Photo

Terps AD Kevin Anderson to Stanford? Apparently Not.


  • Please log in to reply
44 replies to this topic

#21 Baltimore Chop

Baltimore Chop
  • Members
  • 74 posts
  • LocationTowson

Posted 20 June 2012 - 04:10 PM

I'm a Colorado alum, so I'm not so familiar with Stanford quite yet, being our first year in Pac-12. I'd say Maryland is definitely a great job, but I'm biased I know.

I guess what I'm asking is do you think the difference is Stanford is the 5th best and Maryland is like 50th? I got no idea off the top of my head if I had to list every BCS program AD job.

I think if Stanford football can continue it's success it could be one of the best jobs in the country. I guess the ceiling at Stanford is higher than Maryland. I don't see Maryland getting to the caliber Stanford is in football. At the same time, I think the ceiling for Maryland men's basketball is bigger. Stanford is a much better in baseball , tennis, golf teams I believe. Maryland gets the upperhand in lacrosse. :lol: Sorry I don't too much about non-revenue sports.


Good question, and I'm not really sure I have a good answer there.

Stanford around fifth best? I'd buy that. Money talks, and they got that in spades. Plus, they have a boatload of sports that do well already established.

I think Maryland is higher than 50th. Maybe 25-30 range, though I am willing to listen to arguments for between 20-40 range. I think MD could be a top football school, but the school would have to decide between basketball or football. Basketball has the more recent tradition, so I see the school leaning more that way.

I tend to agree with you about the celings for both, although Stanford has shown that it can do well in men's hoops. Ultimately, MD's ceiling there probably is higher.

Still, I do think it is a substantial step up.
Perception is reality.

#22 BSLMikeLowe

BSLMikeLowe

    CFB Analyst

  • Moderators
  • 19,278 posts
  • LocationPortland, Oregon

Posted 20 June 2012 - 05:25 PM

Starting this coming year, Stanford will be raking in much bigger money than Maryland in conference money, with the Pac-12's new TV deal starting up. I would say Stanford is a better AD job than MD. No talk of cutting sports there. And many more deep-pocketed donors too.

#23 Oriole85

Oriole85

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,321 posts
  • LocationNorthern VA

Posted 20 June 2012 - 08:25 PM

I think MD could be a top football school, but the school would have to decide between basketball or football. Basketball has the more recent tradition, so I see the school leaning more that way.

I don't think they have to "choose" between the two, I think they can be successful in both as they were in the early 2000s. I think they'd rather be successful in football if they had to choose going from KA's "good to great" comment and that being where the $$$ is. A successful football program at any school will do better than an equally successful men's basketball program. In terms of being a "top" football school, if winning the ACC every so often, I'd agree with you. I don't think they'll ever be able to compete with top dogs (Alabama, Ohio State, USC, etc).
@levineps

#24 Oriole85

Oriole85

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,321 posts
  • LocationNorthern VA

Posted 20 June 2012 - 08:36 PM

Starting this coming year, Stanford will be raking in much bigger money than Maryland in conference money, with the Pac-12's new TV deal starting up. I would say Stanford is a better AD job than MD. No talk of cutting sports there. And many more deep-pocketed donors too.

I think it's "better" but also different. They've had their share of problems though, in 2010, they couldn't fill up their stadium despite fielding a top caliber team. Not sure how sustainable their football success if, will find out soon, Shaw was winning last year with Harbaugh's players including Luck.

Public versus Public. Flagship school versus Research institution. East coast versus West coast. ACC versus Pac-12. DC/Baltimore versus Bay Area. So while it's better when you take into account quality of life factors, I don't think it's such a slam dunk. If you are just going for the better job and don't care where you live or the environment, you go with Stanford.
@levineps

#25 Baltimore Chop

Baltimore Chop
  • Members
  • 74 posts
  • LocationTowson

Posted 21 June 2012 - 08:40 AM

I don't think they have to "choose" between the two, I think they can be successful in both as they were in the early 2000s. I think they'd rather be successful in football if they had to choose going from KA's "good to great" comment and that being where the $$$ is. A successful football program at any school will do better than an equally successful men's basketball program. In terms of being a "top" football school, if winning the ACC every so often, I'd agree with you. I don't think they'll ever be able to compete with top dogs (Alabama, Ohio State, USC, etc).


The only issue here is there are very, very few schools that are able to do this on a regular basis. I can probably count on one hand the number of schools that are consistently good in both basketball and football....but ultimately, most schools are either basketball or football schools. Therefore, they basically choose which they want to be.

