Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
John Cunningham evaluation?
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
cpawstoney Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 681
Joined: Jun 2015
Reputation: 15
I Root For: U.C.
Location:
Post: #41
RE: John Cunningham evaluation?
(04-09-2021 09:43 PM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  We'll see who he hires.

If he hires the next Bob Huggins he'll be the greatest AD in history.

There aren't that many "Bob Huggins" out there. There are less than a handful of coaches with more career wins (900) than Higgs. Don't set your expectations too high, you will be disappointed.
 
04-10-2021 04:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bearcat54 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,525
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 44
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #42
RE: John Cunningham evaluation?
(04-09-2021 10:22 PM)The Big O Wrote:  I'm still willing to give him the benefit of doubt since not a lot is known (as with Brannen), but it's looking more like amateur hour on Cunningham's part. I hope it doesn't have a lasting effect on UC athletics.

does anybody think that this current UC administration can and will make a good choice for basketball coach? will they even know how to keep CLF at UC for years? I sure don't. Sort of reminds me of the pre-huggins days when Jim Kelly SR was watching over the sports.
 
04-10-2021 05:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Bearhawkeye Offline
The King of Breakfast
*

Posts: 12,170
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 373
I Root For: Zinzinnati
Location:
Post: #43
RE: John Cunningham evaluation?
(04-10-2021 07:27 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  
(04-10-2021 07:17 AM)skyblade Wrote:  I think Cunningham is going to come out of this looking just fine. Pinto obviously thinks so and he has a lot more information than we do. The BoT was certainly involved in this as well. A lot of people who know what their doing determined that Brannen can and should be fired with cause.

UC admin has been quiet, they've said as little as possible. They were investigating him well before the season ended, there has been plenty of time for them. They never tried to dirty the waters. To me this indicates they found something that justifies a for cause firing.

Brannen has been trying his best to muddy the waters. Frivolous lawsuits, Tom Mars on twitter, Brannen's wife on twitter, the Luke text release. I feel like Brannen knows UC has something on him and is trying to make this as ugly as possible in order for UC to give him a significant chunk of go away money. At some point Brannen decided he know longer cares about UC and is going to do his best to burn it down on his way out.
We disagree on here a lot but I keep coming back to the bolded in my evaluation as well. Maybe we'll be proven wrong but uc has handled this like they are confident in what they have. I don't think they make the move if they are not. Mars and Brannen have acted increasingly desperate throwing crap against the wall in public. I don't think they're fond of their case so they're trying to use public anger to fuel a beneficial settlement.

Maybe UC hasn't talked because they don't have anything new or important to say. Occam's razor and all that. The players have spoken anonymously and it added up to a whole lot of not much or at least not enough that justifies termination for cause rather than corrective action.

I don't think Mars and Co. come of desperate (unless there was a breach of trust with Fickell which we don't know. Either way the quote itself spoke volumes.) I think UC comes off as clumsy and arrogant as well as a bad faith actor. The desperation is with UC. I mean does anybody really believe this whole charade is nothing but a desperate attempt not to pay what UC contractually owes?
 
(This post was last modified: 04-11-2021 10:50 AM by Bearhawkeye.)
04-11-2021 10:49 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Bearhawkeye Offline
The King of Breakfast
*

Posts: 12,170
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 373
I Root For: Zinzinnati
Location:
Post: #44
RE: John Cunningham evaluation?
(04-10-2021 07:37 AM)levydl Wrote:  
(04-10-2021 07:27 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  
(04-10-2021 07:17 AM)skyblade Wrote:  I think Cunningham is going to come out of this looking just fine. Pinto obviously thinks so and he has a lot more information than we do. The BoT was certainly involved in this as well. A lot of people who know what their doing determined that Brannen can and should be fired with cause.

UC admin has been quiet, they've said as little as possible. They were investigating him well before the season ended, there has been plenty of time for them. They never tried to dirty the waters. To me this indicates they found something that justifies a for cause firing.

Brannen has been trying his best to muddy the waters. Frivolous lawsuits, Tom Mars on twitter, Brannen's wife on twitter, the Luke text release. I feel like Brannen knows UC has something on him and is trying to make this as ugly as possible in order for UC to give him a significant chunk of go away money. At some point Brannen decided he know longer cares about UC and is going to do his best to burn it down on his way out.
We disagree on here a lot but I keep coming back to the bolded in my evaluation as well. Maybe we'll be proven wrong but uc has handled this like they are confident in what they have. I don't think they make the move if they are not. Mars and Brannen have acted increasingly desperate throwing crap against the wall in public. I don't think they're fond of their case so they're trying to use public anger to fuel a beneficial settlement.

