Pages:
Actions
  • #51 by Rudy Baylor on 04 Nov 2017
  • Has Chris Bahn begun lobbying for Gus to get our head coaching job yet?
  • #52 by hobhog on 04 Nov 2017
  • The only fans saying stuff like this are the ones that don't understand what kind of coach Arkansas needs, which Long didn't.   Just because you got a name don't mean diddle.  Long made a mistake and a lot of people knew it at the time.  Most of us still hoped and gave it time but it never "felt" like it would work out.

    This is just plain wrong. No hire will get 100% approval, but coach B had a VERY HIGH approval rating, especially nationally.

    Not a huge fan of Longs but to make every thread all about him is getting really old.
  • #53 by ricepig on 04 Nov 2017
  • Has Chris Bahn begun lobbying for Gus to get our head coaching job yet?

    Yes, can't you figure out his 6 different names on here, if anyone should know.......
  • #54 by EastexHawg on 04 Nov 2017
  • This is just plain wrong. No hire will get 100% approval, but coach B had a VERY HIGH approval rating, especially nationally.

    Not a huge fan of Longs but to make every thread all about him is getting really old.

    We had just had the blueprint for Arkansas success in the SEC demonstrated in 2010 and 2011.  We had a roster built for that type of system. 

    To a lot of people who dug beneath "Big 10 Rose Bowls!" it seemed likely that Bielema's approach was going to work with Arkansas talent lining up against the types of athletes he was going to face in the SEC.  Has everyone forgotten all those SEC wins against lumbering Big 10 teams, all the scoffing and joking about the Big 10?

    You say you forgot and allowed yourself to be impressed that we had signed a "name"?   That's okay, so did our athletic director, and five years later here we are.

    Our coach even came out and said after year one that he didn't understand the athleticism he would face in this conference until he lined up against those teams.  Are you kidding me?
  • #55 by Cinco de Hogo on 04 Nov 2017
  • As a disclaimer: I'd like to see Bielema gone at the end of this season.

    As for Long's choice of Bielema, his hire (based in part on his success at Wisconsin) looked like a home run at the time due to the facts that:

    1. He was an advocate of players getting to class, staying out of trouble, getting their degrees.
    2. He embraced a strong R/S Program.
    3. Didn't depend on getting high ranking recruiting classes to have success.
    4. He put a lot of emphasis on long term player development to sustain success in a program.
    5. His background growing up on a farm might make him a better fit for a state like Arkansas.
    6. He had won conference titles and gone to a lot of bowls at a major P-5 school.

    On the surface, to many if not most of us, this did indeed look like a home run hire and we weren't the only ones who thought that was true.

    Bielema wanted this job pretty badly but I think he underestimated the level of the challenge, especially with regard to recruiting in the SEC. Higher ranked talent didn't gravitate to Arkansas based on Bielema's name and record as he thought they would. There have been several reasons for that.

    I believe that Long thought that if a HC could have the level of success at Wisconsin that Bielema had, while instilling discipline on and off the field as well as in the classroom and academics (Long's hot button), that he could surely emulate the same success at Arkansas.

    So did Long whiff on the hire of Bielema? Well of course hindsight is 20/20 but there were very few (aside from those blatantly biased in favor of BP at the time) that didn't say that this was a great hire. It produced great expectations.

    It didn't turn out to be the success that everyone (including Bielema and Long) had hoped to see, but the initial hire was thought to be a home run.

    I understand believe me I do but there were also the ones that stated empathetically that his offense wouldn't work at Arkansas.  Now I admit to having hope that he could adjust and his hiring of Chaney and Enos drove that hope but still "something" has been off within the organization from day one.  It's like a target that keep moving and keeps you guessing but at the same time hoping.  I got my share of grief the last four years when I would "mention" things.  But I did always understand why most were awed with the hire.

    This is what I take from the hire and the hire of CBP before him, we CAN attract a top flight coach even if that coach is only at the coordinator level.

    As for the BP comment yes I admit that although it's not personal, it's all about who can win at Arkansas.
  • #56 by Rudy Baylor on 04 Nov 2017
  • Yes, can't you figure out his 6 different names on here, if anyone should know.......

    who are you? Do I know you? have we met?
  • #57 by MuskogeeHogFan on 04 Nov 2017
  • We had just had the blueprint for Arkansas success in the SEC demonstrated in 2010 and 2011.  We had a roster built for that type of system. 

    To a lot of people who dug beneath "Big 10 Rose Bowls!" it seemed likely that Bielema's approach was going to work with Arkansas talent lining up against the types of athletes he was going to face in the SEC.  Has everyone forgotten all those SEC wins against lumbering Big 10 teams, all the scoffing and joking about the Big 10?

    You say you forgot and allowed yourself to be impressed that we had signed a "name"?   That's okay, so did our athletic director, and five years later here we are.

    Our coach even came out and said after year one that he didn't understand the athleticism he would face in this conference until he lined up against those teams.  Are you kidding me?

    A Pro Style Power Offense can work in the SEC or any conference. The problem is the school. If Bielema had landed at Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Auburn, LSU, Texas A&M or even Tennessee, I believe that we would be having a different discussion and dreading to play Bielema, even with his errors in judgement during games. To do what he wants to do (at least in the SEC) you have to have a whole lot more talent on BOTH sides of the ball to make it work. I think that at those other schools who have the ability to pull in higher ranked classes with not only more talent, but deep in talent on both sides of the ball, success could be found behind his scheme.

