How Much Can You Hang on Engstrom, Really?

[PlayerRep]

Jim O'Day shares more blame than Engstrom - he was the one who wanted to "put the band back together" and things gave been shit ever since.

No, Plfu is the one who called Beers and asked if he wanted to help put the band back together. Wasn't O'Day.

 

[PlayerRep]

Jesus, did Tyler ever defeat EWU as DC? Did he ever defeat Cal Poly?

Unfortunately, since CP would have required an offense, no. And yes, we did defeat EWU last year and could not do so this year.

Next question?

I recall Stitt saying Semore was calling the shots by the EWU game. Tyler didn't deny he was no longer in charge.

No, Stitt did not say that. He said Semore was taking a more active role in game planning. He also said TG was still the DC and called the plays during games.

 

[PlayerRep]

I get it, people loved Jim O'Day because he was a personable guy who would yuck it up. But the facts are stubborn. When Bobby moved on there was no search for a new coach. Plug rad was named coach with no real search. He hired a bunch of non-college coaches, and O'Day said they were putting the band back together. In 2010 the Griz went 6-4 against D1 competition and lost to the cats at home - with a stocked roster and many future NFL players. The next year was much the same shit show into November barely eeking out an unsatisfying win over DII team before finally coming alive right for the Cat game and 2 playoff games.

Then came the accusations and investigations. A retraining order that seemed under control and a QB back at practice until Pflugrad spoke to the press and inflames the wound, ultimately leading to criminal charges and a bogus trial. Ultimately it turned out Pflugrad knew players he'd received (marginal, bullshit benefit but still by the rules) un-allowed benefits from a booster, and all those wins were vacated due to "LACK OF INSTITUTIONAL CONTROL". That is on O'Day. So since 2009 the Griz have no conference titles, no deep playoff runs, and fewer scholarships than they should have because someone wasn't doing their job. As AD, that is on O'Day.. So call bullshit if you want, but those are the facts. Disagree all you want, but Pflugrad is an assistant coach at a community college, and O'Day isn't an AD anywhere.

Well, Grizbeer you really don't "get it"! Was it a lack of institutional control when an average of nearly 90 percent of our student-athletes graduated during his athletic directorship? Was a lack of institutional control defined by meeting NCAA academic standards every year during his tenure? Was a lack of institutional control defined by meeting Title Nine standards every year of his tenure? Was a lack of institutional control defined by an annual budget that was always in the black during his tenure? Was a lack of institutional control defined by the highest amount of funds raised during his 16 years in the athletic department in comparison to before he was hired and after he was terminated? Was it a lack of institutional control when his administration boasted the most longevity for men and women coaches who stayed with Griz athletics even though they were making less than their counterparts in the BSC? Was it a lack of institutional control when he was chosen to represent the Big Sky Conference on selection committees for football and basketball six of his nine years at the helm? Was it a lack of institutional control when he signed the TV contract for Griz football to be aired exclusively throughout Montana at the behest of the BSC? Grizbeer, with all due respect, you are entitled to your own justifications but not your own facts.

cool so you post a bunch of opinions but question facts? Ok no real point arguing. Post a pic of all the trophies in the hall of champions Sind 2009....

Can you tell us what the ncaa said was lack of institutional control? I know you can't but I'll give you a chance first.

 

[Blgs Griz Fan]

Engstrom started this mess by firing a good coach and athletic director to hide his own incompetence. I think Griz fans hoped that Coach Stitt would bring a new start, but that hope was faltering, and it died today with this pitiful loss to a bad Bobcat team.

Griz are going to have to start all over again after Stitt, and Engstrom, the idiot that started the entire mess is still President at UM.

God help us!

I think Engstrom is satisfied with a winning program and is not willing to accept the challenges that a championship program can bring.
I am also a bit concerned about the Mormon influence. Aren't Haslam and Engstron both members? Stitt? I say this because I watched the issues crop up in a great rural school district.

 

[OlPonyQB]

1) Engstrom is, and is paid to be, an academician. Aligning with an Athletic department is neither wanted
nor would it be tolerated by the Regents.
2) Football has been given resources second to none at this level. Football is charged with $$ performance
first and foremost.
3) Recruiting performance is acceptable, and will be measured loosely based on legal problems and standard
academic results when measured against total students.
4) Volatility in Cat/Griz games is best for both institutions.
5) Coaches come and go, hire from the top 25% of applicants and results will be acceptable for 3-5 years.
6) Highest priority is keeping the "stadium asset" at the projected revenue/expense level. That target level
is most important goal, only when wins and losses have a severe impact will their be scrutiny...see #5.

 

[RABIDAWG]

The worm is turning on which is to be the "Flagship" university. It starts with the respective presidents. 'Nuff said.