Brannen's big reveal that UC was in breach because . . . he had to report to some other guy seems pretty telling and hilarious.

Nope, it is a breach but that was just to make UC look silly and it works (although I do agree it's hilarious). Who does Fickell report to? The Manager of Concessions?
 
(This post was last modified: 04-11-2021 11:50 AM by Bearhawkeye.)
04-11-2021 10:53 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Bearhawkeye Offline
The King of Breakfast
*

Posts: 12,170
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 373
I Root For: Zinzinnati
Location:
Post: #45
RE: John Cunningham evaluation?
(04-10-2021 08:28 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  
(04-10-2021 08:26 AM)Former Lurker Wrote:  Legalities aside, isn't such an arrangement indicative of a deeply dysfunctional athletic department? How can you have an AD who doesn't talk to the HC of one of the major revenue sports?

I would say it's indicative of one side's spin while the other side is remaining quiet and going about its business.

So none of this happened? UC's spin was done for them in the press anonymously by the players (I'm not saying I have a problem with that btw - they have every right to speak out.)
 
(This post was last modified: 04-11-2021 11:46 AM by Bearhawkeye.)
04-11-2021 11:02 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Bcatbog Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,158
Joined: Oct 2013
Reputation: 33
I Root For: U of Cincy
Location:
Post: #46
RE: John Cunningham evaluation?
If the administration knew there was a problem long ago, the administration should have addressed it then and not allowed it to continue. Pitiful

This situation blew up in their face with the transfers.
 
04-11-2021 11:14 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Bcatbog Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,158
Joined: Oct 2013
Reputation: 33
I Root For: U of Cincy
Location:
Post: #47
RE: John Cunningham evaluation?
(04-09-2021 09:57 PM)QSECOFR Wrote:  
(04-09-2021 09:29 PM)UCBearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  Getting Brannen and his crew out of here is a huge positive. Program saving decision. Still need to find a good coach but the first part of the equation is done.

I agree that sending Brannen on his way is a good thing.

BUT............

Who is responsible for overseeing head coaches and insuring that programs aren’t allowed to be run into the ground?

Cunningham is not entirely blameless for the fiasco that we have witnessed over the last two years.

(04-10-2021 08:48 AM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  
(04-09-2021 10:32 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  
(04-09-2021 10:00 PM)Bearhawkeye Wrote:  
(04-09-2021 09:26 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  Honestly it's way too early to know on Cunningham.

He's provided next to zero transparency so far, but eventually I think the fans will demand answers especially when we see the final price tag on his handling of this. And Cunningham deserves to tell his version. I don't know how good things will look for Brannen when it all comes out, but I've got a high degree of confidence it won't look good for Cunningham.

From Rauch's twitter earlier today before the news:

[Image: EyjcADpXMAEn8xH?format=png&name=small]

Saw that earlier. They're really grasping if they are using that as an example of not honoring his contract.

Either there is or isn't cause for the firing. Cause doesn't have to be ncaa violations. I think both sides have incentive to eventually settle but I guess we'll see.

Agreed. Weak sauce accusation by Mars.
Bohn was on his way out the door so Brannen had to report to an interim which evidently was Bose. If that reporting relationship stayed in place again big whoop. Reporting structures change regularly in big organizations. It's not like they had Brannen reporting to a manager of concessions. He was reporting to the CFO likely the #2 guy.
If this is the contract violation it's not much of an argument.

In the real world firing someone for cause is a process where the subject is warned about unacceptable performance. Failure to respond becomes justification for firing. Many times a simple layoff is the preferred solution where the person dismissed is eligible for layoff benefits. A positive performance review would be damning for the administration.
 
04-11-2021 11:20 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Bearhawkeye Offline
The King of Breakfast
*

Posts: 12,170
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 373
I Root For: Zinzinnati
Location:
Post: #48
RE: John Cunningham evaluation?
(04-10-2021 08:48 AM)levydl Wrote:  
(04-10-2021 08:26 AM)Former Lurker Wrote:  
(04-10-2021 07:37 AM)levydl Wrote:  
(04-10-2021 07:27 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  
(04-10-2021 07:17 AM)skyblade Wrote:  I think Cunningham is going to come out of this looking just fine. Pinto obviously thinks so and he has a lot more information than we do. The BoT was certainly involved in this as well. A lot of people who know what their doing determined that Brannen can and should be fired with cause.