I was thinking about this larger conversation more this morning, actually. If Anderson leaves MD now, his legacy is one where he made took the football team from good to suck, (not saying this is a fair assessment, but it seems to be the perception), he improved men's basketball, and he eliminated sports at the school. Not exactly a ringing endorsement. So, why leave now if he thinks that things can get better from this inauspicious start?

In the back of my mind, I'm wondering if the books aren't worse than he's publicly letting on. Perhaps he's seeing the writing on the wall that he might need to further cut sports/scholarships in the not too distant future, which would really make him look bad.

If that's the case, then going to Stanford would be a slam dunk, because he doesn't have to deal with these issues.
Perception is reality.

#26 Oriole85

Oriole85

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,321 posts
  • LocationNorthern VA

Posted 21 June 2012 - 10:27 AM

The only issue here is there are very, very few schools that are able to do this on a regular basis. I can probably count on one hand the number of schools that are consistently good in both basketball and football....but ultimately, most schools are either basketball or football schools. Therefore, they basically choose which they want to be.

I was thinking about this larger conversation more this morning, actually. If Anderson leaves MD now, his legacy is one where he made took the football team from good to suck, (not saying this is a fair assessment, but it seems to be the perception), he improved men's basketball, and he eliminated sports at the school. Not exactly a ringing endorsement. So, why leave now if he thinks that things can get better from this inauspicious start?

In the back of my mind, I'm wondering if the books aren't worse than he's publicly letting on. Perhaps he's seeing the writing on the wall that he might need to further cut sports/scholarships in the not too distant future, which would really make him look bad.

If that's the case, then going to Stanford would be a slam dunk, because he doesn't have to deal with these issues.

Not sure how you came to the conclusion that he improved men's basketball, they just missed the postseason for the second time in two years. I like to think the team under Turgeon is heading in the right direction, but the jury is still very much out on him. And by the same measure, if Edsall can turn it around, he'll look pretty good, although I'm not so optimistic on that front.

I agree with his legacy including sports being eliminated since he was the one in charge when that happened, but doesn't that fall more to Yow? She oversaw the football renovations, where there hasn't been nearly the interest there was early in Fridge's tenure AND men's basketball went from all sellouts in ACC games to a handful a year(GW deserves blame with that as well). And I'm not even as harsh on Yow as most, after all plenty of sports prospered during her tenure, I just think she mismanged some things and could've had better relationships with her two top coaches (GW and Fridge).
@levineps

#27 Oriole85

Oriole85

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,321 posts
  • LocationNorthern VA

Posted 21 June 2012 - 10:31 AM

The only issue here is there are very, very few schools that are able to do this on a regular basis. I can probably count on one hand the number of schools that are consistently good in both basketball and football....but ultimately, most schools are either basketball or football schools. Therefore, they basically choose which they want to be.

As I said then, every D-1 BCS school is choosing football since that's where the $$$ is. And that's what KA is trying to do that with the "good to great." I'm no KA fan, but clearly he empathized with that statement, he wanted football to be just as good if not better than basketball. So if Maryland is "choosing" under KA's watch atleast, they are choosing football IMO.
@levineps

#28 Baltimore Chop

Baltimore Chop
  • Members
  • 74 posts
  • LocationTowson

Posted 21 June 2012 - 12:41 PM

Not sure how you came to the conclusion that he improved men's basketball, they just missed the postseason for the second time in two years. I like to think the team under Turgeon is heading in the right direction, but the jury is still very much out on him. And by the same measure, if Edsall can turn it around, he'll look pretty good, although I'm not so optimistic on that front.


I think that people understand that Turgeon was working with a relatively bare cupboard this year (at least, as compared to years past), so people gave him a pass for missing the postseason. With everything coming in, most believe that Turgeon was the correct choice as coach, and that basketball is clearly looking up. At this point. If Turgeon winds up sucking (which I don't think he will), then obviously that comment changes in a big way. But still, at this point in time, KA's selection there has people believing that basketball is going in the right direction. Hence my comment that he improved men's hoops.

Likewise, if Edsall turns it around this year, KA hiring him looks a lot better than it does now. However, at this point in time, I would argue that KA looks bad for hiring Edsall.

I agree with his legacy including sports being eliminated since he was the one in charge when that happened, but doesn't that fall more to Yow? She oversaw the football renovations, where there hasn't been nearly the interest there was early in Fridge's tenure AND men's basketball went from all sellouts in ACC games to a handful a year(GW deserves blame with that as well). And I'm not even as harsh on Yow as most, after all plenty of sports prospered during her tenure, I just think she mismanged some things and could've had better relationships with her two top coaches (GW and Fridge).


