+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: ACCbbs (/forum-381.html)
+---- Forum: ACC Conference Talk (/forum-351.html)
+---- Thread: Ranking the ACC ADs (/thread-901005.html)
Ranking the ACC ADs - TerpsNPhoenix - 06-11-2020 08:26 PM
Ranking the ACC ADs With Jeff Goodman and Brett McMurphy
https://watchstadium.com/ranking-the-acc-ads-with-jeff-goodman-and-brett-mcmurphy-06-10-2020/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk
RE: Ranking the ACC ADs - georgia_tech_swagger - 06-11-2020 09:33 PM
Giving Todd a C- for the first season of flushing the option is dumb. Go look at the baseball and softball and women's basketball hires or the level of talent coming into the FB program compared to what it was getting. In all four cases it was an immediate substantial upgrade. His grade should either be some sort of A or Incomplete if you insist upon revenue hires only.
RE: Ranking the ACC ADs - Kaplony - 06-11-2020 10:30 PM
(06-11-2020 09:33 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: Giving Todd a C- for the first season of flushing the option is dumb. Go look at the baseball and softball and women's basketball hires or the level of talent coming into the FB program compared to what it was getting. In all four cases it was an immediate substantial upgrade. His grade should either be some sort of A or Incomplete if you insist upon revenue hires only.
The whole premise of the article is dumb, not just that ranking.
RE: Ranking the ACC ADs - Wolfman - 06-14-2020 10:05 PM
The methodology is weird. I'd give Corrigan a C-. I don't think he is failing but I don't think he is moving forward either. I'm also tired of hearing "I'm still learning."
RE: Ranking the ACC ADs - TexanMark - 06-15-2020 12:53 PM
(06-11-2020 10:30 PM)Kaplony Wrote:(06-11-2020 09:33 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: Giving Todd a C- for the first season of flushing the option is dumb. Go look at the baseball and softball and women's basketball hires or the level of talent coming into the FB program compared to what it was getting. In all four cases it was an immediate substantial upgrade. His grade should either be some sort of A or Incomplete if you insist upon revenue hires only.
The whole premise of the article is dumb, not just that ranking.
I agree pretty much another clickbait article
You need to evaluate ADs on hiring/firings, contract execution and negotiation, department morale, winning, ticket sales,bstaying within NCAA compliance, fundraising and alumni/fan engagement. These are some of the major areas. I'm sure I missed a few.
RE: Ranking the ACC ADs - zibby - 06-15-2020 12:56 PM
Giving Heather Lyke a C+ for hiring Chris Creighton is asinine. 28-47 and three bowls may not sound great, but those are EMU's first three bowls since 1987. They finished above .500 twice under Creighton. The last time they finished above .500 was 1995. Hiring Creighton was an A+ move. They should name the stadium after him.