Random Questions on Mike Hamilton

[Tenacious D]

This is a sincere question - Is he known to be one of the more well-respected, connected or influential AD's in the SEC? The nation?

Giving the chance to do it over again, do you think that he would be re-hired today, now having seen his body of work over the course of the previous seven years? Does the good outweigh the bad, so to speak?

What will have to occur in the course of the next 1-2 years in order for him to be replaced - outside of his being found to have committed some criminal act or some other personally damaging information comes to light? Does such a scenario even exist where he could be fired in this timeframe?

Fill in the blanks: If the attendance for the final home game (Kentucky) falls to -BLANK - percent of Neyland Stadium's total capacity, Mike Hamilton will be - BLANK.

If Hamilton is fired, does the University hire from within, or go outside? If they go outside, who are the first three candidates that should be interviewed, who do you ultimately want to get the job, and why?

What's the one thing that most likely saves Hamilton's job?

What's the one thing that is most likely to cost it?

I'll hang up and listen to your response.

 

[xXRockyTopXx]

I have no idea if he is well respected or not. I honestly don't have much beef with him other than the Kiffin debacle. But, that obviously was out of his control. Now, he should have certainly protected the University better with a higher buy-out option, but hindsight is always 20/20. I think Dooley's performance will certainly weigh on how long he continues to be AD. Pearl and Summit are doing great and I think as long as Dooley improves each season his job will be secure. If Dooley ends up tanking, then I would really be surprised if he wasn't released. In that event, as much as some folks may not like it I think Fulmer gets the job unless Summit has stopped coaching by that point.

 

[MikeHamiltonFan]

Jimmy Sexton has hot tub photos of everyone and controls the boosters and Mike...

No just kidding.

Mike has done a great job with basketball.
With baseball he had to make a change and the new coach was hammered by the scholarship reductions due to the complete fail on the part of the previous coach to stay on top of academics.
He was snookered by Kiffin. Kiffin did not have poor recruiting classes or fail as a coach, he screwed us over when his dream job was offered to him.
He has also presided over upgrading facilities in a major way. He has been great at fundraising and donor relations generally.

It is difficult to ascertain how much credit or blame for bowl pairings goes to Mike Hamilton because I do not think any of us know enough about how those picks happen.

I do know that he will be happy to not be pitted against his conference by a coach who likes to tweak the commissioner and other coaches and some towns.

 

[Dudleys87]

Serious questions on a message board? Ooo man...

 

[OrangeNYC]

I think MH has done a great job.

Pearl was the best hire imaginable, and we now have a consistently good bball program, which we've never really had.

Firing Fulmer made him a lot of enemies, but I think most objective, unbiased Vols fans saw that with CPF, we'd never overtake the Bama's and UF's. The Kiffin & staff he hired was capable of out-recruiting those schools, and maybe eventually beating them, but they left for an easier job at the school they'd always loved.
Had there been a $2 million buyout, USC or Kiffin still would have paid it and left, and no big name hire was/is going to sign up for a $10 mill buyout.
Also, the fact that a school as prestigious as USC stole our coaches speaks to how good they were and what a good choice MH made. As far as we all knew, Carroll was going to stay at USC forever, as he'd always said. Then this "Is MH any good?" ? would be a moot point.

As for Dooley, how can you blame MH if it doesn't go well? It's not his fault no one wanted to come here. And if it does work out, he comes out looking like a genius again, just like with CBP. I'm rooting for Mike Ham.

 

[Tenacious D]

I have no idea if he is well respected or not. I honestly don't have much beef with him other than the Kiffin debacle. But, that obviously was out of his control. Now, he should have certainly protected the University better with a higher buy-out option, but hindsight is always 20/20.

I don't follow. Do you not have a beef with him, except for the X fiasco - or do you because he should have protected us better with a larger buyout? Are you satisfied that he didn't protect us better?

Was X's departure beyond his control? I would say that by the time he called him to say he was leaving, yes, it was. However, Hamilton first knew about his interest on Saturday....at which point he promptly left town. So what could have been controlled in the ensuing 3-4 days?

Hindisght is fine. Foresight would have been most preferred.

