I remember hearing that he only had a one-year contract. And oh what a long year it's been. Now that the door has closed another couple of inches on USM's chances of getting into a conference that's worthy of our history / ambition , I can't help but think Jeff's days are numbered. He's done an OK job of balancing the budget, if anyone cared about that, but other than that I perceive zero progress coming from Jeff or his department.

Does anyone know anything specific about his status? Has anyone heard anything about a contract extension, for example?

Tindall and Monchen don't save his bacon?

(04-23-2013 09:54 AM)Smaug Wrote:  Tindall and Monchen don't save his bacon?

My opinion: Tyndall helps... a little. Monken's an open question.

He gets an extension. Unless Hammond can single handedly triple the population of Hattiesburg and get all of those people to stop popping boners every time the SEC is mentioned we aren't going to a new conference.

(04-23-2013 10:09 AM)GCEagle Wrote:  He gets an extension. Unless Hammond can single handedly triple the population of Hattiesburg and get all of those people to stop popping boners every time the SEC is mentioned we aren't going to a new conference.

My opinion on that is that if we settle for excuses from the people we hire to lead, we won't get very good leaders. What you say may be true... it probably is too late to correct the conference issue. However, we need a guy who at least talks about the future, and does so in a big picture way. You can give up on escaping C-SBC, but we still need to talk about growth, or ten years from now it will be UL-Ruston and South Alabama looking down their noses at us.

(04-23-2013 10:18 AM)AndreWhere Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 10:09 AM)GCEagle Wrote:  He gets an extension. Unless Hammond can single handedly triple the population of Hattiesburg and get all of those people to stop popping boners every time the SEC is mentioned we aren't going to a new conference.

My opinion on that is that if we settle for excuses from the people we hire to lead, we won't get very good leaders. What you say may be true... it probably is too late to correct the conference issue. However, we need a guy who at least talks about the future, and does so in a big picture way. You can give up on escaping C-SBC, but we still need to talk about growth, or ten years from now it will be UL-Ruston and South Alabama looking down their noses at us.

Hammond found a way to get 2+ mil to fire Elllllllllllloss. That is a pretty amazing feat, especially with a school that doesn't have that many big money alumni. I think he'll do a good job in growing Southern Miss.

(04-23-2013 10:26 AM)GCEagle Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 10:18 AM)AndreWhere Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 10:09 AM)GCEagle Wrote:  He gets an extension. Unless Hammond can single handedly triple the population of Hattiesburg and get all of those people to stop popping boners every time the SEC is mentioned we aren't going to a new conference.

My opinion on that is that if we settle for excuses from the people we hire to lead, we won't get very good leaders. What you say may be true... it probably is too late to correct the conference issue. However, we need a guy who at least talks about the future, and does so in a big picture way. You can give up on escaping C-SBC, but we still need to talk about growth, or ten years from now it will be UL-Ruston and South Alabama looking down their noses at us.

Hammond found a way to get 2+ mil to fire Elllllllllllloss. That is a pretty amazing feat, especially with a school that doesn't have that many big money alumni. I think he'll do a good job in growing Southern Miss.

That's a fair point. Don't sell us short, though. We've got more money and more of a reputation than people in South MS give us credit for. That's a big part of the problem here in my opinion.

Andre, why don't you apply for the job if you can do it better?

(04-23-2013 09:52 AM)AndreWhere Wrote:  I remember hearing that he only had a one-year contract. And oh what a long year it's been. Now that the door has closed another couple of inches on USM's chances of getting into a conference that isn't an embarassment to the human tradition of sport, I can't help but think Jeff's days are numbered. He's done an OK job of balancing the budget, if anyone cared about that, but other than that I perceive zero progress coming from Jeff or his department.

Does anyone know anything specific about his status? Has anyone heard anything about a contract extension, for example?

I was originally somewhat on your side, but you have gotten worse and worse. Whatever, dude. All this pessimism gets one nowhere in life. I guess when the rapture comes and the sky actually falls, you can run around telling everyone you were right all along.

All Southern Miss has done under Hammond:

1. Fixed the track facilities that Giannini refused to even attempt to fix because of claims that we couldn't afford it.

2. Address the budget issue. This has been a somewhat mixed blessing. He has largely fixed the short-term problem, but he has yet to fully and comprehensively address the long-term revenue generating capability of the athletic department.

