TOM CREAN FIRED

[HoosierAloha 29,942]

I changed it. I completely agree with you. I think at some point the athletic department is going to have to pony up to keep boosters around. These up and comers just haven't worked out for us.

 

The boosters pulling support/donations is the quickest way for a change.  Unfortunately, I don't see that happening anytime soon and would take a terrible few years or another string of off the court issues.  The other way is for alumni/fans to simply turn their back to the program for years.  I'm not sure this will happen due to the sheer number of fans that would love to attend just one game in Assembly Hall or aren't passionate enough to not tune into a game on TV.  The whole situation is frustrating and the longer Crean is "leading" the program and not winning the more upset passionate fans will become with him.  That's where incidents at games, on campus, etc. will begin to take place.  We have heard the booing and it could get a lot worse.

[mdn82 25,464]

The boosters pulling support/donations is the quickest way for a change. Unfortunately, I don't see that happening anytime soon and would take a terrible few years or another string of off the court issues. The other way is for alumni/fans to simply turn their back to the program for years. I'm not sure this will happen due to the sheer number of fans that would love to attend just one game in Assembly Hall or aren't passionate enough to not tune into a game on TV. The whole situation is frustrating and the longer Crean is "leading" the program and not winning the more upset passionate fans will become with him. That's where incidents at games, on campus, etc. will begin to take place. We have heard the booing and it could get a lot worse.

I 100% agree with you. Hell I have been booing at games. This is the problem with a fractured fan base.

[MartintheMopMan 7,765]

In ranking? Yes by a couple of spots. In revenue? No. We have increased revenue by over 30%.

Over 30%? Where are you getting that?

[8bucks 6,175]

Ultimately the fans drive those revenues as you have noted. The fan boy in us keeps us coming back to watch and buy gear. While our fandom runs deeper, the Pacers lost their fan base during the Tinsley post brawl years and that impacted the bottom line and even as those guys were sent away it took awhile to turn that corner.

So I think you make a good point mdn82, I think IU basketball is at a similar point. Fans are tired of Crean and the IU Bball product. Most understand that we have to eat until the end of the year but if we don't greatly exceed expectations many will not accept another year.

I am convinced Glass knows this and he also knows the probability of sustaining success in football is lower than it is in Bball. So you ride the football horse as long as you can and make every effort to sustain success there but you can't afford to let Bball slip away because it can be hard to get it back.

[mdn82 25,464]

Over 30%? Where are you getting that?

The revenue you cited was $22 million. We are up to just shy of $30 million.

[yogisballin 2,289]

http://www.forbes.com/pictures/fgif45jifi/8-indiana-hoosiers/

Those results are from 2013-14

[MartintheMopMan 7,765]

The revenue you cited was $22 million. We are up to just shy of $30 million.

My link was the companion to USPS's so it's not straight revenue, it's "team value".

 

I missed where the $30 million is coming from though, I went back and looked and can't figure out that number.

[MikeRoberts 6,838]

I'm not following the argument here about Glass and us being fanboys.

Brands often take decades to build and decades to be destroyed. My wife and I both work in marketing/advertising and there are two things all brands look at, immediate results to appease the board and shareholders and the longterm health and longevity of the brand.

What was built over 50 years has been chipped away at for 15 years. Basketball revenues are up across the board so looking at an increase is irrelevant unless compared to other institutions in the same comp list.

Again, that is only looking at the short term. The longterm damages won't be realized in Glass and McRobbies tenure, it will be realized over the coming decades.

This has nothing to do with being a fanboy, but everything to do with business and a business of this sort has to be viewed from a larger lens than a few years.

[mdn82 25,464]

My link was the companion to USPS's so it's not straight revenue, it's "team value".

 

I missed where the $30 million is coming from though, I went back and looked and can't figure out that number.

My bad.  It was team value.  But those have used as attendance revenue numbers through forbes before (at the end of every year they posted 'attendance values'.  They changed the name of them.  Not sure if they took out aspects of this?  So that would not be a true representation.  I remember in 2012 we had a value + merchandise of $39,000,000.  We were ranked in the top 10 that year too.  I would be very surprised if the number that would be close to $30,000,000 isn't the attendance numbers as well as the $22,000,000 you had.  I don't think it includes concessions, but used to involve merchandise as well.  I will have to look for those numbers.  With it being a state school they have to put them out there. 

