Please Explain

[Huckleberry]

I’ve been reading this board for a long time and a lot of posters keep suggesting that the problem with the football program stems from a lack of commitment by the President and Board of Regents and also the ineptitude of the Athletic Director. I’m not saying I’m on the Bruininks and Maturi bandwagon; but how does their commitment level affect the football team? Is the fact that Brewster was hired show lack of commitment? Or was it just a bad hire now that we are able to look back?

I hear how the funding for the football program is at the bottom of the B10, but then I read that when all things are equally compared, the football budget at the U is actually in the middle of the conference. Where do we need to spend more money in order to compete? Are our assistant coaches paid less than at other schools? Is our recruiting budget too small to effectively recruit big time players? If so what do other schools do in regards to recruiting that we don’t? Are our practice facilities worse than other schools?

I also read how Wisconsin turned things around when their President and AD made the commitment to winning. What did Wisconsin do to prove they wanted to win? I see they went out and hired a top Defensive Coordinator who’s only head coaching experience was at the high school level, how does that show a commitment to winning? Did they change admission standards for the football team? What changed? Or did they finally find the right guy to coach the team?

Most every other program at the U is at least somewhat successful while dealing with the same administration that the football team is. Even the programs that are considered down aren’t that bad, the BB team made it to the conference championship and NCAA tourney last year, the hockey team is coming off of 3 tough years but winning 2 National Championships in the last 8 years gives them some slack. If anybody should be complaining about lack of support it would John Anderson and the baseball team but they just keep rolling along.

I admit I am not as in tuned with the Athletic Department as many of you on here, I am sincerely trying to find out why people think that the problem runs deeper than the Head Coach. Thanks.

 

[glovedgopher]

You will find that people on this board like to use broad statements that can not be backed with facts or evidence. I think they hear Sid use an argument and run with it too often. That being said, I myself can't tell if the President and Board of Regents have a strong commitment towards building a winning football team. I know they did manage to build a new football stadium. However, they do continue to let Joel keep his job. Like you I don't know all the facts.

 

[alphagopher]

throwing money at the problem doesn't always fix it-i think we spend plenty now-we need the right people on the bus-our money is fine to get the kind of guy we want, imho

 

[Doc1001]

That is my question too

If we had more money or committment from the University where would it go? Where are we lacking? Sid was saying we dont have as many recruiters out as OSU does. I find that hard to believe. I am sure there are limitations on recruiting governed by the NCAA so unless teams cheat I would think we have as many as them. Arent our assistant coaches being paid reasonable well? Someone needs to tell me EXACTLY where our money and committment needs to go. I wonder if it isnt just an excuse. Straighten me out. I tend to think its just bad decisions on our part much more so than spending money etc. That new stadium has to show a big committment. Good post huckleberry.

 

[Rescooter]

Oh where do we start....

1) The whole "Mason Contract". His contract was allowed to nearly expire which affected attitude and recruiting. Once Mason was renewed, he was fired shortly thereafter. The cost to the university was huge.

2) The "Monson Contract". Same type of situation, only the names were changed.

3) The football coordinator pay ceiling. Ted Roof didn't leave for greener/warmer pastures, it was all about the money. Why does Minnesota fire the lousy coordinators and not pay up for the good ones? Commitment.

4) Hiring Brewster in the first place....using an expensive search agency. We had some great coaches that would have loved the job. Pelini and Kiffin to name two. We didn't need a search agency, we just needed common sense.

-I'm sure others can come up with more as I'm out of time. Got to go.

 

[glovedgopher]

Oh where do we start....

1) The whole "Mason Contract". His contract was allowed to nearly expire which affected attitude and recruiting. Once Mason was renewed, he was fired shortly thereafter. The cost to the university was huge.

2) The "Monson Contract". Same type of situation, only the names were changed.

3) The football coordinator pay ceiling. Ted Roof didn't leave for greener/warmer pastures, it was all about the money. Why does Minnesota fire the lousy coordinators and not pay up for the good ones? Commitment.

