Official Jon Gruden Thread VI

Status
Not open for further replies.
#3,052
#3,052
Leopold Stotch said:
SBV said Randy Shannon was going to be our DC and he wasn't ever even contacted. That's not very solid. Others you mentioned did the same, but I can't keep the people with "sources" in this thread straight. I promise you he is not coming and this is just misinformation being perpetuated to the Nth degree. Move on to something more productive.
Click to expand...

You're speaking in definites. You don't know that Randy Shannon was or wasn't contacted. The only person that knows that is Randy Shannon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#3,056
#3,056
Leopold Stotch said:
SBV said Randy Shannon was going to be our DC and he wasn't ever even contacted. That's not very solid. Others you mentioned did the same, but I can't keep the people with "sources" in this thread straight. I promise you he is not coming and this is just misinformation being perpetuated to the Nth degree. Move on to something more productive.
Click to expand...

There!!!...... You came up with your own solution for your problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#3,059
#3,059
Leopold Stotch said:
SBV said Randy Shannon was going to be our DC and he wasn't ever even contacted. That's not very solid. Others you mentioned did the same, but I can't keep the people with "sources" in this thread straight. I promise you he is not coming and this is just misinformation being perpetuated to the Nth degree. Move on to something more productive.
Click to expand...

I can understand you doubting people on here and there "sources" but answer me this question. All the recent Gruden rumors started with the story hes contacting people to put a staff together for his return to coaching. Why would a coach headed to the NFL have such an urgency to put a staff togehter in October? Wouldnt it make more sense someones putting a staff togehter now becuase they need to be ready to recruit ASAP. Theres no need to rush together a staff for the NFL. No coaching moves will be made til January and there is simply no rush to put a staff together at this point for the NFL.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 10 people
#3,061
#3,061
PaVolsfn said:
I can understand you doubting people on here and there "sources" but answer me this question. All the recent Gruden rumors started with the story hes contacting people to put a staff together for his return to coaching. Why would a coach headed to the NFL have such an urgency to put a staff togehter in October? Wouldnt it make more sense someones putting a staff togehter now becuase they need to be ready to recruit ASAP. Theres no need to rush together a staff for the NFL. No coaching moves will be made til January and there is simply no rush to put a staff together at this point for the NFL.
Click to expand...

Spot on. Gave you a like for this.
 
#3,064
#3,064
jos3ywales said:
There just trying to clean up the PR mess the behind the scenes. Stuff is all about Wrapped up with the verbal stuff. All that left now is for No one in the AD Office to screw it up on the PR side and keep blowing smoke everywhere else. Gruden knows what he is doing and If the Contract is Signed in December then Hart will look like a freaking Hero for keeping everyone from knowing the truth. I know some you seen the post I made early today and I was then and am now just passing on what I was told. Dad just came by and told me the rest of the Story I see no way it was fake or made up. Just passing on another tid bit I got if I receive anymore I will pass it on. Again no insider don't claim anything just want Gruden here just telling you what the Booster/Owner of the said car dealerships my dads boss told him Today
Click to expand...

Sounds good thanx for the info. Keep bringing good news as you hear it.
 
#3,066
#3,066
Don't really like to share stuff from TOS but I think this says a lot about what some of the insiders have said:

On the original agenda, there was to be a performance and retention plan for executive officers, but that was deferred and not in this meeting. I was told they were not ready to discuss it, but no one could tell me why.

They did approved the UTFI amendment. So what does that mean. In talking to people today it only affects fundraising and it means they will continue to do it under the current structure that was approved a year and a half ago. What it means is that athletic fundraising goes under the UTFI meaning the director of athletic development (now Chris Fuller) reports to head of the UTFI who works for the University side and not the athletic side. But that doesn't means the University side determines what is spent on athletics or what it's spent for. Athletics director Dave Hart dictates how money raised for athletics is used. We know his plan is to invest in the student athletes and not as much for the fans.

Now as for all the other chatter regarding Cheek, the academics view of athletics, etc. It was not discussed today in the big board meeting but in talking to some who were in committee meetings earlier today. It was discussed and I had a couple of members tell me that Cheek is gaining a much better understanding of athletics (remember he's never been involved in athletics before) and these representatives believe that some compromises will be made to allow everyone to reach their goals. As one person told me, Chancellor Cheek has a much better understanding of athletics and it's importance to the University than he had a year ago.