[mdn82 25,464]

I'm not following the argument here about Glass and us being fanboys.

Brands often take decades to build and decades to be destroyed. My wife and I both work in marketing/advertising and there are two things all brands look at, immediate results to appease the board and shareholders and the longterm health and longevity of the brand.

What was built over 50 years has been chipped away at for 15 years. Basketball revenues are up across the board so looking at an increase is irrelevant unless compared to other institutions in the same comp list.

Again, that is only looking at the short term. The longterm damages won't be realized in Glass and McRobbies tenure, it will be realized over the coming decades.

This has nothing to do with being a fanboy, but everything to do with business and a business of this sort has to be viewed from a larger lens than a few years.

True, but our rise in "business" in value ranking is adequate to what it has been over that period.  Say we look at just value ranking which seems more reasonable since we don't know what is all included, we are still top 10 in all of the nation in basketball.  That is pretty damn solid.  As for the fanboy comments, you don't hear many looking at this from a business perspective.  You don't see the fact that Glass has to accommodate a $11 million buyout to please the masses.  Or our "value" is not being diminished to a damaging level.  We have dropped a couple of spots, but that is to be expected.  We (as in every person in this thread not liking the position we are in) are looking at this from a I am a fan and I don't think Crean can get us to where we belong view.  Glass has a wider  sense than that.  Yet he is the one being called a fanboy.  That is where that comes from.  We are all guilty of that.  That is just fandom.  If you don't like that, so be it.  But, from a business perspective, we have went from Mike Davis, Kelvin Sampson debacle, and now Crean, and we are a top ten valued program.  I wish we could get numbers on where we were when we went from Knight to Davis.  I am guessing we were top 2-3 valued programs (Forbes since they are the ones being sited).  

[mdn82 25,464]

Ok Mike. If we are to look at this from just a marketing perspective, then how is hiring Archie Miller or someone of that ilk going to be perceived by the average fan? The fan that makes up the majority of Hoosier fans? We are just talking about our brand here. How from a business perspective can you sell your donors on anything less than a Donovan, Stevens, or a championship coach if you are Glass? How can you go to boosters for $11 million for anything less than a homerun after you signed him to that extension? I mean, let's look at this from a realistic standpoint. You are in marketing. You just were signed to a large account only 3 years in to it you realize you made a mistake in some of the decisions you made in the campaign. Do you go to your bosses and try and sell them on anything less than a homerun when you know your job is now dependent on this decision?

[mdn82 25,464]

All I am ultimately saying is as a fan base we have to find a way to reach Glass on his level for a change. I don't feel a change will be made for the sake of change. I think too much is invested in his decision from a personal perspective after he made the extension. We all know how dumb that was in hindsight. The boosters at this point will have to make this decision IMO.

[MikeRoberts 6,838]

True, but our rise in "business" in value ranking is adequate to what it has been over that period. Say we look at just value ranking which seems more reasonable since we don't know what is all included, we are still top 10 in all of the nation in basketball. That is pretty damn solid. As for the fanboy comments, you don't hear many looking at this from a business perspective. You don't see the fact that Glass has to accommodate a $11 million buyout to please the masses. Or our "value" is not being diminished to a damaging level. We have dropped a couple of spots, but that is to be expected. We (as in every person in this thread not liking the position we are in) are looking at this from a I am a fan and I don't think Crean can get us to where we belong view. Glass has a wider sense than that. Yet he is the one being called a fanboy. That is where that comes from. We are all guilty of that. That is just fandom. If you don't like that, so be it. But, from a business perspective, we have went from Mike Davis, Kelvin Sampson debacle, and now Crean, and we are a top ten valued program. I wish we could get numbers on where we were when we went from Knight to Davis. I am guessing we were top 2-3 valued programs (Forbes since they are the ones being sited).

so even you believe we have likely dropped from "2-3" to 8 in 15 years. That trend will continue unless immediate action is taken to correct that. That stat sums up my point that we are surviving on the equity that was built over 50 years... The brand that Crean has built is not a top 8 brand so he is borrowing against inherited equity. The brand he has built is top 30 and that is where we will be 30 years from now if Glass doesn't look at this from a longterm approach. We are top 8 NOW because of what we were doing 30 years ago, what we are doing now will likewise be visible 30 years from now