Ultimately, KA cut the sports. Yow didn't. That falls on KA. Not saying it's fair, but that blood is on his hands, so to speak.

As I said then, every D-1 BCS school is choosing football since that's where the $$$ is. And that's what KA is trying to do that with the "good to great." I'm no KA fan, but clearly he empathized with that statement, he wanted football to be just as good if not better than basketball. So if Maryland is "choosing" under KA's watch atleast, they are choosing football IMO.


Sure, everyone wants football to be good. I get that. The problem is football is a big expense/big reward kinda sport. So, if you choose football, it is ultimately being done at the expense of other sports, including basketball.

Football at Maryland has traditionally been a money loser. For many years, basketball was the only thing bringing money into the athletic department. So, at some point, they decided to emphasize basketball and see what happened with football. During the 2000s, this changed somewhat, but basketball was still the more recognized program, so they continued to emphasize it a bit more than football (although the disparity shrank).

Personally, I think they are still choosing basketball over football. Evidence of this can be seen in who was hired for each of the vacancies. Basketball got a guy who was a nationally well reputed coach. Football got a guy who, wasn't as reputed as the guy they hired for basketball, even though there was a guy out there that a lot of people thought was a much better option.

Don't get me wrong, I think football can be good on a regular basis at UM. I just question if they are ready, willing, and able (mostly willing and able) to put the money forth to make it be good on a regular basis.
Perception is reality.

#29 Oriole85

Oriole85

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,321 posts
  • LocationNorthern VA

Posted 21 June 2012 - 01:19 PM

Personally, I think they are still choosing basketball over football. Evidence of this can be seen in who was hired for each of the vacancies. Basketball got a guy who was a nationally well reputed coach. Football got a guy who, wasn't as reputed as the guy they hired for basketball, even though there was a guy out there that a lot of people thought was a much better option.

Don't get me wrong, I think football can be good on a regular basis at UM. I just question if they are ready, willing, and able (mostly willing and able) to put the money forth to make it be good on a regular basis.

They got their 5th or 6th choice for basketball, Sean Miller, Mike Brey, Brad Stevens, etc all turned them down. I'm not saying they didn't get quality candidate, but they didn't get exactly get close to their first choice. Ditto with football, it was the same sort of thing, although I think they got cold feet with Leach, might have even been higher-ups than KA who put the axe on that.

They are empathizing football, the "good to great" comment is clear evidence of that. I personally would've extended Fridge, I understand why they didn't, but I'd rather him than Edsall(and yes I said that before the new coach was even hired). The results aren't there (yet), but that's not a lack of effort IMO. I think you are judging the results too much in your conclusions and not so much the efforts being made.
  • Baltimore Chop likes this
@levineps

#30 Baltimore Chop

Baltimore Chop
  • Members
  • 74 posts
  • LocationTowson

Posted 21 June 2012 - 03:43 PM

[post deleted]
Perception is reality.

#31 Baltimore Chop

Baltimore Chop
  • Members
  • 74 posts
  • LocationTowson

Posted 21 June 2012 - 03:52 PM

Even though they got their fifth or sixth choice, they still got a top candidate. I can't say that for football.

Regarding Leach, I am of the opinion that he wasn't coming here at all, anyway. Even had there not been the cold feet, he was asking for way more money than what the athletic department was willing to put out (from what I'm remembering at the time). It was a cool pipe dream to think he was coming, but it was still a pipe dream.

They are empathizing football, the "good to great" comment is clear evidence of that. I personally would've extended Fridge, I understand why they didn't, but I'd rather him than Edsall(and yes I said that before the new coach was even hired). The results aren't there (yet), but that's not a lack of effort IMO. I think you are judging the results too much in your conclusions and not so much the efforts being made.


As Johnny U used to say before every game, "Talk is cheap." So, yes, I need to see results and hear evidence that the Athletic Department is giving them every resource they need to be successful. Until that, I can't say that they have chosen football over basketball.

I will say this, though -- finishing the job at Byrd Stadium with the new turf is evidence that they want to improve football. It's a good start. Now, show me that Edsall is being given the resources he needs to be successful, and I'll gladly change my tune.

By the way, I am a UM grad and have season tix for football and basketball...so, I very much want to see both doing great.
Perception is reality.