    Arkansas isn't a bad fit for Bielema as a coach off the field, but it is a bad fit for him as far as being a coach on the field. He just can't recruit enough talent at Arkansas to make it work against the better athletes and talent in the SEC.

    JMO
  • #58 by Cinco de Hogo on 04 Nov 2017
  • After watching BB for five years it appears he's just not that good of a coach period.  I think we can just leave the discussion at that.

    Will the next coach be better?  Well we can't stay with what we got so roll the dice make the best decision you can and play the games.
  • #59 by Hawg Life on 04 Nov 2017
  • Auburn is not about hire an AD dumb enough to fire Bobby Petrino over what Long did.

    I know itís hard for some to accept, but Jeff Long is a great AD, and could be an AD @ any school in the country. I want Bielema fired. Petrino fired Petrino!!!
  • #60 by Ironhawg on 04 Nov 2017
  • A Pro Style Power Offense can work in the SEC or any conference. The problem is the school. If Bielema had landed at Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Auburn, LSU, Texas A&M or even Tennessee, I believe that we would be having a different discussion and dreading to play Bielema, even with his errors in judgement during games. To do what he wants to do (at least in the SEC) you have to have a whole lot more talent on BOTH sides of the ball to make it work. I think that at those other schools who have the ability to pull in higher ranked classes with not only more talent, but deep in talent on both sides of the ball, success could be found behind his scheme.

    Arkansas isn't a bad fit for Bielema as a coach off the field, but it is a bad fit for him as far as being a coach on the field. He just can't recruit enough talent at Arkansas to make it work against the better athletes and talent in the SEC.

    JMO

    I think your opinion of Bielema is spot on.  I do wonder if he might be just a tad lazy, but I have no evidence to support that.  What do you see as a system that would more or less work at Arkansas?  I think I have pretty realistic expectations.  I don't expect Arkansas to compete for the SEC championship every year, but once a decade would be nice.  I just want to see Arkansas competitive in games and not getting hosed five years running by the Aggies.
  • #61 by USChog on 04 Nov 2017
  • I honestly do not understand all of the Long hate on this board. Frank Broyles ran off Ken Hatfield who had a 55-17-1 record at Arkansas. He hired Jack Crowe, he allowed Joe Kines to be interim, he hired Danny Ford, and then there was Hootie yet y'all act like he was a god of an AD.

    Oh let's not forget his racism ran off the best BB coach we've ever had.

    But you guys are right, Frank Broyles was way better than Long.

    No, he was not better he was just at Arkansas a lot longer so he had time to make some bad choices and some good ones.

    Jeff Long is a good AD, and the fanbase would be crazy to want someone else. 
  • #62 by hogblitz on 04 Nov 2017
  • I honestly do not understand all of the Long hate on this board. Frank Broyles ran off Ken Hatfield who had a 55-17-1 record at Arkansas. He hired Jack Crowe, he allowed Joe Kines to be interim, he hired Danny Ford, and then there was Hootie yet y'all act like he was a god of an AD.

    Oh let's not forget his racism ran off the best BB coach we've ever had.

    But you guys are right, Frank Broyles was way better than Long.

    No, he was not better he was just at Arkansas a lot longer so he had time to make some bad choices and some good ones.

    Jeff Long is a good AD, and the fanbase would be crazy to want someone else. 
    A lot of the hate are statements that Jeff has made.  It is apparent that Jeff does not care about winning at a high level.  I think a younger pre-Nutt Broyles would have already fired him.  CBB may have not even returned for year 5. 
  • #63 by tusked on 04 Nov 2017
  • Absolutely. Because hiring a big 10 retread who was going to bring us a smashmouth offensive line and stout defense with zero team speed was a great idea from the get go.


    Lots can't get past how it looks on 'paper'.  Paper don't win games.
  • #64 by USChog on 04 Nov 2017
  • A lot of the hate are statements that Jeff has made.  It is apparent that Jeff does not care about winning at a high level.  I think a younger pre-Nutt Broyles would have already fired him.  CBB may have not even returned for year 5.

    The problem is the fanbase thinks AD means Football CEO. There is so much that goes into the athletic department. As a current teacher with a degree from the UofA and a masters from USC, I never forget that these kids are student athletes. The grades should always come before the record.
  • #65 by LZH on 04 Nov 2017
  • Long didn't screw up hiring Bielema. I hope fans don't truly believe this.
    He didn't throw his name in there. But carry on....

    Woof..... I think you guys missed my crotch shot at Jeff long. All in good fun, ya know.
  • #66 by MuskogeeHogFan on 04 Nov 2017
  • I honestly do not understand all of the Long hate on this board. Frank Broyles ran off Ken Hatfield who had a 55-17-1 record at Arkansas. He hired Jack Crowe, he allowed Joe Kines to be interim, he hired Danny Ford, and then there was Hootie yet y'all act like he was a god of an AD.

    Oh let's not forget his racism ran off the best BB coach we've ever had.

    But you guys are right, Frank Broyles was way better than Long.

