Bustle, UL agree to extension through 2011 season

[Turbine]

You're way overthinking this.

That is true, imo its a reaction to others not thinking it through.

Under your scenario there is zero chance of any contract ever being fulfilled as written.

I do not see the slightest slight in "he is up for renewal after next seasons bowl appearance."

[wcd35]

_ That is true, imo its a reaction to others not thinking it through.

Under your scenario there is zero chance of any contract ever being fulfilled as written.

I do not see the slightest slight in "he is up for renewal after next seasons bowl appearance." _

I think its more about making sure everything is clarified and not leaving any sort of doubt in our recruits, which seems to be the impetus of this extension.

[ManAboutTown]

_ I think its more about making sure everything is clarified and not leaving any sort of doubt in our recruits, which seems to be the impetus of this extension. _

Its another example of this administration getting by with the least amount of effort and ruffled feathers as possible. Don't let anyone tell you any different.

[Turbine]

_ I think its more about making sure everything is clarified and not leaving any sort of doubt in our recruits, which seems to be the impetus of this extension. _

At some point a program has to cross an uncomfortable threshold.

Sometimes it is that single offseason recruiting period that forces the coach to recruit like there is no tomorrow. You simply cannot continue give a coach artificial buffers and expect him to coach like his back is against the wall.

I understand Bustle using this line of reasoning I just don't see how anyone can buy it. He was not going to be a lame duck recruiter he recruits to winning ALWAYS and he was up for renewal after next season. What's wrong with that?

[wcd35]

Its another example of this administration getting by with the least amount of effort and ruffled feathers as possible. Don't let anyone tell you any different.

_ At some point a program has to cross an uncomfortable threshold.

Sometimes it is that single offseason recruiting period that forces the coach to recruit like there is no tomorrow. You simply cannot continue give a coach artificial buffers and expect him to coach like his back is against the wall.

I understand Bustle using this line of reasoning I just don't see how anyone can buy it. He was not going to be a lame duck recruiter he recruits to winning ALWAYS and he was up for renewal after next season. What's wrong with that? _

If you wanted the threshold to be crossed, it should have been with firing him last year. At this point, he had to be renewed. If you dont understand the situation or dont agree with the reasoning, then you just dont know the recruiting game very well. Recruiting is not a once a year type deal where we recruit our asses off to sign seniors. It is a multiple year process and this decision will keep that process going with future signees in years down the line. If he gets canned next year, then at least we have already started to sell the school to the class of 11.

Can him or extend him. I dont necessarily disagree with the opinion that he should have been fired, but that's not what we're discussing.

[snote]

hurt recruiting??

don't the cajuns have the most "committs" at this point in time, than ever before??

[wcd35]

_ hurt recruiting??

don't the cajuns have the most "committs" at this point in time, than ever before?? _

I believe so. Which shows that our staff is doing a better and better job of getting kids looking at this program early on. Many of the recruits have been here and heard from the coaches in their junior years.

[Turbine]

_ I believe so. Which shows that our staff is doing a better and better job of getting kids looking at this program early on. Many of the recruits have been here and heard from the coaches in their junior years. _

No it shows that having 1 year on your contract does not hurt recruiting. it hasn't

"If" you are saying the buffer year is to help recruit the 2011 class then it would all be undone with a firing after next year.

For the record I think Bustle can realistically get to 7 wins next season I just wish he and Walker thought so.

[ManAboutTown]

_ If you wanted the threshold to be crossed, it should have been with firing him last year. At this point, he had to be renewed. If you dont understand the situation or dont agree with the reasoning, then you just dont know the recruiting game very well. Recruiting is not a once a year type deal where we recruit our asses off to sign seniors. It is a multiple year process and this decision will keep that process going with future signees in years down the line. If he gets canned next year, then at least we have already started to sell the school to the class of 11.

Can him or extend him. I dont necessarily disagree with the opinion that he should have been fired, but that's not what we're discussing. _

We're all fully aware of how the process matriculates.. But what makes you think a flimsy extension with a "less buyout money" clause is going to change any perception of any recruit? If I were being recruited by the University, and I read the reports about how this is supposed to "help recruiting", I would be offended. How stupid do you think these kids and parents are? Especailly the local guys, which is supposed to be prime grazing ground. You don't think these people follow the news concerning the school that they or their child is going to give the next 4 years to? C'mon man..

[wcd35]

You can put it anyway you want and break it down as much as you want, but this is the way the recruiting game works. Ask anyone in the know. You cant recruit as a lame duck. This extension removes that tag and yes, he does have a chance to be extended again next year. This topic has been beaten up enough for me. Read Jay's blog and wait for BJ's response.