Coach Curt Cignetti to INDIANA

[Josh 12,996]

6 minutes ago, IndyResident16 said:

Realistically after the 2022 season, but any program worth a salt would have fired him after the 2021 season where he went 0fer in conference after laying one of the biggest eggs of all-time.

So just one season longer than you realistically believe.  Ehhh, I'm not seeing anything fireable there.

[IndyResident16 567]

1 minute ago, Josh said:

Most large donations are donated for specific reasons.  You can't just use the money for whatever you like, the donor says exactly what they want it used for.  If a couple big donations come in to fire Allen, but wouldn't have come in otherwise, then you're really not using facility money to fire a coach.

The fact that you don’t see the absurdity in needing $20 million in donations to fire a coach who has won 3 conference games in 3 years is outrageous. 

[Hovadipo 60,185]

20 minutes ago, IndyResident16 said:

Lol the buyout has kept Allen around two extra years and has allowed IU to fall further and further behind.

People are saying the buyout may keep us from firing him now. My post meaning it will not. Josh’s post was also pretty clear on that. 

[Josh 12,996]

2 minutes ago, IndyResident16 said:

The fact that you don’t see the absurdity in needing $20 million in donations to fire a coach who has won 3 conference games in 3 years is outrageous. 

It seems like a lot of money to you I'm sure.  It's not to others.  

[IndyResident16 567]

3 minutes ago, Josh said:

So just one season longer than you realistically believe.  Ehhh, I'm not seeing anything fireable there.

Losing 38-3 at home to Rutgers (who have now beaten us 3 years in a row) is a fireable offense alone. IU went from preseason ranked to winning 2 games. The Tom Allen era is we knew it ended after the 2021 season.

[IndyResident16 567]

Just now, Josh said:

It seems like a lot of money to you I'm sure.  It's not to others.  

It’s an unnecessary amount of money that could be allocated several other places. Why not fire him then after the last season when the buyout was $25 million if it’s not a big deal? Clearly Dolson has to go out of his way to raise the money that would have (and should) be spent elsewhere.

[Josh 12,996]

3 minutes ago, IndyResident16 said:

Losing 38-3 at home to Rutgers (who have now beaten us 3 years in a row) is a fireable offense alone. IU went from preseason ranked to winning 2 games. The Tom Allen era is we knew it ended after the 2021 season.

Fair enough.  Allen really pooped the bed.  For a few reasons I suppose.

I just don't think Dolson has done anything fireable.  Go Hoosiers

[Josh 12,996]

2 minutes ago, IndyResident16 said:

It’s an unnecessary amount of money that could be allocated several other places. Why not fire him then after the last season when the buyout was $25 million if it’s not a big deal? Clearly Dolson has to go out of his way to raise the money that would have (and should) be spent elsewhere.

But it could not be allocated elsewhere.  That's not how large donations work.  

[IndyResident16 567]

1 minute ago, Josh said:

But it could not be allocated elsewhere.  That's not how large donations work.  

Of course it could. If you can get someone(s) to donate $20 million to fire a terrible football coach you damn sure can get the same source to donate towards facility upgrades or a similar project. Imagine not needing $20 million to fire a bad football coach?

[Josh 12,996]

Just now, IndyResident16 said:

Of course it could. If you can get someone(s) to donate $20 million to fire a terrible football coach you damn sure can get the same source to donate towards facility upgrades or a similar project. Imagine not needing $20 million to fire a bad football coach?

No, not at all.  Usually there are a group of people who will donate specifically to athletic endeavors and a group who donates specifically to research, a group that donates specifically to facilities...etc.  They give their donations with specific rules on how you can use their money.  It would be an incredibly poor decision to take money earmarked for one project and spend it on another instead.  

I've never been able to get large donor to give money anywhere except where they want it to go.  If you have you're better than me or any trustee I've ever known.

[IndyResident16 567]

3 minutes ago, Josh said:

No, not at all.  Usually there are a group of people who will donate specifically to athletic endeavors and a group who donates specifically to research, a group that donates specifically to facilities...etc.  They give their donations with specific rules on how you can use their money.  It would be an incredibly poor decision to take money earmarked for one project and spend it on another instead.  

I've never been able to get large donor to give money anywhere except where they want it to go.  If you have you're better than me or any trustee I've ever known.

You’re not listening to what I’m saying. If someone or some group is willing to donate $20 million for Tom Allen not to coach again…that same someone or group is willing to donate $20 million to other athletic endeavors. Imagine if not needing $20 million to fire Tom Allen wasn’t on the table?