    No, he was not better he was just at Arkansas a lot longer so he had time to make some bad choices and some good ones.

    Jeff Long is a good AD, and the fanbase would be crazy to want someone else. 

    Jeff Long's only failing is not putting enough emphasis on the need to win more games. Petrino was officially his hire, but not his first choice. Petrno was difficult to manage as a HC. Bielema pursued Long before Long pursued him. If Long sticks around this will really be his first hire where he didn't receive pressure to hire one guy over another or doesn't have someone cultivating a relationship with him first (as far as we know at this point).

    Long is a good business manager for Arkansas, no doubt about that, he has brought ROI. But what he is finding out is that folks need to see more wins to continue to invest their time and money in the program and that is important with all of the money that has been committed to expansion.

    If he remains at Arkansas this will be a very important hire for him. Does he push it off until after 2018 or does he react more quickly?

    I don't think that people are asking for SEC West Championships, they are just asking that the program be more competitive in every game and stop leaving 2-3 wins each year on the field due to poor coaching decisions.

    If Bielema had won 9 to 10 each of the last three years (which was doable) you wouldn't hear anyone being critical of Bielema or Long.
  • #67 by Cinco de Hogo on 04 Nov 2017
  • I honestly do not understand all of the Long hate on this board. Frank Broyles ran off Ken Hatfield who had a 55-17-1 record at Arkansas. He hired Jack Crowe, he allowed Joe Kines to be interim, he hired Danny Ford, and then there was Hootie yet y'all act like he was a god of an AD.

    Oh let's not forget his racism ran off the best BB coach we've ever had.

    But you guys are right, Frank Broyles was way better than Long.

    No, he was not better he was just at Arkansas a lot longer so he had time to make some bad choices and some good ones.

    Jeff Long is a good AD, and the fanbase would be crazy to want someone else.

    So if I read this right you think Long should have the opportunity to make as many bad decisions as Broyles did.

    How many football games has Long won, conference championship, national championships?  When has Long moved us to the best most profitable conference in the country?  I think Broyles stay ten years too long but there is no way you can compare the two.

    Long is a capable AD but he has done nothing special while AD at Arkansas except for firing a winning coach, but as you alluded to it isn't the first time it's happened.

    Other than that I simply do not trust his ability to hire the football coach we need and before you say it, it's not my job it's his most important job.
  • #68 by USChog on 04 Nov 2017
  • So if I read this right you think Long should have the opportunity to make as many bad decisions as Broyles did.

    How many football games has Long won, conference championship, national championships?  When has Long moved us to the best most profitable conference in the country?  I think Broyles stay ten years too long but there is no way you can compare the two.

    Long is a capable AD but he has done nothing special while AD at Arkansas except for firing a winning coach, but as you alluded to it isn't the first time it's happened.

    Other than that I simply do not trust his ability to hire the football coach we need and before you say it, it's not my job it's his most important job.

    What I am saying is there is more that goes into being AD than who the head football coach is.
  • #69 by USChog on 04 Nov 2017
  • Jeff Long's only failing is not putting enough emphasis on the need to win more games. Petrino was officially his hire, but not his first choice. Petrno was difficult to manage as a HC. Bielema pursued Long before Long pursued him. If Long sticks around this will really be his first hire where he didn't receive pressure to hire one guy over another or doesn't have someone cultivating a relationship with him first (as far as we know at this point).

    Long is a good business manager for Arkansas, no doubt about that, he has brought ROI. But what he is finding out is that folks need to see more wins to continue to invest their time and money in the program and that is important with all of the money that has been committed to expansion.

    If he remains at Arkansas this will be a very important hire for him. Does he push it off until after 2018 or does he react more quickly?

    I don't think that people are asking for SEC West Championships, they are just asking that the program be more competitive in every game and stop leaving 2-3 wins each year on the field due to poor coaching decisions.

    If Bielema had won 9 to 10 each of the last three years (which was doable) you wouldn't hear anyone being critical of Bielema or Long.

    I'm saying the University of Arkansas is an institiue of higher learning, not a football factory.
  • #70 by MuskogeeHogFan on 04 Nov 2017
  • What I am saying is there is way more that goes into being AD than who the head football coach is.

    As I agreed. But, at most schools in the SEC, hiring the right HC is a pretty big factor. You can't compare JFB and Long. Different times, different challenges. Broyles greatest move as an AD was saving Arkansas from a sinking SWC and getting us into the SEC where there would be more money to better fund all athletic programs and provide stability for the next 20-30 years.
  • #71 by MuskogeeHogFan on 04 Nov 2017
  • I'm saying the University of Arkansas is an institiue of higher learning, not a football factory.

    It is, but if you really believe the last part of your statement you don't understand Arkansas and its part in the SEC. To overlook the importance of even limited success in football to the majority of the fan base and to money for the university, is just missing the point entirely.
  • #72 by GunnerHawg70 on 04 Nov 2017
  • The problem is the fanbase thinks AD means Football CEO. There is so much that goes into the athletic department. As a current teacher with a degree from the UofA and a masters from USC, I never forget that these kids are student athletes. The grades should always come before the record.
    Good luck trying to convince HV that grades are more important than winning football games...Have you read anything on HV?!?! Some topics are pretty good and have added value to all things Razorback football but a good percentage are CBB, ADJL, Allen's and Coaching staff bashing. Pretty funny at times but mainly sad reading the personal shaming and attacks on the people whom are actually playing or coaching while the complainers are armchair quarterbacks...just saying...
  • #73 by HogPharmer on 04 Nov 2017
  • I don't know why you guys complain about Long so much. We've got ball park hot dogs at the concession stand. Life is good!

