Rate the job Scott Farmer is doing as UL AD

[CajunAmos]

That mantra of doing more with less is prevalent not only in athletics but in academics too. I fear our leadership is content with our current success and being dominant in the Sun Belt. That is my biggest concern. If we are ever going to move beyond that, no better time than now. If we are ever going to complete Phase 2 and be truly competitive on a major level, we need a dynamic person to head up an RCAF that is separate from the Endowment as you stated. While it is great that we have accomplished what we have with so little, it is time we move from "doing more with less" to "doing more with more".

Maybe "Doing even more with more".

[CajunT]

That mantra of doing more with less is prevalent not only in athletics but in academics too. I fear our leadership is content with our current success and being dominant in the Sun Belt. That is my biggest concern. If we are ever going to move beyond that, no better time than now. If we are ever going to complete Phase 2 and be truly competitive on a major level, we need a dynamic person to head up an RCAF that is separate from the Endowment as you stated. While it is great that we have accomplished what we have with so little, it is time we move from "doing more with less" to "doing more with more".

I think there are those that are perfectly happy sitting in the SBC until we are done with Phase II or III. I'm not one of those people, but you have to have someone that views the landscape differenty campaigning for this athletic program. Build from the SBC seems to have won out, regardless of what anyone thinks at this time.

[CajunRebel]

I think there are those that are perfectly happy sitting in the SBC until we are done with Phase II or III. I'm not one of those people, but you have to have someone that views the landscape differenty campaigning for this athletic program. Build from the SBC seems to have won out, regardless of what anyone thinks at this time.

What's the alternative?

It's not like we have the option to build in C-USA.

[California Cajun]

I think UL athletics is administration controlled and acts when brought to the brink of disaster (I.e. keeping Hud from quitting). The AD doesn't have the staffing or, I think the attributes to lead the department into the big time. He is paid accordingly and will be until UL can afford a$400-$500k athletic director.

[Turbine]

Maybe "Doing even more with more".

My thoughts exactly.

Always focus on doing more.

[Just1More]

What's the alternative?

It's not like we have the option to build in C-USA.

I don't think T needed to bring those semantics into his well explained reasons for a funding chairman. There's a belief that some of the funding drive mechanics are limited, acceptably so, for a healthy future lifestyle as a forever SBC member. Whereas, some believe we should specifically launch a more substantial funding reach that identifies the metrics thresholds required to achieve membership elsewhere.

I'm in the camp of others that we need to hire a great funding chairman. Talking about the yearly wages for this person is silly. They won't just pay their own salary by their own efforts, they'll create veins of financing and support that don't materialize by themselves (the attraction that winning generates). As T pointed out, this individual is tasked with going after the creation of business ties to the university that generate all kinds of benefits... including money. As it stands, we appear satisfied because we're "moving in the right direction".

[Turbine]

If he just pays for himself it is worth every penny.

What is the holdup?

If a fund raiser can't cover his own salary ... next.

[CrazyCajun]

If he just pays for himself it is worth every penny.

What is the holdup?

If a fund raiser can't cover his own salary ... next.

We can't afford to not have one

[Just1More]

Come on, take a shot. Give up a number, based on what you do know. I know what you mean, we don't and won't have the facts, so it's not accurate. It's fun to see what people think at this point.

I give him 9.42477 for not bungling up anything substantial in the past couple of years.

I give him 6.28318 for our current success and direction, athletically, in the capacities I believe he played a role.

I give him 3.14159 for communications faults, our conference situation, some of our branding debacles... all of which I cannot accurately assess his direct responsibility.

[Turbine]

We can't afford to not have one

+1

sHE's FREE