#32 BSLMikeLowe

BSLMikeLowe

    CFB Analyst

  • Moderators
  • 19,278 posts
  • LocationPortland, Oregon

Posted 21 June 2012 - 03:57 PM

As Johnny U used to say before every game, "Talk is cheap." So, yes, I need to see results and hear evidence that the Athletic Department is giving them every resource they need to be successful. Until that, I can't say that they have chosen football over basketball.


http://espn.go.com/b...accs-facilities

They have a looooooong way to go. Worst facilities in the ACC, according to Heather Dinich, who would know pretty well having covered the Terps several years at The Sun. Isn't MD one of only a couple ACC programs without an indoor practice facility? I think Miami is the other, like they really need one. I mean, even Duke has one of those.....Duke!

#33 Baltimore Chop

Baltimore Chop
  • Members
  • 74 posts
  • LocationTowson

Posted 21 June 2012 - 04:02 PM

http://espn.go.com/b...accs-facilities

They have a looooooong way to go. Worst facilities in the ACC, according to Heather Dinich, who would know pretty well having covered the Terps several years at The Sun. Isn't MD one of only a couple ACC programs without an indoor practice facility? I think Miami is the other, like they really need one. I mean, even Duke has one of those.....Duke!


Honestly, I'm not sure how much an indoor practice facility matters. Players need to be ready to go in any weather. It's a nice bell and whistle, though, which I'm sure would draw recruits.

I do think UM deserves a better stadium than Byrd. I don't really think it's that great of a facility, particularly when you go to some of the other BCS schools out there. Comparitively speaking, it looks run down.

I wonder how much Dinich's opinion would change based off the new turf, though -- I think that will help some.
Perception is reality.

#34 BSLMikeLowe

BSLMikeLowe

    CFB Analyst

  • Moderators
  • 19,278 posts
  • LocationPortland, Oregon

Posted 21 June 2012 - 04:06 PM

For anyone curious, ESPN's Pac-12 blogger ranks Stanford's facilities 5th in the conference.

http://espn.go.com/b...ball-facilities

#35 BSLMikeLowe

BSLMikeLowe

    CFB Analyst

  • Moderators
  • 19,278 posts
  • LocationPortland, Oregon

Posted 21 June 2012 - 04:14 PM

Honestly, I'm not sure how much an indoor practice facility matters. Players need to be ready to go in any weather. It's a nice bell and whistle, though, which I'm sure would draw recruits.

I do think UM deserves a better stadium than Byrd. I don't really think it's that great of a facility, particularly when you go to some of the other BCS schools out there. Comparitively speaking, it looks run down.

I wonder how much Dinich's opinion would change based off the new turf, though -- I think that will help some.


You answered the question of how much an indoor facility matters. I keep hearing it's near the top of the "to do" list at UM. But I've been hearing it for years. We'll see.

Byrd really could use a better facelift than it has received so far. As I mentioned in the thread about the new field, I wish they could lower the field level a few feet. Then the front rows would go from being obstructed view to premium seats. Seems like a waste now. And I don't know why they don't take out the bleacher seating on the 2nd level of the North side and put in seats, and make it more of a "club-level" type of thing....with more amenities in the concourse area too. They probably could have done that a lot cheaper than building all of the suites onto Tyser Tower.

#36 Oriole85

Oriole85

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,321 posts
  • LocationNorthern VA

Posted 21 June 2012 - 04:15 PM

Regarding Leach, I am of the opinion that he wasn't coming here at all, anyway. Even had there not been the cold feet, he was asking for way more money than what the athletic department was willing to put out (from what I'm remembering at the time). It was a cool pipe dream to think he was coming, but it was still a pipe dream.

He went to Washington State, I don't think Maryland was beneath him. He wanted to get back into coaching and given his ties with Plank, I think Maryland was a good first step for him. From what I read that Maryland told his wife to find a place and they set her up with a real estate broker. I don't think this happens to the run of the mill candidate. Somebody told me who knows people in the athletic department that all indications Leach was going to be given the job. Obviously this proved to be incorrect.
@levineps

#37 Oriole85

Oriole85

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,321 posts
  • LocationNorthern VA

Posted 21 June 2012 - 04:26 PM

Honestly, I'm not sure how much an indoor practice facility matters. Players need to be ready to go in any weather. It's a nice bell and whistle, though, which I'm sure would draw recruits.

I do think UM deserves a better stadium than Byrd. I don't really think it's that great of a facility, particularly when you go to some of the other BCS schools out there. Comparitively speaking, it looks run down.

I wonder how much Dinich's opinion would change based off the new turf, though -- I think that will help some.