    And beer right???
  • #74 by USChog on 04 Nov 2017
  • It is, but if you really believe the last part of your statement you don't understand Arkansas and its part in the SEC. To overlook the importance of even limited success in football to the majority of the fan base and to money for the university, is just missing the point entirely.

    I do understand Arkansas and its part in the SEC. Arkansas is a bottom half of the league SEC football team. Arkansas has never won the SEC, and it is going to be very hard to ever do it. I relish in Arkansas' success in all things. But, even the winning coach that JL fired that you seem to admire so much never even won the division.

    I understand that our performance on the football field the past 2 seasons has been unacceptable. I agree that CBB needs to go this year. If he is retained for another season I will falter some on my stance of JL. However, until I see how the next 2 months pan out, JL still has my vote of confidence for all the other things he does as AD. Mainly a focus on academics and his ability to make the program profitable.
  • #75 by Cinco de Hogo on 04 Nov 2017
  • The problem is the fanbase thinks AD means Football CEO. There is so much that goes into the athletic department. As a current teacher with a degree from the UofA and a masters from USC, I never forget that these kids are student athletes. The grades should always come before the record.

    I want to ask you a serious question but first I agree that academics are important, to the student body, that's why their there.  I think it's very hard to compare the general student life of the two.  The U has no further responsibility toward a general student other than providing the classes nor does the U ask for anything further.   The general student who also may be on full scholarship doesn't have to "perform" on Saturday for your pleasure.  I don't advocate paying players, I love amateur athletics.  I also hate it win I see academic types trying to lump every student in the same boat.  Athletes aren't just passengers on the boat, they are the entertainment.   I would like to see athletes given a one or two year extension on their scholarship after their playing days are over to finish she their degree(for free) instead of this argument to pay them.

    Now the question,

    Do you think the APR score at Alabama is legit?  North Carolina recently basically won their disagreement with the NCAA.  Are we requiring more of our athletes than those two schools?  Is it really wrong if you go lighter on a athlete than the general student body and if you do what wrong with giving them an extension on their academic scholarship?   These "students" earn the school money or other tangible value vs the general student.
  • #76 by USChog on 04 Nov 2017
  • It is, but if you really believe the last part of your statement you don't understand Arkansas and its part in the SEC. To overlook the importance of even limited success in football to the majority of the fan base and to money for the university, is just missing the point entirely.

    Arkansas is 169-191-8 all time against current SEC opponents, so why don't you tell me Arkansas' part in the SEC Muskogee?
  • #77 by USChog on 04 Nov 2017
  • I want to ask you a serious question but first I agree that academics are important, to the student body, that's why their there.  I think it's very hard to compare the general student life of the two.  The U has no further responsibility toward a general student other than providing the classes nor does the U ask for anything further.   The general student who also may be on full scholarship doesn't have to "perform" on Saturday for your pleasure.  I don't advocate paying players, I love amateur athletics.  I also hate it win I see academic types trying to lump every student in the same boat.  Athletes aren't just passengers on the boat, they are the entertainment.   I would like to see athletes given a one or two year extension on their scholarship after their playing days are over to finish she their degree(for free) instead of this argument to pay them.

    Now the question,

    Do you think the APR score at Alabama is legit?  North Carolina recently basically won their disagreement with the NCAA.  Are we requiring more of our athletes than those two schools?  Is it really wrong if you go lighter on a athlete than the general student body and if you do what wrong with giving them an extension on their academic scholarship?   These "students" earn the school money or other tangible value vs the general student.

    Being on a scholarship is a privilege. Yes athletics bring in a ton of money for the school, but most of these student athletes will not be playing their sport for money beyond college athletics. They will be in the real world working their tails off to make ends meet, but you know what? They will be adequately prepared to do that. Majorly prepared to do that.

    I was on scholarship at the UofA. I was responsible for doing a certain amount of things outside of the classroom to meet those requirements. I also worked full time to support myself instead of going thousands of dollars in debt. I did not get an extra two years to finish my degree. I had time constraints, deadlines, and sleepless nights. I am a better person for it.

    I understand your argument, but being on scholarship and being able to play division one athletics is a privilege not a right.

    Yes, I think tons of Universities out there are going about it the wrong way, that doesn't mean I think it is right.
  • #78 by East Clintwood on 04 Nov 2017
  • As a disclaimer: I'd like to see Bielema gone at the end of this season.

    As for Long's choice of Bielema, his hire (based in part on his success at Wisconsin) looked like a home run at the time due to the facts that:

    1. He was an advocate of players getting to class, staying out of trouble, getting their degrees.
    2. He embraced a strong R/S Program.
    3. Didn't depend on getting high ranking recruiting classes to have success.
    4. He put a lot of emphasis on long term player development to sustain success in a program.
    5. His background growing up on a farm might make him a better fit for a state like Arkansas.
    6. He had won conference titles and gone to a lot of bowls at a major P-5 school.

