Did Tanner make a big mistake?
- Thread starter MANAFOLD
- Start date
I doubt anyone is happy with the baseball program. I have been vocal about that since 2015. However a very small percentage of our fan base is unhappy with Tanner. Whether you like it or not he's not going anywhere unless he chooses to do so.
It's hard to tell because the development of those players was so poor when they got here.
Could be; could be not. Muschamp could extend him. In fact, right now, he is Tanner's best hope. You need to have at least one of the big two revenue-producing sports on solid ground continually. Football is the sport that does him the most good. That secures an AD's position. Otherwise, an AD is vulnerable, plus his cast of handlers could change. Tanner's future is weighed in the balances, however much people like him personally.
co-sign
He actually made one HUGE one before that....& it was an athletic program altering one.
Fulmer's ascendancy was not only non-linear, but resulted from desperation. He obviously wasn't their first choice on at least a couple of occasions when the job was open. We'll see how he does.
That is not necessarily true. McGee and Hyman didn't always have the big revenue producing sports on solid ground continually. Their positions were very secure.
My guess is that UT will give him a substantial support staff. Same with RT, although my guess is that RT had/has more experience in athletics administration.
Spot on. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again - Barring some embarrassing scandal, Tanner’s future as USC AD is tied directly to the success of Muschamp. Everything else is just noise. Football is what matters.
It is basically this way at every SEC school except Kentucky. Oh and Mizzou, but I don’t really understand them and they have never seemed like a real SEC school.
They were established administrative professionals who were brought in to solidify the overall department. Hyman set the table for Tanner in terms of bringing the department into the current century. Tanner is a comparative amateur who will be wearing Muschamp around his neck like a tie, or a noose. Also Kingston. Tanner isn't nearly as eminent as an athletic director as his two immediate predecessors. He is Pastides' means of controlling the department in a way he could not do with Hyman.
Last edited:
"Noise", as you put it, does matter. May not bring in the $$$, but it does garner lots of good will.
I enjoy the noise and I’ll agree it matters to me whether we win or lose in every sport. But the topic is about Tanner’s job security. In this context, only football matters.
Tanner was a guy who had a minor role in N.C. State's athletic administration years - decades - before he was granted his wish to leave the dugout and assume the athletic director's job at an SEC school. He was obviously placed there for reasons having nothing to do with his qualifications. If it wasn't because of his qualifications, what could it have been? It was about institutional administrative control through a surrogate. Could not have been anything else.
From what I've read, RT has been doing some athletics administration tasks since he arrived in Columbia. Was it his wish to become AD specifically at an SEC school?
Actually, I think it's a good idea for the athletic department at a school to be more beholden to the school as a whole.
You can have a winning football team, but if as AD you're not a wise steward of the athletic department's resources (i.e., monies, staff, buildings, etc.), you won't last long in the position either.
He wanted to be athletic director at this one. I think the administration agreed with you about the athletic department being more beholden, hence, a less autonomous AD.
Last edited:
Wrong again...He was placed because he was considered to be the best man for the job and that he was (is) well qualified. Your "institutional administrative control through a surrogate" is ridiculous. Was that beamed down through your tin foil hat?
Because he loves USC, and he said this many times. However if there had not been an opening, he would be in administration somewhere else. He would not continue coaching baseball.
"Best man" can carry many connotations, including most manageable, the one which seems to fit best in this instance.
Hey, I'm romantic also. I'm watching the episode of Bones in which she and Booth get married. I cry every time I watch it.
I'm going to disagree with King and Kitchenlabs. I think Ray was given the AD gig because of the good ol' boy system: Lately, we seem to always want to promote the homegrown guy instead of getting the best guy for the job. (That includes many of our fans as well.) Not that we always do, but that need for a feel-good sentiment is there.
But the Lorenzo Ward, Tanner and now BMac promotions from within are prime examples. One was an abysmal failure. The next still has the jury out (though there are already many detractors). The last remains to be seen.
But the Lorenzo Ward, Tanner and now BMac promotions from within are prime examples. One was an abysmal failure. The next still has the jury out (though there are already many detractors). The last remains to be seen.
Last edited:
You can have a winning football team, but if as AD you're not a wise steward of the athletic department's resources (i.e., monies, staff, buildings, etc.), you won't last long in the position either.[/QUOTE]
He may last longer than you think, being a member of the "good ol boy" system.
He may last longer than you think, being a member of the "good ol boy" system.
pepsicock
Well-Known Member
It's May 6 and we already swept Top 20 team of LSU, won a midway week game, took 2 out of 3 against Top 20 team of Vandy on the road and just won 2 games against the #4 Team of Ole Miss... Sunday's game will only be a bonus if we win... All of this after losing to PC...
With that said putting up double digit runs, went from the #9 seed SEC team to #4 seeded SEC team...
Still a long ways to go...
This reminded me a season where Tanner was something like 3 - 9 start in the SEC and turned it around moving from last place to something like top 5 or 6 team in the SEC... Maybe 10 years ago or so...
With that said putting up double digit runs, went from the #9 seed SEC team to #4 seeded SEC team...
Still a long ways to go...
This reminded me a season where Tanner was something like 3 - 9 start in the SEC and turned it around moving from last place to something like top 5 or 6 team in the SEC... Maybe 10 years ago or so...
Kingward is like dangerfield only less witty. Eager to pile on and place blame when things aren’t going well.
A
anon_n4c0cp5zhdxn7
Guest
Now the original title should read, “Did Tanner make a great hire with Kingston?”
A
anon_n4c0cp5zhdxn7
Guest
Jury is still out but glad Tanner gave him more than 1/2 a season to find out.
I think Mark should be Coach of the year in the SEC and National Coach of the year...
I'd bet right now Tanner is sitting in his nice garnet leather desk chair, with his feet propped up on his desk, with two fingers of Pappy's bourbon, a big ole Honduran in his mouth, and grinning from ear to ear.
Thanks for whoever brought this thread back to the forefront to help us point out the stupidity that is rampant on FGF. We lead the nation in the "fire somebody" crowd based on a bad quarter/inning/game. Comical
I agree. I'm happy for what this team has bounced back to achieve. The fact is, our recruiting has always been good enough to position us in the upper echelon of college baseball. This team has not over achieved. It has rounded into form late in the season to achieve to its capabilities.
You get it. Too many think this is overachieving. It’s not. It’s doing what we are supposed to do.
This is our 14th super regional. We’ve been to Omaha 11 Times. Played in 5 championship games/series. When that’s your pedigree you beat ECU, OSU & Wilmington.
Similar threads
