I have no way to know if he's in trouble or not, but evidently Wally small must be ready for him to go. When Wally starts writing about a pig coach's possible firing, I think his past record indicates that he's stopped his cheerleading for that particular coach.

You are absolutely right. When Wally starts writing columns about Pelphrey like he has lately, you can rest assured he's really on the hot seat. Someone told me early this season that a friend of theirs who is closely associated with the program (I won't mention the name, since it's strictly heresay), told him that if they didn't make the NCAA this year, Pelphrey would be gone, and Mike Anderson would be the new coach. Some will question that and ask why Mike would want to leave Missouri, but I was told he is definitely interested in coming back if the job is ever offered. We'll see. For now, Pelphrey is the coach. If he's gone, then we'll find out if the other information is correct.

(02-20-2011 10:49 AM)outsideualr Wrote:  You are absolutely right. When Wally starts writing columns about Pelphrey like he has lately, you can rest assured he's really on the hot seat. Someone told me early this season that a friend of theirs who is closely associated with the program (I won't mention the name, since it's strictly heresay), told him that if they didn't make the NCAA this year, Pelphrey would be gone, and Mike Anderson would be the new coach. Some will question that and ask why Mike would want to leave Missouri, but I was told he is definitely interested in coming back if the job is ever offered. We'll see. For now, Pelphrey is the coach. If he's gone, then we'll find out if the other information is correct.

Wally has been getting in his little digs at Pelphrey for several weeks now, and has just amped it up a few notches. Pelphrey isn't going anywhere and Anderson coming here is just more delusional hog-talk. Wally has also suggested that Bill Self would leave KU to come here- right.

(02-20-2011 11:16 AM)mjs Wrote:  Pelphrey isn't going anywhere.

+1 Saviours must be a dime a dozen.

(02-20-2011 11:34 AM)Scotto Wrote:  

(02-20-2011 11:16 AM)mjs Wrote:  Pelphrey isn't going anywhere.

+1 Saviours must be a dime a dozen.

Scotto, you seemed pretty sold on Pelphrey. Has that changed? I think this talk of "how he ends the season" being crucial is complete nonsense. After almost 4 years, Long should know if he is the right guy or not. A couple of more wins or losses won't make any difference or, at least, it shouldn't at this point. For what it's worth, I think they beat an overrated Kentucky team on Wednesday.

I still think Coach Pelphrey can make it happen. They've got some highly-regarded recruits coming in; I suspect he'll get a chance to coach those guys. They've shown improvement, and that's what counts. Right..?

(02-20-2011 11:58 AM)Scotto Wrote:  I still think Coach Pelphrey can make it happen. They've got some highly-regarded recruits coming in; I suspect he'll get a chance to coach those guys. They've shown improvement, and that's what counts. Right..?

Sounds like an endorsement for a lifetime contract.

(02-20-2011 12:20 PM)LRTrojan Wrote:  Sounds like an endorsement for a lifetime contract.

I heard Bill Vickery on the radio this morning, and he made some pretty interesting observations concerning Razorback basketball. He said that when they list the attendance at Bud Walton as 8,000, but there are only 5,000 there, that even if the tickets are pre sold, but the people don't come and fill up the seats, the loss of ancillary revenue from concessions is tremendous. Supposedly the revenue from concessions has steadily gone down through the last few years as people aren't showing up for the games. He said nobody has probably sat in the upper deck all season. That's pretty bad.

Another point he made, and I thought this was a real eye opener. You don't keep a bad coach because of a good recruiting class. He mentioned that was always Houston Nutt's deal. Fire me, and you'll lose all those good players. Didn't happen. Won't happen in many cases. And if it does, the good coach will more than make up for it in the long run.

His point was clear that football and basketball are the revenue producers that support all the programs, and you can't just judge a coach only by wins and losses. Obviously if you're winning, generally more people will come. If you're not, they don't, even if they buy a ticket. And money is what drives a program. If the product you're putting on the floor doesn't attract fans, and let's face it, that's the bottom line, whether we want to admit it or not, then the program can't flourish financially. I just thought it was a very thoughful commentary on Vickery's part, and some of what he said could very well have been applicable to any program.

(02-20-2011 11:58 AM)Scotto Wrote:  I still think Coach Pelphrey can make it happen. They've got some highly-regarded recruits coming in; I suspect he'll get a chance to coach those guys. They've shown improvement, and that's what counts. Right..?

Well, it will get you another year with me.

(02-20-2011 01:03 PM)outsideualr Wrote:  I heard Bill Vickery on the radio this morning, and he made some pretty interesting observations concerning Razorback basketball. He said that when they list the attendance at Bud Walton as 8,000, but there are only 5,000 there, that even if the tickets are pre sold, but the people don't come and fill up the seats, the loss of ancillary revenue from concessions is tremendous. Supposedly the revenue from concessions has steadily gone down through the last few years as people aren't showing up for the games. He said nobody has probably sat in the upper deck all season. That's pretty bad.

