GIVE AN AWARD
Use your CatCoins™ to grant this post a special award and grant the author bonus CatCoins™!


YOUR BALANCE
monetization_on
Where do people stand on spending for basketball?
storage This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic
Replies: 18  

Where do people stand on spending for basketball?

[1]
Jan 17, 2022, 12:20 PM

It seems to me that Judge Keller doesn't believe that people are willing to spend more on the basketball program. Is he right or is it just the current basketball program?

Maybe I base things too much on my on opinion, and am ignorant of where others stand, but I don't think that most people would be against spending more on basketball. I don't believe that people want to spend more on the current staff because it is not like their effort would be more or less based on what they are making. If it is then we need to get rid of them.

I know more money could be spent in supporting roles, but I think most are in a holding pattern including ones in the athletic department. The one that is going to be coach in the future should be the one deciding how things should be distributed. Until Brownell gets himself off of the hot seat or we hire another coach, we don't know who that coach will likely be. Thus we stand pat.

You can argue that is unfair for Coach Brownell and in a way it is. However, that is the way life is. Whether in our personal life or in business, people hold tight to their purse strings when they there is instability. I hope that it is not just my opinion and that people will be willing to spend more on the basketball program when there is some confidence in who the head guy is going to be in the future. People, at least right now, just are not confident that is going to be Brownell.

I agree with Judge that if we expect better results and don't just want to hope for better results that we should spend more money. I don't think that our past results can be credited or blamed on past spending. A new administration has a starting point and then changes in spending are justified by results. Anyhow do you want to shift more money to the basketball program? Do you want to leave levels where they are currently and hope that we find a coach on their way up? Or are you comfortable being a football school, and rather have money shifted back to football or another sport?

flag link

I’m not for spending more on Brad, that’s for sure.

[2]
Jan 17, 2022, 12:23 PM

If by “spending more money,” JK means hiring a competent, more expensive coach, that seems reasonable.

2022 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg flag link


Re: I’m not for spending more on Brad, that’s for sure.

[1]
Jan 17, 2022, 12:34 PM

Regardless of what we spend the next coach could end up better or worse. Spending more money increases the odds that the person would be better, but I am sure Judge is right about some Clemson fans. Many would rather us gamble on a young and economical coach. They might end up being the next Coach K as much as I despise the man. I would rather bet more money with better odds than less on a longshot, but that's me.

flag link

Re: Where do people stand on spending for basketball?

[1]
Jan 17, 2022, 12:25 PM

I don’t know this for fact but I’d bet our yearly basketball budget has increased every year for the last 12 years. I’d also bet that it has probably increased close to %50 or more in the last decade.

2022 white level member flag link

Re: Where do people stand on spending for basketball?


Jan 17, 2022, 12:30 PM

What does more money get you if you can’t bring in better players. I could coach the top 5 player’s against the greatest basketball coach ever if he had average to below average talent. He would get smoked. Players win games

flag link

Re: Where do people stand on spending for basketball?

[1]
Jan 17, 2022, 12:40 PM

My thought on that would be spending more on a named coach that kids wanted to play for. But no need in spending more money for another unproven name that may or may not help in recruiting.

2022 white level member flag link

MEG


Re: Where do people stand on spending for basketball?


Jan 17, 2022, 12:32 PM

We need to spend in the middle of pack of ACC.

flag link

Where would more money go?


Jan 17, 2022, 12:32 PM

Better uniforms? More basketballs? Better game music? Would we just pay players?

flag link

Re: Where would more money go?

[1]
Jan 17, 2022, 12:45 PM

To me where the money goes would be primarily up to a new coach. If it were up to me, I would look to spend about the same or slightly more on the head coach's salary, and give him more for discretionary spending for assistants and whatever they think is necessary compared to our current spending.

I don't want to just throw money at the problem, but I don't think that we should make a change and then hamstring the new guy either.

flag link

Re: Where do people stand on spending for basketball?

[1]
Jan 17, 2022, 12:43 PM

We don't a vote but if we want a competitive program, we have to spend the money. It worked for football and football pays the bills so write a check.

flag link

Re: Where do people stand on spending for basketball?