UC admin has been quiet, they've said as little as possible. They were investigating him well before the season ended, there has been plenty of time for them. They never tried to dirty the waters. To me this indicates they found something that justifies a for cause firing.

Brannen has been trying his best to muddy the waters. Frivolous lawsuits, Tom Mars on twitter, Brannen's wife on twitter, the Luke text release. I feel like Brannen knows UC has something on him and is trying to make this as ugly as possible in order for UC to give him a significant chunk of go away money. At some point Brannen decided he know longer cares about UC and is going to do his best to burn it down on his way out.
We disagree on here a lot but I keep coming back to the bolded in my evaluation as well. Maybe we'll be proven wrong but uc has handled this like they are confident in what they have. I don't think they make the move if they are not. Mars and Brannen have acted increasingly desperate throwing crap against the wall in public. I don't think they're fond of their case so they're trying to use public anger to fuel a beneficial settlement.

Brannen's big reveal that UC was in breach because . . . he had to report to some other guy seems pretty telling and hilarious.

Legalities aside, isn't such an arrangement indicative of a deeply dysfunctional athletic department? How can you have an AD who doesn't talk to the HC of one of the major revenue sports?

I can't say I'm an expert on how athletic depts are structured. I just don't believe that what Brannen's camp is saying is the entire story. For example, the CFO guy is apparently also the Senior Associate AD, so maybe it's not weird at all for him to be the point man with day-to-day stuff involving the hoops coach? And, again, if this was the arrangement from the time Brannen was hired, well he was hired under Bohn, not Cunningham, so that wouldn't be particularly indicative of Cunningham's dysfunction. And why didn't Brannen raise the issue when he got a new AD?

The issue is so trivial and the specifics they are putting out so suspect that it shows me Brannen's camp is flailing. They are also making a bunch of process arguments--"The AD didn't interview me"; "The investigation was ongoing"--which also suggests they don't have a good response to the substantive reasons for his firing.

???? What substantive reasons? None have been given.
 
04-11-2021 11:22 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Bearhawkeye Offline
The King of Breakfast
*

Posts: 12,170
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 373
I Root For: Zinzinnati
Location:
Post: #49
RE: John Cunningham evaluation?
(04-10-2021 10:39 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  
(04-10-2021 10:37 AM)BcatMatt13 Wrote:  
(04-10-2021 09:57 AM)cincy7718 Wrote:  Personally most interested in how this all affects our ability moving forward to retain Fick, and attract best possible new b-ball coach and athletes as well as with fundraising. I absolutely could be wrong but it seems winning the PR battle would be a big part of that, regardless of who was legally in the right.

Also I haven’t seen mentioned, maybe for good reason or maybe I just missed it, but didn’t Cunningham just tell Fick a few months ago he was a few mill short of being being able to fully upgrade facilities? And blamed covid for his inability to raise the money. Then he finds it almost immediately to spend on firing/hiring for a different sport? If Fick truly is unhappy or unimpressed with how this was handled, coupled with watching money that could have helped him, might be a difficult combination to resolve. Just my speculation.

UC isn’t paying Brannen anything unless a Judge forces them to at this point.

I think they'd settle out court in the near future. I think their releases clearly leave that option open and are saying we'll avoid tarnishing Brannen's name if we can get this done amicably. Of course does that go out the door is Mars continues to make this a public spectacle?

Brannen knows he has nothing to lose - the allegations are already out there in public from the players who left (along with the public support of at least one) and he's been fired. There is ZERO evidence UC has anything above and beyond that. And I highly doubt they want to get into when they found out about those things and what the AD did at the time to address it. So UC desperately wants to stay out of court. My best guess is they'll keep upping the offer until it gets very close to $5.25M and Brannen will settle.
 
(This post was last modified: 04-11-2021 11:47 AM by Bearhawkeye.)
04-11-2021 11:31 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Bearhawkeye Offline
The King of Breakfast
*

Posts: 12,170
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 373
I Root For: Zinzinnati
Location:
Post: #50
RE: John Cunningham evaluation?
(04-11-2021 11:14 AM)Bcatbog Wrote:  If the administration knew there was a problem long ago, the administration should have addressed it then and not allowed it to continue. Pitiful

This situation blew up in their face with the transfers.

