So you throw absurd money at an elite proven coach and then fire him when he fails here?
You should have titled this thread "hypothetic ways to quickly bury an already pathetic football program."
So you throw absurd money at an elite proven coach and then fire him when he fails here?We fire him and finally call ourself a football school because we will finally get it that that shouldn't be acceptable or the ceiling at a school like Kentucky.
Also a lot of you are missing the caller's point. You pony up we'll say $100 mil/5. Alabam, Texas, Notre Dame don't go close to that because they don't have to. If we jump the gun and do it we CAN get someone here. That's what I meant when I said absurd, not just topping the existing threshold. That's what a lot of y'all are missing here.
Where does this extra $17 million/yr come from?We fire him and finally call ourself a football school because we will finally get it that that shouldn't be acceptable or the ceiling at a school like Kentucky.
Also a lot of you are missing the caller's point. You pony up we'll say $100 mil/5. Alabam, Texas, Notre Dame don't go close to that because they don't have to. If we jump the gun and do it we CAN get someone here. That's what I meant when I said absurd, not just topping the existing threshold. That's what a lot of y'all are missing here.
The UKAA was dissolved 4.5 years ago by the BoT... There is no UKAA, only a University Athletics Committee made up of 5 Board of Trustees members, up to 3 non-voting community members, and the faculty athletics representative as an ex officio non-voting member.
UK’s Athletic Association Board Dissolved
LEXINGTON, Ky. (Feb. 15, 2012) – The duties performed by the University of Kentucky Athletic Association (UKAA) Board of Directors will now be handled by a new committee of the UK Board of Trustees, as a result of action taken today at the UKAA board's final meeting.
The UKAA directors voted to disband the organization following the recommendation of a special committee of the Board of Trustees last year. The special committee, which was appointed by Board of Trustees Chair Britt Brockman in March 2011, conducted a review of benchmark institutions and current best practices. The committee met last October and recommended that the Board of Trustees create a new Athletics Committee within the structure of the board and include community adviser members. The special committee further recommended that in order to remain compliant with NCAA rules on institutional control over intercollegiate athletics, the committee membership and its chair should be appointed by UK's president in consultation with the board chair.
At its meeting in December, the full Board of Trustees approved the proposed revision of the university's governing regulations to establish a University Athletics Committee within the board's committee structure.
The University Athletics Committee’s responsibilities will include: providing counsel to the UK president concerning matters or activities of the Athletics Department; reviewing the Athletics Department’s annual budget and audit reports, major expenditures and acquisitions, and construction of facilities if the cost is expected to exceed $400,000; and providing needed information to the BOT. The committee will be composed of five Board of Trustees members, up to three non-voting community members, and the faculty athletics representative as an ex officio non-voting member.
***************************************************************************************
CWS renovations were financed with state bonds and those bonds are being paid out of UK Athletics operating revenues. The K-Fund is just a part of that revenue stream. All athletics revenue (SEC distribution, ticket sales, K-Fund, etc) goes into one big pocket and then that money is used to cover the obligations and expenses of UK Athletics.
Where does this extra $17 million/yr come from?
Everybody at UK is wanting to know.
No, it's not called something else. The UKAA was singularly focused on UK athletics and it's board members were all UK athletics people...the new committee, at least all of the voting members are from the BoT which for anyone who has paid attention to over the years, has not always been friendly to UK athletics. The VERY reason that UK athletics is funding $65 million for academic buildings is because of who now ultimately controls the purse strings. Mitch didn't go to the board and say "Hey, why don't you take $65 million from athletics..."...the board just said..."We need money and you've got it so we're taking it..." as they wrote the obligation into the budget.So they call it something else. Great. tomato/tomato - potato/potato
No, it's not called something else. The UKAA was singularly focused on UK athletics and it's board members were all UK athletics people...the new committee, at least all of the voting members are from the BoT which for anyone who has paid attention to over the years, has not always been friendly to UK athletics. The VERY reason that UK athletics is funding $65 million for academic buildings is because of who now ultimately controls the purse strings. Mitch didn't go to the board and say "Hey, why don't you take $65 million from athletics..."...the board just said..."We need money and you've got it so we're taking it..." as they wrote the obligation into the budget.
Under the UKAA, the UKAA would have presented the BoT with an athletics budget and the board would have voted it up or down. They approved or denied things but they weren't a part of the budget formation process. It's a pretty significant change.
do you have basketballitis? Don't have to be 5 stars to be called talent.
Where else but UK in the SEC is there an emphasis on a different sport?Sometimes organizations are forced to cut their losses by developing an exit strategy. Anything less than 6-6, and bringing the current staff back would be a disaster for ticket sales and contributions.
And speaking of 6-6, where else in the SEC besides Vandy and UK would 6-6 get you off the hot seat?
More like...potato/potato
tomato/tomato
Where else but UK in the SEC is there an emphasis on a different sport?
The figures were on this board a few weeks ago. UK spends about the same on football and basketball... Vandy was the next closest and they spend 2.5x more on football than basketball, most spend 4x,5x...7x more on football than basketball. Nobody spends half of what UK does on basketball. And before you go down that road...if UK cut all spending on all of the other sports to $0 and gave all that money to football...they still would have the lowest ratio of spending between football and basketball. With all that said, UK still outspends UL on football.
Other schools in the SEC have no/very little pressure to win at basketball and therefore they can focus their resources. UK doesn't have that option.
.Is there a mute feature on this board?