-
Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your WyoNation.com experience today!
Wyo-UNLV game AD problems
- Thread starter Wyowilly2015
- Start date
joshvanklomp
Well-known member
Except it was Burman who hired them, so if any of them win it will be because of Burman. They couldn't have won games as Wyoming coach if Burman hadn't hired them. (and don't give me the committee BS either, because Burman made the final decision)Cuttslam said:
Wyolie Coyote
Well-known member
Or sun shines on a dog's ass every once in a while.BeaverPoke said:
Fact is he would have been long gone in any other business sector. Performance appraisals would have sent him on to his next career path.
NowherePoke
Well-known member
wyopig said:
While coaching hires are of course a huge part of the job, they aren't the only piece. From my perspective, while the Schroyer hire is what started my displeasure with Burman, it is not his coaching hires that have been the issue. It is the structural development of the program under his tenure.
Let's compare UW under his tenure (just over 8 years) to our closest peer institution, Colorado State University:
1. Budget - At the time of Burman's hire, UW's athletic budget was around $21M and CSU's was around $19M. Today, UW's is around $30M, while CSU's is around $35M. In the span of 8 years, we went from spending 10% more than CSU to spending more than 15% less. That is a huge change and a trajectory that looks to continue with their new stadium (more on that in a minute). Of course, athletic budgets are subject to all types of manipulation and only tell you so much (for example, each athlete at DU costs way more on paper in the budget than at CSU or UW due to tuition rates, but those are not truly direct costs in the way that recruiting budget and salaries are). So, let's look at a more relevant metric:
2. Coaching Salaries. Data can be found here: http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/. If you compare Wyoming and CSU you can see that the coaching salaries for the Women's team (head and assistants) are pretty similar. However, CSU pays their average Men's team head coach over 30% more than UW and assistants on the Men's teams are 50% higher than UW. I don't have the data readily available, but I definitely remember that was not the case in 2006.
3. Facilities - The investment that will occur for their new stadium exceeds everything Burman has worked on in his tenure combined (remember, things like the RAC and IPF were pre-Burman). You could argue about the source of the funds for the CSU stadium, but that is my point. They don't let roadblocks stand in their way. If their students don't want to pass an athletics fee, they institute it anyway. If they can't get money from the State of CO or private donors for facility upgrades, they will issue debt or find other ways to build it. They are taking risks to try to grow their program. We are content. That's not entirely Burman's fault of course, but he bears a responsibility for that.
4. Performance - In the end, this is what matters most. During Burman's tenure, Wyoming has won zero MWC titles in any sport, while CSU has 11 spread over 5 different sports (7 in Volleyball, 1 each for Men's Golf and Women's BB, XC, and Outdoor T&F). Of course, revenue sports drive the bus and during Burman's tenure neither has distinguished themselves in Football very often, but in the end CSU was able to build a 10 win Top 25 team, which we haven't been able to do in nearly 20 years and here in Burman's 8th year we are still 4-8. Men's BB is even more frustrating. Prior to Burman's hire, CSU had not finished ahead of UW in the conference standings in over a decade. Since that time, CSU has hired two excellent coaches (Miles and Eustachy) and finished ahead of UW in 5 of the last 6 years, including two NCAA tournament appearances and a NCAA tournament win. We do not have a single legitimate (NCAA/NIT) postseason birth during Burman's tenure as AD, by far our longest such drought in the "modern" era. If the season ended today, CSU would again be in the NCAA tourney and we would again be in the CBI.
Going beyond CSU to speak specifically about the coaches, maybe we have good coaches but we haven't given them the pieces they need to be successful. The results are clear, and poor. The only question is the cause. Is it because we haven't built the infrastructure of a successful program? Is it because we don't have the right coaches? Is it because it is too hard to recruit to UW?
Personally, I think it is mostly the first one (although I am not naive regarding the last one). That is not solely the domain of the Athletic Director, but an Athletic Director with a leadership and vision can drive an institution to build that support. Jack Graham may have been a colossal asshole, which likely got him fired, but he provided a vision for success for CSU. He believed CSU belonged in the Big 12 and could compete there (he is wrong, but that's not my point). Our Athletic Director is happy every time the MWC gets weaker so that we can have a better chance to compete (yet, we still can't).
hithere
Well-known member
tweaked said:
YES! Yes, I would love to do that. I'm not calling you names, questioning your intelligence or treating you like a child. But our opinions on Tom Burman couldn't be further away from each other on the "what makes a good Athletics Department" spectrum.
