Interesting Story regarding USC BOT

[Clevercock3]

https://www.thestate.com/news/local/education/article259811560.html

A snipit from the article. We aren't the only people questioning the decisions on buyouts and other issues in the program.

‘Not a great head football coach’​

Lawmakers also latched onto the high-priced buyouts for former coaches Muschamp and Martin.

After his firing in 2019, football coach Muschamp reached a deal with the university to be paid $12.9 million in one lump sum. Martin, who was recently let go as the men’s basketball coach after 10 years, will get $3 million.

In Muschamp’s case, Harpootlian argued the university should never have brokered that deal, struck amid the COVID-19 pandemic when college sports shut down and the athletics department was losing millions of dollars and did not have the cash on hand to pay Muschamp’s buyout.

The university loaned the athletics department roughly $10 million to cover his payment — a large lump sum that board member Williams, who opposes big buyouts, alleged the board wasn’t aware of until later on and asked for more oversight.

“You do have oversight, because you hire a president do you not?” Speaker Lucas asked Williams. “And the president hires the athletic director, is that correct? And if we make poor decisions in hiring the president then we lose our ability to have oversight on athletics, wouldn’t you agree with that?”

Asked his take, Smith told lawmakers, “the short answer is, I don’t like credit obviously,” when asked whether athletics director Ray Tanner should have fired Muschamp. “I think Coach Muschamp is a fine person. I think he was not a great head football coach.”

Martin’s $3 million buyout and how it’s paid will be negotiated in the coming weeks, though Tanner indicated that the former coach will receive the full amount. Had the university waited one more season — after April 1, 2023 — the athletics director could have fired Martin without any buyout obligation.

State Rep. John King, a York Democrat who sits on the screening panel, questioned whether Tanner was forced to fire Martin, citing calls he’s received that a board member called and forced the firing of Martin. He did not name the board member.

“He just told me he was under extreme pressure, and that’s all I know,” said Williams, who also offered up a private conversation he had with Pastides about Martin. Williams said he asked Pastides whether he OK’d Martin’s firing, to which he said Pastides replied, “I told him I’m out of here in May, I don’t have to live with it but I thought the best thing is to let him stay another year and save $3 million.”

This is a developing story. Check back for updates.

This story was originally published March 29, 2022 10:38 AM.

 

[Conway Gamecock]

“You do have oversight, because you hire a president do you not?” Speaker Lucas asked Williams. “And the president hires the athletic director, is that correct? And if we make poor decisions in hiring the president then we lose our ability to have oversight on athletics, wouldn’t you agree with that?”

He's not wrong. That's what a President is - he/she PRESIDES over the functions of a governing body or entity of an institution. So who was the University President when Muschamp was fired?

But it also back-tracks to the Athletic Director: if large buyout clauses in contracts for head coaches are the order of the day, and in order to hire or keep quality head coaches then large buyouts are necessary, then it falls on the AD to make quality hires and quality contractual agreements with those coaches, to make sure we're not just throwing money to the wind.

If we get stuck with a bad apple head coach to the point where we must keep them longer than we'd like, just to save the buyout money that was promised to them earlier, then more scrutiny needs to fall on the Athletic Director that put the Athletic Department and University in such a predicament. I mean, was Muschamp a coach in high demand at ANY time during his tenure at South Carolina, where we needed to anoint him financially in order to keep him from being stolen by someone else? Was there ANY ripples of other programs coming after Will that we had to deal with?

 

[67gamecock]

I don't think Tanner ever understood the games of high stakes salary negotiations re: football and basketball HC's in big time college athletics. Thus poor hiring, firing and retention decisions led to millions $$$ flying out the door - millions that could have been used to hire better coaches which would have likely resulted in more wins, happier fans and even better facilities for USC athletics.

 

[Clevercock3]

I don't think Tanner ever understood the games of high stakes salary negotiations re: football and basketball HC's in big time college athletics. Thus poor hiring, firing and retention decisions led to millions $$$ flying out the door - millions that could have been used to hire better coaches which would have likely resulted in more wins, happier fans and even better facilities for USC athletics.

History is always a great way to look back at what you did right and what you did wrong. Forget Ray Tanner as a coach and what he did. He wanted to give that gig up and become an AD even though no other school would have ever entertained that but us.

We did what we did and as we sit here today and look at his tenure as an AD it is a sad record to be honest.

First Spurrier told him a year before he just quit that he was ready to retire. We KNOW that Ray took that information and did not a single thing. He in fact thought he would talk Spurrier into staying around. That was certainly a plan but what was the plan if that didn't work? Ray had no other plan as history shows. He went out and got a guy after many others passed that no one with a serious program would have considered. To be honest I liked the hire at first because Muschamp had a lot of pressure on him to produce if he ever intended to be a HC anywhere again. But instead of recognizing that valuable consideration, Ray overpaid for someone that no one else wanted. Sometimes you have to be willing to tell the coach or his agent that's the deal and if you don't want to sign you have 48 hours before I start looking at other options and you should always have "other options" in your desk drawer.

The fact is Muschamps tenure should have been decided within the first 3 years of being here and there was nothing special about keeping him around thus no buyout was necessary because no one else wanted him. Ray is just lost on that aspect of the job.

I'm going to just pass on baseball at the moment because that train wreck is in progress as we speak yet again and there is no plan in place nor even a desire apparently to let people know what we do expect. If you can't get the job done it's not personal but we will find someone that can!

This fiasco with Frank never needed to happen. If he knew last year when he renewed his contract that Frank was more or less on a year to year basis then the buyout should have reflected the same. Again not a guy that anyone was beating the door down to steal from you. But anyway Ray agrees to that and bam pulls the trigger again with no apparent plan at all in place. One would think you'd look over the market, see who might be available or interested, if no one is available to get you to the point you want the program to be in then maybe you pass till the next year and see if things are better. Not to mention it cost you $3 MILLION less to do just that and I mean what's the worst that happens then? You get your 4th or 5th place candidate for the opening?

I like Ray Tanner as a person and he's done a lot of wonderful things however it's beyond time to pull the plug on his role as the AD at South Carolina and us to move on from the damage that has been done.

For all the people that say well look at our traditions and what we've done and blah blah blah I will point you rather quickly to an AD that believed in and sold the potential at South Carolina. He went out and got two legendary coaches to come to a place that no one would have ever considered prior to that so don't tell me the sell is that tough or can't be done. It can be done if you believe in what you are selling and know what you are doing. Unfortunately Ray Tanner hasn't a clue what he is doing and it's time we moved on!

 

[Gamecockben1979]

History is always a great way to look back at what you did right and what you did wrong. Forget Ray Tanner as a coach and what he did. He wanted to give that gig up and become an AD even though no other school would have ever entertained that but us.

We did what we did and as we sit here today and look at his tenure as an AD it is a sad record to be honest.

First Spurrier told him a year before he just quit that he was ready to retire. We KNOW that Ray took that information and did not a single thing. He in fact thought he would talk Spurrier into staying around. That was certainly a plan but what was the plan if that didn't work? Ray had no other plan as history shows. He went out and got a guy after many others passed that no one with a serious program would have considered. To be honest I liked the hire at first because Muschamp had a lot of pressure on him to produce if he ever intended to be a HC anywhere again. But instead of recognizing that valuable consideration, Ray overpaid for someone that no one else wanted. Sometimes you have to be willing to tell the coach or his agent that's the deal and if you don't want to sign you have 48 hours before I start looking at other options and you should always have "other options" in your desk drawer.

The fact is Muschamps tenure should have been decided within the first 3 years of being here and there was nothing special about keeping him around thus no buyout was necessary because no one else wanted him. Ray is just lost on that aspect of the job.

I'm going to just pass on baseball at the moment because that train wreck is in progress as we speak yet again and there is no plan in place nor even a desire apparently to let people know what we do expect. If you can't get the job done it's not personal but we will find someone that can!

This fiasco with Frank never needed to happen. If he knew last year when he renewed his contract that Frank was more or less on a year to year basis then the buyout should have reflected the same. Again not a guy that anyone was beating the door down to steal from you. But anyway Ray agrees to that and bam pulls the trigger again with no apparent plan at all in place. One would think you'd look over the market, see who might be available or interested, if no one is available to get you to the point you want the program to be in then maybe you pass till the next year and see if things are better. Not to mention it cost you $3 MILLION less to do just that and I mean what's the worst that happens then? You get your 4th or 5th place candidate for the opening?

I like Ray Tanner as a person and he's done a lot of wonderful things however it's beyond time to pull the plug on his role as the AD at South Carolina and us to move on from the damage that has been done.

For all the people that say well look at our traditions and what we've done and blah blah blah I will point you rather quickly to an AD that believed in and sold the potential at South Carolina. He went out and got to legendary coaches to come to a place that no one would have ever considered prior to that so don't tell me the sell is that tough or can't be done. It can be done if you believe in what you are selling and know what you are doing. Unfortunately Ray Tanner hasn't a clue what he is doing and it's time we moved on!

You bring up some really good points. First he should have never talked Spurrier out of retirement. It’s hard to imagine an employee that wants to retire giving it his all after being talked into it. Second, this was giving a year heads up to Tanner that a change was coming and even with advanced notice we ended up with Will Muschamp. Then once we got Muschamp we rewarded him with a kings ransom for one nine win season built on the back of Spurrier recruits and beating a bunch of midgets.

It is well documented Ray Tanner wanted to fire Frank Martin last year, but a couple of state politicians made that move all but impossible. So then we go through a lame duck season and here is another example of having a year to hire a coach and we end up with a 5th best option. A coach that was on no one’s radar prior to his hiring. It’s hard to imagine anyone doing any worse at this…..

 

[rogue cock]

You bring up some really good points. First he should have never talked Spurrier out of retirement. It’s hard to imagine an employee that wants to retire giving it his all after being talked into it. Second, this was giving a year heads up to Tanner that a change was coming and even with advanced notice we ended up with Will Muschamp. Then once we got Muschamp we rewarded him with a kings ransom for one nine win season built on the back of Spurrier recruits and beating a bunch of midgets.

It is well documented Ray Tanner wanted to fire Frank Martin last year, but a couple of state politicians made that move all but impossible. So then we go through a lame duck season and here is another example of having a year to hire a coach and we end up with a 5th best option. A coach that was on no one’s radar prior to his hiring. It’s hard to imagine anyone doing any worse at this…..

This is what JC and John Whittle reported at the time and it hasn't changed. Same thing many of us have heard also from different sources:

John WhittleSTAFF
Posted on Feb 4th, 2020, 9:35 AM, , User Since 138 months ago, User Post Count: 88305

• Feb 4th, 2020, 9:35 AM
• 138 months
• 88305

OXCockuru21 said... (original post)Spurrier called Tanner that week and said, “I think it’s time. Let’s call the press conference.”But Tanner urged Spurrier to reconsider, which g...
show more

I can't read the whole story as I'm not a member (although, I am thinking about subscribing because they have done a great job with the EPL) but what I'm reading is what I have personally been saying.
I haven't heard the "I think it's time to call the press conference line" but have always said that Ray and Steve had a conversation about it and Ray told him to take his time to be sure of the decision. Jerri and Steve Jr. (who I am assuming are the "external forces") are who convinced him to keep coaching.
I'm not sure where the news is here.

 

[king ward]

https://www.thestate.com/news/local/education/article259811560.html

A snipit from the article. We aren't the only people questioning the decisions on buyouts and other issues in the program.

‘Not a great head football coach’​

Lawmakers also latched onto the high-priced buyouts for former coaches Muschamp and Martin.

After his firing in 2019, football coach Muschamp reached a deal with the university to be paid $12.9 million in one lump sum. Martin, who was recently let go as the men’s basketball coach after 10 years, will get $3 million.

In Muschamp’s case, Harpootlian argued the university should never have brokered that deal, struck amid the COVID-19 pandemic when college sports shut down and the athletics department was losing millions of dollars and did not have the cash on hand to pay Muschamp’s buyout.

The university loaned the athletics department roughly $10 million to cover his payment — a large lump sum that board member Williams, who opposes big buyouts, alleged the board wasn’t aware of until later on and asked for more oversight.

“You do have oversight, because you hire a president do you not?” Speaker Lucas asked Williams. “And the president hires the athletic director, is that correct? And if we make poor decisions in hiring the president then we lose our ability to have oversight on athletics, wouldn’t you agree with that?”