4) Hiring Brewster in the first place....using an expensive search agency. We had some great coaches that would have loved the job. Pelini and Kiffin to name two. We didn't need a search agency, we just needed common sense.

-I'm sure others can come up with more as I'm out of time. Got to go.

Are these examples of commitment or dumb choices?

 

[Rescooter]

Are these examples of commitment or dumb choices?

Either way, it falls on Maturi. Having someone in such a high profile position, that habitually makes dumb choices shows lake of commitment (or laziness) from those higher up. He has cost the university a lot of money.

Can someone tell me why we have a women's rowing team? Sure it's a Title IX thing, but the coach making 6-figures?

 

[glovedgopher]

Either way, it falls on Maturi. Having someone in such a high profile position, that habitually makes dumb choices shows lake of commitment (or laziness) from those higher up. He has cost the university a lot of money.

Can someone tell me why we have a women's rowing team? Sure it's a Title IX thing, but the coach making 6-figures?

6 figures no way! Did we ever hire a women's softball coach?

 

[dpodoll68]

If we had more money or committment from the University where would it go? Where are we lacking?

Is this a joke?

I just want to make sure you are serious before I write a book to respond to this ridiculous post.

 

[metrolax]

I think he's serious....

 

[Nashvlgopher]

You cannot simply throw money at a problem, but it sure is easier to solve a problem when you've got the cash to do it. The U of TN raised $34 million in donations last year. At the U of M, that would be more than half the athletic department's budget. Obviously, the U is not going to be able to raise that kind of cash on an annual basis until teams have a tradition of winning, but with Maturi's "we'll just be a middle of the road athletic department" attitude, I don't see how we're going to get any better.

According to the Daily, 1,500 alumni contributed to the building of the stadium. Are you kidding me? The U has over 50,000 students enrolled and only 1,500 alumni contributed to the football stadium? That's pathetic. If fans want a winning program, we are going to have to pony up the cash. It's all well and good to bash Maturi, I don't think he's been terribly effective either. But at some point we're going to have to put our money where our mouths are and support the team. Join the Goal Line Club, make donations, etc.

Okay, flame away.

 

[Schnoodler]

The obvious answers.

Money = Investment, which denotes return.

First money, then results.

What we have now is essentialy the result of the investment from ten years ago. We have improved our investment. This began about 5-6 years ago. We will begin to see those results soon. Unfortunately as was already admitted, that will be somewhere in the middle.

The differences you will note are things like marketing budgets, staff budgets. It's not just the coordinators pay, it's things like assistants. Our staff sizes alone in less than our competitors. The things around the edges are the things that get neglected. These are the small things that make that little bit of difference that maybe gets one more talented kid, one more technique taught, one more atta-boy delivered at the right time that means one more play made where it wasn't before. That maybe means two more points in some important game somewhere down the line.

It just becomes disengenuous when we try to give off a message that we want a winning program when we continue to make, and even celebrate mediocre investment.

 

[EverTheSkeptic]

The problem isn't lack of commitment or lack of money, though thses may exacerbate the main problem, which is lack of competent coaching. Giving the present coaching staff more money would just make them a more expensive failure.

 

[Brewscrew]

It's not like Maturi didn't try to spend money before. Pelini didn't impress and Patterson turned down $2+ mill per year and then later reconsidered, but it was after Maturi had agreed to principals with Brewster.

Some of the 'lack of commitment' has changed over the past few years thanks to Brewster and the new stadium. We have put money into the practice facility, weight rooms (they still pale in comparison to other top programs), stadium, assistant coaches (OL, OC & DC) are paid on par with other B10 teams and recruiting budget has more than doubled under Brewster.

Where can they do more? Recruiting budgets, additional academic support(ie advisors and tutors), more $$ in practice facilities, registers at The Bank and most importantly hiring the best available coach (see Tubby) at any cost.

 

[glovedgopher]

The obvious answers.

Money = Investment, which denotes return.

First money, then results.

What we have now is essentialy the result of the investment from ten years ago. We have improved our investment. This began about 5-6 years ago. We will begin to see those results soon. Unfortunately as was already admitted, that will be somewhere in the middle.