So, yes. Let's check in with each other in two years time to review Burman's job performance after he's had 10+ years on the job. We need some measuring sticks though, yes? What do you think will be fair to review? I would propose the following:
1. Conference championships. Number of.
2. Athletics department budget surplus/deficits
3. Athletics budget growth trajection in five, ten, fifteen and twenty year increments
4. Salary pools of coaches in Football and Men's basketball
5. Successful lobbying of legislature to enhance current UW AD's budget
6. Overall and conference records of Shyatt and Bohl while at UW (excluding the year 1997-98 for Shyatt). Since this exercise is geared toward Tom Burman and his legacy, I would consider a conference (not a division) championship as successful. At this point, anything less than that is not successful to me but a continuation of the past 15 years of sub mediocrity. Please let me know your expectations.
Unless something tragic happens, I expect both Bohl and Shyatt to be coaching for UW in January 2017. I would like to analyze their respective staffs though. Here's Bohl's as of today. http://imgur.com/Ab2GzPs.png" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
And Shyatt's. http://imgur.com/qR8i0LH.png" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;. Firing Steve Stanard would be a huge success in my mind. But those are my preconceived notions. If possible, we should try to stay as objective as much as we can, correct?
I'm curious about your thresholds for success. Can they be measured? Are they subjective or arbitrary based on gut feelings? I'm asking because you mentioned Christensen being a good hire on paper. Whose paper? Why do you think he was a good hire?
I'm looking forward to conversing with you.
McPeachy
Well-known member
Fact of the matter - at least as it relates to the OP...
UW athletics shit the bed hard on 12/31/14. But I have come to expect very little anymore, so color me unsurprised. Tom and staff have done an outstanding job dummying the entire department down to a comfortable and manageable level...right under the noses of most UW fans, who are not only accepting, but fine with bending over and taking it in the ass when needed.
UW athletics shit the bed hard on 12/31/14. But I have come to expect very little anymore, so color me unsurprised. Tom and staff have done an outstanding job dummying the entire department down to a comfortable and manageable level...right under the noses of most UW fans, who are not only accepting, but fine with bending over and taking it in the ass when needed.
HiCountryCowboy
Well-known member
Three monumental posts preceding this one - well done fellas. Among the historical and current day climate of collegiate athletics, you couldn't have picked a worse time to have a Burman at the helm. Widespread apathy abounds...
hithere said:
Hey thanks for that .. no sucking dick comments, calling me Burman, etc. Taking the argument on face value and trying to be specific. I appreciate it. And am glad to respond. For me the outcomes are simple and clear. The marquee sports--mens' football and basketball--compete for conference championships with regularity. Doesn't mean win MWC every year. But compete with regularity.
Take football. In January 2017, I expect that we will have gone bowling in 2016 and in 2017. I actually think Bohl will very likely get us there next year which would make it 3 consecutive years. Basically, I expect that by 2017 Wyoming will be in the early phases of establishing itself as a solid football program, one that goes bowling every year and competes for championships with regularity. I think we are competing for championships by 2017, which means finishing in the top 3 of our conference. I suspect if we extend our timeline to 2019 that we will have won a MWC championship and will be at the point where we are all expecting to be conference champs every year but at least winning every third year on average.
Take basketball. I expect us to finish in the top three with regularity in the MWC. I expect either NCAA or NIT tourneys every year, with conference championships every third year on average. Frankly, I think a MWC championship is very possible this year.
We attain those two outcomes--and with Bohl and Shyatt I believe we will--the rest of your criteria take care of themselves. With one caveat. UW needs a strong president who can advocate for UW athletics. Sternberg was crazy. Absolutely fing bonkers. Most people outside of Laramie don't realize the half of it. And I don't think he would have been an effective advocate with the legislature. But he had somethings correct, at least in terms of expecting excellence and articulating a willingness to advocate for UW sports (again he would've sucked with state legislature in being an effective advocate). Right now we do not have strong leadership. We have a interim president who is amicable, smart, but doesn't understand the organization he's heading. When the new UW president is selected--and let's hope the trustees don't f this up like they appear prone to doing--then Burman needs to advocate strongly for athletics to that president.
If we win in the Marquee sports, the fact is that the crowds return, the state is excited about UW athletics, including the legislature, AD budgets increase, with success on the field so do coaches salaries, and as I said, your other criteria are obtained.
