm again... If the Saints draft a player he has to sign with the Saints unless he sit's out or is traded, even if the Saints are training at Mike Miley Playground...The Player can sit...maybe play in the CFL, or he can sign with the Saints....In college it is a facilities arm race, I get it but you and Ed do not seem to understand that pro franchises stocking a roster is different than college ..in College the player has choices, in the pro's he does not
Right. That's why the college has it easier than the pro team. It's Tulane that insists on making it hard on itself.
?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!??
As you note, in college a player has choices. Which means if all of the top 25 recruits in a given class want to play at Tulane, they can. Conversely, the Saints were only allowed to pick 1 of the top 31 choices in the draft. So a college has less barriers to getting the players they want, as Alabama and LSU prove regularly. So Tulane could have done whatever it wanted to make itself attractive to recruits, but Rick Dickson is too smart for that.
You are assuming the coulda...woulda...shoulda.... I am basing my post on what Tulane HAD, and NOW has as for facilities to attract recruits...
Of course. We spent $100M on facilities and have very little to show for it.
golfnut69
Wild Pelican
Posts: 14229
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 9:38 am
Status: Offline

jonathanjoseph wrote:
golfnut69 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
golfnut69 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
golfnut69 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
golfnut69 wrote:
Wave755 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
golfnut69 wrote:
tpstulane wrote:
winwave wrote:He was talking about how the two pro teams have come back strong after Katrina but that Tulane and UNO haven't. He talked about how marketing can help but that ultimately you have to win to get fans to come out.
Ok. Thanks!
if Tulane could "draft" it's players like the Saints, not be encumbered by "Presidents, BOA's and Tenured Prof's" with an agenda, or worry about SAT scores, I would put some type of faith into Ed's editorial.
Well, to be fair, Tulane has less barriers to getting the players it wants than the Saints, which have to both wait their turn to pick players and fit their roster under a set budget.
Reliable sources tell me we can now sign anyone eligible to play under NCAA general rules and requirements.
Hmmmm...not exactly...when the Saints draft a player, that player has to play for the Saints, the only recruiting the saints do, is when their is a "free agent" they want on the roster.... so I do not get it when U say tulane has an easier time than the Saints...budget, the saints have an unlimited budget, but a payroll limit...not exactly the same thing as Tulane, which is giving less per player than the P5 conferences
The limits you are referring to are self inflicted. Like not giving out as much COA money or not having competitive facilities are Cowen/Dickson's choices. If Tulane solved those problems, they could get every qualified athlete they wanted. The Saints can't do anything about the salary cap or the structure of the draft, which stipulates that they can only draft 1 of the first 32 players selected.

It's actually the opposite. It's Tulane with the theoretically unlimited budget, it's just that they've chosen not to utilize it.
hmmm again... If the Saints draft a player he has to sign with the Saints unless he sit's out or is traded, even if the Saints are training at Mike Miley Playground...The Player can sit...maybe play in the CFL, or he can sign with the Saints....In college it is a facilities arm race, I get it but you and Ed do not seem to understand that pro franchises stocking a roster is different than college ..in College the player has choices, in the pro's he does not
Right. That's why the college has it easier than the pro team. It's Tulane that insists on making it hard on itself.
?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!??
As you note, in college a player has choices. Which means if all of the top 25 recruits in a given class want to play at Tulane, they can. Conversely, the Saints were only allowed to pick 1 of the top 31 choices in the draft. So a college has less barriers to getting the players they want, as Alabama and LSU prove regularly. So Tulane could have done whatever it wanted to make itself attractive to recruits, but Rick Dickson is too smart for that.
You are assuming the coulda...woulda...shoulda.... I am basing my post on what Tulane HAD, and NOW has as for facilities to attract recruits...
Of course. We spent $100M on facilities and have very little to show for it.
I suggest U contact people who are leaders in the field of NCAA athletics to guide you in the spending and ROI of funds / facilities...but here is a big hint, do not bother to call anyone at Tulane, there is no one there qualified to answer your questions
Be a Hero Today.... Adopt a Shelter Pet... The Beatles once sang "Can't Buy Me Love"... I disagree, unconditional Love can be bought, for the nominal adoption fee at your local Pet Shelter !
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