I think Dooley's performance will certainly weigh on how long he continues to be AD. Pearl and Summit are doing great and I think as long as Dooley improves each season his job will be secure. If Dooley ends up tanking, then I would really be surprised if he wasn't released. In that event, as much as some folks may not like it I think Fulmer gets the job unless Summit has stopped coaching by that point.

Some might argue about how well CBP is doing - other the vast majority would agree with you. MH has no claim on Summit, her program, or its success - she precedes him by about 25+ years, and as her team answers to the Women's UTAD, she does not fall under his oversight.

 

[tm3]

follow the money.

AD was in the black last year. don't know if staying steady will do it or if there will have to be an upward trend, but that will likely be the ultimate barometer.

 

[randomfan10]

He's done a good job but you have to remember he took a job that nobody else wanted. And, to top it off, he was given the job b/c the school president was going on vacation and didn't want the search for a new AD hanging over him.

 

[PoochPunt3rdDown]

He's done great with the facility upgrades, if you ask me. I think he messed up big time with the 6 million dollar buyout. That is the reason the budget for last year was not balanced. Unfortunately, in the current climate of college athletics, that is one of his most important oversights.

That being said, he's done enough good to outweigh the bad, and this opinion is not coming from just me. I asked a big booster who was a total Fulmer Fan, and he thinks this way, as well....

 

[Tenacious D]

I think MH has done a great job.

Pearl was the best hire imaginable, and we now have a consistently good bball program, which we've never really had.

Is that the goal? If not, what is?

Firing Fulmer made him a lot of enemies, but I think most objective, unbiased Vols fans saw that with CPF, we'd never overtake the Bama's and UF's.

Do you now think that we are better poised to do so?

The Kiffin & staff he hired was capable of out-recruiting those schools, and maybe eventually beating them, but they left for an easier job at the school they'd always loved.
Had there been a $2 million buyout, USC or Kiffin still would have paid it and left, and no big name hire was/is going to sign up for a $10 mill buyout.

We'll never know if a $2M buyout would have prevented him from walking, because it wasn't a stipulation that they had to contend with.

I don't recall "X" - a recently fired coach who was embroiled in an arbitration suit and media war with his former employer - and who had just spent the previous 3 months doing nothing but interviewing for every major coaching job in America (unsuccessfully, I might add) - being a "big-name" who had the capital to refuse such demands. Again, we'll never know if a $10M buyout was feasible, because it was never required of him.

Also, the fact that a school as prestigious as USC stole our coaches speaks to how good they were and what a good choice MH made. As far as we all knew, Carroll was going to stay at USC forever, as he'd always said. Then this "Is MH any good?" ? would be a moot point.

Does this mean that USC is a prestigious school, and that UT is not?

I like the use of the verb, "stole" there - who, by his own admission, stood idly by as it happened?

I think that the question of whether MH is, "any good" is one which is worthy of discussion Both here, and elsewhere.

As for Dooley, how can you blame MH if it doesn't go well? It's not his fault no one wanted to come here. And if it does work out, he comes out looking like a genius again, just like with CBP. I'm rooting for Mike Ham.

Didn't Hamilton hire him? If the AD is not judged on the success of his hires, then what other criteria would you use?

It's not his fault that no one wanted to come here?!? What is it that you think that the AD's job entails? Perhpas if there was a more substantial buy-out for X, we wouldn't have been attempting to hire a coach within 3 weeks of NSD.

Who negotiated that contract, again?

 

[xXRockyTopXx]

I don't follow. Do you not have a beef with him, except for the X fiasco - or do you because he should have protected us better with a larger buyout? Are you satisfied that he didn't protect us better?

Was X's departure beyond his control? I would say that by the time he called him to say he was leaving, yes, it was. However, Hamilton first knew about his interest on Saturday....at which point he promptly left town. So what could have been controlled in the ensuing 3-4 days?

Hindisght is fine. Foresight would have been most preferred.



Some might argue about how well CBP is doing - other the vast majority would agree with you. MH has no claim on Summit, her program, or its success - she precedes him by about 25+ years, and as her team answers to the Women's UTAD, she does not fall under his oversight.