3. Fixed the FUBAR situation he inherited (and partially caused, it must be admitted) in football. This has been addressed, but we won't know if he has actually fixed anything until around Thanksgiving.

4. Replaced the football turf and fixed the drainage. This is happening now. A claim has been filed with the insurance company for the scoreboard as well, but we don't have a judgment on that claim yet.

5. Begun a complex and potentially prosperous rebranding of Southern Miss's athletic department. This particular effort is full of potential pitfalls because of the Iowa situation, but so far he has negotiated a more profitable uniform supplier contract, and there is some evidence that he is actually listening to the alumni over this issue.

6. Replaced one successful basketball coach with one who so far looks to be an even better coach.

Known negatives under Hammond:

1. Women's sports are in a tailspin. He just resigned Lee-McNelis to a contract extension despite the fact that she only has two winning seasons and zero NCAA appearances. The softball team that at one point was a force in CUSA is in freefall. The volleyball team is winless. Other women's sports aren't doing much better. It is clear that he is focusing on the revenue generating sports in an effort to fix the budgeting woes, but he could be digging too deep a hole here to easily extricate the department from.

2. His most forceful demonstration on the conference realignment front has been to hire a firm to "take a snapshot" (his words) of the athletic department and tell him what he needs to do next. Without more action from his office, Southern Miss is not going anywhere.

3. Most of Southern Miss's biggest boosters were confirmed Giannini loyalists who enjoyed a lot of power and prestige under his run as AD. Very few of these have made up with Hammond since he took over as AD. Part of this is a change in philosophy as Hammond wants to build around the Eagle Club rather than a relative handful of big money donors, but something more needs to be done because large-scale projects such as building a basketball practice facility or renovating Reed Green won't happen without the big money. This can also be a problem down the road because many of them also have ties to the state's SEC schools. We can ill afford to bleed donors at this point.

Overall, in order to keep his job, Hammond has to impress two people more than anyone else:

1. Southern Miss's president.
2. The head of IHL.

The former person, Rodney Bennett, is brand new to his job (April 1 was his first official day). All signs suggest that he is happy with Hammond so far. The latter person is Hank Bounds, a USM graduate. While he and the rest of IHL were unhappy with the choice of Hammond initially, they like what he has done so far with correcting the budget snafu. THE IHL itself could probably care less about Southern Miss's success on the field, even with USM graduates in prominent positions.

Most signs that I see point to Hammond keeping his job past the First of June. Whether he will get another one year deal or a more standard four year contract (anti-carpetbagging law in Mississippi limits public employees to five year contract terms) remains to be seen.

Just put worthless posters like Andre on your ignore list like I did. Life immediately gets better.

(04-23-2013 10:45 AM)nastybunch Wrote:  Just put worthless posters like Andre on your ignore list like I did. Life immediately gets better.

I don't know, man... you're an expert computer operator from the 1,200 baud modem days and you needed technical help ignoring me. Kinda made you look dumb, IIRC. Do you think a mere mortal will be able to figure it out?

(04-23-2013 09:52 AM)AndreWhere Wrote:  I remember hearing that he only had a one-year contract. And oh what a long year it's been. Now that the door has closed another couple of inches on USM's chances of getting into a conference that's worthy of our history / ambition , I can't help but think Jeff's days are numbered. He's done an OK job of balancing the budget, if anyone cared about that, but other than that I perceive zero progress coming from Jeff or his department.

Does anyone know anything specific about his status? Has anyone heard anything about a contract extension, for example?

I guess it comes down to 1) will the Goa'ould system lords band together and attack the Earth as a united force? 2) Will the Asgard step in?

(04-23-2013 10:37 AM)Freshy Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 09:52 AM)AndreWhere Wrote:  I remember hearing that he only had a one-year contract. And oh what a long year it's been. Now that the door has closed another couple of inches on USM's chances of getting into a conference that isn't an embarassment to the human tradition of sport, I can't help but think Jeff's days are numbered. He's done an OK job of balancing the budget, if anyone cared about that, but other than that I perceive zero progress coming from Jeff or his department.

Does anyone know anything specific about his status? Has anyone heard anything about a contract extension, for example?

I was originally somewhat on your side, but you have gotten worse and worse. Whatever, dude. All this pessimism gets one nowhere in life. I guess when the rapture comes and the sky actually falls, you can run around telling everyone you were right all along.