So hithere ... again thanks for the civil interaction and let's check back. I'll be here. Go Pokes.
hithere said:
Hithere, forgot to respond to your Christensen question. At the time, I just remember that Christensen had been voted Offensive Coordinator of the Year and was generally regarded as one of the top young up-and-coming coaching prospects in the country. I think his name was mentioned for some fairly big programs, including Washington. And I remember national outlets expressing some surprise when Wyoming landed him. But, as we learned, top coordinators don't always become top head coaches. But Burman appeared to learn from that. And this time we hired someone both with head coaching experience and success, who also had the advantage of bringing in most of his old staff, and who also had FBS experiences (something Glenn didn't have). Burman's judgment appeared sound at the time; the outcomes sucked, I agree. But I think most people felt he had made an excellent hire.
That's great & all, but it's lip service to improving efforts to improve at best.tweaked said:
Bottom line is this- more people might have some faith in Burman's ability if the relatively simple, operational matters that are 100% controllable like the OP-referenced one above (vs. things like competitive outcomes) at least APPEARED to be getting handled. They're not. This was just one opportunity where a little attention to detail would have dulled the harsh light Burman's standing in and he missed it. It wasn't a hard thing to manage, in fact it's as fundamental as could be vis a vis the collision between the fans and donors and UW Athletics Ops.
McPeachy
Well-known member
tweaked said:
Sorry about this...but...
I met dickface about a week after he was hired, and knew instantly there was a serious character flaw there. Surely the way he manhandled Tom week one (and from every day thereafter) Tom himself finally figured that out as well.
Why it didn't surface in the interview process - I have no idea. No wait, I have an idea...Tom is SHITTY at interviewing and is a horrific judge of people. That is a crucial part of being the head of a department - any department.
I am grateful for the hiring committee pushing Shyatt down Tom's throat.
I'm a fence sitter on this AD issue - not the Wyo-UNLV game problems, but the entire AD issue. It seems to me there is a huge problem with accepting mediocracy in the whole university. How much of it is related to Burman - I'm not sure, but some of it is. There are a ton of things that should have been done differently (better). Promotions and reaching out to the grass root fans (not just the high donors) are at the top of the list.
Problems like we had at the last game should have been handled by Burman or someone in his office. Their job is to look for problem areas and fix them and not a year later, but right away. If someone is not doing that, then they aren't doing their job.
When it comes to budget, I'm not sure how much of that problem is Burman's and how much is the President's, the BOT, or directly related to our state legislature.
One thing I am sure of (in my mind), we don't need to upset the entire Athletic Dept. by firing Burman and having a new AD come in and replace all the coaches at this point in time. The timing is not right. That would set us back another decade.
Problems like we had at the last game should have been handled by Burman or someone in his office. Their job is to look for problem areas and fix them and not a year later, but right away. If someone is not doing that, then they aren't doing their job.
When it comes to budget, I'm not sure how much of that problem is Burman's and how much is the President's, the BOT, or directly related to our state legislature.
One thing I am sure of (in my mind), we don't need to upset the entire Athletic Dept. by firing Burman and having a new AD come in and replace all the coaches at this point in time. The timing is not right. That would set us back another decade.
TSpoke
Well-known member
I am also on the fence about the AD. But Tweaked is right about one thing the porblem goes higher than the AD. We need a president who will support athletics and is able to get others on board with supporting athletics at a high level. I don't think Sternburg was the answer. He wanted to support athletics but it didn't sound like he had the ability to do the second part and get people on his side for his vision. Sounds like he was a poor leader. We need someone who has a vision and can lead.
As to the OP. It was kinda annoying. We walked through the fieldhouse with plans of entering that way since it was so cold but the line was backed up in there so we cut out to go through the entrance by the War and saw the one long line there too. It was cold and annoying to only have one ticket taker but it still didn't take long. By the time we got in they were tearing of ticket stubs and scanning them later(so it looked like they made adjustments to the situation). Once I got in though I had completely forgotten about it till I read this thread. It had no bearing on my enjoyment of the night except the 5 or so minutes I stood outside.
As to the OP. It was kinda annoying. We walked through the fieldhouse with plans of entering that way since it was so cold but the line was backed up in there so we cut out to go through the entrance by the War and saw the one long line there too. It was cold and annoying to only have one ticket taker but it still didn't take long. By the time we got in they were tearing of ticket stubs and scanning them later(so it looked like they made adjustments to the situation). Once I got in though I had completely forgotten about it till I read this thread. It had no bearing on my enjoyment of the night except the 5 or so minutes I stood outside.