    On the surface, to many if not most of us, this did indeed look like a home run hire and we weren't the only ones who thought that was true.

    Bielema wanted this job pretty badly but I think he underestimated the level of the challenge, especially with regard to recruiting in the SEC. Higher ranked talent didn't gravitate to Arkansas based on Bielema's name and record as he thought they would. There have been several reasons for that.

    I believe that Long thought that if a HC could have the level of success at Wisconsin that Bielema had, while instilling discipline on and off the field as well as in the classroom and academics (Long's hot button), that he could surely emulate the same success at Arkansas.

    So did Long whiff on the hire of Bielema? Well of course hindsight is 20/20 but there were very few (aside from those blatantly biased in favor of BP at the time) that didn't say that this was a great hire. It produced great expectations.

    It didn't turn out to be the success that everyone (including Bielema and Long) had hoped to see, but the initial hire was thought to be a home run.

    As to #1 - OK, you're right there.  To JL this would be #1 on his list

    As to #2 - that's not a bad thing for any coach but it's more important for some, less important for others.  It's almost a necessity for Bert's system and I don't think he ever implemented here it to the degree he needed to.

    #3 - Worked well in the weak (at the time) B10.

    #4 - Sounds great.  I don't know how successful he was at Wisconsin - I didnt follow them that deeply.  I question that though just based on his performance here. I've not seen much development of players here with a few exceptions.

    #5 - Whatever.  I don't see any relevance.

    #6 - Yes he did but I look at this like I do Hootie's West Div "championships".  You have to dig a little deeper than the final numbers and see who he was competing against and the state of those programs at the time.  Most of his victories came against the weaker division opponents while against the real strength of the conference he had little success  (1-5 vrs ohio state for example).  His record against ranked B10 opponents was 5-10.   He was 2-4 in bowl games.  He "earned" his last Rose Bowl trip (that Alverez ended up coaching) by going 8-6 overall and 4-4 in conference because Ohio ST and Penn St weren't eligible.  Overall, decent but not inspiring.

    Where I and many others had issue with the hire was more from his football philosophy and the system he brought with him and also his inability to keep assistant coaches.  He ran a system that was based on big ole beefy linemen that pushed on the opponents not quite so beefy linemen until the other side got tired of pushing back.  It worked great on equal or lesser opponents but when he come up against the better teams with linemen that were almost as strong but also had speed (ohio st, michigan, etc) his system came up short.

    In the SEC, it wouldn't be just 2 or 3 teams that would outquick him but closer to 10 or 12 teams, maybe not stronger, but certainly quicker.  He would not be able to recruit to overcome this.   There's just not that many fast 300# linemen out there and the competition to recruit them is intense.

    I don't want to spend all day at this but to summarize, a lot of us could see that the odds were stacked against him from the start.  But, whenever anybody tried to point out why this probably wasn't going to work, we were shouted down as BP lovers crying over the loss of out hero.  Some were banned for their views, the rest of us just sat back in silence to await the inevitable collapse.  It took a lot longer than I thought it would.
  • #79 by MuskogeeHogFan on 04 Nov 2017
  • Arkansas is 169-191-8 all time against current SEC opponents, so why don't you tell me Arkansas' part in the SEC Muskogee?

    It sounds as if you have more of an academic point of view about all of this so I don't expect you to understand. Now academics are important and I agree with you that the first and foremost reason for any kid to go to college is to get a degree that hopefully helps makes their life and the society to which they belong, be improved.

    But there is nonetheless, no matter how much we want to focus on academics in this discussion, the athletics side of college life for a select few who are so blessed as to be able to participate and attend a college as a member of a team and that is a valuable experience in life.

    There is plenty of focus on academics under our current HC and AD. They value and are proud of. the academic achievements of our student athletes. They take pride in those kids getting their degrees and graduating.

    If you don't understand how all of this works, along with the pressure to win as a member of a P-5 conference, I guess all I can do is recommend that you study the economics of college athletics.
  • #80 by East Clintwood on 04 Nov 2017
  • I agree with this 100%, nice job MuskogeeHogFan.. Realistic views and what I thought when he was hired.

    I'm curious.  Why were yours the realistic views if mine (which by your definition must have been unrealistic) turned out in the end to have been correct all along?
  • #81 by jkstock04 on 04 Nov 2017
  • I'm curious.  Why were yours the realistic views if mine (which by your definition must have been unrealistic) turned out in the end to have been correct all along?
    It's pretty much the only defense the pro Bielema hire people have left in deflection of being dead wrong the past 5 or 6 years. I can't get over most of this stuff I have read and heard ad nauseam the past few years. It's been nothing but a bunch of BS....and it was loud, in your face...if you disagree with me you are an imbecile...just wait and see type of stuff.

    The current logic is even though it has been proven wrong since it "looked good" at the time it was still a genius move by Jeff Long. So, essentially even though your assessment of what was going to happen turned out to be correct...you are still in the wrong and they are right lol. It's looney toons material.
  • #82 by USChog on 04 Nov 2017
  • It sounds as if you have more of an academic point of view about all of this so I don't expect you to understand. Now academics are important and I agree with you that the first and foremost reason for any kid to go to college is to get a degree that hopefully helps makes their life and the society to which they belong, be improved.