For Cheek and the University the goal is to be a top-25 research institution and for athletics it's to make sure they are on a level playing field in the SEC.

- HUBBS

Since I've read almost every post in the Gruden Threads this lines up with what some of the others are saying in regards to the Big Players in getting Gruden to UT. It seems like they explained to Cheek it was time to get on board or move out. Since the vote on retention was delayed, I take it as they are giving them a chance to come around.

I take all of this as good news in regards to Gruden! :good!:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#3,071
#3,071
Farris_TN said:
Don't really like to share stuff from TOS but I think this says a lot about what some of the insiders have said:

On the original agenda, there was to be a performance and retention plan for executive officers, but that was deferred and not in this meeting. I was told they were not ready to discuss it, but no one could tell me why.

They did approved the UTFI amendment. So what does that mean. In talking to people today it only affects fundraising and it means they will continue to do it under the current structure that was approved a year and a half ago. What it means is that athletic fundraising goes under the UTFI meaning the director of athletic development (now Chris Fuller) reports to head of the UTFI who works for the University side and not the athletic side. But that doesn't means the University side determines what is spent on athletics or what it's spent for. Athletics director Dave Hart dictates how money raised for athletics is used. We know his plan is to invest in the student athletes and not as much for the fans.

Now as for all the other chatter regarding Cheek, the academics view of athletics, etc. It was not discussed today in the big board meeting but in talking to some who were in committee meetings earlier today. It was discussed and I had a couple of members tell me that Cheek is gaining a much better understanding of athletics (remember he's never been involved in athletics before) and these representatives believe that some compromises will be made to allow everyone to reach their goals. As one person told me, Chancellor Cheek has a much better understanding of athletics and it's importance to the University than he had a year ago.

For Cheek and the University the goal is to be a top-25 research institution and for athletics it's to make sure they are on a level playing field in the SEC.

- HUBBS

Since I've read almost every post in the Gruden Threads this lines up with what some of the others are saying in regards to the Big Players in getting Gruden to UT. It seems like they explained to Cheek it was time to get on board or move out. Since the vote on retention was delayed, I take it as they are giving them a chance to come around.

I take all of this as good news in regards to Gruden! :good!:
Click to expand...

Pretty sure this lines up exactly with what OV was saying. This is good news.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#3,072
#3,072
Farris_TN said:
Don't really like to share stuff from TOS but I think this says a lot about what some of the insiders have said:

On the original agenda, there was to be a performance and retention plan for executive officers, but that was deferred and not in this meeting. I was told they were not ready to discuss it, but no one could tell me why.

They did approved the UTFI amendment. So what does that mean. In talking to people today it only affects fundraising and it means they will continue to do it under the current structure that was approved a year and a half ago. What it means is that athletic fundraising goes under the UTFI meaning the director of athletic development (now Chris Fuller) reports to head of the UTFI who works for the University side and not the athletic side. But that doesn't means the University side determines what is spent on athletics or what it's spent for. Athletics director Dave Hart dictates how money raised for athletics is used. We know his plan is to invest in the student athletes and not as much for the fans.

Now as for all the other chatter regarding Cheek, the academics view of athletics, etc. It was not discussed today in the big board meeting but in talking to some who were in committee meetings earlier today. It was discussed and I had a couple of members tell me that Cheek is gaining a much better understanding of athletics (remember he's never been involved in athletics before) and these representatives believe that some compromises will be made to allow everyone to reach their goals. As one person told me, Chancellor Cheek has a much better understanding of athletics and it's importance to the University than he had a year ago.

For Cheek and the University the goal is to be a top-25 research institution and for athletics it's to make sure they are on a level playing field in the SEC.

- HUBBS

Since I've read almost every post in the Gruden Threads this lines up with what some of the others are saying in regards to the Big Players in getting Gruden to UT. It seems like they explained to Cheek it was time to get on board or move out. Since the vote on retention was delayed, I take it as they are giving them a chance to come around.

I take all of this as good news in regards to Gruden! :good!:
Click to expand...

Thanks for posting!
 
#3,073
#3,073
vol4eva said:
He also said 6 wins would save Dooley his job and that we weren't willing to put up the money for a big time coach.
Click to expand...

Then reversed course a few days ago. LWS has good info but has been behind on Gruden.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement





Back
Top