In other words, I don't have any major problems with him other than feeling as though he should have protected us with a larger buyout. I don't blame Hamilton for Kiffin leaving because nobody could have seen that coming. At the time, everyone (most people anyway) thought Kiffin was a great hire. Foresight is always preferred, but most of us do not operate with that luxury.

 

[mch317]

He's all in with queens against AK with this hire. We will see what happens ...

 

[GAVol]

Hindisght is fine. Foresight would have been most preferred.

Do you really think a $2 million buyout vs. an $800,000 buyout would have made any difference whatsoever to a program in as tough a spot as USC was in?

 

[tigervol9802]

I think people need to remember he was about the 5th choice for AD and Thunder/Fulmer had to beg and plead for it to happen.

He's probably a mid-major level AD in the SEC, if I had to guess. (Foley has the most power right now.)

I like Mike as a person and he's done some things that I really like. In many ways he's very forward-thinking. The facilities upgrades are superb. I think Pearl speaks for himself (even if he makes me scratch my head occasionally). Personally, I think how he handled the Fulmer firing was the best thing that could have been done for the football program (assuming we don't know what we do now), albeit not Fulmer's pride. I do think he made a mistake with Kiffin's buyout being so low, but I doubt even Sexton himself thought USC would come calling so soon. I also don't think it would have mattered what the price tag was either if push came to shove.

There have been a couple of decisions I have not agreed with. That's fine.

Ultimately, he will be judged on if Dooley works out or not. I think he's probably got three years barring a catastrophe. If Dooley succeeds, then he's stable. If Dooley bombs, we better get a bigger chair for the AD to sit in, because Fulmer is a much bigger man than Hamilton.

 

[Tenacious D]

He's done great with the facility upgrades, if you ask me. I think he messed up big time with the 6 million dollar buyout. That is the reason the budget for last year was not balanced. Unfortunately, in the current climate of college athletics, that is one of his most important oversights.

That being said, he's done enough good to outweigh the bad, and this opinion is not coming from just me. I asked a big booster who was a total Fulmer Fan, and he thinks this way, as well....

What kind of coach might that extra $6M have bought us......we're only left to wonder.

Having a "big-booster" endorse the great job that MH's doing is akin to asking Tom Arnold if fat women are sexier than skinny ones.

Or, the reverse might be to say, "It was the keen insight into the world of sports and her dogged pursuit of the highest standards of journalism which landed her the job on the morning show."

 

[tigervol9802]

I think MH has done a great job.



Is that the goal? If not, what is?


Do you now think that we are better poised to do so?



We'll never know if a $2M buyout would have prevented him from walking, because it wasn't a stipulation that they had to contend with.

I don't recall "X" - a recently fired coach who was embroiled in an arbitration suit and media war with his former employer - and who had just spent the previous 3 months doing nothing but interviewing for every major coaching job in America (unsuccessfully, I might add) - being a "big-name" who had the capital to refuse such demands. Again, we'll never know if a $10M buyout was feasible, because it was never required of him.



Does this mean that USC is a prestigious school, and that UT is not?

I like the use of the verb, "stole" there - who, by his own admission, stood idly by as it happened?

I think that the question of whether MH is, "any good" is one which is worthy of discussion Both here, and elsewhere.



Didn't Hamilton hire him? If the AD is not judged on the success of his hires, then what other criteria would you use?

It's not his fault that no one wanted to come here?!? What is it that you think that the AD's job entails? Perhpas if there was a more substantial buy-out for X, we wouldn't have been attempting to hire a coach within 3 weeks of NSD.

Who negotiated that contract, again?

I had a gut feeling your original post was loaded.

 

[tm3]

What kind of coach might that extra $6M have bought us......we're only left to wonder.

just curious, TD, who you think we could have landed with an additional $6mil to play with?

 

[Tenacious D]

In other words, I don't have any major problems with him other than feeling as though he should have protected us with a larger buyout. I don't blame Hamilton for Kiffin leaving because nobody could have seen that coming. At the time, everyone (most people anyway) thought Kiffin was a great hire. Foresight is always preferred, but most of us do not operate with that luxury.

So.....other than his complete bungling of each of the previous two (2) contractual negotiations with our head football coaches - the sport which accounts for 85% of the UTAD's total revenue - you're ok with the job he's done. Check.