[Josh 12,996]

2 minutes ago, IndyResident16 said:

You’re not listening to what I’m saying. If someone or some group is willing to donate $20 million for Tom Allen not to coach again…that same someone or group is willing to donate $20 million to other athletic endeavors. Imagine if not needing $20 million to fire Tom Allen wasn’t on the table?

Have you ever been involved in large fundraising?  Or been a trustee of any kind?  If so you work with different donors than I.

Usually if you need money to apply to X, you know to contact X group of people.  If you need money for Y, you contact Y group of people.  There is little willingness for these groups to spend their money in other endeavors than their stated interests.  And if you keep asking X donors to spend their money on Y, you turn off these donors.

Again, just from my experiences.  You sound like you have different experiences than I or you're just completely guessing.

[Stuhoo 86,263]

15 minutes ago, IndyResident16 said:

You’re not listening to what I’m saying. If someone or some group is willing to donate $20 million for Tom Allen not to coach again…that same someone or group is willing to donate $20 million to other athletic endeavors. Imagine if not needing $20 million to fire Tom Allen wasn’t on the table?

We don’t need to write a check to the man for $20 million. To begin with, the payments owed to CTA are spread out, and IU can ‘mortgage’ the payments further. 

 

[IndyResident16 567]

5 minutes ago, Josh said:

Have you ever been involved in large fundraising?  Or been a trustee of any kind?  If so you work with different donors than I.

Usually if you need money to apply to X, you know to contact X group of people.  If you need money for Y, you contact Y group of people.  There is little willingness for these groups to spend their money in other endeavors than their stated interests.  And if you keep asking X donors to spend their money on Y, you turn off these donors.

Again, just from my experiences.  You sound like you have different experiences than I or you're just completely guessing.

X and Y are the same applicants in this scenario, football/athletic donors. 

[IndyResident16 567]

1 minute ago, Stuhoo said:

We don’t need to write a check to the man for $20 million. To begin with, the payments owed to CTA are spread out, and IU can ‘mortgage’ the payments further. 

 

IU isn’t going to spend a dime buying out Allen, it’s all donor funded. And it will be a negotiated settlement paid out in one lump sum somewhere between $12-15 million.

[Josh 12,996]

2 minutes ago, IndyResident16 said:

X and Y are the same applicants in this scenario, football/athletic donors. 

Lol, do you bro.  Your scenarios you create in your head seem great!

Go Hoosiers

[AZ Hoosier 9,606]

2 hours ago, mamasa said:

Zero reasons to fire Dolson

I disagree. I get it that the extension was required by the previous contract (that alone is questionable), but to put the university in such a hole with the buy-out arbitrarily is unconscionable.

[AZ Hoosier 9,606]

3 hours ago, Artie86 said:

I just talked to my guy good friend in Bloomington. He was my old college roommate. He worked for IU in sports management and had several connections with former IU players. I just thought I would ask what he thought or heard… This was was his reply and only a rumor of what he heard. Mind you, this is what he has heard, but he said who knows. Take it for what it’s worth. He said his source is from inside athletics…

The rumor over the last few weeks…  Is that Allen will be fired and his replacement is Antwaan Randall El. Apparently it’s a done deal.  
Allen is a good guy and incredible values but unfortunately that doesn’t win games. 

He will end up a defensive coordinator somewhere. Another rumor is Southern Cal is interested in him for the DC job.

With the defense that IU has played this season alone, there's no way I'd hire Allen to be my DC.

However, from an IU view, any job that pays an obscene amount would be good to help offset the buy-out... 

[AZ Hoosier 9,606]

1 hour ago, IndyResident16 said:

Nobody thought COVID was a fluke? Where teams literally went a week without practicing and still played in weekend games without fans with several opt outs and players being forced to sit out? 

COVID was clearly a one-off that screwed up a lot... but every team in America were hamstrung with the same limitations... 

[AZ Hoosier 9,606]

1 hour ago, Josh said:

If he crippled us with a $20M extension, but then raises $20M to negate it, was there ever a crippling at all?

I say "yes". If he can raise $20M to fire a coach, could he have not expended the same effort to raise $20M for facilities, staff, etc?

So he guarantees Allen's buyout, effectively costing the university money that could have been raised and spent more proactively to move the program forward, even in some small way.

At best, IF Dolson raises the $20M to can Allen, he's breaking even... he hasn't moved the needle in that scenario.