BINGO. If Brannen did something at the time so egregious that he deserved to be fired, they should have investigated immediately and terminated him if true for cause. Their inaction makes it clear they didn't consider it important enough to fire for cause - so what changed? If he just made some mistakes worthy of correction, UC should have instituted a correction plan and monitored his progress. If it goes to trial, I believe Brannen won't be the only head that rolls in this thing.
 
04-11-2021 11:40 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
levydl Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,414
Joined: Mar 2007
Reputation: 79
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #51
RE: John Cunningham evaluation?
(04-11-2021 11:22 AM)Bearhawkeye Wrote:  
(04-10-2021 08:48 AM)levydl Wrote:  
(04-10-2021 08:26 AM)Former Lurker Wrote:  
(04-10-2021 07:37 AM)levydl Wrote:  
(04-10-2021 07:27 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  We disagree on here a lot but I keep coming back to the bolded in my evaluation as well. Maybe we'll be proven wrong but uc has handled this like they are confident in what they have. I don't think they make the move if they are not. Mars and Brannen have acted increasingly desperate throwing crap against the wall in public. I don't think they're fond of their case so they're trying to use public anger to fuel a beneficial settlement.

Brannen's big reveal that UC was in breach because . . . he had to report to some other guy seems pretty telling and hilarious.

Legalities aside, isn't such an arrangement indicative of a deeply dysfunctional athletic department? How can you have an AD who doesn't talk to the HC of one of the major revenue sports?

I can't say I'm an expert on how athletic depts are structured. I just don't believe that what Brannen's camp is saying is the entire story. For example, the CFO guy is apparently also the Senior Associate AD, so maybe it's not weird at all for him to be the point man with day-to-day stuff involving the hoops coach? And, again, if this was the arrangement from the time Brannen was hired, well he was hired under Bohn, not Cunningham, so that wouldn't be particularly indicative of Cunningham's dysfunction. And why didn't Brannen raise the issue when he got a new AD?

The issue is so trivial and the specifics they are putting out so suspect that it shows me Brannen's camp is flailing. They are also making a bunch of process arguments--"The AD didn't interview me"; "The investigation was ongoing"--which also suggests they don't have a good response to the substantive reasons for his firing.

???? What substantive reasons? None have been given.

That he worked guys until medical staff had to step in? That he went over practice limits and then held a team meeting to find out who ratted him out to the AD? That he was such a jerk his entire freshman class transferred?

Why do you think UC fired him?
 
04-11-2021 12:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
levydl Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,414
Joined: Mar 2007
Reputation: 79
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #52
RE: John Cunningham evaluation?
(04-11-2021 10:53 AM)Bearhawkeye Wrote:  
(04-10-2021 07:37 AM)levydl Wrote:  
(04-10-2021 07:27 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  
(04-10-2021 07:17 AM)skyblade Wrote:  I think Cunningham is going to come out of this looking just fine. Pinto obviously thinks so and he has a lot more information than we do. The BoT was certainly involved in this as well. A lot of people who know what their doing determined that Brannen can and should be fired with cause.

UC admin has been quiet, they've said as little as possible. They were investigating him well before the season ended, there has been plenty of time for them. They never tried to dirty the waters. To me this indicates they found something that justifies a for cause firing.

Brannen has been trying his best to muddy the waters. Frivolous lawsuits, Tom Mars on twitter, Brannen's wife on twitter, the Luke text release. I feel like Brannen knows UC has something on him and is trying to make this as ugly as possible in order for UC to give him a significant chunk of go away money. At some point Brannen decided he know longer cares about UC and is going to do his best to burn it down on his way out.
We disagree on here a lot but I keep coming back to the bolded in my evaluation as well. Maybe we'll be proven wrong but uc has handled this like they are confident in what they have. I don't think they make the move if they are not. Mars and Brannen have acted increasingly desperate throwing crap against the wall in public. I don't think they're fond of their case so they're trying to use public anger to fuel a beneficial settlement.

Brannen's big reveal that UC was in breach because . . . he had to report to some other guy seems pretty telling and hilarious.

Nope, it is a breach but that was just to make UC look silly and it works (although I do agree it's hilarious). Who does Fickell report to? The Manager of Concessions?

Yeah, I don't think it worked in making UC look silly, but I gather we are coming at this whole thing from different points of view.
 