golfnut69 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
golfnut69 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
golfnut69 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
golfnut69 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
golfnut69 wrote:
Wave755 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
golfnut69 wrote:
tpstulane wrote:
winwave wrote:He was talking about how the two pro teams have come back strong after Katrina but that Tulane and UNO haven't. He talked about how marketing can help but that ultimately you have to win to get fans to come out.
Ok. Thanks!
if Tulane could "draft" it's players like the Saints, not be encumbered by "Presidents, BOA's and Tenured Prof's" with an agenda, or worry about SAT scores, I would put some type of faith into Ed's editorial.
Well, to be fair, Tulane has less barriers to getting the players it wants than the Saints, which have to both wait their turn to pick players and fit their roster under a set budget.
Reliable sources tell me we can now sign anyone eligible to play under NCAA general rules and requirements.
Hmmmm...not exactly...when the Saints draft a player, that player has to play for the Saints, the only recruiting the saints do, is when their is a "free agent" they want on the roster.... so I do not get it when U say tulane has an easier time than the Saints...budget, the saints have an unlimited budget, but a payroll limit...not exactly the same thing as Tulane, which is giving less per player than the P5 conferences
The limits you are referring to are self inflicted. Like not giving out as much COA money or not having competitive facilities are Cowen/Dickson's choices. If Tulane solved those problems, they could get every qualified athlete they wanted. The Saints can't do anything about the salary cap or the structure of the draft, which stipulates that they can only draft 1 of the first 32 players selected.

It's actually the opposite. It's Tulane with the theoretically unlimited budget, it's just that they've chosen not to utilize it.
hmmm again... If the Saints draft a player he has to sign with the Saints unless he sit's out or is traded, even if the Saints are training at Mike Miley Playground...The Player can sit...maybe play in the CFL, or he can sign with the Saints....In college it is a facilities arm race, I get it but you and Ed do not seem to understand that pro franchises stocking a roster is different than college ..in College the player has choices, in the pro's he does not
Right. That's why the college has it easier than the pro team. It's Tulane that insists on making it hard on itself.
?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!??
As you note, in college a player has choices. Which means if all of the top 25 recruits in a given class want to play at Tulane, they can. Conversely, the Saints were only allowed to pick 1 of the top 31 choices in the draft. So a college has less barriers to getting the players they want, as Alabama and LSU prove regularly. So Tulane could have done whatever it wanted to make itself attractive to recruits, but Rick Dickson is too smart for that.
You are assuming the coulda...woulda...shoulda.... I am basing my post on what Tulane HAD, and NOW has as for facilities to attract recruits...
Of course. We spent $100M on facilities and have very little to show for it.
I suggest U contact people who are leaders in the field of NCAA athletics to guide you in the spending and ROI of funds / facilities...but here is a big hint, do not bother to call anyone at Tulane, there is no one there qualified to answer your questions
You are right again.

I will continue to ask if anyone is legally responsible and/or accountable for a billion dollar organization to allow a major program to sink under the weight of incompetence.
golfnut69
Wild Pelican
Posts: 14229
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 9:38 am
Status: Offline

Straight from the Vatican ... or for U NOLA types...The desk of Ed Daniels

http://clarionherald.info/clarion/index ... -mysteries
Be a Hero Today.... Adopt a Shelter Pet... The Beatles once sang "Can't Buy Me Love"... I disagree, unconditional Love can be bought, for the nominal adoption fee at your local Pet Shelter !
Highwave
Low Tide
Posts: 161
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2011 8:06 am
Status: Offline

http://clarionherald.info/clarion/index ... d-problems

http://www.theneworleansadvocate.com/sp ... ulane-have

Ed Daniels: "And, here’s my biggest question: If you change coaches, who in their right mind would want the job?"
Ted Lewis: "It’s never been easy at Tulane. The last coach to depart with a winning record after at least three years on the job was Henry Frnka, 64 years and 15 successors ago."

I posted the following on the other board originally in response to Lewis' piece. Daniels' piece warrants the same response. Just some food for thought and my humble 2 cents. Our record of coaching hires is pathetic... anyway, welcome any feedback from you guys.

I am sick and tired of reading this stuff - it has been the mantra of local sportswriters for a number of years, despite not being grounded in fact but rather perception. Contrary to popular belief, good coaches have routinely proven that you can win at Tulane, though John Q. Public would never know it. The problem has been keeping good coaches and timely getting rid of the bad ones, and that is where the "never easy at Tulane" part comes in.

Mack Brown - improved each year at TU and went to a bowl game in year 3 before leaving.
Tommy Bowden - took a program that was 23-67 under the 2 prior HCs and went 19-4 before leaving (should have gone to 2 bowls but declined an invite in his 1st year).
Larry Smith - improved each year and went to a bowl game in year 4 before leaving.
Jim Pittman - left after he went to a bowl game

All of the above left immediately after achieving success at Tulane and one proved that you don’t even have to be an elite HC to win at TU (Bowden).