Jan 17, 2022, 12:55 PM

Not one more cent.

flag link

Re: Where do people stand on spending for basketball?


Jan 17, 2022, 1:06 PM

Do you think that we should have a better program based on what we are spending now or are you unconcerned with basketball? Do you think a new coach should prove himself and then earn more money for himself and the program?

flag link

Re: Where do people stand on spending for basketball?

[1]
Jan 17, 2022, 1:00 PM

In a round about way I was asking how concerned were people with having a competitive program. Sure all of us want one, but some are not all that concerned and would rather spend less and take a chance. I would like to spend more but I am not sure how much more that I want to just put on the head coach. I would like to give them more to spend on assistants and support staff and give them the ability to earn substantial bonuses based on results. If we get the results, then the bonuses pay for themselves.

flag link

Football won first.***


Jan 17, 2022, 1:02 PM



2022 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link

Re: Football won first.***


Jan 17, 2022, 1:21 PM

Very true. Dabo was a gamble and one that paid off well. It's nothing wrong with that as long as we are not the addict that goes into it expecting to win.

flag link

No, football didn't win first before we funded it well.


Jan 17, 2022, 2:05 PM

Dabo inherited a program with new facility upgrades and a top 5 recruiting class that February. As we know, Dabo earned the job at the end of the 2008 season.

Kevin Steele was hired prior to the 2009 season. This was a big hire, as he was Alabama's defensive coordinator and had also coached in the NFL. We paid him a lot of money to come to Clemson.

Because Dabo was barely above .500 in 2008, 2009, and 2010, including a 2010 team that had a losing record, Dabo had to make some changes. So at the conclusion of our 2010 season, Napier was fired.

Clemson increased the assistant coach budget further to allow for the hiring of Chad Morris as offensive coordinator. As we know, this hire transformed our program, as our 2011 season included an ACC championship.

At the conclusion of our 2011 season, Morris was given a raise which made him the highest paid assistant in college football. This, after a season when we finished 22nd in the final polls.

So as you can see, we did NOT win big before we funded football well. In fact, that increased funding was arguably the biggest reason why we started winning.

2022 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link

Cobbox on Brad Brownell: “His only problem is he has to deal with turd fans questioning every move he makes.”


The coach in any sport has got to have a vision and then

[2]
Jan 17, 2022, 1:27 PM

be able to sell it to the ad and then the bot and he’s got to be able to clearly present how his plans/vision will benefit Clemson and how and how much it will affect recruiting and how he’ll use it to upgrade the program.

A lot of coaches don’t even question the amount of money given to their program (excluding their salary). Other coaches may want more money for facilities or coaching salaries but take the wrong approach by making public negative comments about the situation.

IMO, the coaches that get what they want, are the ones that don’t publicly bash the ad or school. They don’t publicly berate their leadership. The successful coaches ask their boss for what they want and then they present justification for why the are requesting it. In other words they clearly explain how the request would be beneficial or why it may needed. Then depending on how convincing/believable the coach was the ad and board members would decide on whether to take any actions.

Sometimes the ad doesn’t buy what they are selling. Meaning it might have been a good idea but the coach didn’t do a good job of selling it.

IMO, Clemson is not opposed to spending on basketball if they believe it will truly help improve the program and also bring additional revenue back to the school but they aren’t going to open the checkbook if they don’t think the improvements will help very much.

flag link


Successful coaches don’t have a sycophantic toady avatar on TigerNet


Jan 17, 2022, 2:18 PM

whining that they should be given more money.

2022 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg flag link


I am not spending any more of my money on an inferior

[1]
Jan 17, 2022, 2:20 PM

product that is not seeking to improve.

2022 white level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg flag link

"When I was young, I was sure of many things; now there are only two things of which I am sure: one is, that I am a miserable sinner; and the other, that Christ is an all-sufficient Saviour. He is well-taught who learns these two lessons." -John Newton


Replies: 18  

TIGER TICKETS

FB GAME: Miami
FOR SALE: 3 seats for Miami in lower level section UN row W, on the 30 yard line. Asking $300 each, also hav...

Buy or Sell CU Tickets and More in Tiger Tickets!

Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic
749 people have read this post