04-11-2021 12:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Bearhawkeye Offline
The King of Breakfast
*

Posts: 12,170
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 373
I Root For: Zinzinnati
Location:
Post: #53
RE: John Cunningham evaluation?
(04-11-2021 12:11 PM)levydl Wrote:  
(04-11-2021 11:22 AM)Bearhawkeye Wrote:  
(04-10-2021 08:48 AM)levydl Wrote:  
(04-10-2021 08:26 AM)Former Lurker Wrote:  
(04-10-2021 07:37 AM)levydl Wrote:  Brannen's big reveal that UC was in breach because . . . he had to report to some other guy seems pretty telling and hilarious.

Legalities aside, isn't such an arrangement indicative of a deeply dysfunctional athletic department? How can you have an AD who doesn't talk to the HC of one of the major revenue sports?

I can't say I'm an expert on how athletic depts are structured. I just don't believe that what Brannen's camp is saying is the entire story. For example, the CFO guy is apparently also the Senior Associate AD, so maybe it's not weird at all for him to be the point man with day-to-day stuff involving the hoops coach? And, again, if this was the arrangement from the time Brannen was hired, well he was hired under Bohn, not Cunningham, so that wouldn't be particularly indicative of Cunningham's dysfunction. And why didn't Brannen raise the issue when he got a new AD?

The issue is so trivial and the specifics they are putting out so suspect that it shows me Brannen's camp is flailing. They are also making a bunch of process arguments--"The AD didn't interview me"; "The investigation was ongoing"--which also suggests they don't have a good response to the substantive reasons for his firing.

???? What substantive reasons? None have been given.

That he worked guys until medical staff had to step in? That he went over practice limits and then held a team meeting to find out who ratted him out to the AD? That he was such a jerk his entire freshman class transferred?

Why do you think UC fired him?

They won't say. That's a big part of the problem.
 
04-11-2021 12:15 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Bearhawkeye Offline
The King of Breakfast
*

Posts: 12,170
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 373
I Root For: Zinzinnati
Location:
Post: #54
RE: John Cunningham evaluation?
(04-11-2021 12:13 PM)levydl Wrote:  
(04-11-2021 10:53 AM)Bearhawkeye Wrote:  
(04-10-2021 07:37 AM)levydl Wrote:  
(04-10-2021 07:27 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  
(04-10-2021 07:17 AM)skyblade Wrote:  I think Cunningham is going to come out of this looking just fine. Pinto obviously thinks so and he has a lot more information than we do. The BoT was certainly involved in this as well. A lot of people who know what their doing determined that Brannen can and should be fired with cause.

UC admin has been quiet, they've said as little as possible. They were investigating him well before the season ended, there has been plenty of time for them. They never tried to dirty the waters. To me this indicates they found something that justifies a for cause firing.

Brannen has been trying his best to muddy the waters. Frivolous lawsuits, Tom Mars on twitter, Brannen's wife on twitter, the Luke text release. I feel like Brannen knows UC has something on him and is trying to make this as ugly as possible in order for UC to give him a significant chunk of go away money. At some point Brannen decided he know longer cares about UC and is going to do his best to burn it down on his way out.
We disagree on here a lot but I keep coming back to the bolded in my evaluation as well. Maybe we'll be proven wrong but uc has handled this like they are confident in what they have. I don't think they make the move if they are not. Mars and Brannen have acted increasingly desperate throwing crap against the wall in public. I don't think they're fond of their case so they're trying to use public anger to fuel a beneficial settlement.

Brannen's big reveal that UC was in breach because . . . he had to report to some other guy seems pretty telling and hilarious.

Nope, it is a breach but that was just to make UC look silly and it works (although I do agree it's hilarious). Who does Fickell report to? The Manager of Concessions?

Yeah, I don't think it worked in making UC look silly, but I gather we are coming at this whole thing from different points of view.

Maybe, but I can honestly say I was neutral on Cunningham until this fiasco.

Again: Do you know of any other major program where the Head Basketball Coach reports to the CFO with no athletic background? Does it make you wonder who the Head Football Coach reports to and why?
 
