I shed a few tears when Carolina won its first baseball championship back in 2010. But now? Rat Tanner is a ******* menace to society! Worst AD of all time and it’s not close!!!
RAT TANNER IS DEAD TO ME!
- Thread starter Evilchicken
- Start date
If someone were to tell me that Tanner’s tenure as AD was a premeditated years-long scheme funded by Clemson donors to completely subvert our men’s athletic programs, I probably wouldn’t call them crazy.
Ray's first hire made all the sense in the world.
All subsequent ones have been utterly baffling.
All subsequent ones have been utterly baffling.
I can still separate what he did as a coach and AD. But no doubt it tainted it a bit. Still thankful for the glory days of Gamecock Baseball. Tanner should’ve never been the AD. Despise those who allowed it to happen.
I think I officially turned on Tanner when we tried to backdoor him with Brad Edwards. Remember that? We were bringing him in, basically as an Assistant AD, and turning it over to him a year or 2 later. When that leaked, Tanner really put his foot down. I get his frustration with it, but it also reveals the gutless leadership of our university. When that happened, we should parted ways with Tanner and we’d be in a much better spot today than we are. Instead we let a disgruntled guy that we tried to dump with a silly scheme stick around and run this thing into the ground.
Don’t just despise Ray Tanner. Despise everyone calling the shots at USC. The same ones that pissed off our largest donor who now gives all her money to Clemson. Those a$$holes need their a$$es kicked.
I think I officially turned on Tanner when we tried to backdoor him with Brad Edwards. Remember that? We were bringing him in, basically as an Assistant AD, and turning it over to him a year or 2 later. When that leaked, Tanner really put his foot down. I get his frustration with it, but it also reveals the gutless leadership of our university. When that happened, we should parted ways with Tanner and we’d be in a much better spot today than we are. Instead we let a disgruntled guy that we tried to dump with a silly scheme stick around and run this thing into the ground.
Don’t just despise Ray Tanner. Despise everyone calling the shots at USC. The same ones that pissed off our largest donor who now gives all her money to Clemson. Those a$$holes need their a$$es kicked.
I'm not mad at him. Kind of feel bad for him. He is legendary around here as a head coach. Maybe our most legendary ever in any sport. Baseball is our pride and joy, and he was the best to ever do it here.
But he was put into a position he had no business being in. He LOVES the school and did his very best in that capacity. It's just that his very best was terrible.
But he was put into a position he had no business being in. He LOVES the school and did his very best in that capacity. It's just that his very best was terrible.
I understand the frustration, but I actually think he doesn't get enough credit for what he did.
1) Until COVID, the USC Athletics Dept. was one of about a dozen in the country that actually operated in the black.
2) He kept Dawn Staley from taking the Ohio State Job.
3) Not every coaching hire works out and I know there were some odd circumstances that came up while Tanner was A.D.
a) BASEBALL - Hiring Holbrook was the right thing to do at the time. 100 percent. It didn't work out, but it was still the right hire the day it happened. Sometimes good hires don't work out (Tom Herman at Texas comes to mind, but there are many more all around the country). When Holbrook was let go, O'Sullivan was going to be our coach. That's a fact. Once the Florida's season ended, the announcement was coming. Then the Gators got hot and won the CWS, Florida through more money at him and offered to build a new stadium if he stayed, which he did, and USC was left hanging. That led to Kingston, which was OK, but not great. Then we hired Mainieri, which at the time seemed pretty damn good. I don't think ANYBODY saw it being a disaster, but the day he was hired, it seemed like a great move.
b) BASKETBALL - Paris was an OK hire. Looked like a great hire after 26 wins a couple of years ago, and now we know it's the worst funded program in the SEC. I'm not ready to bury Paris yet.
c) Football: Ray's weakness was taking people at their word. That's what he did when Kirby Smart said he was coming to SC only to have his agent do an end around and tell Georgia what was happening, so they fired Richt (who was averaging 9.5 wins per year) so they could snatch Kirby. That left SC hanging and we end up with Muschamp, which I didn't think was a great hire and turned out to be be bad. I think Beamer was a gutsy and good hire. Last year sucked, but Beamer has shown he can do some good things here, in one of the toughest football jobs in the SEC. If football gets back to winning 7-8 games next year, all the better.
That being said, Ray being asked to step down was at the right time as he did not live in the NIL world and SC needed a businessman like J.D. to come in. The other part of this is you have to look at SC's Board of Trustees who has to approve every hire and contract extension before a deal can be made. The fact that they were in lockstep with all of the above should tell you more about how decisions are really made at Universities.
Ray gave us one of the greatest accomplishments in USC history in the 2010 CWS when, facing elimination, we defeated Clemson in back-to-back games to advance to the finals, which we won. Winning the CWS is one thing. Beating Clemson 2x in a row to do it is legendary.
Overall, I like this post. I'm also glad to see many posters write that the Holbrook hire was good on paper but didn't work out. In past years, many have written about what a terrible hire it was. Such was ultimately the case, but again, it looked like a good hire at the beginning.
And beating them back-to-back in 2002 in Omaha only sweetens that pot, even if we did lose to Texas in the championship game.
They're hand in hand responsibilities. Agree that extending contracts are something that most schools screw up but they sort of have to. You can't have a coach under contract for less than four years or else other coaches will use that against you in recruiting. That being said, remember, the Board of Trustees has to OK all contract extensions and it was OUR BOT who wanted to give Muschamp the extension he got (that didn't come from RT initially).
If only schools could/would push back on recruits, stating "Will you commit to staying here all four years and earn your degree?"
Agreed but nobody is disputing he was a legendary baseball coach. HOF worthy. No business being hired as AD though. Lazy, convenient hire.
Wonder why that "4-year rule" for contracts isn't obsolete now that the players are mercenaries with short-term agreements?
The only players who seem to stick around for four years now are the ones the school can afford to give a massive raise every year or the ones who don't have options.
Still looking forward to the day it all implodes. I used to root for a school, not a business that hires call girls dressed in pads and a helmet. I have no connection with that arrangement and therefore no rooting interest.
RT should have been hired as an assistant in USC's Athletic Department, or left to become AD at a smaller school.
He served briefly as like an assistant AD at NC State but my understanding is it was very brief.
I have to believe there are a few who stick around to finish their degrees in a major meaningful to them. Sadly, they are probably bench warmers. But if it's anything like UGA WBB, having tuition taken care of via an athletic scholraship plus receiving 60k annually in NIL doesn't hurt.
I would be nice if it implodes, but I think it's more likely that schools and professional teams will iron out "working agreements," thus more formalizing minor league status of NCAA D-I athletics.
Yes, he did some athletics administation work while at NCSU, and some at USC as well while being the head baseball coach.
Those are the ones I was referring to with the "...or the ones who don't have options", comment.
The point is, I don't see where a coach having a publicly visible 4-year commitment from the school means much to the difference-making kids - the who have a constant wandering eye, always looking for who's offering them the biggest bag. They aren't playing for the name on the front of the jersey, only concerned with the one on the back.