All Southern Miss has done under Hammond:

1. Fixed the track facilities that Giannini refused to even attempt to fix because of claims that we couldn't afford it.

2. Address the budget issue. This has been a somewhat mixed blessing. He has largely fixed the short-term problem, but he has yet to fully and comprehensively address the long-term revenue generating capability of the athletic department.

3. Fixed the FUBAR situation he inherited (and partially caused, it must be admitted) in football. This has been addressed, but we won't know if he has actually fixed anything until around Thanksgiving.

4. Replaced the football turf and fixed the drainage. This is happening now. A claim has been filed with the insurance company for the scoreboard as well, but we don't have a judgment on that claim yet.

5. Begun a complex and potentially prosperous rebranding of Southern Miss's athletic department. This particular effort is full of potential pitfalls because of the Iowa situation, but so far he has negotiated a more profitable uniform supplier contract, and there is some evidence that he is actually listening to the alumni over this issue.

6. Replaced one successful basketball coach with one who so far looks to be an even better coach.

Known negatives under Hammond:

1. Women's sports are in a tailspin. He just resigned Lee-McNelis to a contract extension despite the fact that she only has two winning seasons and zero NCAA appearances. The softball team that at one point was a force in CUSA is in freefall. The volleyball team is winless. Other women's sports aren't doing much better. It is clear that he is focusing on the revenue generating sports in an effort to fix the budgeting woes, but he could be digging too deep a hole here to easily extricate the department from.

2. His most forceful demonstration on the conference realignment front has been to hire a firm to "take a snapshot" (his words) of the athletic department and tell him what he needs to do next. Without more action from his office, Southern Miss is not going anywhere.

3. Most of Southern Miss's biggest boosters were confirmed Giannini loyalists who enjoyed a lot of power and prestige under his run as AD. Very few of these have made up with Hammond since he took over as AD. Part of this is a change in philosophy as Hammond wants to build around the Eagle Club rather than a relative handful of big money donors, but something more needs to be done because large-scale projects such as building a basketball practice facility or renovating Reed Green won't happen without the big money. This can also be a problem down the road because many of them also have ties to the state's SEC schools. We can ill afford to bleed donors at this point.

Overall, in order to keep his job, Hammond has to impress two people more than anyone else:

1. Southern Miss's president.
2. The head of IHL.

The former person, Rodney Bennett, is brand new to his job (April 1 was his first official day). All signs suggest that he is happy with Hammond so far. The latter person is Hank Bounds, a USM graduate. While he and the rest of IHL were unhappy with the choice of Hammond initially, they like what he has done so far with correcting the budget snafu. THE IHL itself could probably care less about Southern Miss's success on the field, even with USM graduates in prominent positions.

Most signs that I see point to Hammond keeping his job past the First of June. Whether he will get another one year deal or a more standard four year contract (anti-carpetbagging law in Mississippi limits public employees to five year contract terms) remains to be seen.

I agree with most of that. I'd realllllly have to fake things to be optimistic right now.. there are some people who are still doing it, but I think they've got a screw loose.

I think the IHL wants us to succeed, but doesn't want USM or anybody else stirring up ****. I don't think anyone at IHL gets off on seeing USM trapped in a subpar conference, or on seeing us lose football games.

Jeff's plan to balance the budget relies too much on "body bag" road games, in my opinion. He's undoing a lot of gains that RG made. Did RG finance this progress on credit? Maybe, to some extent... but I'll take financed success over paid-for failure any day of the week.

(04-23-2013 09:52 AM)AndreWhere Wrote:  He's done an OK job of balancing the budget, if anyone cared about that, but other than that I perceive zero progress coming from Jeff or his department.

You do realize that right now that is our number 1 goal right? We are broke and we need to get out of this financial rut before any of these conferences even take a cursory look at us.

I don't understand how nobody seems to realize that there is no such freaking thing as a quick fix in this world. You have to take things one step at a time or else your gonna end up tripping over yourself. You want USM to be in a conference like Memphis and ECU and UCF are now. Well, here is the difference.

ECU and UCF-location, high enrollment, financially stable
Memphis-MARKET!
Tulane-MARKET!
UH-MARKET!

Hate to tell you this guys, until we get financially stable and begin to compete, we aren't going anywhere. Expanding our market size takes something, anybody wanna guess what that something is?

