Random Questions on Mike Hamilton

#51
#51
MikeHamiltonFan said:
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.
Click to expand...

Todd Raleigh has not been held back by any scholarship limitations. He has been held back by his ability.
 
#53
#53
Ben said:
Does anyone else find it a bit odd that everyone is judging the Hamilton based almost solely on his hiring of coaches? True, these are definitely among the most important decisions that an AD has to make, but due to the urgent nature of the searches, they can only take up a very small portion of his employable time.....
Click to expand...

Perhaps you've forgotten the many instances where he has fired a coach during / immediately after the conclusion of their season (i.e. Peterson, Delmonico, Fulmer) - and specifically mentioned that such was required as a means to give himself time to find the "right" person for the job.

Other than the self-imposed two-day hiring deadline to replace X, there hasn't been any semblance of a pressing urgency in his hiring of any coach.

I'm obviously not as smart as MH, but were I tasked with the hiring of a CEO who would be directly responsible for $85M of my $100M budget, likely, I'd take more than two days to make such a decision. I'd also spend less time perfecting my hyper-secretive "cloak-and-dagger" schtick, and far more on due diligence.

Again, that's just what I would do - it's probably wrong.
 
#54
#54
I still wonder if Mike Hamilton is just a figure head that allows a handful of boosters to pull the strings. When names like Cut start popping up as a second or third choice, and when Fulmer offers to help with the transition it leads me to believe that Mike is just one player in a political structure that is much bigger than he is.

If it was up to Mike how long do you think he would have kept Fulmer around after 2005?
 
#55
#55
Lexvol said:
I still wonder if Mike Hamilton is just a figure head that allows a handful of boosters to pull the strings. When names like Cut start popping up as a second or third choice, and when Fulmer offers to help with the transition it leads me to believe that Mike is just one player in a political structure that is much bigger than he is.

If it was up to Mike how long do you think he would have kept Fulmer around after 2005?
Click to expand...

Politics and money make the world go around. There is not an AD at any college who has free reign.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#56
#56
Ben said:
I don't think it's wrong to judge Hamilton on his coaching decisions, but it would be nice if someone with a little insight could explain the day-to-day duties of an AD. That way, we can fairly judge him for both his most critical decisions (coaching hires) as well as the normal duties that constitute the vast majority of his actual responsibilities.
Click to expand...

My guess is that he's really a 'well-organized' person since he sought out that same trait and commented on it as what he liked about our new head football coach.

He probably types the tabs for his file folders and saw that Dooley does that too.

That would help explain the hiring decision and also support your hypothesis that he does much better on day-to-day tasks.
 
#58
#58
jarvol said:
1 day but Haslem and the BOT would have no part of it.
Click to expand...

Just out of curiosity, would it be better to have an AD who has the people skills needed to stand up for what's best for the program or is it okay to have a puppet on a string? If just a puppet, can we cut some costs there with respect to salary?

There are a lot of used car salesman who could be more persuasive with selling Tennessee to prospective coaches and their salary demands shouldn't be very high at all. Even Hamilton could hire one of them for less than a 100K/year but he'd probably need a search firm to find one.
 
#59
#59
Tenacious D said:
Perhaps you've forgotten the many instances where he has fired a coach during / immediately after the conclusion of their season (i.e. Peterson, Delmonico, Fulmer) - and specifically mentioned that such was required as a means to give himself time to find the "right" person for the job.
Click to expand...
You are either misunderstanding the point or intentionally obfuscating it. Sure, Hamilton may have done things in the past to give him more time to search for a new coach. The simple fact of the matter is that the hiring process for Lane Kiffin was pretty much completed in 1 month's time. At the time, there was high support for the hire, and at the least, no one was complaining that he didn't extend the searching process longer. The point is, with little time constraints, it only took 1 month to hire a HFC. What are we paying him for the other 11 months out of the year?

Tenacious D said:
Other than the self-imposed two-day hiring deadline to replace X, there hasn't been any semblance of a pressing urgency in his hiring of any coach.
Click to expand...
This is a joke, right? NSD was a little more than 3 weeks away from the date of Kiffin's departure. The broader fact is that you can't have a major program coach-less for the majority part of an off-season and expect whoever you hire to be able to have success.

