2 year extension for tubs only matters of the buyout gets significantly higher

(04-15-2016 06:17 PM)Racinejake Wrote:  

(04-15-2016 04:46 PM)uchoops Wrote:  Let's rehash tubbs coaching staff again for the umpteenth time

I agree it's much better if we don't discuss it

Some of you guys and Tubs:




SMH

(04-16-2016 12:01 AM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(04-15-2016 11:35 PM)robertfoshizzle Wrote:  I feel a 5-7 season coming on.

Nah. 6-6

******Spoiler Alert******


We will be 5-7, 6-6, or 7-5
Go to middling bowlcation
Get crushed

(04-16-2016 07:07 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  2 year extension for tubs only matters of the buyout gets significantly higher

Exactly. As long as the buyout didn't get any higher, then i have zero problem with this.

(04-16-2016 07:48 AM)The T-Shirt Wrote:  

(04-16-2016 07:07 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  2 year extension for tubs only matters of the buyout gets significantly higher

Exactly. As long as the buyout didn't get any higher, then i have zero problem with this.

As bad as I think TT is, I still hold out hope that I am wrong. I believe we are recruiting a little better than last year, so an extension w/o a higher buyout is fine with me.

(04-16-2016 07:07 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  2 year extension for tubs only matters of the buyout gets significantly higher

Agree, but it's still disappointing, IMO. I know it's a requirement for recruiting, but it still makes me feel like the administration is giving it's approval to crappy results.

(04-16-2016 07:07 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  2 year extension for tubs only matters of the buyout gets significantly higher

Buyout was set to drop to just $500,000 on January 1. My guess is this resets it to the high number it sat at after 2014.

This administration now trades mediocrity for what it views as stability.

The contract extension happened late on a Friday, sounds like one of those famous Obama data dumps.

(04-16-2016 09:27 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  

(04-16-2016 07:07 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  2 year extension for tubs only matters of the buyout gets significantly higher

Buyout was set to drop to just $500,000 on January 1. My guess is this resets it to the high number it sat at after 2014.

This administration now trades mediocrity for what it views as stability.

I want to see three things:

1. B12 Invite in May
2. Tubs FIRED later that day
3. Tressel hired that night

Tressel? No ******* thanks.

I used to be "Mr. Negativity" of the board. Then I figured out that I was just looking at things cockeyed...

Start from a "zero-sum" premise... 6-6 is "average" and normal. So, if we finish the season 6-6 then that's good enough. Then every game above 6-6 is actually +2. So, 7-5 is +2, because not only did you add one win, you also dropped one in the loss column.

Forget the Bowl games... They are exhibitions and do not have any bearing on anything.

So last year was not only a "success," it was a success with +2 extra credit.

Just saying, it all matters where you set your sights. If we finish 6-6, I'll be very pleased. Anything greater than that, and the coaching staff deserves bonus money.

(And when you think about it, that's consistent with how our coaching administration approaches the Bowl games...they are a "reward" for the team obviously finishing 6-6 or better. Win 9-3 (a +6), and you get a really NICE reward, finish at 7-5 and you get a slightly less nice reward, finish at 6-6 and you get an "OK" reward...)

(04-16-2016 02:03 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  I used to be "Mr. Negativity" of the board. Then I figured out that I was just looking at things cockeyed...

Start from a "zero-sum" premise... 6-6 is "average" and normal. So, if we finish the season 6-6 then that's good enough. Then every game above 6-6 is actually +2. So, 7-5 is +2, because not only did you add one win, you also dropped one in the loss column.

Forget the Bowl games... They are exhibitions and do not have any bearing on anything.

So last year was not only a "success," it was a success with +2 extra credit.

Just saying, it all matters where you set your sights. If we finish 6-6, I'll be very pleased. Anything greater than that, and the coaching staff deserves bonus money.