    But there is nonetheless, no matter how much we want to focus on academics in this discussion, the athletics side of college life for a select few who are so blessed as to be able to participate and attend a college as a member of a team and that is a valuable experience in life.

    There is plenty of focus on academics under our current HC and AD. They value and are proud of. the academic achievements of our student athletes. They take pride in those kids getting their degrees and graduating.

    If you don't understand how all of this works, along with the pressure to win as a member of a P-5 conference, I guess all I can do is recommend that you study the economics of college athletics.

    Study the economics of college athletics? The last time I checked we have only become more profitable and worth more as an athletic program under Jeff Long.

    What is your argument really?

    Want to know what school makes the most in its athletics? Texas A&M. How happy is their fan base with their coach?

    If it's only about economics for you then go root for the Aggies. I think you and I can both agree that would be the worst life decision you could ever make.
  • #83 by Cinco de Hogo on 04 Nov 2017
  • Being on a scholarship is a privilege. Yes athletics bring in a ton of money for the school, but most of these student athletes will not be playing their sport for money beyond college athletics. They will be in the real world working their tails off to make ends meet, but you know what? They will be adequately prepared to do that. Majorly prepared to do that.

    I was on scholarship at the UofA. I was responsible for doing a certain amount of things outside of the classroom to meet those requirements. I also worked full time to support myself instead of going thousands of dollars in debt. I did not get an extra two years to finish my degree. I had time constraints, deadlines, and sleepless nights. I am a better person for it.

    I understand your argument, but being on scholarship and being able to play division one athletics is a privilege not a right.

    Yes, I think tons of Universities out there are going about it the wrong way, that doesn't mean I think it is right.


    But what is right, is it one opinion or the opinion of the masses? Something in between?  Does fan expectations factor in(since in the end that's were the money comes from)?    As one fan, I expect athletes to go to the required number of classes that lead to a meaningful degree however I also realize that some of these players would not be in college at all if not for sports.  Is that good or bad?  If you think it's bad wouldn't that be a little elitist?  If it's good what do you do to make sure they get some benefits from their time as a student while playing sports.  Extra benefits are almost a given but sometimes those are stretched a lot more at some schools than others and sometimes the NCAA turns its back to what goes on depending on the school.

    In Arkansas case we are a smaller, rural state with a lot of small underprivileged school districts. Is it wise or even fair to force higher standards than is required. 
  • #84 by ricepig on 04 Nov 2017

  • In Arkansas case we are a smaller, rural state with a lot of small underprivileged school districts. Is it wise or even fair to force higher standards than is required. 


    Higher standards of what? I don't think our student-athletes have a higher standard than the general student population, in fact they have much more resources than the average student.

  • #85 by USChog on 04 Nov 2017

  • But what is right, is it one opinion or the opinion of the masses? Something in between?  Does fan expectations factor in(since in the end that's were the money comes from)?    As one fan, I expect athletes to go to the required number of classes that lead to a meaningful degree however I also realize that some of these players would not be in college at all if not for sports.  Is that good or bad?  If you think it's bad wouldn't that be a little elitist?  If it's good what do you do to make sure they get some benefits from their time as a student while playing sports.  Extra benefits are almost a given but sometimes those are stretched a lot more at some schools than others and sometimes the NCAA turns its back to what goes on depending on the school.

    In Arkansas case we are a smaller, rural state with a lot of small underprivileged school districts. Is it wise or even fair to force higher standards than is required.

    You're right, a lot of these players would not be in college if not for sports, and I think that is a good thing. It is allowing them to excel in an area of talent and provide them support to excel in other areas of life (the areas that they will be using much more after college). I'm not asking anyone to force higher standards, but I sure do not want to see those standards dropped at all.

    I want little things more than to see Arkansas succeed on the football field (hence me being in the forum), but one thing I do want more is to see the student athletes who come to Arkansas become bigger successes beyond the grid iron.
  • #86 by MuskogeeHogFan on 04 Nov 2017
  • Study the economics of college athletics? The last time I checked we have only become more profitable and worth more as an athletic program under Jeff Long.

    What is your argument really?

    Want to know what school makes the most in its athletics? Texas A&M. How happy is their fan base with their coach?

    If it's only about economics for you then go root for the Aggies. I think you and I can both agree that would be the worst life decision you could ever make.

    Sounds like you are a person who went to school on an Academic Scholarship, also had to work outside of school hours and somehow resents the student Athlete whose work outside of class is devoted to whichever sport awarded them a scholarship. Obviously I don't know that to be the truth since I don't know you, but it sounds as if you are harboring an agenda against Student Athletes.

    Your first line of this post tells me that you don't understand the financial benefit of having joined the SEC, let alone what was likely to happen to Arkansas if we were unable to do so. No, we didn't start benefiting financially just because Jeff Long came along. He has done a fine job, but it didn't start with him.

    And yes, study the economics of college football and you'll understand why winning, is a part of that equation.
  • #87 by Cinco de Hogo on 04 Nov 2017
  • Study the economics of college athletics? The last time I checked we have only become more profitable and worth more as an athletic program under Jeff Long.

    What is your argument really?

    Want to know what school makes the most in its athletics? Texas A&M. How happy is their fan base with their coach?