The differences you will note are things like marketing budgets, staff budgets. It's not just the coordinators pay, it's things like assistants. Our staff sizes alone in less than our competitors. The things around the edges are the things that get neglected. These are the small things that make that little bit of difference that maybe gets one more talented kid, one more technique taught, one more atta-boy delivered at the right time that means one more play made where it wasn't before. That maybe means two more points in some important game somewhere down the line.

It just becomes disengenuous when we try to give off a message that we want a winning program when we continue to make, and even celebrate mediocre investment.

The Jacksonville Jaguars have 20 coaches on their staff compared to New Englands' 13. More coaches might not be the answer. Better coaches, now..........

 

[monk10]

Why the hell weren't all replies started with "I'll be your Huckleberry"?

 

[Ewert86PC]

Why the hell weren't all replies started with "I'll be your Huckleberry"?

We were waiting for you to do it first...

 

[Doc1001]

dpodoll68

Thats an impressive list of examples you have there!!!!

 

[wdgold]

The problem isn't lack of commitment or lack of money, though thses may exacerbate the main problem, which is lack of competent coaching. Giving the present coaching staff more money would just make them a more expensive failure.

You got that right! It's amazing the excuses that keep coming out, it's pretty simple people get the right coaching staff in here and pay them and this program will win end of story.

 

[WAGopher]

... Patterson turned down $2+ mill per year and then later reconsidered, but it was after Maturi had agreed to principals with Brewster.

Is this true? I don't recall ever hearing that Patterson said yes, but too late.

 

[MspHawk]

don’t mistake motion for progress

I’ve been reading this board for a long time and a lot of posters keep suggesting that the problem with the football program stems from a lack of commitment by the President and Board of Regents and also the ineptitude of the Athletic Director. I’m not saying I’m on the Bruininks and Maturi bandwagon; but how does their commitment level affect the football team? Is the fact that Brewster was hired show lack of commitment? Or was it just a bad hire now that we are able to look back?

I hear how the funding for the football program is at the bottom of the B10, but then I read that when all things are equally compared, the football budget at the U is actually in the middle of the conference. Where do we need to spend more money in order to compete? Are our assistant coaches paid less than at other schools? Is our recruiting budget too small to effectively recruit big time players? If so what do other schools do in regards to recruiting that we don’t? Are our practice facilities worse than other schools?

I also read how Wisconsin turned things around when their President and AD made the commitment to winning. What did Wisconsin do to prove they wanted to win? I see they went out and hired a top Defensive Coordinator who’s only head coaching experience was at the high school level, how does that show a commitment to winning? Did they change admission standards for the football team? What changed? Or did they finally find the right guy to coach the team?

Most every other program at the U is at least somewhat successful while dealing with the same administration that the football team is. Even the programs that are considered down aren’t that bad, the BB team made it to the conference championship and NCAA tourney last year, the hockey team is coming off of 3 tough years but winning 2 National Championships in the last 8 years gives them some slack. If anybody should be complaining about lack of support it would John Anderson and the baseball team but they just keep rolling along.

I admit I am not as in tuned with the Athletic Department as many of you on here, I am sincerely trying to find out why people think that the problem runs deeper than the Head Coach. Thanks.

Fair questions in my opinion. A couple of thoughts......

1. Is Indiana known for Hockey? Is Wisconsin known for Wrestling? Is Iowa known for Basketball? Is MN known for football? You can’t be great at everything, one could argue MN is great at many sports; Hockey, Baseball, Golf etc. Look at the director’s cup for an overall flavor of MN sports. 2009/2010 they are 18th in the country, ahead of everyone in the bigten except penn state and OSU.

2. Everything works in cycles, MN has been a national power once before, they will more then likely be competing again soon.

3. I think some basic fundamentals haven’t been applied are what frustrates MN fans the most. For example: The football team lacks an identity. Having 6 coordinators in 4 years. A head coach with no head coaching experience besides H.S.