I'm probably not the best person on this topic having only been to three BCS on-campus facilities (Maryland, Colorado, WVU). And I must say I like Folsom the best, but that might have something to do with the fact, the Flatirons are nicer to look at than being in the middle of PG County or spending time in WV. Nonethless, I like Byrd fine. I don't expect it to be Florida State, Stanford, or Texas, but does anyone really think Maryland can keep up with these schools in arms race? I don't think Byrd will be getting a major renovation or a new stadium anytime soon(were cutting sports after all and they just did that with the suites).
@levineps

#38 Baltimore Chop

Baltimore Chop
  • Members
  • 74 posts
  • LocationTowson

Posted 22 June 2012 - 07:25 AM

You answered the question of how much an indoor facility matters. I keep hearing it's near the top of the "to do" list at UM. But I've been hearing it for years. We'll see.


Oh, I know. I was just referring to the utility of having one, more so than it being a nice feature.

When Fridge/Yow were around, they got a lot of things done, like installing a cafeteria in the Team House (the team had to schlep from South Campus Dining Hall over to Byrd for practices, which wasted 15 minutes or so), improving the weight room and film room in the team house, and getting the suites installed.

Byrd really could use a better facelift than it has received so far. As I mentioned in the thread about the new field, I wish they could lower the field level a few feet. Then the front rows would go from being obstructed view to premium seats. Seems like a waste now. And I don't know why they don't take out the bleacher seating on the 2nd level of the North side and put in seats, and make it more of a "club-level" type of thing....with more amenities in the concourse area too. They probably could have done that a lot cheaper than building all of the suites onto Tyser Tower.


The next thing after the suites was supposed to be lowering the field and installing new turf. That was to have happened in 2009 or 2010 or so, but that got postponed, due to the slowing economy.

So, with the new field going in, I wonder if the field is getting lowered, or if they are just installing the turf. Would be a wasted opportunity if they just installed the new turf, for reasons that you mention. Edited to add: According to this rendering, it appears that the field is, in fact, getting lowered. Awesome! http://grfx.cstv.com...jpeg?1340232055

I think after the turf was supposed to be the indoor facility....we'll see if that comes to fruition.
Perception is reality.

#39 Baltimore Chop

Baltimore Chop
  • Members
  • 74 posts
  • LocationTowson

Posted 22 June 2012 - 07:35 AM

I'm probably not the best person on this topic having only been to three BCS on-campus facilities (Maryland, Colorado, WVU). And I must say I like Folsom the best, but that might have something to do with the fact, the Flatirons are nicer to look at than being in the middle of PG County or spending time in WV. Nonethless, I like Byrd fine. I don't expect it to be Florida State, Stanford, or Texas, but does anyone really think Maryland can keep up with these schools in arms race? I don't think Byrd will be getting a major renovation or a new stadium anytime soon(were cutting sports after all and they just did that with the suites).


And that's kind of the point. The basketball team got a band new facility in 2002. The football team is stuck with a relic from the 1950s. Granted, they have made some improvements to it (and are continuing to do so at a slow pace), but the sightlines aren't optimal (pitch of the stadium isn't deep enough, and the field itself needs to be deeper than it is).

Now, what remains to be seen is how these improvements can attract recruits. Sadly, this is a comparative exercise. So, while they might be working to make improvements, they need to be showing recruits why UM is a better option than places like WVU or Penn State or UVA or Va Tech, etc. Some of that involves having the bells and whistles, and attempting to keep up with the Joneses.
  • Oriole85 likes this
Perception is reality.

#40 Oriole85

Oriole85

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,321 posts
  • LocationNorthern VA

Posted 22 June 2012 - 09:20 AM

And that's kind of the point. The basketball team got a band new facility in 2002. The football team is stuck with a relic from the 1950s. Granted, they have made some improvements to it (and are continuing to do so at a slow pace), but the sightlines aren't optimal (pitch of the stadium isn't deep enough, and the field itself needs to be deeper than it is).

Now, what remains to be seen is how these improvements can attract recruits. Sadly, this is a comparative exercise. So, while they might be working to make improvements, they need to be showing recruits why UM is a better option than places like WVU or Penn State or UVA or Va Tech, etc. Some of that involves having the bells and whistles, and attempting to keep up with the Joneses.

I think as you mentioned the next step is the indoor facility. Truth of the matter is this if you want to represent your hometown state, be closer to home, and/or start right away come to Maryland. If you want to go somewhere with top-notch facility, tradition, and a chance at a national title, this isn't for you. All that being said, if you do it big at Maryland you have a chance to be something special since you'll be remembered for generations to come as opposed to those SEC schools where it's expected every year to win a national title.
  • BSLChrisStoner and Baltimore Chop like this
@levineps




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


Our Sponsors


 width=