The one constant at Tulane has been its inability to follow up a good hire with another good hire. Here is a look at the other hires over the past 50 years:

Curtis Johnson – record at TU: 12-27;
Pre-TU – 50 y/o; never a coordinator at any level before hired

Bob Toledo - record at TU: 15-40
Pre-TU – 61 y/o; some success as HC at UCLA, but he was out of fball for 3 yrs after and had been back as an OC at New Mex. for only 1 year when hired.
Post-TU - out of football for 2 years; now OC at San Diego St.

Chris Scelfo - record at TU: 37-57
Pre-TU – 35 y/o; no HC experience; OC at an FCS school; asst. HC at UGA
Post-TU – out of football for 2 yrs; 6 yrs as a TE coach for the Falcons

Buddy Teevens - record at TU: 9-36
Pre-TU – 36 y/o; 26-22 as a HC at Dartmouth
Post-TU - Stanford hired him as a HC 6 yrs later and went 10-23; now back at Dartmouth where it took him 6 yrs to build a winner in the Ivy League

Greg Davis - record at TU: 14-31
Pre-TU – no HC experience at all; assistant with no coordinator experience except with Mack Brown
Post-TU – OC only; no other HC gigs

Wally English - record at TU: 5-17
Pre-TU – 44 y/o; no HC experience; hired from Dolphins where he was a position coach; only 3 yrs OC experience total pre-hire;
Post-TU – out of football for 8 yrs before a 1 yr stint as a OC in World League of American Football; then, out of football another 5 yrs before a 1 yr stint as OC at Hawaii

Vince Gibson - record at TU: 17-17;
Pre-TU – 47 y/o; 58-81 overall as a HC at Kansas St. and Louisville
Post-TU – coached 1 year for a Nola arena league football team 10 years after he was fired from TU

Bennie Ellender - record at TU: 27-29
Pre-TU – 46 y/o; 7 yrs of success as a HC at a FCS school
Post-TU – never a HC again

It is not a coincidence that only 1 of the coaches above got another shot at a HC position. One might argue that this proves TU is a coaching graveyard. However, notably, the only coach on that list with pre-TU success as a HC at the FBS level was Toledo, who was 61 y/o when hired. Further, Teevens failed miserably at his 2nd shot in FBS with Stanford (who shortly thereafter hired Harbaugh and was off to the races).

When will local sportswriters start demanding that their city’s largest employer start making competent employment decisions in football? Rather than blaming the school for an ineffective HC’s ineffectiveness, blame the school for hiring ineffective head coaches in the first place. (Can anyone imagine Rich Rod going 12-22 in his 1st 3 yrs at TU?)

TU athletics deserves plenty of criticism, but its high time the media starts getting it right when it comes to the substance of the criticism TU deserves.
User avatar
Bigschtick
Riptide
Posts: 3279
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2010 9:57 am
Location: Tucson, Az.
Status: Offline

Good post Highwave. So I guess some these sportswriters would have us keep the incompetent
Johnson and his staff!
Speak softly but carry a bigschtick! In Sumrall We Trust!
winwave
Top of the WAVE
Posts: 24908
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 10:34 am
Status: Offline

It goes w/out saying that a good coach can win at Tulane. The problem is in this day and age w/getting a good coach to take the job. There is no administrative support for one. Then there is the very lacking facilities. The administration keeps ignoring the facilities issues. If too many of our fans bury their head in the sand on that then it's over. The demand has to be for a new AD followed by the immediate fundraising for a new on-campus football operations building w/a legit weight room, meeting rooms and a new squad room. Without those facilities there will NEVER BE A GOOD HC AT TULANE AGAIN.
BAYWAVE&Sophandros are SPINELESS COWARDS
YOU NEED LEVERAGE TO BE PROACTIVE!
Small time facilities for small time programs
6-4-23:Now all of the mistakes Tulane has made finally catches up with them as they descend to CUSAAC.
Highwave
Low Tide
Posts: 161
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2011 8:06 am
Status: Offline

winwave wrote:It goes w/out saying that a good coach can win at Tulane. The problem is in this day and age w/getting a good coach to take the job. There is no administrative support for one. Then there is the very lacking facilities. The administration keeps ignoring the facilities issues. If too many of our fans bury their head in the sand on that then it's over. The demand has to be for a new AD followed by the immediate fundraising for a new on-campus football operations building w/a legit weight room, meeting rooms and a new squad room. Without those facilities there will NEVER BE A GOOD HC AT TULANE AGAIN.
There is no doubt that TU can do more to attract a good coach. However, it is far from a hopeless, thankless job. A hungry coach, with a proven record of success, either as a HC or at least implementing his own off/def system as a coordinator, will win at TU every time. With winning comes $$, with $$ comes improvements, etc.