Good points. As I've said many times, we need a coaching change, if for no other reason than the dwindling attendance. And I hadn't even taken concessions into consideration.

(02-20-2011 01:03 PM)outsideualr Wrote:  I heard Bill Vickery on the radio this morning, and he made some pretty interesting observations concerning Razorback basketball. He said that when they list the attendance at Bud Walton as 8,000, but there are only 5,000 there, that even if the tickets are pre sold, but the people don't come and fill up the seats, the loss of ancillary revenue from concessions is tremendous. Supposedly the revenue from concessions has steadily gone down through the last few years as people aren't showing up for the games. He said nobody has probably sat in the upper deck all season. That's pretty bad.

Another point he made, and I thought this was a real eye opener. You don't keep a bad coach because of a good recruiting class. He mentioned that was always Houston Nutt's deal. Fire me, and you'll lose all those good players. Didn't happen. Won't happen in many cases. And if it does, the good coach will more than make up for it in the long run.

His point was clear that football and basketball are the revenue producers that support all the programs, and you can't just judge a coach only by wins and losses. Obviously if you're winning, generally more people will come. If you're not, they don't, even if they buy a ticket. And money is what drives a program. If the product you're putting on the floor doesn't attract fans, and let's face it, that's the bottom line, whether we want to admit it or not, then the program can't flourish financially. I just thought it was a very thoughful commentary on Vickery's part, and some of what he said could very well have been applicable to any program.

The argument that you have to keep Pel to keep the recruiting class is complete nonsense. 3 of the kids are from Arkansas and are coming regardless. At worst, one of the other 2 will come as well. Of course, you don't have to release any of them under the rules. Now I believe Long feels that the right thing to do is to give Pelphrey the chance to coach the kids he's been recruiting the last couple of years and he will give him that chance. He obviously does not act on impulse, like Broyles did, and apparently cares about the coaches as people. I guess many would argue that the second part is not a good characteristic for an AD to have.

Good points. As I've said many times, we need a coaching change, if for no other reason than the dwindling attendance. And I hadn't even taken concessions into consideration.
[/quote]

Our attendance is down over the last 4 years
UALR avg. att.
2010-11 - 3088
09-10 - 3360
08-09 - 3765
07-08 - 3736

At least it isn't down 3 or 4,000
Ark. avg. att.
2010-11 - 13062
09-10 - 13182
08-09 - 16043
07-08 - 17148 Pels first year

(02-22-2011 09:02 PM)ez272 Wrote:  Good points. As I've said many times, we need a coaching change, if for no other reason than the dwindling attendance. And I hadn't even taken concessions into consideration.

Our attendance is down over the last 4 years
UALR avg. att.
2010-11 - 3088
09-10 - 3360
08-09 - 3765
07-08 - 3736

At least it isn't down 3 or 4,000
Ark. avg. att.
2010-11 - 13062
09-10 - 13182
08-09 - 16043
07-08 - 17148 Pels first year
[/quote]

This is the second year we've held the major auction at the Stephens Center. We raised about $190,000 each year. That more than made up for any lost ticket revenue and a handful of extra hot dogs we may have sold. Folks with a lot more disposable income than I have are apparently quite happy with the athletic program and showed it by opening their wallets. Probably means more to Chris than some whining on message boards.

The reality is that "butts in the seats" is really only a small part of the equation Chris uses to make our budget each year.

[/quote]

The reality is that "butts in the seats" is really only a small part of the equation Chris uses to make our budget each year.
[/quote]

Let's say we average 2,000 more per game in attendance. Let's say 1,000 of those spend $5 a game. Over 14 games that's $70,000.

Our high school team brings in $40,000 a game for football.

The reality is that "butts in the seats" is really only a small part of the equation Chris uses to make our budget each year.
[/quote]

Let's say we average 2,000 more per game in attendance. Let's say 1,000 of those spend $5 a game. Over 14 games that's $70,000.

Our high school team brings in $40,000 a game for football.
[/quote]

Ticket revenue is probably "chump change" in Chris' eyes. If our attendance goes up 33%, a huge increase, that would be 1000 folks a game. Most walk-ups would do what I would do in that situation- buy a $6 ticket. 1000 tickets X 6 bucks X 15 games = $90,000. Not even half of what the auction raised. As a fan, I've always wanted more butts in the seats and thought that should be our primary goal. Luckily, Chris is a lot smarter than me when it comes to running an athletic program. You have to sell a hell of a lot of $6 and $10 tickets (more than we have available) to come close to the revenue he raises through the foundation, seat license fees, auction, donations of services, advertising, etc. The reality is that most of those donors really don't care if we win 16 games or 22 games. They do care that we run a clean program, with quality student-athletes who don't get the university in the news for the wrong reasons.