(And when you think about it, that's consistent with how our coaching administration approaches the Bowl games...they are a "reward" for the team obviously finishing 6-6 or better. Win 9-3 (a +6), and you get a really NICE reward, finish at 7-5 and you get a slightly less nice reward, finish at 6-6 and you get an "OK" reward...)

you're a sad sad man

(04-16-2016 01:13 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(04-16-2016 09:27 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  

(04-16-2016 07:07 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  2 year extension for tubs only matters of the buyout gets significantly higher

Buyout was set to drop to just $500,000 on January 1. My guess is this resets it to the high number it sat at after 2014.

This administration now trades mediocrity for what it views as stability.

I want to see three things:

1. B12 Invite in May
2. Tubs FIRED later that day
3. Tressel hired that night

Tressel? Please put down the crack pipe.

(04-16-2016 02:43 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(04-16-2016 02:03 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  I used to be "Mr. Negativity" of the board. Then I figured out that I was just looking at things cockeyed...

Start from a "zero-sum" premise... 6-6 is "average" and normal. So, if we finish the season 6-6 then that's good enough. Then every game above 6-6 is actually +2. So, 7-5 is +2, because not only did you add one win, you also dropped one in the loss column.

Forget the Bowl games... They are exhibitions and do not have any bearing on anything.

So last year was not only a "success," it was a success with +2 extra credit.

Just saying, it all matters where you set your sights. If we finish 6-6, I'll be very pleased. Anything greater than that, and the coaching staff deserves bonus money.

(And when you think about it, that's consistent with how our coaching administration approaches the Bowl games...they are a "reward" for the team obviously finishing 6-6 or better. Win 9-3 (a +6), and you get a really NICE reward, finish at 7-5 and you get a slightly less nice reward, finish at 6-6 and you get an "OK" reward...)

you're a sad sad man

LOL!

I am going to lose sleep over your lack of approval...

(04-16-2016 02:48 PM)JackieTreehorn Wrote:  

(04-16-2016 01:13 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(04-16-2016 09:27 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  

(04-16-2016 07:07 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  2 year extension for tubs only matters of the buyout gets significantly higher

Buyout was set to drop to just $500,000 on January 1. My guess is this resets it to the high number it sat at after 2014.

This administration now trades mediocrity for what it views as stability.

I want to see three things:

1. B12 Invite in May
2. Tubs FIRED later that day
3. Tressel hired that night

Tressel? Please put down the crack pipe.

why? Crack is fun.

(04-16-2016 02:03 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  I used to be "Mr. Negativity" of the board. Then I figured out that I was just looking at things cockeyed...

Start from a "zero-sum" premise... 6-6 is "average" and normal. So, if we finish the season 6-6 then that's good enough. Then every game above 6-6 is actually +2. So, 7-5 is +2, because not only did you add one win, you also dropped one in the loss column.

Forget the Bowl games... They are exhibitions and do not have any bearing on anything.

So last year was not only a "success," it was a success with +2 extra credit.

Just saying, it all matters where you set your sights. If we finish 6-6, I'll be very pleased. Anything greater than that, and the coaching staff deserves bonus money.

(And when you think about it, that's consistent with how our coaching administration approaches the Bowl games...they are a "reward" for the team obviously finishing 6-6 or better. Win 9-3 (a +6), and you get a really NICE reward, finish at 7-5 and you get a slightly less nice reward, finish at 6-6 and you get an "OK" reward...)

I have no problem watching a 6-6 well coached team. You know, a team that does not have a 100 yards in penalties or plus 3 on turnovers. A team that will hit and block. A coach that puts his players in the best position for success. Last year I saw a disinterested coaching staff and disinterested football team.

(04-16-2016 03:13 PM)rosewater Wrote:  

(04-16-2016 02:03 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  I used to be "Mr. Negativity" of the board. Then I figured out that I was just looking at things cockeyed...

Start from a "zero-sum" premise... 6-6 is "average" and normal. So, if we finish the season 6-6 then that's good enough. Then every game above 6-6 is actually +2. So, 7-5 is +2, because not only did you add one win, you also dropped one in the loss column.