The alternative is to shell out $$ to short-circuit the above progression, which TU seems unwilling to do institutionally - they are not alone though in that regard. My point is that if you won't fork over the $$ up-front to invest in big time facilities improvements, then at least make the right hires.

Btw, TU has shown it is willing to pay a very competitive salary for a coach and his staff - may have been an issue in the past, but not anymore. So, all we are talking about is institutional support and that at least seems to be heading in a better direction than before. Mind you, if it were up to me, TU would be doing things a lot differently - just saying that us fans shouldn't buy into the myth that you just simply "can't win at Tuh-lane".
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

Highwave wrote:http://clarionherald.info/clarion/index ... d-problems

http://www.theneworleansadvocate.com/sp ... ulane-have

Ed Daniels: "And, here’s my biggest question: If you change coaches, who in their right mind would want the job?"
Ted Lewis: "It’s never been easy at Tulane. The last coach to depart with a winning record after at least three years on the job was Henry Frnka, 64 years and 15 successors ago."

I posted the following on the other board originally in response to Lewis' piece. Daniels' piece warrants the same response. Just some food for thought and my humble 2 cents. Our record of coaching hires is pathetic... anyway, welcome any feedback from you guys.

I am sick and tired of reading this stuff - it has been the mantra of local sportswriters for a number of years, despite not being grounded in fact but rather perception. Contrary to popular belief, good coaches have routinely proven that you can win at Tulane, though John Q. Public would never know it. The problem has been keeping good coaches and timely getting rid of the bad ones, and that is where the "never easy at Tulane" part comes in.

Mack Brown - improved each year at TU and went to a bowl game in year 3 before leaving.
Tommy Bowden - took a program that was 23-67 under the 2 prior HCs and went 19-4 before leaving (should have gone to 2 bowls but declined an invite in his 1st year).
Larry Smith - improved each year and went to a bowl game in year 4 before leaving.
Jim Pittman - left after he went to a bowl game

All of the above left immediately after achieving success at Tulane and one proved that you don’t even have to be an elite HC to win at TU (Bowden).

The one constant at Tulane has been its inability to follow up a good hire with another good hire. Here is a look at the other hires over the past 50 years:

Curtis Johnson – record at TU: 12-27;
Pre-TU – 50 y/o; never a coordinator at any level before hired

Bob Toledo - record at TU: 15-40
Pre-TU – 61 y/o; some success as HC at UCLA, but he was out of fball for 3 yrs after and had been back as an OC at New Mex. for only 1 year when hired.
Post-TU - out of football for 2 years; now OC at San Diego St.

Chris Scelfo - record at TU: 37-57
Pre-TU – 35 y/o; no HC experience; OC at an FCS school; asst. HC at UGA
Post-TU – out of football for 2 yrs; 6 yrs as a TE coach for the Falcons

Buddy Teevens - record at TU: 9-36
Pre-TU – 36 y/o; 26-22 as a HC at Dartmouth
Post-TU - Stanford hired him as a HC 6 yrs later and went 10-23; now back at Dartmouth where it took him 6 yrs to build a winner in the Ivy League

Greg Davis - record at TU: 14-31
Pre-TU – no HC experience at all; assistant with no coordinator experience except with Mack Brown
Post-TU – OC only; no other HC gigs

Wally English - record at TU: 5-17
Pre-TU – 44 y/o; no HC experience; hired from Dolphins where he was a position coach; only 3 yrs OC experience total pre-hire;
Post-TU – out of football for 8 yrs before a 1 yr stint as a OC in World League of American Football; then, out of football another 5 yrs before a 1 yr stint as OC at Hawaii

Vince Gibson - record at TU: 17-17;
Pre-TU – 47 y/o; 58-81 overall as a HC at Kansas St. and Louisville
Post-TU – coached 1 year for a Nola arena league football team 10 years after he was fired from TU

Bennie Ellender - record at TU: 27-29
Pre-TU – 46 y/o; 7 yrs of success as a HC at a FCS school
Post-TU – never a HC again

It is not a coincidence that only 1 of the coaches above got another shot at a HC position. One might argue that this proves TU is a coaching graveyard. However, notably, the only coach on that list with pre-TU success as a HC at the FBS level was Toledo, who was 61 y/o when hired. Further, Teevens failed miserably at his 2nd shot in FBS with Stanford (who shortly thereafter hired Harbaugh and was off to the races).