(02-22-2011 10:01 PM)mjs Wrote:  

(02-22-2011 09:31 PM)ez272 Wrote:  

The reality is that "butts in the seats" is really only a small part of the equation Chris uses to make our budget each year.

Let's say we average 2,000 more per game in attendance. Let's say 1,000 of those spend $5 a game. Over 14 games that's $70,000.

Our high school team brings in $40,000 a game for football.
[/quote]

Ticket revenue is probably "chump change" in Chris' eyes. If our attendance goes up 33%, a huge increase, that would be 1000 folks a game. Most walk-ups would do what I would do in that situation- buy a $6 ticket. 1000 tickets X 6 bucks X 15 games = $90,000. Not even half of what the auction raised. As a fan, I've always wanted more butts in the seats and thought that should be our primary goal. Luckily, Chris is a lot smarter than me when it comes to running an athletic program. You have to sell a hell of a lot of $6 and $10 tickets (more than we have available) to come close to the revenue he raises through the foundation, seat license fees, auction, donations of services, advertising, etc. The reality is that most of those donors really don't care if we win 16 games or 22 games. They do care that we run a clean program, with quality student-athletes who don't get the university in the news for the wrong reasons.
[/quote]

Getting back to LRTrojan's original question I obviously don't have a clue what they will do in Fayetteville. All I know that the same yahoos, on the internet and radio, that wanted Nolan run out of town, and then wanted Heath run out of town, now want Pelphrey run out of town. I have a feeling Long might realize that a revolving door of coaches is not necessarily a good solution. It is interesting- on Wally's show today they talked like Pelphrey is gone and its a done deal. On Drivetime, Sunshine Rick and Ron Crawford seemed to have no doubt Pelphrey will be back. I guess the reality is that no one really knows.

I did get a kick out Drivetime yesterday when one guy blasted all the "rednecks" for calling for Pelphrey's scalp. Randy Rainwater in all seriousness said "Well, while I don't consider myself to be a redneck....

(02-22-2011 09:20 PM)mjs Wrote:  This is the second year we've held the major auction at the Stephens Center. We raised about $190,000 each year. That more than made up for any lost ticket revenue and a handful of extra hot dogs we may have sold. Folks with a lot more disposable income than I have are apparently quite happy with the athletic program and showed it by opening their wallets. Probably means more to Chris than some whining on message boards.

The reality is that "butts in the seats" is really only a small part of the equation Chris uses to make our budget each year.

If that's really the way Peterson thinks, and I don't think it is, then no wonder we aren't anymore successful on the court than we have been. Get a successful winning coach, bring in the fans, sell concessions, and then raise the money from the auctions, and you'll have even more money to operate your department. I guess anyone stupid enough to give big money to a program, and not be bending Peterson's ear about getting a coach that can win, isn't a fan to begin with. He's just giving the money for a tax write off.

(02-22-2011 10:23 PM)LRTrojan Wrote:  

(02-22-2011 09:20 PM)mjs Wrote:  This is the second year we've held the major auction at the Stephens Center. We raised about $190,000 each year. That more than made up for any lost ticket revenue and a handful of extra hot dogs we may have sold. Folks with a lot more disposable income than I have are apparently quite happy with the athletic program and showed it by opening their wallets. Probably means more to Chris than some whining on message boards.

The reality is that "butts in the seats" is really only a small part of the equation Chris uses to make our budget each year.

If that's really the way Peterson thinks, and I don't think it is, then no wonder we aren't anymore successful on the court than we have been. Get a successful winning coach, bring in the fans, sell concessions, and then raise the money from the auctions, and you'll have even more money to operate your department. I guess anyone stupid enough to give big money to a program, and not be bending Peterson's ear about getting a coach that can win, isn't a fan to begin with. He's just giving the money for a tax write off.

I believe it is the way Chris has to think. Not saying he doesn't want to sell more tickets, but producing revenue and balancing the budget is much more important than a few more butts in the seats. Like I said, you have to sell a ton of $6 tickets to balance your budget. So I don't think attendance is that crucial. However, like you said if those donors become very disatisfied Chris may have to listen. I may be wrong, but I don't think most of those donors "live and die" with each UALR win or loss. Not sure how many of them actually attend games with any regularity. They support UALR because it is their city's university and they believe it is the "right" thing to do.

(02-22-2011 10:37 PM)mjs Wrote:  I may be wrong, but I don't think most of those donors "live and die" with each UALR win or loss. Not sure how many of them actually attend games with any regularity. They support UALR because it is their city's university and they believe it is the "right" thing to do.

I think you are right.