(This post was last modified: 04-11-2021 12:19 PM by Bearhawkeye.)
04-11-2021 12:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
UCBearcatlawjd2 Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 966
Joined: Nov 2014
Reputation: 10
I Root For: UC
Location:
Post: #55
RE: John Cunningham evaluation?
(04-11-2021 12:19 PM)Bearhawkeye Wrote:  
(04-11-2021 12:13 PM)levydl Wrote:  
(04-11-2021 10:53 AM)Bearhawkeye Wrote:  
(04-10-2021 07:37 AM)levydl Wrote:  
(04-10-2021 07:27 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  We disagree on here a lot but I keep coming back to the bolded in my evaluation as well. Maybe we'll be proven wrong but uc has handled this like they are confident in what they have. I don't think they make the move if they are not. Mars and Brannen have acted increasingly desperate throwing crap against the wall in public. I don't think they're fond of their case so they're trying to use public anger to fuel a beneficial settlement.

Brannen's big reveal that UC was in breach because . . . he had to report to some other guy seems pretty telling and hilarious.

Nope, it is a breach but that was just to make UC look silly and it works (although I do agree it's hilarious). Who does Fickell report to? The Manager of Concessions?

Yeah, I don't think it worked in making UC look silly, but I gather we are coming at this whole thing from different points of view.

Maybe, but I can honestly say I was neutral on Cunningham until this fiasco.

Again: Do you know of any other major program where the Head Basketball Coach reports to the CFO with no athletic background? Does it make you wonder who the Head Football Coach reports to and why?

Brannen doesn’t coach here anymore. Time to move on.
 
04-11-2021 12:24 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
levydl Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,414
Joined: Mar 2007
Reputation: 79
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #56
RE: John Cunningham evaluation?
(04-11-2021 12:19 PM)Bearhawkeye Wrote:  
(04-11-2021 12:13 PM)levydl Wrote:  
(04-11-2021 10:53 AM)Bearhawkeye Wrote:  
(04-10-2021 07:37 AM)levydl Wrote:  
(04-10-2021 07:27 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  We disagree on here a lot but I keep coming back to the bolded in my evaluation as well. Maybe we'll be proven wrong but uc has handled this like they are confident in what they have. I don't think they make the move if they are not. Mars and Brannen have acted increasingly desperate throwing crap against the wall in public. I don't think they're fond of their case so they're trying to use public anger to fuel a beneficial settlement.

Brannen's big reveal that UC was in breach because . . . he had to report to some other guy seems pretty telling and hilarious.

Nope, it is a breach but that was just to make UC look silly and it works (although I do agree it's hilarious). Who does Fickell report to? The Manager of Concessions?

Yeah, I don't think it worked in making UC look silly, but I gather we are coming at this whole thing from different points of view.

Maybe, but I can honestly say I was neutral on Cunningham until this fiasco.

Again: Do you know of any other major program where the Head Basketball Coach reports to the CFO with no athletic background? Does it make you wonder who the Head Football Coach reports to and why?

The CFO is a Sr. Assoc. AD. Mars did not mention that, huh? Again, if Brannen has been reporting to him from the beginning, as Mars claimed, then that would have been Mike Bohn's directive, not Cunningham's. I can imagine that this CFO guy could be the point man for day-to-day stuff between Brannen and the athletic office, I don't know. I just know that one second of digging into Mars's statement reveals that it's not the whole story, so it's probably best not to buy it as gospel, as you've seemed to do.
 
04-11-2021 12:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Bearhawkeye Offline
The King of Breakfast
*

Posts: 12,170
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 373
I Root For: Zinzinnati
Location:
Post: #57
RE: John Cunningham evaluation?
(04-11-2021 12:24 PM)UCBearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  
(04-11-2021 12:19 PM)Bearhawkeye Wrote:  
(04-11-2021 12:13 PM)levydl Wrote:  
(04-11-2021 10:53 AM)Bearhawkeye Wrote:  
(04-10-2021 07:37 AM)levydl Wrote:  Brannen's big reveal that UC was in breach because . . . he had to report to some other guy seems pretty telling and hilarious.

Nope, it is a breach but that was just to make UC look silly and it works (although I do agree it's hilarious). Who does Fickell report to? The Manager of Concessions?

Yeah, I don't think it worked in making UC look silly, but I gather we are coming at this whole thing from different points of view.

Maybe, but I can honestly say I was neutral on Cunningham until this fiasco.

Again: Do you know of any other major program where the Head Basketball Coach reports to the CFO with no athletic background? Does it make you wonder who the Head Football Coach reports to and why?

Brannen doesn’t coach here anymore. Time to move on.