When will local sportswriters start demanding that their city’s largest employer start making competent employment decisions in football? Rather than blaming the school for an ineffective HC’s ineffectiveness, blame the school for hiring ineffective head coaches in the first place. (Can anyone imagine Rich Rod going 12-22 in his 1st 3 yrs at TU?)

TU athletics deserves plenty of criticism, but its high time the media starts getting it right when it comes to the substance of the criticism TU deserves.
Good post, Highwave.

The challenge I have is that everything that happened Pre-Cowen doesn't really matter. Coinciding with the start of Cowen's tenure, the value of D1A college athletics has skyrocketed while the value of the median college degree has plummeted.

The idea that college athletics might be an extracurricular activity had some merit pre-1998. Not a lot of merit, as universities like Michigan and Notre Dame clearly show, but at least it was a credible viewpoint.

That's no longer the case. Over the past 15 years numerous billions of dollars have been invested in D1A football facilities while Tulane built a baseball stadium. Now Tulane built a stadium that, while nice, is small enough to immediately turn off top level recruits and coaches and conferences.

The problem is now that it's too late. $100M in capital was just spent on a plan that is an absolute failure. Ironically, the facilities might be enough to create a decent basketball program given our conference, but basketball is barely relevant next to football. Our football program is in real trouble thanks to a lack of facilities and the organizational commitment to winning.

Tulane could absolutely be the next TCU or Baylor. But leadership decided, without letting anyone know, that they didn't want to be. No promising coach is going to work for this administration, and this administration is not going anywhere. They do not look at this as their job where they need to perform. They look at the university as theirs to do with as they please, and a large bank account they can do with what they please.

This development isn't new. I got kicked off the other forum in 2005 for saying just that. So the other forum has been absolutely complicit in silencing voices of dissent and continuing to toe the party line. Not that there were many dissenting voices, but silencing them for 10 years can go a long way towards masking the problem. Coincidentally, that's exactly why dictators control media messages.

The situation is likely beyond repair, and the only chance at repair rests on an aggressive legal campaign to retake the power and authority from those who stole it, unethically and perhaps illegally.
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

Highwave wrote:
winwave wrote:It goes w/out saying that a good coach can win at Tulane. The problem is in this day and age w/getting a good coach to take the job. There is no administrative support for one. Then there is the very lacking facilities. The administration keeps ignoring the facilities issues. If too many of our fans bury their head in the sand on that then it's over. The demand has to be for a new AD followed by the immediate fundraising for a new on-campus football operations building w/a legit weight room, meeting rooms and a new squad room. Without those facilities there will NEVER BE A GOOD HC AT TULANE AGAIN.
There is no doubt that TU can do more to attract a good coach. However, it is far from a hopeless, thankless job. A hungry coach, with a proven record of success, either as a HC or at least implementing his own off/def system as a coordinator, will win at TU every time. With winning comes $$, with $$ comes improvements, etc.

The alternative is to shell out $$ to short-circuit the above progression, which TU seems unwilling to do institutionally - they are not alone though in that regard. My point is that if you won't fork over the $$ up-front to invest in big time facilities improvements, then at least make the right hires.

Btw, TU has shown it is willing to pay a very competitive salary for a coach and his staff - may have been an issue in the past, but not anymore. So, all we are talking about is institutional support and that at least seems to be heading in a better direction than before. Mind you, if it were up to me, TU would be doing things a lot differently - just saying that us fans shouldn't buy into the myth that you just simply "can't win at Tuh-lane".
So in every case the investment comes before the success. That's true for every successfully built college football program (Baylor, TCU, Louisville, etc) and it's also true of any business endeavor. It's common sense.

Meanwhile, you talk about institutional support but we have SEVEN expected scholarship football players unavailable for various academic reasons.

As for Tulane's competitive salaries? C'mon. You noted that you post on the other site, so I'm left to point out that you believe something that is an obvious lie perpetuated by the cheerleaders on that forum. If the rumors of CJ's $1.25M salary are correct, then I believe that makes him the lowest paid head coach in the AAC. Or if he isn't he's very close to the bottom. Ed Conroy is similarly lowly paid, making a fraction of what the AAC's top coaches make.