Winner, money.

And we aint got that right now. So instead of pushing the panic button cause we aren't in the Big East or whatever the hell conference is out there, how about we sit down and look at this thing objectively and realize that it is not gonna get fixed over night. It's gonna take a few steps and the guy in charge so far is taking those steps.

And do you really think other conferences give two craps about women's sports?

(04-23-2013 11:09 AM)GrandPointEagle Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 09:52 AM)AndreWhere Wrote:  He's done an OK job of balancing the budget, if anyone cared about that, but other than that I perceive zero progress coming from Jeff or his department.

You do realize that right now that is our number 1 goal right? We are broke and we need to get out of this financial rut before any of these conferences even take a cursory look at us.

I don't understand how nobody seems to realize that there is no such freaking thing as a quick fix in this world. You have to take things one step at a time or else your gonna end up tripping over yourself. You want USM to be in a conference like Memphis and ECU and UCF are now. Well, here is the difference.

ECU and UCF-location, high enrollment, financially stable
Memphis-MARKET!
Tulane-MARKET!
UH-MARKET!

Hate to tell you this guys, until we get financially stable and begin to compete, we aren't going anywhere. Expanding our market size takes something, anybody wanna guess what that something is?

Winner, money.

And we aint got that right now. So instead of pushing the panic button cause we aren't in the Big East or whatever the hell conference is out there, how about we sit down and look at this thing objectively and realize that it is not gonna get fixed over night. It's gonna take a few steps and the guy in charge so far is taking those steps.

And do you really think other conferences give two craps about women's sports?

Balancing a $20 million budget is Jeff's "biggest goal" right now. Apparently it's yours, too. Maybe you'll get t-shirts printed for that. BUT IT'S NOT MY BIGGEST GOAL. Honestly, I don't care. I think it's a huge distraction and a manufactured problem.

(04-23-2013 11:13 AM)AndreWhere Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 11:09 AM)GrandPointEagle Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 09:52 AM)AndreWhere Wrote:  He's done an OK job of balancing the budget, if anyone cared about that, but other than that I perceive zero progress coming from Jeff or his department.

You do realize that right now that is our number 1 goal right? We are broke and we need to get out of this financial rut before any of these conferences even take a cursory look at us.

I don't understand how nobody seems to realize that there is no such freaking thing as a quick fix in this world. You have to take things one step at a time or else your gonna end up tripping over yourself. You want USM to be in a conference like Memphis and ECU and UCF are now. Well, here is the difference.

ECU and UCF-location, high enrollment, financially stable
Memphis-MARKET!
Tulane-MARKET!
UH-MARKET!

Hate to tell you this guys, until we get financially stable and begin to compete, we aren't going anywhere. Expanding our market size takes something, anybody wanna guess what that something is?

Winner, money.

And we aint got that right now. So instead of pushing the panic button cause we aren't in the Big East or whatever the hell conference is out there, how about we sit down and look at this thing objectively and realize that it is not gonna get fixed over night. It's gonna take a few steps and the guy in charge so far is taking those steps.

And do you really think other conferences give two craps about women's sports?

Balancing a $20 million budget is Jeff's "biggest goal" right now. Apparently it's yours, too. Maybe you'll get t-shirts printed for that. BUT IT'S NOT MY BIGGEST GOAL. Honestly, I don't care. I think it's a huge distraction and a manufactured problem.

Yes, it is my biggest goal right now because I know how finances work.

You wanna get ahead, you've got to have money.

You think Ole Miss and Mississippi State are in the SEC because of the quality of their programs? Hell no, but they are rich as hell.

Of course its a manufactured problem because we've had morons manufacturing it for the past 13 years. I don't see how Hammond takes blame for attempting to fix it.

I can tell your #1 goal is get out of C-USA today, right now. Let me try once again to break it down for you why that is next to impossible.

We are B-R-O-K-E! Do you not understand this concept? Let me ask you something. If you are holding a part-time job making $7.50 an hour. Are you going to go out and buy a $200,000 house? If so, then I've heard all I need to hear and I hope you enjoy the foreclosure in a few months.

We have no market! The only way to counteract this is by building up an artificial market with advertising, recruiting, and holding events. Guess what all this stuff costs....money! So with no money comes no market, which is the biggest thing these conferences look for. We are a small town university. What we have done despite that is downright amazing, but the college football elite do not recognize it because they only have one goal in sight.