 

[Allezchat]

I did think the commercials for you guys were much better yesterday than ones I've seen in the past. They looked like professional polished commercials. Though I think there were only 2 played over and over. One MSU commercial played to go with one MSU-B. But um was one of the sponsors of the broadcast.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

 

[umwsufan]

I get it, people loved Jim O'Day because he was a personable guy who would yuck it up. But the facts are stubborn. When Bobby moved on there was no search for a new coach. Plug rad was named coach with no real search. He hired a bunch of non-college coaches, and O'Day said they were putting the band back together. In 2010 the Griz went 6-4 against D1 competition and lost to the cats at home - with a stocked roster and many future NFL players. The next year was much the same shit show into November barely eeking out an unsatisfying win over DII team before finally coming alive right for the Cat game and 2 playoff games.

Then came the accusations and investigations. A retraining order that seemed under control and a QB back at practice until Pflugrad spoke to the press and inflames the wound, ultimately leading to criminal charges and a bogus trial. Ultimately it turned out Pflugrad knew players he'd received (marginal, bullshit benefit but still by the rules) un-allowed benefits from a booster, and all those wins were vacated due to "LACK OF INSTITUTIONAL CONTROL". That is on O'Day. So since 2009 the Griz have no conference titles, no deep playoff runs, and fewer scholarships than they should have because someone wasn't doing their job. As AD, that is on O'Day.. So call bullshit if you want, but those are the facts. Disagree all you want, but Pflugrad is an assistant coach at a community college, and O'Day isn't an AD anywhere.

Well, Grizbeer you really don't "get it"! Was it a lack of institutional control when an average of nearly 90 percent of our student-athletes graduated during his athletic directorship? Was a lack of institutional control defined by meeting NCAA academic standards every year during his tenure? Was a lack of institutional control defined by meeting Title Nine standards every year of his tenure? Was a lack of institutional control defined by an annual budget that was always in the black during his tenure? Was a lack of institutional control defined by the highest amount of funds raised during his 16 years in the athletic department in comparison to before he was hired and after he was terminated? Was it a lack of institutional control when his administration boasted the most longevity for men and women coaches who stayed with Griz athletics even though they were making less than their counterparts in the BSC? Was it a lack of institutional control when he was chosen to represent the Big Sky Conference on selection committees for football and basketball six of his nine years at the helm? Was it a lack of institutional control when he signed the TV contract for Griz football to be aired exclusively throughout Montana at the behest of the BSC? Grizbeer, with all due respect, you are entitled to your own justifications but not your own facts.

cool so you post a bunch of opinions but question facts? Ok no real point arguing. Post a pic of all the trophies in the hall of champions Sind 2009....

Can you tell us what the ncaa said was lack of institutional control? I know you can't but I'll give you a chance first.

Those rhetorical questions were all factual. Do the research. Let me add one more: Was it a lack of institutional control when the Department of Justice's year-long investigation into O'Day's department found no wrongdoings?

 

[scooter1985]

Hey Grizzbeer how many Big Sky conference championships have been won in any sport since Engstrom and Haslam took over at UM now going on seven 7 years ago. How many Sterling Saving academic cups has UM won since Engstrom and Haslam took over now going on seven years ago? Zero nada none. In any sport since they arrived and took over at UM.

How many Big Sky conference Championships have been won during Odays time at UM in many sports not just Football--too many for you to count since it is beyond ten (10). How many Sterling Saving cups were won while Oday was AD--several!!!

Here is a tip for you Grizzbeer--if you want to take on Oday who is not at UM nor is he a public official anymore that I know of ---how about you GROW A PAIR and use your real name!

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

Ty played a big part in the reason that he is no longer in Missoula. Stitt made the decision, but TG put him into a position that had no other possible outcome.

 

[UMGriz75]

Ty played a big part in the reason that he is no longer in Missoula. Stitt made the decision, but TG put him into a position that had no other possible outcome.

Actually, the "outcome" was this:

Ty 1, Stitt 0.

And Stitt's long-term prospects just took a dark turn for the worse as well.

Purdue may not come calling.

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

Ty played a big part in the reason that he is no longer in Missoula. Stitt made the decision, but TG put him into a position that had no other possible outcome.

Actually, the "outcome" was this:

Ty 1, Stitt 0.

And Stitt's long-term prospects just took a dark turn for the worse as well.

Purdue may not come calling.

You have to argue everything, even if you are arguing a completely different point than the original.

 

[UMGriz75]

You have to argue everything, even if you are arguing a completely different point than the original.

It's responding to your off-topic comment, idiot. Nobody brought up Ty on this thread except you. But it is somewhat reassuring that you now realize that.

 

[buckingthesun]

When you think about the evolution and future of Grizzly football you must start with the administration at Main Hall, perhaps even higher.