[JSHoosier 19,611]

True, but our rise in "business" in value ranking is adequate to what it has been over that period. Say we look at just value ranking which seems more reasonable since we don't know what is all included, we are still top 10 in all of the nation in basketball. That is pretty damn solid. As for the fanboy comments, you don't hear many looking at this from a business perspective. You don't see the fact that Glass has to accommodate a $11 million buyout to please the masses. Or our "value" is not being diminished to a damaging level. We have dropped a couple of spots, but that is to be expected. We (as in every person in this thread not liking the position we are in) are looking at this from a I am a fan and I don't think Crean can get us to where we belong view. Glass has a wider sense than that. Yet he is the one being called a fanboy. That is where that comes from. We are all guilty of that. That is just fandom. If you don't like that, so be it. But, from a business perspective, we have went from Mike Davis, Kelvin Sampson debacle, and now Crean, and we are a top ten valued program. I wish we could get numbers on where we were when we went from Knight to Davis. I am guessing we were top 2-3 valued programs (Forbes since they are the ones being sited).

What's the buyout after this season? I think it drops quite a bit but don't remember the numbers off hand.

Regardless, it's not a lump sum. It's paid out over 5(?) years and what he makes at his next job is deducted. It's a stupid contract but not quite as stupid as it seems on the surface.

[mdn82 25,464]

so even you believe we have likely dropped from "2-3" to 8 in 15 years. That trend will continue unless immediate action is taken to correct that. That stat sums up my point that we are surviving on the equity that was built over 50 years... The brand that Crean has built is not a top 8 brand so he is borrowing against inherited equity. The brand he has built is top 30 and that is where we will be 30 years from now if Glass doesn't look at this from a longterm approach. We are top 8 NOW because of what we were doing 30 years ago, what we are doing now will likewise be visible 30 years from now

Crean's numbers may have dropped from Sampson in "value" but we absolutely could be easily worse. Glass may have to look at this the way you want from a marketing perspective but please answer the other questions I laid out. You can only market what your business side provides you with. Please, answer what I asked while looking at this from his perspective.

[mdn82 25,464]

What's the buyout after this season? I think it drops quite a bit but don't remember the numbers off hand.

Regardless, it's not a lump sum. It's paid out over 5(?) years and what he makes at his next job is deducted. It's a stupid contract but not quite as stupid as it seems on the surface.

It drops after July 1. It's essentially $11 million or he is coming back next year. No way a decision is made that late. It starts dropping quick after next year.

[mdn82 25,464]

Ok Mike. If we are to look at this from just a marketing perspective, then how is hiring Archie Miller or someone of that ilk going to be perceived by the average fan? The fan that makes up the majority of Hoosier fans? We are just talking about our brand here. How from a business perspective can you sell your donors on anything less than a Donovan, Stevens, or a championship coach if you are Glass? How can you go to boosters for $11 million for anything less than a homerun after you signed him to that extension? I mean, let's look at this from a realistic standpoint. You are in marketing. You just were signed to a large account only 3 years in to it you realize you made a mistake in some of the decisions you made in the campaign. Do you go to your bosses and try and sell them on anything less than a homerun when you know your job is now dependent on this decision?

[TheWatShot 13,353]

What's the buyout after this season? I think it drops quite a bit but don't remember the numbers off hand.

Regardless, it's not a lump sum. It's paid out over 5(?) years and what he makes at his next job is deducted. It's a stupid contract but not quite as stupid as it seems on the surface.

 

$7.5 million after this season, $4 million after next season, $2 million by spring of 2018, $1 million in 2019. 

[Class of '66 Old Fart 81,379]

What's the buyout after this season? I think it drops quite a bit but don't remember the numbers off hand.

Regardless, it's not a lump sum. It's paid out over 5(?) years and what he makes at his next job is deducted. It's a stupid contract but not quite as stupid as it seems on the surface.

WatShot is correct.  There is a website devoted to the buyout at:  http://www.tomcreanbuyout.com/

[mdn82 25,464]

$7.5 million after this season, $4 million after next season, $2 million by spring of 2018, $1 million in 2019.

I hope we don't wait 2 years to make a decision. All July 1... That was smart on his part.