Tenacious D said:
I'm obviously not as smart as MH, but were I tasked with the hiring of a CEO who would be directly responsible for $85M of my $100M budget, likely, I'd take more than two days to make such a decision. I'd also spend less time perfecting my hyper-secretive "cloak-and-dagger" schtick, and far more on due diligence.
Click to expand...
1. You probably aren't giving yourself enough credit.
2. Whether or not you would have taken 2 days or 2 weeks is rather immaterial to my point. My point is that by very basic arithmetic of his employable hours there are a lot of duties that he must execute as an AD that have nothing to do with coaching searches. Do we know what these duties are, and how is he performing in their execution?
 
#61
#61
Lexvol said:
I still wonder if Mike Hamilton is just a figure head that allows a handful of boosters to pull the strings. When names like Cut start popping up as a second or third choice, and when Fulmer offers to help with the transition it leads me to believe that Mike is just one player in a political structure that is much bigger than he is.

If it was up to Mike how long do you think he would have kept Fulmer around after 2005?
Click to expand...

When ESPN's crawler read that members of the UT BOT had contacted Fulmer about his interest in either the AD or HC position......that told the tale.

I think it was as close to an internally hostile takeover as was possible. Some might say that a mutiny was only avoided by the thinnest of margins.

Others might say that MH's decision to rush the naming of x's replacement had little to do with the recruiting class, the team or the spurned fan base. Instead, perhaps there was a race of an altogether different sort -

Whether Hamilton was going to get his guy named before others had the necessary votes to get each of theirs...Cut as HC and PF as AD. Maybe Big Jim was in Ruston for far more important reasons than to simply negotiate DD's contract....maybe it also provided a convenient excuse as to why he would be incommunicado for several hours.

I haven't heard much talk - if any at all -about this in the local media, although you'd think that they'd want to at least to attempt to explain how ESPN's rumors had originated, what forces might have been at play, who was involved, etc. etc.

However, its not surprising that they haven't done so - they're not going to air the dirty laundry of either the UTAD or the influential boosters involved.

Why? Because they don't have to, and we don't demand that they do, and they likely wouldn't even then. That's why. What do you think that they are? Reporters?

Had it not come out on ESPN, not only would you not have heard about it, there'd be 1,000 people on this very message board decrying even the remote possibility that such may have even occurred.
 
#62
#62
Tenacious D said:
When ESPN's crawler read that members of the UT BOT had contacted Fulmer about his interest in either the AD or HC position......that told the tale.

I think it was as close to an internally hostile takeover as was possible. Some might say that a mutiny was only avoided by the thinnest of margins.

Others might say that MH's decision to rush the naming of x's replacement had little to do with the recruiting class, the team or the spurned fan base. Instead, perhaps there was a race of an altogether different sort -

Whether Hamilton was going to get his guy named before others had the necessary votes to get each of theirs...Cut as HC and PF as AD. Maybe Big Jim was in Ruston for far more important reasons than to simply negotiate DD's contract....maybe it also provided a convenient excuse as to why he would be incommunicado for several hours.

I haven't heard much talk - if any at all -about this in the local media, although you'd think that they'd want to at least to attempt to explain how ESPN's rumors had originated, what forces might have been at play, who was involved, etc. etc.

However, its not surprising that they haven't done so - they're not going to air the dirty laundry of either the UTAD or the influential boosters involved.

Why? Because they don't have to, and we don't demand that they do, and they likely wouldn't even then. That's why. What do you think that they are? Reporters?

Had it not come out on ESPN, not only would you not have heard about it, there'd be 1,000 people on this very message board decrying even the remote possibility that such may have even occurred.
Click to expand...

That looks insightful.

There could still be a major bloodletting, but it's probably after NSD... and the SuperBowl!
 
#63
#63
Seemed strange to me Hamilton took a recommendation from Muschramp to hire Dooley, Muschamp had no connection to the UT program and was recommending a friend.

I know Grunfeld recommended Pearl but he was a UT alum.
 
#64
#64
oklavol said:
Seemed strange to me Hamilton took a recommendation from Muschramp to hire Dooley, Muschamp had no connection to the UT program and was recommending a friend.

I know Grunfeld recommended Pearl but he was a UT alum.
Click to expand...

I was curious as to why Hamilton was talking to Saban at all - much less during the HC search.

Did Saban recommend DD for the job...or did he provided MH with a positive reference for the hire, once he was already being considered for the job?
 
#65
#65
Hamilton is a SNAKE and if he leaves the program in a mess at the end of his term he could care less. The last Fulmer and Kiffin contracts that he handled were complete disasters, and UT will be paying for his contract mistakes for years to come. His slap across the face to Kippy by not giving him the decency of a fair interview before he hired DD was a disgrace to all Vol fans.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top