LanderPoke
Well-known member
We do need a new president that is willing to invest in athletics. UW needs to focus on
1. engineering
2. science (eventually becoming a top-tier research university and starting a med school)
3. business
4. education
5. agriculture
6. athletics
Imo, we are farrrrr too diverse in our offerings at UW. We don't have the enrollment to keep investing in bullcrap areas like the humanities and fine arts. We need to define what we want to become as a University (it's not having 40k+ students and trying to be excellent in everything). I guess what I'm saying is we need a president who will trim the fat and help us carve out a true identity.
1. engineering
2. science (eventually becoming a top-tier research university and starting a med school)
3. business
4. education
5. agriculture
6. athletics
Imo, we are farrrrr too diverse in our offerings at UW. We don't have the enrollment to keep investing in bullcrap areas like the humanities and fine arts. We need to define what we want to become as a University (it's not having 40k+ students and trying to be excellent in everything). I guess what I'm saying is we need a president who will trim the fat and help us carve out a true identity.
BeaverPoke
Well-known member
LanderPoke said:
That's an interesting thought.
I have realized in my 4+ years at Wyo that since it is the only school in the state they offer a little bit of everything. Where if you were to compare curriculum at Oregon and Oregon State or CU and CSU, they kind of have their own focus. UW has to do a little bit of each. The blue collar, and the white collar.
hithere
Well-known member
This post went plaid, fast. Bless your heart if you can read this whole stupid novel.
I don't remember the last time the football team competed for a conference championship. 1999? Losing to UNLV cost the team that year.
That's kind of my point in all of this. Wyoming has been constantly "building towards something" for twenty years now and I and you and everyone else has been expecting conference championships regularly for quite some time. But nothing. In fact, not only are the teams nowhere near competing for conference championships, they are bottom of the barrel. The football team hasn't beaten San Jose State since 1997. We all remember past success. But most don't. And it's fading more and more every year.
Burman was extremely adroit in the hiring of Bohl; he gets all the credit. Football had bottomed out thanks to his last hire who was terrible at not only being a head coach, but being a respected, civil, well behaved person. He hires a well respected FCS coach to "rebuild". This process will take at least five years giving Burman time to wait it out. I give him credit where credit is due. This was very smart on his part in terms of job security. Whether you and I check back in two, three or five years, the one constant will be that we will remain fans, no matter what. We'll foolishly indoctrinate our kids. We'll keep naming our pets Fennis or Mitch or Hoost. The word Wyoming will always be on the front of the jersey.
Hiring Christensen, Schroyer (and Yerty) were failures. Spectacular failures. But since Burman is an alum, he's allowed more chances, more breaks and excuses. I don't know if Shyatt and Bohl will be successful. I'm extremely hopeful and between the two of them, one really couldn't say that they were ever even close to bad hires. But if they do not compete for championships, in this narrative, they couldn't possibly be failures. It would have to be something else. Salary pools, recruiting difficulty, any other excuse that can be conjured up that wouldn't fall on them or an AD with 8 years on the job at his alma mater.
If anyone said (or actually believed) that Shyatt was a bad hire, I'd be one of the first to line up so they could be viciously slapped right in the face. Repeatedly.
But I'm not quite sure that Burman had anything to do with his hire. I would argue that no matter who the AD was, Shyatt would have been hired. I believe this based on the integrity of Shyatt wanting to come back after 1998. And his proven track record as coach, mentor and recruiter at the highest levels of NCAA basketball. But most important was of course the all-time, monumental, breathtaking, dizzying, dazzling, pants droppingly glorious in its negligence hiring of one Heath Schroyer by Tom Burman to be UW's head men's basketball coach in 2007. This event, more than any other, crippled any belief that I ever had that Burman knows what he's doing and set back most fans expectations so low that many forget how these dark days even came about in the first place. But not me. I am not a smart man. I'm not as dumb as BeaverPoke either but I know that Heath Schroyer is worse than AIDS. And yes, I do love hyperbole.
Yeah, again not arguing with you here. But it's like you expect everyone that's been involved with UW and it's athletics arm the past 20+ years to suddenly change for the better. I do not share this, I'm sorry to say, delusion. If Wyoming football or basketball succeeds, in my mind it will be in spite of current administration.
If these things don't come to pass, we'll always look to the next five year timeframe. Like always.
tweaked said:
I don't remember the last time the football team competed for a conference championship. 1999? Losing to UNLV cost the team that year.
tweaked said:
That's kind of my point in all of this. Wyoming has been constantly "building towards something" for twenty years now and I and you and everyone else has been expecting conference championships regularly for quite some time. But nothing. In fact, not only are the teams nowhere near competing for conference championships, they are bottom of the barrel. The football team hasn't beaten San Jose State since 1997. We all remember past success. But most don't. And it's fading more and more every year.