4. Brewster is insulting the University and the BigTen at this point. While he doesn’t have much choice to do anything other than stay positive. I won’t condemn him for what he says I will however sell him out for the product on the field at the end of the day.

5. Brewster, in my opinion has not recruited players who play well with others. For example, just recruiting the best available guy doesn’t mean they will work well in the system. But then again without an identity....what's the system? There is a decent bigten team who has 21 high school QBs on its team, 8 of them starters this year. This is just an example of recruiting towards a programs identity. Kids who have a higher probability of coachability, who are FB smart, probably good athletes, probably good students too since this is about an education too.

6. Coaching, Brewster really hasn’t shown he can coach a kid up. Get more then he should have out of the talent.

7. Fan support, that little ol town just south of here, the one without an airport big enough to fly the other team into....ya that one. The economic impact of a seven-game home game schedule of the UI football program on Johnson County exceeds $100 million, according to a pilot study under the direction of the Iowa City/Coralville Area Convention and Visitors Bureau (CVB) released in Augusto 2010. The 2010-11 budget for the UI Athletics Department is $70 million - just 2.5 percent of the $2.8 billion budget for the University of Iowa. And, as has been the case for several years, the budget for intercollegiate athletics includes no state or University support.


8. When things are bad and I think this year was a new low, you go to the top for answers. Does Wall Street go to the sales guys when projections don’t produce? They go to the CEO! Bruininks just might need to rid the AD and the Coach, not just Brewster. Keep in mind Ferentz was on the hot seat just a couple years ago and that was following a couple big ten championships and a "turn around" on most accounts. Point is, this is a fickle business, a low tolerance for poor performance. No one is safe.

These are only my opinions. Money and success go hand n hand, a little of one brings a little of the other and they leap frog each other over time. Too much or a big injection of one does not produce long term success that is sustainable. Basic business principles go along way in the world of University Athletics, try to get fancy and you’ll get caught with your pants down. MN has a nice stadium though, it's on campus, there is now tailgating, they have made progress but progress in the most important segment now needs a change and it's the product on the field. Just make the change and make it before the season ends, don’t mistake motion for progress.

 

[dpodoll68]

Thats an impressive list of examples you have there!!!!

Can you read?

I wanted you to verify that you were actually serious. If you were just making a joke (like I figured you had to be), I wouldn't waste my time.

 

[Huckleberry]

Thanks for all the responses. So here is a condensed list of reasons why the football team isn’t winning games:

1. Glen Mason getting a contract extension and then getting fired.
2. Dan Monson getting a contract extension and then getting fired.
3. The coordinator pay ceiling.
4. Using a search agency when hiring Brewster.
5. Joel Maturi being allowed to continue on as AD.
6. Marketing budget not big enough.
7. Not enough assistant coaches to teach missing techniques.
8. Not enough atta-boys given out to players.
9. Things missing “around the edges” that keep top players from coming.
10. Minnesota just isn’t known for football.
11. Too much coaching turnover – lack of identity.
12. Fans aren’t supportive enough.
13. Poor recruiting.
14. Poor coaching.
15. Recruiting budget too small.

I know I took most of that out of context but it really seems to be a stretch to use most of these as excuses as to why we aren’t winning. Many posters referred to money issues but I still don’t know where we are falling short compared to other programs. Do other coaches make more in-home visits with recruits and we don’t have the money to do this? Does a recruit in Iowa get taken out for a steak dinner and in Minnesota they get taken to Burger King because of the budget? I’ve never heard of a recruit choosing Ohio State over the U because they have more assistant coaches, but I suppose it is possible.

I think most would agree that Maturi has made some bad choices that have hurt the program but I don’t see him as a reason we can’t be successful.

Marketing the program at this point is next to impossible without results on the field. If the team starts winning, the marketing department will have the easiest job in the state. Look at the Gopher Women’s basketball team transformation when Brenda Oldfield became coach. The women’s team was just an afterthought, within a year they are filling the pavilion and have to start playing games at Williams arena.

