Chattanooga

Re: Chattanooga

Postby Smurf » Mon Jan 13, 2020 3:44 pm

Good points, SU DOG.

It is important that we take the macro view when discussing issues like this. Football, while underperforming, has not been bad lately. It is just not up to the standards to which most of us aspire, particularly given the talent we have witnessed. I am not making excuse for mediocrity, but merely pointing out that football could be and has been a lot worse than this. Baseball has been rock solid and soccer has been nothing short of stellar. Volleyball made it back to the NCAAs this season. And, as SU Dog alluded, we have Karisa Nelson, who was a national champion. In the past five seasons, softball has finished as a tourney runner up and also won the tourney (and a subsequent NCAA berth). The Samford sky is not falling.

We do not need to be sacrificing very successful sports at SU just because football is underachieving and basketball sucks and has been grossly mismanaged. It would be foolish to throw the baby out with the bath water. Keep what works and fix what doesn't. This isn't an unfixable problem and the university, if it is serious, needs to commit to fixing it. In part, that means hiring the right people in the right positions and moving on if it is obvious that those people cannot live up to certain performance expectations. This should be the mantra of the university as a whole, academic and athletic. However, I digress.

Consider that...

In 2018-2019 our women finished second in the Germann Cup standings. Our men finished fourth.

In 2017-2018 both the women and the men finished second in the German Cup.

In 2016-2017, the women finished second and the men finished third.

In fact, over the last 10 years SU has failed to finish lower than fifth in either the men's or women's standings. This is even more impressive when we consider that for a few of those years, we were battling against the likes of Georgia Southern, Davidson, App State, and Elon.

These accomplishments do not suggest to me that we cannot nor should not be competing at this level. It suggest that we can and should be competing at this level. We just need to fix what isn't working.
BOE.
Smurf
 
Posts: 5141
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 4:17 pm
Location: Durham, NC

Re: Chattanooga

Postby AP » Mon Jan 13, 2020 6:26 pm

Discussing football and basketball in the same post isn't fair. Football needs some tweaks and adjustments.

Basketball needs to be bulldozed and rebuilt from the foundation.
AP
 
Posts: 4933
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 2:38 pm

Re: Chattanooga

Postby Cujo » Mon Jan 13, 2020 6:52 pm

So, Smurf and SUD, you are suggesting Samford has been emphasizing all sports other than the marquee sports of football and basketball? We can make excuses for football, but we have had excellent teams and laid eggs against cellar dwellers when it was time to snatch a championship. Football gets a pass because it is competitive (or was), but the talent and the accomplishments have made the point—for what we could be we have been, we have been a disappointment (inexcusable more often than not). Basketball, the emphasis is of the entire conference, has been a monumental failure.
In an imperfect world, absolute truth is divisive. There's no unity in truth. Decide then whether truth before unity or unity before truth?
Cujo
 
Posts: 10614
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 12:34 am

Re: Chattanooga

Postby Smurf » Mon Jan 13, 2020 7:54 pm

AP put it best: Football needs some adjustments while basketball needs a complete foundational overhaul (which is what I thought we were looking to do when Seltzer was fired). Football has admittedly choked when opportunities were there to win a conference title, potentially earn post season berth, or win a playoff game. Still basketball isn't even remotely to the point of being in that conversation. Basketball wishes it could be where football is right now, warts and all. In the last five years, SU basketball is 74-92 (32-63). SU football is 32-26 (23-17) over the same period. Football has won 64% of their games in the last five years. Basketball has won just 44% of theirs.

For me the sore spot here is that it is basketball became a sport of emphasis and yet six years into Padgett's tenure we are winning just a third of our conference games and are coming off a 38 point loss to a middle of the road conference team. If SU basketball was a corporation, stockholders would have ousted leadership because the return on the investment has been absolutely horrible.

Newton had egg all over his face on the Seltzer hire. Can he afford to endure another embarrassing hire in the sport in which he has the most experience and knowledge? Can he be trusted with yet a third hire for basketball when the time comes?
BOE.
Smurf
 
Posts: 5141
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 4:17 pm
Location: Durham, NC

Re: Chattanooga

Postby AP » Mon Jan 13, 2020 8:26 pm

Smurf wrote: Can he be trusted with yet a third hire for basketball when the time comes?
The AD is 0-2 in hiring for his primary sport. In the SEC, no AD gets to fire and hire 3 football coaches. In the SoCon, no AD gets to fire and hire 3 basketball coaches.
AP
 
Posts: 4933
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 2:38 pm

Re: Chattanooga

Postby big_dog1968 » Tue Jan 14, 2020 9:37 am

AP wrote:
Smurf wrote: Can he be trusted with yet a third hire for basketball when the time comes?
The AD is 0-2 in hiring for his primary sport. In the SEC, no AD gets to fire and hire 3 football coaches. In the SoCon, no AD gets to fire and hire 3 basketball coaches.

Is there any indication that Newton is under any pressure for his job. If there isn't then he may get to break new ground and we might get to 'witness the beginning' yet again.
Image
User avatar
big_dog1968
 
Posts: 2386
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 7:30 pm

Re: Chattanooga

Postby SU DOG » Wed Jan 15, 2020 5:26 pm

I think our main concern in the next couple of years will be a more pressing question. That will be what does the new president thinks of athletics?
I have no confirmation of this, but I think President Westmoreland will be looking at retirement.
SU DOG
 
Posts: 7347
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 8:30 pm

Re: Chattanooga

Postby Smurf » Wed Jan 15, 2020 6:38 pm

Which means that unless Westmoreland is deeply convicted about letting Newton and/or Padgett go, he is not going to rock the boat right before he leaves. I think the same could be said too about an interim president, and then the same would also hold true for a new president early on in his/her tenure. This extends the question about Newton's future from short term to long term.

Assuming what SU DOG has reported is true, then long story short, like it or not, Padgett and Newton will remain at SU at least until their contracts expire.
BOE.
Smurf
 
Posts: 5141
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 4:17 pm
Location: Durham, NC

Re: Chattanooga

Postby big_dog1968 » Wed Jan 15, 2020 7:15 pm

How long does Padgett have?
Image
User avatar
big_dog1968
 
Posts: 2386
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 7:30 pm

Re: Chattanooga

Postby AP » Wed Jan 15, 2020 7:24 pm

big_dog1968 wrote:How long does Padgett have?
Signed through 2021-22 season. Got an extension after year 3, when we paid money to host that CIT game and get them to 20 wins.
AP
 
Posts: 4933
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 2:38 pm

PreviousNext

Return to The Dog Pound

  • Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests