Bustle, Lee, Rogers

[Cajunsmike]

_ Agree 100%. And therein lies the problem. We have had coaches that don't know how to coach a motion offense, or players that either don't know, or are too lazy to run it, or both. Based on my observations over the last several years, I would say the problem is primarily the former. _

Major problem we have had is the lack of a good point guard who makes good decisions after penetrating. Daigle is one of our better shooters and he has the ball in his hands a lot. It is tough to shoot a good % in that situation. We would be better off we could more frequently get him in some catch and shoot situations.

[TillmansNumber1]

The Cajuns problems with coaches and their contracts come from two different problems.

First, the Cajuns often give long term contracts to coaches who don´t need or deserve them (Rogers and Lee), or they do not give enough money or time to the coaches who need long term contracts (Hall, Evans, Bustle).

Rogers, who was an assistant coach for lowly Mississippi State and a local high school head coach, was given, with no questions asked, a four year contract. He has repaid the Cajuns by driving down the win total and running off as many players as possible. No experience needed as the Cajuns give out four year contracts to anyone. On the flip side, the Cajuns gave year to year contracts to J. Kelly Hall, who was raising the win total every year. Winning every year will get you...one more year. The Cajuns, after 3 improving years of J Kelly Hall, finally realized he was a good coach and rewarded him with a four year contract. Though Hall professes his love of Cajun country and is siencere (his daughters were born here), there was no incentive to stay as Cincinatti offered him more money immediately.

UL is now stuck with 2 more years of Rogers, unless the university decides to pay his buyout. Meanwhile, Hall was fired by the Bearcats, and remains available to coach. His wife is a former WNBA player, Hall has had success at UL (got to the NCAA tournament as an at-large 11 seed) and UL has not contacted him. In his two years at Cincinatti, Hall did not forget how to coach.

Go after Hall. He´s not going to become a plumber tomorrow, and he had success at UL. It´s not like Rogers is going to take the Cajuns back to the NCAA tournament or earn a contract extension. Fire Rogers, and re-hire Hall, who is currently unemployed. He likely wants to coach again. As a male, his upward mobility is limited -- sadly -- and he speaks positively of UL.

Lee is no different. Lee completely hoodwinked an entire fan base and administration into believing losing the right way (with no description of such an ethos or credibility) was better than paying Jessie Evans to win 20 games a year. Lee had no experience as a college HC, had experience as an assistant for UL (which is not Arizona, the best program if you want to go to the NBA) and was an HC for a Opelousas High (not to be confused with DeMatha in Maryland), but the Cajuns gave him a 5 year contract.

The Cajuns saddle themselves with long term contract for coaches who have no credibility or experience. They are then stuck with the coach for the duration of the contract and have no wiggle room with which to work.

On the flip side, the Cajuns rarely give contract extensions or money to the coaches who deserve money or time. The Hall example was recently discussed, and Evans routinely won 20 games and only got one contract extension despite repeated postseason appearances. The Cajuns traded 20 wins, postseason appearances and ESPN2 games for 10 wins, home and away games against the same OOC opponent, and yearly first round exits from the SBC tournament.

If the program is performing well, the Cajuns have to reward coaches to promote stability in the program, retain season ticket holders and one time purchasers interested in winning, and establish some foundation for the university and its athletic department. Successful coaches (non-losing seasons at UL) need long term contracts to attract four year students or 3 year transfers (Evans ability, with a one year contract, to attract top athletes makes UL look more foolish for trading him for Lee).

UL may have fired Bustle without announcing it. Despite having non-losing seasons 3 of the last 5 years, Bustle was not rewarded for going 6-6, a rare accomplishment in the last 10 years of UL football (http://www.ncaapalace.com/component/...af/pastseasons). He has two years (2009, 2010) remaining on his deal. UL has no other option waiting in the wings, UL will not receive interest from top assistants or current HCs and UL should have extended Bustle after a 6-6 season.

Bustle will be lucky if he can recruit anyone considering he can truthfully tell recruits he will only be at UL their first season. The Cajuns will, at worst, finish 3-9 or, at best, 5-7 with a little luck in 2009. UL cannot extend Bustle, because of those results, in 2009, which leaves UL and Bustle, its most successful coach since 1993-1996, at a crossroads. Bustle will need more years on his contract to recruit, and UL, if it changes coaches, will have little recruiting from Bustle´s last year (why play for him if he´s not getting paid?), which drives down the appeal of the job and hurts the first year for the incoming coach. Bustle is having non-losing seasons. They aren´t sexy, but UL has no other option.

Second, the Cajuns refuse to raise money or develop a successful fundraising program. RCAF is constantly dotting the I and crossing the T. But, as the economy weakens and the programs get worse, RCAF´s inability to get its act together hurts the Cajuns ability to raise money to pay buyouts, attract coaches, and pay for deserved bonuses. There are no events in Lafayette to raise money for the Cajuns, and the events which are held are poorly advertised, meaning only those in the know can attend or donate. So much for attracting new fans and building a larger donor base.

RCAF will not be ready for the 2009 football season, which could be a blessing as the Cajuns record will be dismal. RCAF needed to be ready last year, and donations need to be required of anyone wanting season tickets. Women´s and men´s basketball will be poorly attended and it will be difficult to solicite donations for a programs going down the tube. But, as it stands, no one really knows about RCAF. The Cajuns announced it on a Friday, with no press attendance (there goes talking about it in front of the water cooler during the week), and it is still not ready. Donations cannot be made online, and the Cajuns have no database of fans to contact trying to get donations.

Example: this poster´s mother earned her Graduate Degree from UL. She has never once, in the 5 years since, been contacted to donate. The initial response might be ¨Well, she should make the effort to donate.¨ But the Cajuns cannot be that foolish. They must contact graduates, fans, ticket purchasers with regularity to build a database or donors who can help RCAF grow.

In order to survive in this economy, the Cajuns need to do two things. First, raise money through donors and companies (difficult to do as Cajuns effectively endorse mediocrity by refusing to fire failures like Lee and Rogers) to help drive down costs of firing and hiring new coaches. Second, give extensions for non-losing seasons (.500 and above) each time the non-losing season is achieved.

When the Cajuns had Hall and Evans and the teams were winning, the Cajuns did not capitalize by trying to get donations. They are currently paying the price. Their ability to change -- accepting on-line donations, calling donors and students, promoting RCAF at games, hosting RCAF events throughout the state -- will determine whether the Cajuns can realistically improve or whether the Cajuns simply change coaches and get the same results.

[cajun4life]

_ The Cajuns problems with coaches and their contracts come from two different problems.

First, the Cajuns often give long term contracts to coaches who don´t need or deserve them (Rogers and Lee), or they do not give enough money or time to the coaches who need long term contracts (Hall, Evans, Bustle).

Rogers, who was an assistant coach for lowly Mississippi State and a local high school head coach, was given, with no questions asked, a four year contract. He has repaid the Cajuns by driving down the win total and running off as many players as possible. No experience needed as the Cajuns give out four year contracts to anyone. On the flip side, the Cajuns gave year to year contracts to J. Kelly Hall, who was raising the win total every year. Winning every year will get you...one more year. The Cajuns, after 3 improving years of J Kelly Hall, finally realized he was a good coach and rewarded him with a four year contract. Though Hall professes his love of Cajun country and is siencere (his daughters were born here), there was no incentive to stay as Cincinatti offered him more money immediately.

UL is now stuck with 2 more years of Rogers, unless the university decides to pay his buyout. Meanwhile, Hall was fired by the Bearcats, and remains available to coach. His wife is a former WNBA player, Hall has had success at UL (got to the NCAA tournament as an at-large 11 seed) and UL has not contacted him. In his two years at Cincinatti, Hall did not forget how to coach.

Go after Hall. He´s not going to become a plumber tomorrow, and he had success at UL. It´s not like Rogers is going to take the Cajuns back to the NCAA tournament or earn a contract extension. Fire Rogers, and re-hire Hall, who is currently unemployed. He likely wants to coach again. As a male, his upward mobility is limited -- sadly -- and he speaks positively of UL.

Lee is no different. Lee completely hoodwinked an entire fan base and administration into believing losing the right way (with no description of such an ethos or credibility) was better than paying Jessie Evans to win 20 games a year. Lee had no experience as a college HC, had experience as an assistant for UL (which is not Arizona, the best program if you want to go to the NBA) and was an HC for a Opelousas High (not to be confused with DeMatha in Maryland), but the Cajuns gave him a 5 year contract.

The Cajuns saddle themselves with long term contract for coaches who have no credibility or experience. They are then stuck with the coach for the duration of the contract and have no wiggle room with which to work.

On the flip side, the Cajuns rarely give contract extensions or money to the coaches who deserve money or time. The Hall example was recently discussed, and Evans routinely won 20 games and only got one contract extension despite repeated postseason appearances. The Cajuns traded 20 wins, postseason appearances and ESPN2 games for 10 wins, home and away games against the same OOC opponent, and yearly first round exits from the SBC tournament.

If the program is performing well, the Cajuns have to reward coaches to promote stability in the program, retain season ticket holders and one time purchasers interested in winning, and establish some foundation for the university and its athletic department. Successful coaches (non-losing seasons at UL) need long term contracts to attract four year students or 3 year transfers (Evans ability, with a one year contract, to attract top athletes makes UL look more foolish for trading him for Lee).

UL may have fired Bustle without announcing it. Despite having non-losing seasons 3 of the last 5 years, Bustle was not rewarded for going 6-6, a rare accomplishment in the last 10 years of UL football (http://www.ncaapalace.com/component/...af/pastseasons). He has two years (2009, 2010) remaining on his deal. UL has no other option waiting in the wings, UL will not receive interest from top assistants or current HCs and UL should have extended Bustle after a 6-6 season.

Bustle will be lucky if he can recruit anyone considering he can truthfully tell recruits he will only be at UL their first season. The Cajuns will, at worst, finish 3-9 or, at best, 5-7 with a little luck in 2009. UL cannot extend Bustle, because of those results, in 2009, which leaves UL and Bustle, its most successful coach since 1993-1996, at a crossroads. Bustle will need more years on his contract to recruit, and UL, if it changes coaches, will have little recruiting from Bustle´s last year (why play for him if he´s not getting paid?), which drives down the appeal of the job and hurts the first year for the incoming coach. Bustle is having non-losing seasons. They aren´t sexy, but UL has no other option.

Second, the Cajuns refuse to raise money or develop a successful fundraising program. RCAF is constantly dotting the I and crossing the T. But, as the economy weakens and the programs get worse, RCAF´s inability to get its act together hurts the Cajuns ability to raise money to pay buyouts, attract coaches, and pay for deserved bonuses. There are no events in Lafayette to raise money for the Cajuns, and the events which are held are poorly advertised, meaning only those in the know can attend or donate. So much for attracting new fans and building a larger donor base.

RCAF will not be ready for the 2009 football season, which could be a blessing as the Cajuns record will be dismal. RCAF needed to be ready last year, and donations need to be required of anyone wanting season tickets. Women´s and men´s basketball will be poorly attended and it will be difficult to solicite donations for a programs going down the tube. But, as it stands, no one really knows about RCAF. The Cajuns announced it on a Friday, with no press attendance (there goes talking about it in front of the water cooler during the week), and it is still not ready. Donations cannot be made online, and the Cajuns have no database of fans to contact trying to get donations.

Example: this poster´s mother earned her Graduate Degree from UL. She has never once, in the 5 years since, been contacted to donate. The initial response might be ¨Well, she should make the effort to donate.¨ But the Cajuns cannot be that foolish. They must contact graduates, fans, ticket purchasers with regularity to build a database or donors who can help RCAF grow.

In order to survive in this economy, the Cajuns need to do two things. First, raise money through donors and companies (difficult to do as Cajuns effectively endorse mediocrity by refusing to fire failures like Lee and Rogers) to help drive down costs of firing and hiring new coaches. Second, give extensions for non-losing seasons (.500 and above) each time the non-losing season is achieved.

When the Cajuns had Hall and Evans and the teams were winning, the Cajuns did not capitalize by trying to get donations. They are currently paying the price. Their ability to change -- accepting on-line donations, calling donors and students, promoting RCAF at games, hosting RCAF events throughout the state -- will determine whether the Cajuns can realistically improve or whether the Cajuns simply change coaches and get the same results. _

I have my own theory as to why we allow both basketball programs to flounder. It goes back to the 70's when we were known as an athletic university and the academic side of the house became bitter and jealous. Therefore the best thing to do is hire inept coaches and barely fund athletics in order to kill them off. But this had a negative affect on USL/UL. In a sports driven region, UL's academic reputation took a huge hit when the athletic department received the death penalty.

Like it or not perception of a university in the south is based off of athletics, if you have great athletics then the average person believes the university to be just as great. Cajunfun may argue otherwise, but again perception is reality, a great example of this is LSU. They are one of the top 10 athletic programs in the country and people around here believe that they are an elite academic institution which is in fact not true. They are the best public university in Louisiana, and even that is debatable.

Getting back to my main point, I do not believe that we need to guarantee coaches who are successful with long term contracts. Incentives for Bustle, Lee, Rogers or any coaches.

If I were writing contracts for UL this is how I would structure them:
I base this off of current salary estimates

Bustle
yearly salary - $200000
Shared Belt Crown - $5000 bonus
Outright Champ - $10000 bonus plus 1 year extension
7-5 season - $15000 bonus each additional win $5000
Bowl appearance - $10000 bonus
Bowl Win - $10000 bonus plus 1 year extension
10 win season - $50000 raise plus 3 year extension

That would allow Bustle to receive up to 55% additional salary through bonus money.

Lee/Rogers
yearly salary - $120000/$100000 (I may be off)
Outright West division champs - $5000 bonus
Outright Belt Champ regular season - $10000 bonus plus 1 year extension
Belt Tourny Champ - $10000 bonus
At Large Bid - $5000 bonus
NCAA Tourny win - $3000 bonus each additional win $3000 plus 2 year extension
20-25 win season - $3000 bonus
25+ wins - $5000 bonus plus 1 year extension

This would allow Lee/Rogers to earn up to $36000 more in bonus money boosting their respective salary to $156000/$136000.

For the basketball coaches with bonuses are still barely making more than Southerns baseball coach.

[zephyr]

_ The Cajuns problems with coaches and their contracts come from two different problems.

First, the Cajuns often give long term contracts to coaches who don´t need or deserve them (Rogers and Lee), or they do not give enough money or time to the coaches who need long term contracts (Hall, Evans, Bustle).

Rogers, who was an assistant coach for lowly Mississippi State and a local high school head coach, was given, with no questions asked, a four year contract. He has repaid the Cajuns by driving down the win total and running off as many players as possible. No experience needed as the Cajuns give out four year contracts to anyone. On the flip side, the Cajuns gave year to year contracts to J. Kelly Hall, who was raising the win total every year. Winning every year will get you...one more year. The Cajuns, after 3 improving years of J Kelly Hall, finally realized he was a good coach and rewarded him with a four year contract. Though Hall professes his love of Cajun country and is siencere (his daughters were born here), there was no incentive to stay as Cincinatti offered him more money immediately.

UL is now stuck with 2 more years of Rogers, unless the university decides to pay his buyout. Meanwhile, Hall was fired by the Bearcats, and remains available to coach. His wife is a former WNBA player, Hall has had success at UL (got to the NCAA tournament as an at-large 11 seed) and UL has not contacted him. In his two years at Cincinatti, Hall did not forget how to coach.

Go after Hall. He´s not going to become a plumber tomorrow, and he had success at UL. It´s not like Rogers is going to take the Cajuns back to the NCAA tournament or earn a contract extension. Fire Rogers, and re-hire Hall, who is currently unemployed. He likely wants to coach again. As a male, his upward mobility is limited -- sadly -- and he speaks positively of UL.

Lee is no different. Lee completely hoodwinked an entire fan base and administration into believing losing the right way (with no description of such an ethos or credibility) was better than paying Jessie Evans to win 20 games a year. Lee had no experience as a college HC, had experience as an assistant for UL (which is not Arizona, the best program if you want to go to the NBA) and was an HC for a Opelousas High (not to be confused with DeMatha in Maryland), but the Cajuns gave him a 5 year contract.

The Cajuns saddle themselves with long term contract for coaches who have no credibility or experience. They are then stuck with the coach for the duration of the contract and have no wiggle room with which to work.

On the flip side, the Cajuns rarely give contract extensions or money to the coaches who deserve money or time. The Hall example was recently discussed, and Evans routinely won 20 games and only got one contract extension despite repeated postseason appearances. The Cajuns traded 20 wins, postseason appearances and ESPN2 games for 10 wins, home and away games against the same OOC opponent, and yearly first round exits from the SBC tournament.

If the program is performing well, the Cajuns have to reward coaches to promote stability in the program, retain season ticket holders and one time purchasers interested in winning, and establish some foundation for the university and its athletic department. Successful coaches (non-losing seasons at UL) need long term contracts to attract four year students or 3 year transfers (Evans ability, with a one year contract, to attract top athletes makes UL look more foolish for trading him for Lee).

UL may have fired Bustle without announcing it. Despite having non-losing seasons 3 of the last 5 years, Bustle was not rewarded for going 6-6, a rare accomplishment in the last 10 years of UL football (http://www.ncaapalace.com/component/...af/pastseasons). He has two years (2009, 2010) remaining on his deal. UL has no other option waiting in the wings, UL will not receive interest from top assistants or current HCs and UL should have extended Bustle after a 6-6 season.

Bustle will be lucky if he can recruit anyone considering he can truthfully tell recruits he will only be at UL their first season. The Cajuns will, at worst, finish 3-9 or, at best, 5-7 with a little luck in 2009. UL cannot extend Bustle, because of those results, in 2009, which leaves UL and Bustle, its most successful coach since 1993-1996, at a crossroads. Bustle will need more years on his contract to recruit, and UL, if it changes coaches, will have little recruiting from Bustle´s last year (why play for him if he´s not getting paid?), which drives down the appeal of the job and hurts the first year for the incoming coach. Bustle is having non-losing seasons. They aren´t sexy, but UL has no other option.

Second, the Cajuns refuse to raise money or develop a successful fundraising program. RCAF is constantly dotting the I and crossing the T. But, as the economy weakens and the programs get worse, RCAF´s inability to get its act together hurts the Cajuns ability to raise money to pay buyouts, attract coaches, and pay for deserved bonuses. There are no events in Lafayette to raise money for the Cajuns, and the events which are held are poorly advertised, meaning only those in the know can attend or donate. So much for attracting new fans and building a larger donor base.

RCAF will not be ready for the 2009 football season, which could be a blessing as the Cajuns record will be dismal. RCAF needed to be ready last year, and donations need to be required of anyone wanting season tickets. Women´s and men´s basketball will be poorly attended and it will be difficult to solicite donations for a programs going down the tube. But, as it stands, no one really knows about RCAF. The Cajuns announced it on a Friday, with no press attendance (there goes talking about it in front of the water cooler during the week), and it is still not ready. Donations cannot be made online, and the Cajuns have no database of fans to contact trying to get donations.

Example: this poster´s mother earned her Graduate Degree from UL. She has never once, in the 5 years since, been contacted to donate. The initial response might be ¨Well, she should make the effort to donate.¨ But the Cajuns cannot be that foolish. They must contact graduates, fans, ticket purchasers with regularity to build a database or donors who can help RCAF grow.

In order to survive in this economy, the Cajuns need to do two things. First, raise money through donors and companies (difficult to do as Cajuns effectively endorse mediocrity by refusing to fire failures like Lee and Rogers) to help drive down costs of firing and hiring new coaches. Second, give extensions for non-losing seasons (.500 and above) each time the non-losing season is achieved.

When the Cajuns had Hall and Evans and the teams were winning, the Cajuns did not capitalize by trying to get donations. They are currently paying the price. Their ability to change -- accepting on-line donations, calling donors and students, promoting RCAF at games, hosting RCAF events throughout the state -- will determine whether the Cajuns can realistically improve or whether the Cajuns simply change coaches and get the same results. _

Well, I will read the rest of your post in a bit but thought I needed to comment on the fact that a 4 year contract is not long at all for a head coach taking over a program. You take a program that was where the women's program was and still is and it takes a LONG time to develop a winning atmosphere. I'm not saying that we should have hired Rogers as i think he is terrible but I think 4 years was fine in terms of length of the contract. The problem comes in when he shows nothing in only 2 years and you want to get rid of him but don't have the private funding to buy him out.. Also, the program DID offer Hall more money to stay when the Cincy offer came up but he CHOSE to go somewhere else. Now, he is seeing that maybe he did have it good here but you can't fault him for wanting what he thought was a good opportunity. UL did everything in their power to keep Hall after the offer they were able to come up with to keep him was even surprising to Hall as he said he never thought UL could come up with that amount to pay him. However, the grass is always greener on the other side. Would I love to get he and his wife back? Absolutely, I think they are a great fit here. However, throw blame into both directions.

[zephyr]

_ The Cajuns problems with coaches and their contracts come from two different problems.

First, the Cajuns often give long term contracts to coaches who don´t need or deserve them (Rogers and Lee), or they do not give enough money or time to the coaches who need long term contracts (Hall, Evans, Bustle).

Rogers, who was an assistant coach for lowly Mississippi State and a local high school head coach, was given, with no questions asked, a four year contract. He has repaid the Cajuns by driving down the win total and running off as many players as possible. No experience needed as the Cajuns give out four year contracts to anyone. On the flip side, the Cajuns gave year to year contracts to J. Kelly Hall, who was raising the win total every year. Winning every year will get you...one more year. The Cajuns, after 3 improving years of J Kelly Hall, finally realized he was a good coach and rewarded him with a four year contract. Though Hall professes his love of Cajun country and is siencere (his daughters were born here), there was no incentive to stay as Cincinatti offered him more money immediately.

UL is now stuck with 2 more years of Rogers, unless the university decides to pay his buyout. Meanwhile, Hall was fired by the Bearcats, and remains available to coach. His wife is a former WNBA player, Hall has had success at UL (got to the NCAA tournament as an at-large 11 seed) and UL has not contacted him. In his two years at Cincinatti, Hall did not forget how to coach.

Go after Hall. He´s not going to become a plumber tomorrow, and he had success at UL. It´s not like Rogers is going to take the Cajuns back to the NCAA tournament or earn a contract extension. Fire Rogers, and re-hire Hall, who is currently unemployed. He likely wants to coach again. As a male, his upward mobility is limited -- sadly -- and he speaks positively of UL.

Lee is no different. Lee completely hoodwinked an entire fan base and administration into believing losing the right way (with no description of such an ethos or credibility) was better than paying Jessie Evans to win 20 games a year. Lee had no experience as a college HC, had experience as an assistant for UL (which is not Arizona, the best program if you want to go to the NBA) and was an HC for a Opelousas High (not to be confused with DeMatha in Maryland), but the Cajuns gave him a 5 year contract.

The Cajuns saddle themselves with long term contract for coaches who have no credibility or experience. They are then stuck with the coach for the duration of the contract and have no wiggle room with which to work.

On the flip side, the Cajuns rarely give contract extensions or money to the coaches who deserve money or time. The Hall example was recently discussed, and Evans routinely won 20 games and only got one contract extension despite repeated postseason appearances. The Cajuns traded 20 wins, postseason appearances and ESPN2 games for 10 wins, home and away games against the same OOC opponent, and yearly first round exits from the SBC tournament.

If the program is performing well, the Cajuns have to reward coaches to promote stability in the program, retain season ticket holders and one time purchasers interested in winning, and establish some foundation for the university and its athletic department. Successful coaches (non-losing seasons at UL) need long term contracts to attract four year students or 3 year transfers (Evans ability, with a one year contract, to attract top athletes makes UL look more foolish for trading him for Lee).

UL may have fired Bustle without announcing it. Despite having non-losing seasons 3 of the last 5 years, Bustle was not rewarded for going 6-6, a rare accomplishment in the last 10 years of UL football (http://www.ncaapalace.com/component/...af/pastseasons). He has two years (2009, 2010) remaining on his deal. UL has no other option waiting in the wings, UL will not receive interest from top assistants or current HCs and UL should have extended Bustle after a 6-6 season.

Bustle will be lucky if he can recruit anyone considering he can truthfully tell recruits he will only be at UL their first season. The Cajuns will, at worst, finish 3-9 or, at best, 5-7 with a little luck in 2009. UL cannot extend Bustle, because of those results, in 2009, which leaves UL and Bustle, its most successful coach since 1993-1996, at a crossroads. Bustle will need more years on his contract to recruit, and UL, if it changes coaches, will have little recruiting from Bustle´s last year (why play for him if he´s not getting paid?), which drives down the appeal of the job and hurts the first year for the incoming coach. Bustle is having non-losing seasons. They aren´t sexy, but UL has no other option.

Second, the Cajuns refuse to raise money or develop a successful fundraising program. RCAF is constantly dotting the I and crossing the T. But, as the economy weakens and the programs get worse, RCAF´s inability to get its act together hurts the Cajuns ability to raise money to pay buyouts, attract coaches, and pay for deserved bonuses. There are no events in Lafayette to raise money for the Cajuns, and the events which are held are poorly advertised, meaning only those in the know can attend or donate. So much for attracting new fans and building a larger donor base.

RCAF will not be ready for the 2009 football season, which could be a blessing as the Cajuns record will be dismal. RCAF needed to be ready last year, and donations need to be required of anyone wanting season tickets. Women´s and men´s basketball will be poorly attended and it will be difficult to solicite donations for a programs going down the tube. But, as it stands, no one really knows about RCAF. The Cajuns announced it on a Friday, with no press attendance (there goes talking about it in front of the water cooler during the week), and it is still not ready. Donations cannot be made online, and the Cajuns have no database of fans to contact trying to get donations.

Example: this poster´s mother earned her Graduate Degree from UL. She has never once, in the 5 years since, been contacted to donate. The initial response might be ¨Well, she should make the effort to donate.¨ But the Cajuns cannot be that foolish. They must contact graduates, fans, ticket purchasers with regularity to build a database or donors who can help RCAF grow.

In order to survive in this economy, the Cajuns need to do two things. First, raise money through donors and companies (difficult to do as Cajuns effectively endorse mediocrity by refusing to fire failures like Lee and Rogers) to help drive down costs of firing and hiring new coaches. Second, give extensions for non-losing seasons (.500 and above) each time the non-losing season is achieved.

When the Cajuns had Hall and Evans and the teams were winning, the Cajuns did not capitalize by trying to get donations. They are currently paying the price. Their ability to change -- accepting on-line donations, calling donors and students, promoting RCAF at games, hosting RCAF events throughout the state -- will determine whether the Cajuns can realistically improve or whether the Cajuns simply change coaches and get the same results. _

I think your opinion of the Bustle situation is not popular by many here but I pretty much feel the same way. However, back to Hall(s). The RCAF IS in place and I've received numerous chances and notices in the mail to donate. However, we should all know that this is not the most efficient or best way to get people involved. Maybe it is likely that your mom does not attend any of the sports functions also? For the longest time you could give donations to the school, even before the RCAF and i don't know why but I was able to set it up online so I don't know why you say the school did not allow people to make donations. If you are willing to give your money to the school, they will find a way to accept it so i think that is wrong also.

Good posts though. They were obviously well thought out and pretty logical even if I don't agree with some of the points.

[DestinCajun]

"Second, the Cajuns refuse to raise money or develop a successful fundraising program. RCAF is constantly dotting the I and crossing the T. But, as the economy weakens and the programs get worse, RCAF´s inability to get its act together hurts the Cajuns ability to raise money to pay buyouts, attract coaches, and pay for deserved bonuses. There are no events in Lafayette to raise money for the Cajuns, and the events which are held are poorly advertised, meaning only those in the know can attend or donate. So much for attracting new fans and building a larger donor base."

When I read this I had to go back and be sure it wasn't written 2 or 3 years ago. I think it is a good example of folks just not being up to speed on what's really happening regardless of what is put out by the university and outlets like KPEL, RaginPagin, the CajunRedzone, the Advertiser etc. ect.

[CajunNation]

Just think that our coaching lineup in a couple of years could be........

WBB...J. Kelly Hall

MBB....Tim Floyd

FB......Clint Conque


I'll take it.

[zephyr]

_ "Second, the Cajuns refuse to raise money or develop a successful fundraising program. RCAF is constantly dotting the I and crossing the T. But, as the economy weakens and the programs get worse, RCAF´s inability to get its act together hurts the Cajuns ability to raise money to pay buyouts, attract coaches, and pay for deserved bonuses. There are no events in Lafayette to raise money for the Cajuns, and the events which are held are poorly advertised, meaning only those in the know can attend or donate. So much for attracting new fans and building a larger donor base."

When I read this I had to go back and be sure it wasn't written 2 or 3 years ago. I think it is a good example of folks just not being up to speed on what's really happening regardless of what is put out by the university and outlets like KPEL, RaginPagin, the CajunRedzone, the Advertiser etc. ect. _

The point remains, the RCAF IS in position and all these i's have been dotted. If you or anybody else wants to donate, you are certainly able to do so. That is an overplayed excuse. The athletic department had scheduled a marketing campaign to develop further interests but since the economy took a huge downward turn, its hard to go out there and beg people for money. It's not the right time for that. You are going to see lots of chances and RCAF info during the fall scrimmage and consequent fan day to get involved. Just curious, but what are programs who have a private fundraising base such as the RCAF doing in the marketing dept that puts us so behind the 8 ball?

[zephyr]

_ Just think that our coaching lineup in a couple of years could be........

WBB...J. Kelly Hall

MBB....Tim Floyd

FB......Clint Conque


I'll take it.

_

I'll take the first two hands down. I'm unsold on the idea of someone like Conque since he hasn't exactly made himself the hot commodity that every small program needs as their HC. I could be wrong but it seems just as risky as keeping Bustle.

[cajun4life]

_ I'll take the first two hands down. I'm unsold on the idea of someone like Conque since he hasn't exactly made himself the hot commodity that every small program needs as their HC. I could be wrong but it seems just as risky as keeping Bustle. _

No way I take Tim Floyd. You know how fast we would get slapped with violations because of him. Had he been here and the same allegations were brought against UL that were brought against USC we would lose the program again. It is USC so they won't touch them, but they would kill the program.