Do we focus too much on money/looking good instead of on the field success?

[Ben]

I notice from a lot of our fanbase that we love to hype up how we do financially, especially according to forbes. We hype about the stadium renovations, and the generous donations from fans, companies, and alumni such as Jerry Jones. That said, do we as a program and fanbase focus too much on money and looking good than we do actual success on the gridiron?

[livevanguy]

I don't think it is the fan base necessarily- but the administration. It's all a numbers game. Why pay for a $15 million buyout if the fans continue to pay for seats, boxes, a stadium expansion, and other buildings on campus. BB may not be winning many games, but he also isn't hurting the pocketbook while coaching. His buyout would affect the bottom line more than an angry fanbase. As long as we pay for seats and donors continue to give money to the U of A, this isn't going to change this season. (and probably next)

[Mo_Better_Hogs]

Things are out of balance for sure. Look at the renovations to the stadium and practice facilities in the past several years. I'm not going to question whether or not it's deserved--that is for others to decide, others that spend the money.

But with each passing game, I just keep thinking "great, we'll have a better looking stadium in a year or so." But aren't the nice facilities to support the program and mainly what is ON THE FIELD, or is it the other way around? We are acting like a team that is really rocking, a program on the rise, with a bright future. I'm not sure I'm seeing that.

[livevanguy]

Look at it from another perspective. The U of A is in a unique position that athletics can pay for itself. Many schools, even from divisions like the Pac 12 can't say the same. Take Washington State for example- they run in the red annually. So long as we can rake in revenue from TV deals, fans paying for tickets, and donors giving- there is no need to rock the boat with the U of A program. We can maintain mediocrity (or less) and still make more money than most programs will ever dream about. Firing a coach because fans are upset isn't a priority when they are busy making green.

[Ben]

I feel like we try so hard as a program to make it look like we are just a top tier program off the field wise, but not on the field. Bragging about a new stadium renovation, how good of a standing we are financially as an athletic program unlike most colleges, having new facilities and Jerry Jones/Waltons/Tyson on our side etc when all these things indeed aren't helping us on the field at all.  We are still waiting for our first conference title since the 80s and have a terrible SEC record.

Its like which is the priority? Money, or on the field success? A lot make it seem like money is the priority. Money that fans aren't enjoying, but only the officials at UA.

[Tusks]

Obviously

[Tejano Jawg]

I feel like we try so hard as a program to make it look like we are just a top tier program off the field wise, but not on the field. Bragging about a new stadium renovation, how good of a standing we are financially as an athletic program unlike most colleges, having new facilities and Jerry Jones/Waltons/Tyson on our side etc when all these things indeed aren't helping us on the field at all.  We are still waiting for our first conference title since the 80s and have a terrible SEC record.

Its like which is the priority? Money, or on the field success? A lot make it seem like money is the priority. Money that fans aren't enjoying, but only the officials at UA.

Man, interesting topic. It's crossed my mind lately—not at all during the grand redo of the practice facilities—but as I'm looking at the nice computer animation of the north end zone seats and suites. You're right, boy do we ever look good though. Our stadium, weight room, locker room, even our other sports venues.

And what Mo-Better said, things are out of balance. Shouldn't our 'style' be a little more on the level as our 'substance'? Are we like the nerd who has the bad-ass car, or the douchey-guy who wears Armani suits? To look at us, you'd think we've been a top 10 team for most of the past decade.

Personally, I would trade all the glitz for a rickety stadium with wooden bleachers and a manual scoreboard...IF we had a solid program consistently. But what about the other fans, especially those who sit in the plush suites? Is their comfort first, what's on the field a distant second? Long has to think so.

I don't know if Long really cares about how we perform, as long as we look good—from the physical, architectural, bottom-line finical standpoint. I wish days like today tore him up, like it does many of us. If we performed poorly consistently, and played in a cow pasture, I'd at least think things are in harmony. Wonder if anyone feels guilty building a beautiful palace to showcase losing football? Never mind, stupid question.

[livevanguy]

Man, interesting topic. It's crossed my mind lately—not at all during the grand redo of the practice facilities—but as I'm looking at the nice computer animation of the north end zone seats and suites. You're right, boy do we ever look good though. Our stadium, weight room, locker room, even our other sports venues.

And what Mo-Better said, things are out of balance. Shouldn't our 'style' be a little more on the level as our 'substance'? Are we like the nerd who has the bad-ass car, or the douchey-guy who wears Armani suits? To look at us, you'd think we've been a top 10 team for most of the past decade.

Personally, I would trade all the glitz for a rickety stadium with wooden bleachers and a manual scoreboard...IF we had a solid program consistently. But what about the other fans, especially those who sit in the plush suites? Is their comfort first, what's on the field a distant second? Long has to think so.

I don't know if Long really cares about how we perform, as long as we look good—from the physical, architectural, bottom-line finical standpoint. I wish days like today tore him up, like it does many of us. If we performed poorly consistently, and played in a cow pasture, I'd at least think things are in harmony. Wonder if anyone feels guilty building a beautiful palace to showcase losing football? Never mind, stupid question.