Wanna guess what that one goal is? Money. It all comes back to that. Without money, product on the field doesn't mean jack. It is an incredibly sad truth of the situation but it is the truth all the same.

(04-23-2013 11:13 AM)AndreWhere Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 11:09 AM)GrandPointEagle Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 09:52 AM)AndreWhere Wrote:  He's done an OK job of balancing the budget, if anyone cared about that, but other than that I perceive zero progress coming from Jeff or his department.

You do realize that right now that is our number 1 goal right? We are broke and we need to get out of this financial rut before any of these conferences even take a cursory look at us.

I don't understand how nobody seems to realize that there is no such freaking thing as a quick fix in this world. You have to take things one step at a time or else your gonna end up tripping over yourself. You want USM to be in a conference like Memphis and ECU and UCF are now. Well, here is the difference.

ECU and UCF-location, high enrollment, financially stable
Memphis-MARKET!
Tulane-MARKET!
UH-MARKET!

Hate to tell you this guys, until we get financially stable and begin to compete, we aren't going anywhere. Expanding our market size takes something, anybody wanna guess what that something is?

Winner, money.

And we aint got that right now. So instead of pushing the panic button cause we aren't in the Big East or whatever the hell conference is out there, how about we sit down and look at this thing objectively and realize that it is not gonna get fixed over night. It's gonna take a few steps and the guy in charge so far is taking those steps.

And do you really think other conferences give two craps about women's sports?

Balancing a $20 million budget is Jeff's "biggest goal" right now. Apparently it's yours, too. Maybe you'll get t-shirts printed for that. BUT IT'S NOT MY BIGGEST GOAL. Honestly, I don't care. I think it's a huge distraction and a manufactured problem.

It is a manufactured problem in that 100-odd other FBS schools out there balance their athletic department budgets with funds taken from academics, which is basically what the audit is accusing us of doing. The problem is that those schools aren't grouped together with a pair of SEC programs who don't have to balance their budgets with money from academics. So we have an athletic director adopting a reactionary solution to the problem in order to please his reactionary bosses on the IHL.

The bigger problem is one of revenue generation, which Hammond has not forcefully addressed yet. Give him credit for tackling the more immediate problem, but he still has work to do to address the looming issue of long-term revenues.

Given that Southern Miss is expected to be 69% female in ten years and give out three degrees to women for every one degree it gives to a man in about twenty years (both statistics are ahead of national trends), you can ignore women's athletics only at your own peril. That's all future alumni base right there.

It's funny that you'd mention the softball thing, Freshy. I had a night class at UNO yesterday and there was a girl wearing a USM softball shirt. People say women's sports don't matter, and they may even think "T-shirt fans" are an SEC thing. I'm seeing evidence to the contrary.

And your take on the budget is perfect. We're not any poorer than a lot of commuter schools with subsidized programs. And I don't give Jeff too much credit for balancing a $20 million budget. Let's talk about $30 million.

Why any Southern Miss fan would question Jeff Hammond's job security is beyond bizarre. The man was handed a mess and has done more than any other AD, short of a divine miracle, to stabilize your program. Add in the fact that his blood, sweat and tears are invested in the Golden Eagle football program.

You are lucky to have him. I respected him as a competitor when we were younger and faster, and even more so now as we are getting older.

Be thankful you didn't get a RC Johnson.

(04-23-2013 11:53 AM)TG4 Wrote:  Why any Southern Miss fan would question Jeff Hammond's job security is beyond bizarre. The man was handed a mess and has done more than any other AD, short of a divine miracle, to stabilize your program. Add in the fact that his blood, sweat and tears are invested in the Golden Eagle football program.

You are lucky to have him. I respected him as a competitor when we were younger and faster, and even more so now as we are getting older.

Be thankful you didn't get a RC Johnson.

The main reason I questioned his job security is the fact that his contract will be expiring soon.


I think Gen.Hammond was handed a delicate situation.... which is exactly what Gianninni walked into, what Jeff Bower walked into, what Fedora walked into, what Tyndall walked into, etc., etc. Even Curley Hallman had to follow up a guy who won 6-7 games every year but got fired for it. That's just reality. We aren't talking about people who make $40,000 per year here. I don't know if miracles can be expected, but the guys I listed came pretty damned close.