    If it's only about economics for you then go root for the Aggies. I think you and I can both agree that would be the worst life decision you could ever make.

    Yes you need to study the economics of college athletics because you obviously do not knowing w where the money comes from.

    Hint:  In Arkansas case not a single penny comes from the U or the State.  On top of that, ALL those beautiful facilities that the U actually owns...again is given to the U for free by the success of the athletic programs.  If you like the State and the student body paying for all those things, maybe as you suggest you should go root for Arkansas State.

    Since I am in favor of the continued success story of the financial side of Razorback sports it would seem that winning by is important to that continued success. 
  • #88 by HardCore on 04 Nov 2017
  • I know itís hard for some to accept, but Jeff Long is a great AD, and could be an AD @ any school in the country. I want Bielema fired. Petrino fired Petrino!!!

    Well, there has and will only be about half a dozen or so AD positions open.  If he is THAT great and THAT loved and THAT respected as all you Long-lovers say.....he should have one of those AD jobs wrapped up without even a shred of non-consideration.  The runway at XNA should be burning hot with all those University Gulfstreams flying in to acquire his services. 

    BUT, oddly enough, none of that is happening.  So, it is hard for some folks to accept.....he is NOT that great, he is NOT getting consideration fron every school in the country.  NOBODY wants him!  If they did.....then based on your logic, he should sitting in Lincoln, Charlottesville, Louisville, Pullman, or Auburn by now.  BUT, once again, he is not.  At the end of the day, no BOT is going to touch him.....in the AD position (and coaching), it still comes down to Wís & Lís.  Be it right or wrong.....that is simply the way it is.
  • #89 by ricepig on 04 Nov 2017
  • Sounds like you are a person who went to school on an Academic Scholarship, also had to work outside of school hours and somehow resents the student Athlete whose work outside of class is devoted to whichever sport awarded them a scholarship. Obviously I don't know that to be the truth since I don't know you, but it sounds as if you are harboring an agenda against Student Athletes.

    Your first line of this post tells me that you don't understand the financial benefit of having joined the SEC, let alone what was likely to happen to Arkansas if we were unable to do so. No, we didn't start benefiting financially just because Jeff Long came along. He has done a fine job, but it didn't start with him.

    And yes, study the economics of college football and you'll understand why winning, is a part of that equation.

    I think his point is, since joining the SEC, our winning % hasn't been too stellar, yet we are still one of the more profitable universities from an athletic standpoint, do you disagree? Everyone wants to win more, and have a better academic standing, let's do both, haha.
  • #90 by MuskogeeHogFan on 04 Nov 2017
  • I think his point is, since joining the SEC, our winning % hasn't been too stellar, yet we are still one of the more profitable universities from an athletic standpoint, do you disagree? Everyone wants to win more, and have a better academic standing, let's do both, haha.

    I'm all for it. Let's just decide to go 15-0, win a SECC, a NC, graduate 100% of our players and have a team GPA or 3.95.
  • #91 by USChog on 04 Nov 2017
  • Sounds like you are a person who went to school on an Academic Scholarship, also had to work outside of school hours and somehow resents the student Athlete whose work outside of class is devoted to whichever sport awarded them a scholarship. Obviously I don't know that to be the truth since I don't know you, but it sounds as if you are harboring an agenda against Student Athletes.

    Your first line of this post tells me that you don't understand the financial benefit of having joined the SEC, let alone what was likely to happen to Arkansas if we were unable to do so. No, we didn't start benefiting financially just because Jeff Long came along. He has done a fine job, but it didn't start with him.

    And yes, study the economics of college football and you'll understand why winning, is a part of that equation.

    haha dude, you could not be farther from misrepresenting me. You are reading way too much into what I am saying. I harbor ZERO resentment against student athletes or academic scholarship. My response was answering Cinco de Hogo's question on whether student athletes should have less of a work load or have more time to complete their degree because they are athletes.

    And I understand the economics of college athletics. It requires money from outside donors, fundraisers, and ticket sales. I am a season ticket holder in football and basketball, and give money annually to the Alumni Association. I in no way harbor any bad feelings towards student athletes or athletics in general.

    I have payed my dues, I have given my money, and above all I give my support every day. But, I do not think it is ludicrous to support an AD who holds academics in high regards.

    The comment that started this whole chain was that people are ready to crucify Jeff Long and also thing Frank Broyles was the savior. I think Frank Broyles did a lot to help out Arkansas athletics. I think he also made a lot of mistakes as an AD as well. People want to act like Jeff Long is terrible because he hired CBB, and that is simply not the case.

    I will state it one last time, there is way more that goes into being an AD than just hiring the head football coach. Anways, I'm off to the game because regardless of anything else going on, at the end of the day I DO support the Hogs on the filed, but more importantly I want to see the Hogs succeed off the field as well.
  • #92 by East Clintwood on 04 Nov 2017

  • Study the economics of college athletics? The last time I checked we have only become more profitable and worth more as an athletic program under Jeff Long.



    Little, if anything, to do with Jeff Long, other than his raising donation levels and ticket prices.

    By far the largest chunk of our increased revenue has come from the SEC's latest TV contract. 
  • #93 by USChog on 04 Nov 2017
  • I think his point is, since joining the SEC, our winning % hasn't been too stellar, yet we are still one of the more profitable universities from an athletic standpoint, do you disagree? Everyone wants to win more, and have a better academic standing, let's do both, haha.