I don’t see any reason why the football team won’t be successful if the right coach is hired. I just hope that the Powers that Be realize that the cost of a proven top level coach will more than pay for itself. The only reasons on the above list that make sense to me are the ones controlled by the Head Coach.

 

[MspHawk]

Thanks for all the responses. So here is a condensed list of reasons why the football team isn’t winning games:

1. Glen Mason getting a contract extension and then getting fired.
2. Dan Monson getting a contract extension and then getting fired.
3. The coordinator pay ceiling.
4. Using a search agency when hiring Brewster.
5. Joel Maturi being allowed to continue on as AD.
6. Marketing budget not big enough.
7. Not enough assistant coaches to teach missing techniques.
8. Not enough atta-boys given out to players.
9. Things missing “around the edges” that keep top players from coming.
10. Minnesota just isn’t known for football.
11. Too much coaching turnover – lack of identity.
12. Fans aren’t supportive enough.
13. Poor recruiting.
14. Poor coaching.
15. Recruiting budget too small.

I know I took most of that out of context but it really seems to be a stretch to use most of these as excuses as to why we aren’t winning. Many posters referred to money issues but I still don’t know where we are falling short compared to other programs. Do other coaches make more in-home visits with recruits and we don’t have the money to do this? Does a recruit in Iowa get taken out for a steak dinner and in Minnesota they get taken to Burger King because of the budget? I’ve never heard of a recruit choosing Ohio State over the U because they have more assistant coaches, but I suppose it is possible.

I think most would agree that Maturi has made some bad choices that have hurt the program but I don’t see him as a reason we can’t be successful.

Marketing the program at this point is next to impossible without results on the field. If the team starts winning, the marketing department will have the easiest job in the state. Look at the Gopher Women’s basketball team transformation when Brenda Oldfield became coach. The women’s team was just an afterthought, within a year they are filling the pavilion and have to start playing games at Williams arena.

I don’t see any reason why the football team won’t be successful if the right coach is hired. I just hope that the Powers that Be realize that the cost of a proven top level coach will more than pay for itself. The only reasons on the above list that make sense to me are the ones controlled by the Head Coach.

The blind are leading the blind here. The president of the University of MN needs to take control or similar results are probable.

 

[ruralgopher]

How did Msphawk go from such a D-bag to a logical poster so quickly? I've never seen that from a troll before.

 

[Doc1001]

So what do you think

Boise State spends on football compared to us? They seem to do it and I just bet we spend alot more on football than they do.

 

[Oneoldgopher]

Oh where do we start....

1) The whole "Mason Contract". His contract was allowed to nearly expire which affected attitude and recruiting. Once Mason was renewed, he was fired shortly thereafter. The cost to the university was huge.

2) The "Monson Contract". Same type of situation, only the names were changed.

3) The football coordinator pay ceiling. Ted Roof didn't leave for greener/warmer pastures, it was all about the money. Why does Minnesota fire the lousy coordinators and not pay up for the good ones? Commitment.

4) Hiring Brewster in the first place....using an expensive search agency. We had some great coaches that would have loved the job. Pelini and Kiffin to name two. We didn't need a search agency, we just needed common sense.

-I'm sure others can come up with more as I'm out of time. Got to go.

After soul searching, and being wrong more than once myself, it does appear you are correct, the administration and Maturi made mistakes in hiring Brewster over other better qualified applicants. This is curious. We can not let them make this mistake again. We need to pressure the U to set up a committee of donars, fans, football minds to review the credentials and qualifications of the next coach. Use the search firm again, but keep the decision to a well qualified panel. I would not find myself qualified to be on the panel.

 

[betterdeadthanred]

Boise State spends on football compared to us? They seem to do it and I just bet we spend alot more on football than they do.

from an SI article

Since Petersen's arrival, the football budget has increased from $3.4 million to $6.6 million -- much of that is in salaries for his assistant coaches. The athletic department's budget has increased dramatically, as well, from $18 million in 2006 to $28 million now. The football and overall budgets trail behind schools in the BCS leagues, but they're catching up.