You make a good point here. It's as though we are embracing the Oregon model- all the glitz, but nothing to back up the 12 different uniforms to wear all season. I remember them making such a big deal when we got the new Nike shoe deal- all of the players jumping around like it was the greatest thing since a smoked pork-butt. The only thing I remember after that was all of the foot injuries that plagued us the remainder of the year. It's one thing to have good facilities for training/medical staff. It's a whole other to get new locker rooms, game rooms, plush boxes if none of that "investment" is paying dividends on the field.

[HognotinMemphis]

The program has big revenues. They need to spend it apparently. It's not translating to success on field. Again, we are paying Ga, Fla, TN, Auburn level to our head coach but consistently getting Mizzou and KY results.

[Sweet Feet]

That's interesting. I think the same thing. More worried about brand and money than actual on the field success. An 89-113 SEC conf record, no conference titles, and only 6 bowl wins in the past 30 years

[Tejano Jawg]

I thought of something else that kinda fits this thinking. The image of Bielema himself (not the visual image...let his wife handle that). But how he projects to our Hog fan base, our media and the SEC media. Bielema is likable, seems like a genuine guy, not an a-hole in a press conference, seems to care deeply for his players, and has some entertainment value. In the SEC, he has to be one of the most enjoyable interviews on media day. I'm sure everyone loves spending time with him.

Bielema could be a true coach-celebrity (albeit it, a funny one with his pig-farm upbringing). If not for one thing—his coaching record.

So, like our pretty stadium and all our athletic facilities, Coach Bielema represents the University of Arkansas with class. He is a great face (figuratively) for our program. But like everything else mentioned in this thread—that doesn't mean it's happening on the field.

[Mo_Better_Hogs]

I thought of something else that kinda fits this thinking. The image of Bielema himself (not the visual image...let his wife handle that).......

Totally fits. I'd take a better coach over an entertaining coach. A better coach over the likable coach. A better coach over an empathetic coach.

You're right about the Bielema image and persona. He's liked and respected (to a point) by other coaches in the SEC. I want that to be true, but not at the expense of being FEARED. A couple years ago, I thought he was on the brink of being that coach that others thought "oh s#%$, he fields a solid team who could upset someone at any moment." No more. Now other SEC coaches like him because they don't have to worry about him. But otherwise, he sure is a good ambassador to the U of A.

[Tejano Jawg]

On this note: Paul Finebaum just talked about how "likable" Bielema is. Then Laura Rutledge said "that's probably why he's given a longer leash."

There you go.

[hogsanity]

To look at us, you'd think we've been a top 10 team for most of the past decade.

Don't look any different than 30-40 other schools. College football in the p5 leagues has been a arms race off the field just like on the field for about 25 years. Michigan adds seats, so Ohio St has to add seats. texas adds seats so A&M has to add seats. Bama pays their coach X mil, Fla has to pay their guy X mil + 1.

[Tejano Jawg]

Don't look any different than 30-40 other schools. College football in the p5 leagues has been a arms race off the field just like on the field for about 25 years. Michigan adds seats, so Ohio St has to add seats. texas adds seats so A&M has to add seats. Bama pays their coach X mil, Fla has to pay their guy X mil + 1.

You're right. I just don't care what other schools are doing, but yeah, plenty of them are in constant upgrade mode, just like us. A couple years ago an Aggie buddy showed me their computer-animated video of their new locker rooms, which was how they spent their first SEC Conference check. Few schools in the SEC sit still long.

I just still want to connect success with the reward for it (new facilities, etc.)—the topic of this thread. But "success" isn't what WE want it to be. It is defined by the ticket buyers and supporters. And Arkansas surely has them. If we lose the every remaining game this season, no booster is going to say "y'all return one of those fancy jumbo-trons back to Best Buy."

[Reservoir Hogs]

So what is the answer here?  Not update facilities and let us fall further behind the SEC Arms race?  We pay our HC very well, and I don't think we are holding back more money so we can afford to update the stadium. 
You have to remember Bret was a big hire when we got him, and we did pony up for him...  I do not think money will be the reason we don;t get another big name coach.

It is hard to win/recruit here, and will be harder if we don't keep up with the Jones' in terms of facilities.

[elksnort]

I will make this comparison.

It is like a lady who spends a great deal of money on product, such as make up, hair stuff, lotion, etc..in order to look good, but the same lady never goes to the gym. The procurement of product is easier than going to the gym consistently.

So, it is easier to make the facilities look great, because it just takes money. Having a very good to great football program takes more than just money.

[Sweet Feet]

It is hard to win/recruit here, and will be harder if we don't keep up with the Jones' in terms of facilities.

In 4 years, Bobby had 2 10 win seasons, an 11 win season, 2 bowl wins, a BCS bowl appearance, a ranking as high as #3. and a top 5 finish.

It's not that hard to win here. It's very possible with the right coach.