Fickell does though. And we are going to be out about $5M that would be a great help to Fickell's football program and paying a new basketball coach (a major insider has already stated that a terrific available candidate is simply unaffordable to us currently). Not to mention all the other programs at UC facing budget crunches of which is basically all of them. Meanwhile, Cunningham is still here acting like he is unaccountable to the public. So there's about $5M reasons we can't just "move on" at this point.
 
(This post was last modified: 04-11-2021 01:09 PM by Bearhawkeye.)
04-11-2021 01:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Bearhawkeye Offline
The King of Breakfast
*

Posts: 12,170
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 373
I Root For: Zinzinnati
Location:
Post: #58
RE: John Cunningham evaluation?
(04-11-2021 12:27 PM)levydl Wrote:  
(04-11-2021 12:19 PM)Bearhawkeye Wrote:  
(04-11-2021 12:13 PM)levydl Wrote:  
(04-11-2021 10:53 AM)Bearhawkeye Wrote:  
(04-10-2021 07:37 AM)levydl Wrote:  Brannen's big reveal that UC was in breach because . . . he had to report to some other guy seems pretty telling and hilarious.

Nope, it is a breach but that was just to make UC look silly and it works (although I do agree it's hilarious). Who does Fickell report to? The Manager of Concessions?

Yeah, I don't think it worked in making UC look silly, but I gather we are coming at this whole thing from different points of view.

Maybe, but I can honestly say I was neutral on Cunningham until this fiasco.

Again: Do you know of any other major program where the Head Basketball Coach reports to the CFO with no athletic background? Does it make you wonder who the Head Football Coach reports to and why?

The CFO is a Sr. Assoc. AD. Mars did not mention that, huh? Again, if Brannen has been reporting to him from the beginning, as Mars claimed, then that would have been Mike Bohn's directive, not Cunningham's. I can imagine that this CFO guy could be the point man for day-to-day stuff between Brannen and the athletic office, I don't know. I just know that one second of digging into Mars's statement reveals that it's not the whole story, so it's probably best not to buy it as gospel, as you've seemed to do.

I'm not sure anybody claimed Cunningham started the process. I know Mars didn't in his statement. He's just continued it. Maybe it's commonplace, but I've asked several times if anybody knows of a similar situation at a major basketball program and I still haven't heard of one. Also no responses to my question about who Fickell reports to.

I don't claim to be an Insider, but my sources for my opinions go beyond Mars. Is it possible you are being a bit defensive given that your answers to most of these issues are generally "I don't know"?
 
04-11-2021 01:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BearcatMan Offline
Kicking Connoisseur/Occasional Man Crush
*

Posts: 17,969
Joined: Jan 2009
Reputation: 374
I Root For: Cincinnati
Location:
Post: #59
RE: John Cunningham evaluation?
Centre College just announced a $50M indoor practice facility and full-service indoor training center for athletics...they're a D3 school with an enrollment of 1400 students. How can we not raise money for an $8M locker room.



Yes, this is meant as a Cunningham evaluation note...
 
04-12-2021 12:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Former Lurker Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,406
Joined: Dec 2009
Reputation: 13
I Root For: UC...who else?
Location:
Post: #60
RE: John Cunningham evaluation?
(04-11-2021 01:06 PM)Bearhawkeye Wrote:  
(04-11-2021 12:24 PM)UCBearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  
(04-11-2021 12:19 PM)Bearhawkeye Wrote:  
(04-11-2021 12:13 PM)levydl Wrote:  
(04-11-2021 10:53 AM)Bearhawkeye Wrote:  Nope, it is a breach but that was just to make UC look silly and it works (although I do agree it's hilarious). Who does Fickell report to? The Manager of Concessions?

Yeah, I don't think it worked in making UC look silly, but I gather we are coming at this whole thing from different points of view.

Maybe, but I can honestly say I was neutral on Cunningham until this fiasco.

Again: Do you know of any other major program where the Head Basketball Coach reports to the CFO with no athletic background? Does it make you wonder who the Head Football Coach reports to and why?

Brannen doesn’t coach here anymore. Time to move on.

Fickell does though. And we are going to be out about $5M that would be a great help to Fickell's football program and paying a new basketball coach (a major insider has already stated that a terrific available candidate is simply unaffordable to us currently). Not to mention all the other programs at UC facing budget crunches of which is basically all of them. Meanwhile, Cunningham is still here acting like he is unaccountable to the public. So there's about $5M reasons we can't just "move on" at this point.

Should have just stayed with Brannen then.
 
04-12-2021 01:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2021 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2021 MyBB Group.