    Yes, ricepig, thank you.
  • #94 by USChog on 04 Nov 2017
  • Well, there has and will only be about half a dozen or so AD positions open.  If he is THAT great and THAT loved and THAT respected as all you Long-lovers say.....he should have one of those AD jobs wrapped up without even a shred of non-consideration.  The runway at XNA should be burning hot with all those University Gulfstreams flying in to acquire his services. 

    BUT, oddly enough, none of that is happening.  So, it is hard for some folks to accept.....he is NOT that great, he is NOT getting consideration fron every school in the country.  NOBODY wants him!  If they did.....then based on your logic, he should sitting in Lincoln, Charlottesville, Louisville, Pullman, or Auburn by now.  BUT, once again, he is not.  At the end of the day, no BOT is going to touch him.....in the AD position (and coaching), it still comes down to Wís & Lís.  Be it right or wrong.....that is simply the way it is.

    Have you ever considered he wants to stay here? Some people are happy with their job and are not looking for something different.

    Anyway, I'm off to DWRRS to support the Razorbacks.

    See ya tonight Hogville.
  • #95 by Cinco de Hogo on 04 Nov 2017
  • I think his point is, since joining the SEC, our winning % hasn't been too stellar, yet we are still one of the more profitable universities from an athletic standpoint, do you disagree? Everyone wants to win more, and have a better academic standing, let's do both, haha.

    We understand the views of academy, the question, how does that fit the narrative for Arkansas or for that matter most of the Universities in the south.  If that is the route we are going to take why not make ASU the "sports" school and let The U of A  pursue academics?  Why pour money into a program that isn't committed to winning?   I support being both but I hate being a rent a win team for the SEC!    We can do much better, we just need to stop making stupid decisions, something that has haunted our time in the SEC.
  • #96 by ricepig on 04 Nov 2017
  • We understand the views of academy, the question, how does that fit the narrative for Arkansas or for that matter most of the Universities in the south.  If that is the route we are going to take why not make ASU the "sports" school and let The U of A  pursue academics?  Why pour money into a program that isn't committed to winning?   I support being both but I hate being a rent a win team for the SEC!    We can do much better, we just need to stop making stupid decisions, something that has haunted our time in the SEC.

    Have we been uncommitted to winning since joining the SEC? Nobody is stopping anyone from putting their money into ASU, are they, I really don't understand that comment. We can do better, and we will, I figured someone who obviously been around awhile knows that Arkansas football is going to be cyclical, patience grasshopper.......
  • #97 by hobhog on 04 Nov 2017
  • Have we been uncommitted to winning since joining the SEC? Nobody is stopping anyone from putting their money into ASU, are they, I really don't understand that comment. We can do better, and we will, I figured someone who obviously been around awhile knows that Arkansas football is going to be cyclical, patience grasshopper.......

    The "not committed to winning" comments are weird, no doubt.

    Are the fans committed enough? Do they go to all the games and give donations til it hurts? If they dont are they really committed? Should they be fired?
  • #98 by EastexHawg on 04 Nov 2017
  • A Pro Style Power Offense can work in the SEC or any conference. The problem is the school. If Bielema had landed at Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Auburn, LSU, Texas A&M or even Tennessee, I believe that we would be having a different discussion and dreading to play Bielema, even with his errors in judgement during games. To do what he wants to do (at least in the SEC) you have to have a whole lot more talent on BOTH sides of the ball to make it work.

    If Jeff Long was the AD at Alabama or Auburn that may be a good point...but he's not.  The problem is he is at Arkansas but doesn't understand the difference.  He is a football moron.  He knows how to stack the endless supply of $100 bills that comes from the SEC office, but he is like a small child when it comes to understanding Arkansas football, the conference in which we play, and the dynamic between the two.

    If he is allowed to pick another coach it will be a case of blind luck if he doesn't come up with another disastrous decision.
  • #99 by Cinco de Hogo on 04 Nov 2017
  • Higher standards of what? I don't think our student-athletes have a higher standard than the general student population, in fact they have much more resources than the average student.

    Ricepig, I was referring to the "uncommon" theme and other efforts that in my opinion(and it is just an opinion)has hurt recruiting especially in the skill positions.  In Arkansas high schools you have to recruit the skill positions because that's were the best players are.  I would assume that is true nationwide to a lessor extent.  Fans love offense and it doesn't matter who or where. 

    I think what Long and BB have preached classified as higher standards no matter NCAA or University requirements.

    If you have a different opinion fine but let's say those standards are higher than most of our SEC brethren and it has lead to five sub-par seasons, what are our options?
  • #100 by Lady Razorback on 04 Nov 2017
  • Good luck trying to convince HV that grades are more important than winning football games...Have you read anything on HV?!?! Some topics are pretty good and have added value to all things Razorback football but a good percentage are CBB, ADJL, Allen's and Coaching staff bashing. Pretty funny at times but mainly sad reading the personal shaming and attacks on the people whom are actually playing or coaching while the complainers are armchair quarterbacks...just saying...

    Really? Why are you on here with such a low opinion of the board and its posters?
Pages:
Actions