Forget the Bowl games... They are exhibitions and do not have any bearing on anything.

So last year was not only a "success," it was a success with +2 extra credit.

Just saying, it all matters where you set your sights. If we finish 6-6, I'll be very pleased. Anything greater than that, and the coaching staff deserves bonus money.

(And when you think about it, that's consistent with how our coaching administration approaches the Bowl games...they are a "reward" for the team obviously finishing 6-6 or better. Win 9-3 (a +6), and you get a really NICE reward, finish at 7-5 and you get a slightly less nice reward, finish at 6-6 and you get an "OK" reward...)

I have no problem watching a 6-6 well coached team. You know, a team that does not have a 100 yards in penalties or plus 3 on turnovers. A team that will hit and block. A coach that puts his players in the best position for success. Last year I saw a disinterested coaching staff and disinterested football team.

No what you saw last year was a very young team, coaches and players. And man did it show big time, those problems have been corrected I believe. I love the coaches that Tubbs brought in to replace the old ones.

(04-16-2016 11:14 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  The contract extension happened late on a Friday, sounds like one of those famous Obama data dumps.

The date on the tweet was Wednesday.

(04-16-2016 02:03 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  I used to be "Mr. Negativity" of the board. Then I figured out that I was just looking at things cockeyed...

Start from a "zero-sum" premise... 6-6 is "average" and normal. So, if we finish the season 6-6 then that's good enough. Then every game above 6-6 is actually +2. So, 7-5 is +2, because not only did you add one win, you also dropped one in the loss column.

Forget the Bowl games... They are exhibitions and do not have any bearing on anything.

So last year was not only a "success," it was a success with +2 extra credit.

Just saying, it all matters where you set your sights. If we finish 6-6, I'll be very pleased. Anything greater than that, and the coaching staff deserves bonus money.

(And when you think about it, that's consistent with how our coaching administration approaches the Bowl games...they are a "reward" for the team obviously finishing 6-6 or better. Win 9-3 (a +6), and you get a really NICE reward, finish at 7-5 and you get a slightly less nice reward, finish at 6-6 and you get an "OK" reward...)

This makes sense, most of the time my optimism gets the best of me. I expect more than I should, I would love to see UC go undefeated in every sport every season. But to expect it is the wrong thing for me to do. It takes all the fun out of it for me.

(04-16-2016 04:01 PM)Tim Johnson Wrote:  

(04-16-2016 03:13 PM)rosewater Wrote:  

(04-16-2016 02:03 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  I used to be "Mr. Negativity" of the board. Then I figured out that I was just looking at things cockeyed...

Start from a "zero-sum" premise... 6-6 is "average" and normal. So, if we finish the season 6-6 then that's good enough. Then every game above 6-6 is actually +2. So, 7-5 is +2, because not only did you add one win, you also dropped one in the loss column.

Forget the Bowl games... They are exhibitions and do not have any bearing on anything.

So last year was not only a "success," it was a success with +2 extra credit.

Just saying, it all matters where you set your sights. If we finish 6-6, I'll be very pleased. Anything greater than that, and the coaching staff deserves bonus money.

(And when you think about it, that's consistent with how our coaching administration approaches the Bowl games...they are a "reward" for the team obviously finishing 6-6 or better. Win 9-3 (a +6), and you get a really NICE reward, finish at 7-5 and you get a slightly less nice reward, finish at 6-6 and you get an "OK" reward...)

I have no problem watching a 6-6 well coached team. You know, a team that does not have a 100 yards in penalties or plus 3 on turnovers. A team that will hit and block. A coach that puts his players in the best position for success. Last year I saw a disinterested coaching staff and disinterested football team.

No what you saw last year was a very young team, coaches and players. And man did it show big time, those problems have been corrected I believe. I love the coaches that Tubbs brought in to replace the old ones.

I share your optimism about the new coaches but i cannot blame last year on youth. Experienced line quarterback runningbacks and receivers.