Asked his take, Smith told lawmakers, “the short answer is, I don’t like credit obviously,” when asked whether athletics director Ray Tanner should have fired Muschamp. “I think Coach Muschamp is a fine person. I think he was not a great head football coach.”

Martin’s $3 million buyout and how it’s paid will be negotiated in the coming weeks, though Tanner indicated that the former coach will receive the full amount. Had the university waited one more season — after April 1, 2023 — the athletics director could have fired Martin without any buyout obligation.

State Rep. John King, a York Democrat who sits on the screening panel, questioned whether Tanner was forced to fire Martin, citing calls he’s received that a board member called and forced the firing of Martin. He did not name the board member.

“He just told me he was under extreme pressure, and that’s all I know,” said Williams, who also offered up a private conversation he had with Pastides about Martin. Williams said he asked Pastides whether he OK’d Martin’s firing, to which he said Pastides replied, “I told him I’m out of here in May, I don’t have to live with it but I thought the best thing is to let him stay another year and save $3 million.”

This is a developing story. Check back for updates.

This story was originally published March 29, 2022 10:38 AM.

I'm thinking, "What a cluster we are."
I'm also thinking how sad it is to have our maladroit methods splashed all over the newspaper, something our principal rival never has to endure.

 

[rogue cock]

I'm thinking, "What a cluster we are."
I'm also thinking how sad it is to have our maladroit methods splashed all over the newspaper, something our principal rival never has to endure.

Both The State and Greenville News are pretty much bankrupt and are desperately trying to pick up readers using different tactics. The P&C reports the situation a bit differently....especially with regard to the $10M. Per the P&C, Caslen vetoed the $10M leaving private donors to make up the difference. I don't doubt Harpootlian made hay out of it....he loves publicity. Wait until the Murdaugh trial kicks up.

The Caslen about-face was odd since he reportedly wanted Muschamp gone before the restructuring of the Muschamp contract that reduced the buyout from $19M to $13M. Maybe the BOT read him the riot act about cutting expenses.

 

[DeeDave]

The worst decision of the last 20 years at the University of South Carolina as far as athletics go was Tanner giving Muschamp a huge buyout

a buyout for a coach that NO OTHER major college program would have hired as a head coach (and still hasn't).

That was simply an awful, awful decision.

It's a decision Ray never had to answer for- and still hasn't.

 

[polo-loco]

The worst decision of the last 20 years at the University of South Carolina as far as athletics go was Tanner giving Muschamp a huge buyout

a buyout for a coach that NO OTHER major college program would have hired as a head coach (and still hasn't).

That was simply an awful, awful decision.

It's a decision Ray never had to answer for- and still hasn't.

The board also signed off on that abomination.

But make no mistake, FGF rank and file loved it, too.

 

[TAV31]

I don't think Tanner ever understood the games of high stakes salary negotiations re: football and basketball HC's in big time college athletics. Thus poor hiring, firing and retention decisions led to millions $$$ flying out the door - millions that could have been used to hire better coaches which would have likely resulted in more wins, happier fans and even better facilities for USC athletics.

Tanner gathered a $15 million, $10 million, and $1 million donor donation last weekend while flying donors to and from our women's basketball games last weekend.
Paris also came and flew with a few of the donors.
We also still have a very good chance at signing GG for one year.
Oh and Rattler definitely has a bit of an cocky ass attitude, but hopefully his play can back it up. If he does well, everyone will call it "swagger". If not, everyone will call it cocky. We shall see.

 

[lexgamecock]

Of course as they say hindsight is 20/20. But when Tanner wanted to retire we should have said thank you for you great service and we wish you well and got a real AD.

Muschamp should have never been considered much less kept on and given a big buyout.

Martin I think is really a good coach he's just not willing to do what it takes to get the caliber of players it takes to win. The exception was Thornwell and PJ and that fluke final four that he could not build on. Too early to tell about our fourth choice but I don't see a winning record next year.

One thing Tanner has done well even though he did not hire her is to keep Dawn happy.

I think Beamer has done a great job considering what he has had to work with. We will see but so far the future looks bright and the FB culture is changing..