Burman was extremely adroit in the hiring of Bohl; he gets all the credit. Football had bottomed out thanks to his last hire who was terrible at not only being a head coach, but being a respected, civil, well behaved person. He hires a well respected FCS coach to "rebuild". This process will take at least five years giving Burman time to wait it out. I give him credit where credit is due. This was very smart on his part in terms of job security. Whether you and I check back in two, three or five years, the one constant will be that we will remain fans, no matter what. We'll foolishly indoctrinate our kids. We'll keep naming our pets Fennis or Mitch or Hoost. The word Wyoming will always be on the front of the jersey.
Hiring Christensen, Schroyer (and Yerty) were failures. Spectacular failures. But since Burman is an alum, he's allowed more chances, more breaks and excuses. I don't know if Shyatt and Bohl will be successful. I'm extremely hopeful and between the two of them, one really couldn't say that they were ever even close to bad hires. But if they do not compete for championships, in this narrative, they couldn't possibly be failures. It would have to be something else. Salary pools, recruiting difficulty, any other excuse that can be conjured up that wouldn't fall on them or an AD with 8 years on the job at his alma mater.
tweaked said:
If anyone said (or actually believed) that Shyatt was a bad hire, I'd be one of the first to line up so they could be viciously slapped right in the face. Repeatedly.
But I'm not quite sure that Burman had anything to do with his hire. I would argue that no matter who the AD was, Shyatt would have been hired. I believe this based on the integrity of Shyatt wanting to come back after 1998. And his proven track record as coach, mentor and recruiter at the highest levels of NCAA basketball. But most important was of course the all-time, monumental, breathtaking, dizzying, dazzling, pants droppingly glorious in its negligence hiring of one Heath Schroyer by Tom Burman to be UW's head men's basketball coach in 2007. This event, more than any other, crippled any belief that I ever had that Burman knows what he's doing and set back most fans expectations so low that many forget how these dark days even came about in the first place. But not me. I am not a smart man. I'm not as dumb as BeaverPoke either but I know that Heath Schroyer is worse than AIDS. And yes, I do love hyperbole.
tweaked said:
Yeah, again not arguing with you here. But it's like you expect everyone that's been involved with UW and it's athletics arm the past 20+ years to suddenly change for the better. I do not share this, I'm sorry to say, delusion. If Wyoming football or basketball succeeds, in my mind it will be in spite of current administration.
tweaked said:
If these things don't come to pass, we'll always look to the next five year timeframe. Like always.
johnywyo
Well-known member
A quality director in any leadership capacity would be able to dissect the situation at hand and develop a comprehensive strategy to determine performance standards for programs, coach's, scheduling, maintenance, and facilities. They, (the new director) would realize immediately the prospects for competitive programs among the MWC opponents. They could develop budgets, marketing and support logistics to handle the duties for making us contenders, not pretenders as has been the case for many years. My gut feeling is that broad statements that have been editorialized from Burman's office is insufficient to give me the impression he has the capacity to do the detail of running this department at UW. He's had plenty of time and ample latitude to gain our confidence, simply put he's not proven a thing regardless of the staff he has in place at this time.
WilyWapiti
Well-known member
The measure of success absolutely shouldn't just be about the success of our marquee sports either. It should actually be easier for us to compete for championships in the Olympic sports, but we haven't managed to accomplish that, either.
But beyond that, the customer satisfaction issues that are discussed here have indicated that the athletic department lacks in its attention to detail. Somebody in the department should be reading these message boards for more than just a chuckle. They should be getting ideas on marketing, ticket and promo management, and the overall image of the athletic department. There is a lot of great, free advice and information available from the constituents that should matter the most to the administration.
Because that doesn't seem to be happening, it leads me to the conclusion that someone at or very near the top of the department, is, at best, very tone-deaf.
WW
But beyond that, the customer satisfaction issues that are discussed here have indicated that the athletic department lacks in its attention to detail. Somebody in the department should be reading these message boards for more than just a chuckle. They should be getting ideas on marketing, ticket and promo management, and the overall image of the athletic department. There is a lot of great, free advice and information available from the constituents that should matter the most to the administration.
Because that doesn't seem to be happening, it leads me to the conclusion that someone at or very near the top of the department, is, at best, very tone-deaf.
WW