It's a real problem that the administrators of that forum so readily spread obvious lies, and then pretend that what they are doing is in Tulane's best interests. This is also the problem with the alumni allowing Cowen/Dickson to tell these bald faced lies and get away with it.
Wave755
Tsunami
Posts: 6225
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 4:04 pm
Status: Offline

I like Ed Daniels and appreciate his articles but to place the complete blame on the administration is wrong. I remember at the end of the Buddy Teevens era the media, including Ed Daniels, sided fully with Teevens saying the then Kelly administration and AD Sandy Barber failed to give Teevens proper support for a winning program at Tulane. Jim Henderson became close to Buddy Teevens over his 5 years as head coach at Tulane and really ripped Tulane for the tearful exit of his friend Buddy. Like Ed Daniels, Jim Henderson also blamed Tulane, not Teevens, for our abysmal 5 years under his leadership as head coach. Then, under the same Kelly/Barber regime with Bowden/RR running a spread offense and instilling a whole new team attitude a seemingly “hapless” Shaun King for the 1995 & 96 seasons starting looking like a Joe Namath and we went 7-4 for 1997. For Henderson & Daniels the “party lie” then became “Tulane didn’t allow Teevens to coach his team for 1997”?

Down 51-10 it was not Michael Fitts who put only 9 men on the field for another easy GT touchdown? No one is asking this team to beat Ohio State, but only to be competitive in the AAC.
Highwave
Low Tide
Posts: 161
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2011 8:06 am
Status: Offline

JJ, you and I largely agree with the historical failures - particularly with the lack of foresight on the part of the admin. We also agree with respect to the insufficiency of the recent investment in TU football (I don't follow bball closely enough to speak on deficiencies of those facilities, though I will say that Hertz seems first class).

However, while I see the investment as too little, I don't see it as too late and incurable at this point. This thing can be quickly turned around with the right leadership/vision. I also believe that any coach who cannot see potential in Yulman and the AAC is not a coach we need to hire. None of the successful coaches mentioned in my original post signed with TU because of anything more than the potential to turn the program around and win quickly. More recently, Tommy Bowden didn't sign on at Tulane and win because he had the Dome and C-USA, just as Rich Rod wasn't curious about TU in 2011 for those same reasons. Rather, TU is a legitimate stepping stool for coaches.

We just need to start viewing our hires the same way - use them as stepping stools to get where we need to be, and for as long as it takes until we finally get there. Then, we can start hiring someone who will stay (which seems to be a quality RD looks for in hiring).

Another thing - I am beginning to believe that our donor base is currently too small (and/or too apprehensive/skeptical) to accomplish more than the commitment TU has made in football to date. It is going to take success on the field or cash from TU itself to make that happen in the short term. We know the latter likely won't happen (and I'm not sure that is common amongst FBS schools), so why don't we (fans and sportswriters alike) start focusing our efforts on emphasizing on the potential for on-field success (all while applying pressure for bigger commitment)? At least we may get to see some good football, even if it isn't as good as it could/should be.

P.S. Touching on my post in response to winwave, if it were up to me, I would have begun a stadium campaign by promising to match every dollar pledged by donors up to $100M with a guarantee that all funds would be spent on the stadium and support facilities. THAT is institutional commitment IMHO - and that should give you an idea of what I think TU should do.
Highwave
Low Tide
Posts: 161
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2011 8:06 am
Status: Offline

jonathanjoseph wrote:
Highwave wrote:
winwave wrote:It goes w/out saying that a good coach can win at Tulane. The problem is in this day and age w/getting a good coach to take the job. There is no administrative support for one. Then there is the very lacking facilities. The administration keeps ignoring the facilities issues. If too many of our fans bury their head in the sand on that then it's over. The demand has to be for a new AD followed by the immediate fundraising for a new on-campus football operations building w/a legit weight room, meeting rooms and a new squad room. Without those facilities there will NEVER BE A GOOD HC AT TULANE AGAIN.
There is no doubt that TU can do more to attract a good coach. However, it is far from a hopeless, thankless job. A hungry coach, with a proven record of success, either as a HC or at least implementing his own off/def system as a coordinator, will win at TU every time. With winning comes $$, with $$ comes improvements, etc.

The alternative is to shell out $$ to short-circuit the above progression, which TU seems unwilling to do institutionally - they are not alone though in that regard. My point is that if you won't fork over the $$ up-front to invest in big time facilities improvements, then at least make the right hires.

Btw, TU has shown it is willing to pay a very competitive salary for a coach and his staff - may have been an issue in the past, but not anymore. So, all we are talking about is institutional support and that at least seems to be heading in a better direction than before. Mind you, if it were up to me, TU would be doing things a lot differently - just saying that us fans shouldn't buy into the myth that you just simply "can't win at Tuh-lane".
So in every case the investment comes before the success. That's true for every successfully built college football program (Baylor, TCU, Louisville, etc) and it's also true of any business endeavor. It's common sense.