Is this a good example of the mythical foresight which you believe so few to possess?

If I am alive tomorrow morning, I will likely want to leave the house at some point. If I leave the house, I should have on pants. Should I burn all of my pants before falling asleep tonight? No, I should not.

Ta-flippin'-da.

 

[PoochPunt3rdDown]

What kind of coach might that extra $6M have bought us......we're only left to wonder.

Having a "big-booster" endorse the great job that MH's doing is akin to asking Tom Arnold if fat women are sexier than skinny ones.

Or, the reverse might be to say, "It was the keen insight into the world of sports and her dogged pursuit of the highest standards of journalism which landed her the job on the morning show."

It's my uncle actually and he doesn't think Hammy is doing a "great job", he really feels that he has done just enough good to outweigh the idiotic contracts he's been throwing around. The Fulmer contract was a disaster, Bruce got handed more money after leveraging the Memphis job (and I'm one of Bruce's biggest fans) which was never going to happen. And Kiffin's staff was the highest paid in all of college football. He didn't have to do that. They all would have come anyways...

As an aside, you made me wonder about something. I know Kiffin is making twice what he was making at UT, but you think USC is paying his assistants as much as UT? Did anyone take a pay cut in this deal?

 

[Tenacious D]

Do you really think a $2 million buyout vs. an $800,000 buyout would have made any difference whatsoever to a program in as tough a spot as USC was in?

Who's to say?

Would you have thought that Cutcliffe would have ever refused the HC position at TN, if offered?

Unfortunately, we'll never know.

But let's say that it wasn't a deterrent at all....and USC just paid it. One then has to wonder what difference it might have made in the search for X's replacement to know that we were about to get $2M thrown into the bank account?

Would you most prefer that your program be thrown in disarray for $800K or $2M?

 

[GAVol]

Would you most prefer that your program be thrown in disarray for $800K or $2M?

The problem with that line of reasoning is that you are assuming that a monster buyout would have been accepted in the contract in the first place. Coaches have agents for a reason.

Look no further than Nick Saban's buyout.

 

[PoochPunt3rdDown]

just curious, TD, who you think we could have landed with an additional $6mil to play with?

I'll take this one, also. Anyone outside of Jesus, Urban, Saban or Conan O'Brien. Man, he really bungled the Kiffin hire. You're actually making me change my mind about him. He kind of blows....

 

[3rdandtheriver]

This is a sincere question - Is he known to be one of the more well-respected, connected or influential AD's in the SEC? The nation?

Giving the chance to do it over again, do you think that he would be re-hired today, now having seen his body of work over the course of the previous seven years? Does the good outweigh the bad, so to speak?

What will have to occur in the course of the next 1-2 years in order for him to be replaced - outside of his being found to have committed some criminal act or some other personally damaging information comes to light? Does such a scenario even exist where he could be fired in this timeframe?

Fill in the blanks: If the attendance for the final home game (Kentucky) falls to -BLANK - percent of Neyland Stadium's total capacity, Mike Hamilton will be - BLANK.

If Hamilton is fired, does the University hire from within, or go outside? If they go outside, who are the first three candidates that should be interviewed, who do you ultimately want to get the job, and why?

What's the one thing that most likely saves Hamilton's job?

What's the one thing that is most likely to cost it?

I'll hang up and listen to your response.

Just curious, are you a regular donor to our athletic department?

 

[volstexans]

The problem with that line of reasoning is that you are assuming that a monster buyout would have been accepted in the contract in the first place. Coaches have agents for a reason.

Look no further than Nick Saban's buyout.

Hindsight, yes. But if a huge buyout in year one and a reasonably decreasing one thereafter is a sticking point with a new hire who was just fired after his last job, it should raise a red flag at least.

I don't think I would be good enough to have seen this coming either, but I'm not getting paid MH money to negotiate the contracts, either.

At the very least, the $6M he just paid out should have opened his eyes to the buyout clause section of all future contracts.

 

[GAVol]

At the very least, the $6M he just paid out should have opened his eyes to the buyout clause section of all future contracts.

But what really can he do about it? The market is what it is and the coaches are the ones with leverage.