Messages

Very well put #62.  I do not think anyone is really defending his performance.  I don't know how you can.  The issue will be if the administration is stupid enough to keep him on for another year or two.  This really should be a no brainer.

Also, on a financial scale - next to basketball, football at Valpo is by far the most expensive sport to operate.  Eating Carlson's contract is a crumb compared to the equipment, stadium maintenance, travel, assistant coaches, etc.  I am sure Carlson's salary is nothing compared to the AD and Bryce Drew.  You could see a mass exodus of players leaving if changes are not made.

I say pay for the mistake and move on.

nerd, you're talking SEC football vs. PFL football. The SEC is all about fanbase, getting butts in the seats, and getting all the tv revenue they can. Derek Dooley wasn't winning games, so CBS and ESPN were avoiding them. Valpo is losing PFL games due to a collective attitude that hasn't been what it should be to win games. You can fault the players for not buying in, you can fault the coaches for a bad philosophy/attitude about winning/losing, and the fan base isn't buying in because they can't get past the smoke and mirrors of excuses that don't change. Knowing the Valpo athletic history of changing coaches, they'll ride Carlson's contract, then let him go. When VU football has scholarships and alumni donations for football being at the level that keeping an eye on the coaching and wins and losses is integral to keep the money coming in, then they'll focus on contracts and when is the right time to buyout, or not give so many years. Don't forget, Valpo football is a rebuilding project, not a first-time program that was launched when Coach Carlson was hired. Sure, after three years, we can't go with "Rome wasn't built in a day", but do we really want VU football to be the next kind of Florida/Miami Marlins's 'Fire sale', where coaches don't want to apply here because they won't get to supplant their foot in the program long enough to feel good about what they are doing?

Run, the problem is the university's policy of retaining coaches.  They may hold on this 2-31 mastermind for 2 more years, but it does not make the policy right.  I agree with having patience, but 3 years with no progress is unacceptable, especially when you are in a situation where you are so bad that you can only go up.  Heck, with that kind of policy, you might as well give him tenure.

I understand that Carlson's contract may be for 5 years, does that imply that we should stick with him for another 2 years ?  I say no way.  Give him a job at the union or as a professor, but the insanity here has to stop.

I'm a fossil myself ....I'm just so frustrated at the terrible three year span the school and the players have gone through. All the cliches, all the blaming the players by Carlson, All the excuses. This is still a college experience for these players and to just say lets try for another 2 years because thats the contract. Unacceptable! This hurts Everyone. It has to stop.

As a fellow fossil, I totally agree with you.  There may be some bad eggs out there, but these kids have perservered through a lot of crap.  The bleeding must stop and does next provide quality to Valpo.  The papers say he is a decent coach, but again it may be a square peg in a round hole.

This was a very interesting read.  I  would like to hear the other side of ther story.  This is sounding similar to the Mike Leach situation at Texas Tech with Craig James' son.

So who would be ideal to make this decision?  I also think the university should listen to the alumni base.  I may also be an "amateur coach" but I do know that 3 years with a 2-31 record is an unsatisfactory review where an employee should be replaced.

Laura, do you want someone young?  How about Lane Kiffin, he is doing a wonderful job at USC 

Also, please note there are some pretty smart fossils out there.

62,

USC is in a similar situation, and there are many who want Kiffin out.  His personality has not been ideal, and his coaching below par.  However, he also has been coaching under strict NCAA sanctions, and he apparantly has a great recruiting class coming up.

Auburn is in a similar position with Chizik, despite buying a national title 2 years ago.

Wow, a differential of 31 points per game over 3 years!  What improvement!

But the good news is that we have moved from #246 to #245 in the Sagarin ratings in three years.  We did not get the 3 peat of futility!

VULB#62, your analysis was bang on and objective without the emotional fluff.

Valparaiso University has great people and is a wonderful university.  They need to do the right thing to ensure a quality experience for all.  A serious change to improve football is imperative, and if a change does not occur then the program should be scrapped.

I hate to see Valpo scrap football, but maintaining the status quo is embarrassing and needs to be changed now.  3 years of this is not promising and not progress.

And stop questioning the ability of the players. The are as good as most teams in the PFL( look at their Bios).