Meanwhile, you talk about institutional support but we have SEVEN expected scholarship football players unavailable for various academic reasons.

As for Tulane's competitive salaries? C'mon. You noted that you post on the other site, so I'm left to point out that you believe something that is an obvious lie perpetuated by the cheerleaders on that forum. If the rumors of CJ's $1.25M salary are correct, then I believe that makes him the lowest paid head coach in the AAC. Or if he isn't he's very close to the bottom. Ed Conroy is similarly lowly paid, making a fraction of what the AAC's top coaches make.

It's a real problem that the administrators of that forum so readily spread obvious lies, and then pretend that what they are doing is in Tulane's best interests. This is also the problem with the alumni allowing Cowen/Dickson to tell these bald faced lies and get away with it.
Two things: 1) I don't identify with a forum, much less rely upon one for my info - I simply posted there because a thread had been created specifically posting the Lewis article. 2) I did not say that the salaries were enough, only that they were competitive. While CJ's salary isn't impressive by AAC standards, neither has been his performance - I'd say it is at least proportional in that regard. Competitive offers were made to other candidates, enough for one of them to accept on the spot (before reneging after consulting with his family). We paid a lot in G5 terms for our fall-back option, which I think speaks to how competitive we were prepared to be.
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

Highwave wrote:JJ, you and I largely agree with the historical failures - particularly with the lack of foresight on the part of the admin. We also agree with respect to the insufficiency of the recent investment in TU football (I don't follow bball closely enough to speak on deficiencies of those facilities, though I will say that Hertz seems first class).

However, while I see the investment as too little, I don't see it as too late and incurable at this point. This thing can be quickly turned around with the right leadership/vision. I also believe that any coach who cannot see potential in Yulman and the AAC is not a coach we need to hire. None of the successful coaches mentioned in my original post signed with TU because of anything more than the potential to turn the program around and win quickly. More recently, Tommy Bowden didn't sign on at Tulane and win because he had the Dome and C-USA, just as Rich Rod wasn't curious about TU in 2011 for those same reasons. Rather, TU is a legitimate stepping stool for coaches.

We just need to start viewing our hires the same way - use them as stepping stools to get where we need to be, and for as long as it takes until we finally get there. Then, we can start hiring someone who will stay (which seems to be a quality RD looks for in hiring).

Another thing - I am beginning to believe that our donor base is currently too small (and/or too apprehensive/skeptical) to accomplish more than the commitment TU has made in football to date. It is going to take success on the field or cash from TU itself to make that happen in the short term. We know the latter likely won't happen (and I'm not sure that is common amongst FBS schools), so why don't we (fans and sportswriters alike) start focusing our efforts on emphasizing on the potential for on-field success (all while applying pressure for bigger commitment)? At least we may get to see some good football, even if it isn't as good as it could/should be.

P.S. Touching on my post in response to winwave, if it were up to me, I would have begun a stadium campaign by promising to match every dollar pledged by donors up to $100M with a guarantee that all funds would be spent on the stadium and support facilities. THAT is institutional commitment IMHO - and that should give you an idea of what I think TU should do.
Fair enough. I don't think you can recover from $100M mistakes quite so easily. To get Tulane football facilities ready to where we can realistically shoot for a P5 is now around $200M (upgrades to Yulman, IPF, locker rooms, etc). That kind of commitment is what any incoming coach would want to see, the tools he needs to be successful. We were only $50M away previously but we decided that building an on campus stadium was the best course of action, so now we're $200M away instead.

As for existing donor base, of course it's too small. That's why a competent and forward thinking athletic director would have made inroads with corporate and other business interests. As I've said repeatedly, the Benson family, among other business interests in NOLA, would benefit substantially if Tulane were a member of the Big 12. It would be easy to justify these interests donating $25M towards the needed facilities. How much increased revenue would the Hyatt realize if Texas and Oklahoma were coming to the Dome every year? Ooops, we decided to compete with them instead.

The fact is that while Yulman is nice, it has short term issues. Tulane had a long enough list of issues to fix without spending $80M to create new and more expensive issues. We are farther from the P5 than we were before Yulman. We aren't even going in the right direction.

I respect and admire your optimism. But this situation is badly diseased and will get worse. I have zero doubt of this. The only fixes are dramatic changes in direction from Cowen/Dickson but they've literally stolen the university and don't plan on giving it back. They are collecting their paychecks, throwing themselves parades, erecting plaques in their own honor, all the while they are making us miserable and lying about it to our faces. They have no intention of there ever being new leadership. They 100% think Tulane is theirs to do with what they want, even though that is immoral and illegal.