Following the turmoil that emerged around 2011, a cadre of top university administrators took a deep dive into what the future of the football program should look like. Probably one of many questions that were asked was should the U of M’s football program continue to strive to be a high performing, great team or would a good, but competitive program be acceptable to the university’s mission and the people who support it?

Being great came at a high cost to the University. There was the JJ debacle, which included turmoil among faculty administrators. Then the Beau Donaldson felony, the Taser incident, and the bad publicity that followed each of these problems, including the Barz report, 2 Justice Department investigation, an NCAA investigation et. al. All of these circumstances contributed to a climate of declining enrollment, which had economic and campus quality of live repercussions.

In this pernicious environment the administration made a conscious decision to regain institutional control over the football program. Engstrom publicly stated that it was time to prioritize the institution’s mission; that it was a place of higher learning first and an athletic program second. Knowing that the universities image had to be cleaned up the decision was made to be a good competitive program and attempt to avoid all the problems that came with being great.

With this in mind, they terminated the sitting AD and the head football coach. They hired an interim coach who was savoy, experienced, respected and could sustain the culture of the program at the level they envisioned.

Delaney’s teams were good, but not great. They were competitive to the point that they even made the postseason playoffs. During his tenure there was no decline in ticket sales, the marketing revenue continue as expected and boosters continued to support the program, even giving additional revenue to build the new Champion Center. Even better, there were no off field or other embarrassing issues during Delaney’s tenure. Main Hall was delighted with this emerging trend.

Now came the decision to find a new coach following Delaney’s retirement. There were two finalists. One was the former head coach who fielded great teams, but had some off field player problems and was known to be overprotective of his players and staff. The other was a D-2 coach with a solid resume, highly respected by peers, but no proven success at a higher level. We all know the decision the administration made.


The result was an implied statement that it is better to be a good football team without problems than to be a great football team and have off field issues that caused embarrassment and frustration to the University, the state and the community.

This is not intended to be an indictment of Engstrom. To the contrary, it was a collaborative leadership decision that was made in the long-range best interest of the University. The plan appears to be working.

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

You have to argue everything, even if you are arguing a completely different point than the original.

It's responding to your off-topic comment, idiot. Nobody brought up Ty on this thread except you. But it is somewhat reassuring that you now realize that.

Actually you senile ol' bastard, you should probably take another look through the thread and see if someone did indeed bring up TG.

 

[NzoneGriz]

1) Engstrom is, and is paid to be, an academician. Aligning with an Athletic department is neither wanted nor would it be tolerated by the Regents.

That's funny because Waded Cruzado took it upon herself to personally do the fundraising the the bobcat stadium expansion. God it would be terrible to see her get in trouble with the regents for aligning herself with the athletic department, because she is an example of a fantastic school president.

2) Football has been given resources second to none at this level. Football is charged with $$ performance first and foremost.

The football program raises it's own money by far and again. As of 2 years ago UofM received the LEAST amount of dollars from the board of regents because our program is so profitable.

3) Recruiting performance is acceptable, and will be measured loosely based on legal problems and standard academic results when measured against total students.

What part of recruiting has been acceptable, whether it be athletic or the university as a whole? Enrollment is tanking, departments and support staff for students have been slashed.

4) Volatility in Cat/Griz games is best for both institutions.

I believe a healthy rivalry is best for both institutions. Volatility is not what you want. LUCKILY for 98% of fans and athletes it is a healthy rivalry. From my experience, less so on the cats side but that's a conversation for a different thread.

5) Coaches come and go, hire from the top 25% of applicants and results will be acceptable for 3-5 years.

Stitt consistently had a 70-80% win rate. He has not achieved that here. You can't tell me there wasn't a talented O or D coordinator that wasn't prepared to step down to take the helm and chomping at the bit to prove themselves.

6) Highest priority is keeping the "stadium asset" at the projected revenue/expense level. That target level is most important goal, only when wins and losses have a severe impact will their be scrutiny...see #5.

Season ticket holder numbers have declined since the Pflugrad firings. Not sure what they were this year, but I know of several long time season ticket holders who gave up their seats. The program is growing stale. The general feeling from the program now is to maintain status quo instead of pushing for excellence. You can't tell me you haven't felt a shift in the program as well.

 

[maroonandsilver]

For what it is worth, I have heard from a fairly reliable source that RE will be allowed to remain and retire in 2020. Not soon enuf for many, I know, but there it is.
And for the poster that asks if RE is Mormon, I would say no, just because I have witnessed he does drink wine at public functions. But who really cares what his religion is?

 

[CFallsGriz]

When you think about the evolution and future of Grizzly football you must start with the administration at Main Hall, perhaps even higher.

Following the turmoil that emerged around 2011, a cadre of top university administrators took a deep dive into what the future of the football program should look like. Probably one of many questions that were asked was should the U of M’s football program continue to strive to be a high performing, great team or would a good, but competitive program be acceptable to the university’s mission and the people who support it?