Since Laura likes bios, maybe we should have hired this guy... At School X, Coach began the program from scratch prior to the 2004 season. He led his team to an undefeated regular season in 2007 and a Mid-States Football Association-Mideast League championship. His team's offense led all of college football averaging more than 50 points per game, while leading NAIA with more than 550 yards of total offense in that same season. In six years at School X, he produced five All-Americans, seven Academic All-Americans, and more than 90 All-Conference performers. In 2009 he was named the NAIA Independent Coach of the Year while earning MSFA-Mideast League Coach of the Year honors in 2007. He also earned American Football Coaches Association Region II and American Football Monthly/Schutt Sports NAIA National Coach of the Year honors in 2007. Prior to his stint at School X, Coach spent eight seasons as the head football coach at School Y. There he also began the intercollegiate football program, leading the school to 11 victories in 1998. That same season he led that team to the NAIA semifinals and a number three ranking nationally in the final NAIA poll. He also led School Y to the Conference championship in 2001, the same season he was named the league's Coach of the Year. What do you think?

I get your point FWalum, very well put.  The problem is not just the coaching, but perhaps this coching position is like putting a square peg in a round hole, i.e., it was just not a good job fit.  I am sure Carlson has personal positive qualities but it may not be the right job for him.  You see the same type of issue in business every day.

Wow, this is going to be an interesting 2 weeks in the ARC and Heritage Hall (USC) offices.  Could be seeing a clean sweep to start fresh and clean out the rot.

I would be surprised if Carlson is around by Dec 1.   I do not think LaBarbera will let this embarrassment prolong.  Students forking out $40K to play football deserve better.

this sounds a whole lot like Northwestern in the late 70's and early 80's when they 0-11, 0-10-1 and 1-10 seasons.  John Pont was the head coach and athletic director, and I remember his post-games quotes..."we are inconsistent on offense, we were inconsistent, but we looked great getting that touchdown in the fourth quarter! (after being behind 42-0 or scores like that - to Minnesota and Purdue, not  Michigan and Ohio State)

Now you hear Carlson, we are inconsistent, we need to hit the weight room, we need to learn form this,etc. Pont and Venturi all over again.  The Sagarin impovement is going from #246, dead last for 2 years to #245. That is not good.

OK, how in the world do you say that you keep this guy? 2-31. Morehead St is not that good.
Change it now before it's too late.

I am going to get ready for the showdown in Pasadena.  This is embarrassing. We need change.  I feel bad for Iclow - I wonder if he needs a bottle of Jack to do a braodcast like this.

I am sure the HC is doing his best with this team.  But like in business and life, sometimes your best is not good enough.

Not that we would expect it, but it would be interesting to see how much a buyout would cost, and analyze the benefit itn the long run.

So the main reason Valpo has football is to bring in 100 male students a year. Thus, $4M a year into the kitty. This makes some sense!  It is used basically to bring in cash.

For those students forking out cash for football, perhaps it would be reasonable to provide a football staff that has stability and knows what they are doing.

Laura,

I was never dissing the players abilities.

Also, why should a discussion of having football at Valpo be off limits?  You need to look at this holistically to see the effect football has on VU's vision. If there is no committment from the university for football and very low interest from students and alums, then how do you justify having a program?

Do it right or try to do it right, or don't do it at all.

Guys, I am just basing my conclusion in an objective manner. I took a systematic approach, looked at the program and their stakeholders to see where football fits in at Valpo to determine the right path.   I read through the Evansville situation and I have to wonder the biasness of the article.  Note that there were people asking to bring football back, with a past where they were losing significant funds and no one was going to the games. UE looks like they are doing just fine.  Also, a few hundred grand of donations at this day and age is a drop in the bucket, considering endowment in the 100's of millions.

If football stays, there must be significant changes, as the path is going into a black hole. Again, has there been improvement after 3 years to keep the same system?

Why did Evansville get rid of football?  Was it finances?  Lack of interest? 

From all the information on this topic, I have to conclude that if VU is not truly commited to football, then they need to get out of that sport. It can be attributed to Carlson, and that is convenient to say, but the heavy hitter is that VU should get rid of football and take a different direction in athletics.  Perhaps more in soccer, lacrosse, field hockey, etc.  Or keep more focus on basketball - many schools are that way - Creighton, St. John's, Marquette, Gonzaga, St. Louis, St. Mary's, etc. and they are just fine.

I know this is upsetting, but I am objectively taking all this in and coming to this conclusion. I am trying to understand why VU should have football in the situation they are in. It doesn't make sense.

this sounds like the South Central Louisiana State University Mud Dogs until Bobby Boucher saved the day