I'll ask you an updated version of the same question that got me kicked off the other forum 10 years ago.....Rick Dickson says we have the facilities we need to win championships. Is he incompetent or lying? Or both?
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

Highwave wrote: Two things: 1) I don't identify with a forum, much less rely upon one for my info - I simply posted there because a thread had been created specifically posting the Lewis article. 2) I did not say that the salaries were enough, only that they were competitive. While CJ's salary isn't impressive by AAC standards, neither has been his performance - I'd say it is at least proportional in that regard. Competitive offers were made to other candidates, enough for one of them to accept on the spot (before reneging after consulting with his family). We paid a lot in G5 terms for our fall-back option, which I think speaks to how competitive we were prepared to be.
1) Then you continue to get your info from people lying and continue to legitimize a "forum" that exists purely to spread those lies. Such lies are repeated without pushback there, and that's how such misinformation becomes the prevailing wisdom.

2) But they are't competitive. It's simply untrue. The definition of competitive is not "the lowest or close to the lowest". I know that everyone does not want to believe that everything that comes out of Tulane/Wilson Center isn't more than a pack of blatant lies. Just as when they say that Yulman is "first class" but doesn't include things that are basic necessities like wifi.

If you are talking about what they "would" have paid Rich Rod, then I would refer back to the issue that no coach worth that money will be willing to work for Cowen/Dickson. What say you about Dickson saying that we've fixed our football facility issue and moving on to OIympic sports?
winwave
Top of the WAVE
Posts: 24908
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 10:34 am
Status: Offline

Highwave wrote:
winwave wrote:It goes w/out saying that a good coach can win at Tulane. The problem is in this day and age w/getting a good coach to take the job. There is no administrative support for one. Then there is the very lacking facilities. The administration keeps ignoring the facilities issues. If too many of our fans bury their head in the sand on that then it's over. The demand has to be for a new AD followed by the immediate fundraising for a new on-campus football operations building w/a legit weight room, meeting rooms and a new squad room. Without those facilities there will NEVER BE A GOOD HC AT TULANE AGAIN.
There is no doubt that TU can do more to attract a good coach. However, it is far from a hopeless, thankless job. A hungry coach, with a proven record of success, either as a HC or at least implementing his own off/def system as a coordinator, will win at TU every time. With winning comes $$, with $$ comes improvements, etc.

The alternative is to shell out $$ to short-circuit the above progression, which TU seems unwilling to do institutionally - they are not alone though in that regard. My point is that if you won't fork over the $$ up-front to invest in big time facilities improvements, then at least make the right hires.

Btw, TU has shown it is willing to pay a very competitive salary for a coach and his staff - may have been an issue in the past, but not anymore. So, all we are talking about is institutional support and that at least seems to be heading in a better direction than before. Mind you, if it were up to me, TU would be doing things a lot differently - just saying that us fans shouldn't buy into the myth that you just simply "can't win at Tuh-lane".

Highwave I have often said you can't impart tone on the internet. I say what I'm about to say to reach out to you. You are ignoring an important issue. Our facilities are extremely substandard. All the talk in sports today is player development. We do not have the facilities in place for that. Good coaches recognize that and refuse to come here. Coach after coach discusses how weak we are. The weight room just doesn't cut it. Those good coaches will realize they can't recruit here. CJ was supposed to be a recruiter. Yet as a poster elsewhere pointed out last year a composite of sites put us at 103 in recruiting. To attract good coaches and players the facilities need dramatic change. Otherwise we will never get that good coach to turn things around.
BAYWAVE&Sophandros are SPINELESS COWARDS
YOU NEED LEVERAGE TO BE PROACTIVE!
Small time facilities for small time programs
6-4-23:Now all of the mistakes Tulane has made finally catches up with them as they descend to CUSAAC.
Highwave
Low Tide
Posts: 161
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2011 8:06 am
Status: Offline

Not referring to Rich Rod.

We don't disagree that keeping the status quo could be the death knell for TU football.

We disagree that the facilities are an impediment to on-field success. You are ignoring the move up to the AAC and I think that is a significant flaw in your analysis of the current state of the program and how quickly it can be turned around...right now.

That said, we agree that RD's administrative vision for TU fball has to expand and improve substantially and rapidly for us to ever have a shot of getting into a P5- which is where we should be. I think his approach to hiring/firing is the biggest impediment to immediate success, which I think unfortunately is the lynchpin for further program investments.
Post Reply