Being great came at a high cost to the University. There was the JJ debacle, which included turmoil among faculty administrators. Then the Beau Donaldson felony, the Taser incident, and the bad publicity that followed each of these problems, including the Barz report, 2 Justice Department investigation, an NCAA investigation et. al. All of these circumstances contributed to a climate of declining enrollment, which had economic and campus quality of live repercussions.

In this pernicious environment the administration made a conscious decision to regain institutional control over the football program. Engstrom publicly stated that it was time to prioritize the institution’s mission; that it was a place of higher learning first and an athletic program second. Knowing that the universities image had to be cleaned up the decision was made to be a good competitive program and attempt to avoid all the problems that came with being great.

With this in mind, they terminated the sitting AD and the head football coach. They hired an interim coach who was savoy, experienced, respected and could sustain the culture of the program at the level they envisioned.

Delaney’s teams were good, but not great. They were competitive to the point that they even made the postseason playoffs. During his tenure there was no decline in ticket sales, the marketing revenue continue as expected and boosters continued to support the program, even giving additional revenue to build the new Champion Center. Even better, there were no off field or other embarrassing issues during Delaney’s tenure. Main Hall was delighted with this emerging trend.

Now came the decision to find a new coach following Delaney’s retirement. There were two finalists. One was the former head coach who fielded great teams, but had some off field player problems and was known to be overprotective of his players and staff. The other was a D-2 coach with a solid resume, highly respected by peers, but no proven success at a higher level. We all know the decision the administration made.


The result was an implied statement that it is better to be a good football team without problems than to be a great football team and have off field issues that caused embarrassment and frustration to the University, the state and the community.

This is not intended to be an indictment of Engstrom. To the contrary, it was a collaborative leadership decision that was made in the long-range best interest of the University. The plan appears to be working.

I would be really interested to know how you are aware of such details. I don't doubt it, but that's some interesting stuff.

 

[griz4life]

When you think about the evolution and future of Grizzly football you must start with the administration at Main Hall, perhaps even higher.

Following the turmoil that emerged around 2011, a cadre of top university administrators took a deep dive into what the future of the football program should look like. Probably one of many questions that were asked was should the U of M’s football program continue to strive to be a high performing, great team or would a good, but competitive program be acceptable to the university’s mission and the people who support it?

Being great came at a high cost to the University. There was the JJ debacle, which included turmoil among faculty administrators. Then the Beau Donaldson felony, the Taser incident, and the bad publicity that followed each of these problems, including the Barz report, 2 Justice Department investigation, an NCAA investigation et. al. All of these circumstances contributed to a climate of declining enrollment, which had economic and campus quality of live repercussions.

In this pernicious environment the administration made a conscious decision to regain institutional control over the football program. Engstrom publicly stated that it was time to prioritize the institution’s mission; that it was a place of higher learning first and an athletic program second. Knowing that the universities image had to be cleaned up the decision was made to be a good competitive program and attempt to avoid all the problems that came with being great.

With this in mind, they terminated the sitting AD and the head football coach. They hired an interim coach who was savoy, experienced, respected and could sustain the culture of the program at the level they envisioned.

Delaney’s teams were good, but not great. They were competitive to the point that they even made the postseason playoffs. During his tenure there was no decline in ticket sales, the marketing revenue continue as expected and boosters continued to support the program, even giving additional revenue to build the new Champion Center. Even better, there were no off field or other embarrassing issues during Delaney’s tenure. Main Hall was delighted with this emerging trend.

Now came the decision to find a new coach following Delaney’s retirement. There were two finalists. One was the former head coach who fielded great teams, but had some off field player problems and was known to be overprotective of his players and staff. The other was a D-2 coach with a solid resume, highly respected by peers, but no proven success at a higher level. We all know the decision the administration made.


The result was an implied statement that it is better to be a good football team without problems than to be a great football team and have off field issues that caused embarrassment and frustration to the University, the state and the community.

This is not intended to be an indictment of Engstrom. To the contrary, it was a collaborative leadership decision that was made in the long-range best interest of the University. The plan appears to be working.

And MSU managed to increase enrollment, improve facilities and removed a head coach for performing at the level you suggest Engstrom desires. All while avoiding the issues you suggest UM had to dismantle athletics to accomplish.
Oh, so did EWU.
If your narrative were true, it suggests Mr Engstrom can't manage anything well. The academic focus isn't producing results and UM is losing millions of dollars.
However, you might want to edit the timing of the events you presented, because the carts before the horse in several areas. It would make your story more cool, bro.

 

[UMGriz75]

The result was an implied statement that it is better to be a good football team without problems than to be a great football team and have off field issues that caused embarrassment and frustration to the University, the state and the community.

If somebody with a PhD actually accepted this "false choice" logical fallacy, they should be fired for that alone.