Stitt on Strahm....

[tnt]

Enrollment statistics don't support your assertion that the decline began in 2007:

2007 12,140
2008 12,436
2009 12,784
2010 13,346
2011 13,917
2012 13,643
2013 12,830
2014 12,211
2015 11,823
2016 11,147
2017 10,478

Beat me to it...

Also feel that Coach Stitt is doing a near perfect job in terms of discipline.

Actually you boys should take a look at the freshman enrollment/retention reports http://www.umt.edu/institutional-research/documents/CSRDE%202016-17%20Master.pdf
and you will see the problem with enrollment did in Fact start in 2008/2009 when those events would have started to have an effect. Its also when the economy tanked but only an idiot (and Jim Foley who was basically running those areas likley qualified as did RE) would have missed what was going to (and did) happen. What is interesting to me though is that incoming SAT and ACT scores increased.

 

[i_the_sky]

So, so many pious people! I think we have, way bigger concerns with Bob Stitt than we do Connor Strahm!!! They canned Jeome Sauers at NAU, mid season, who was doing a much better job than Stitt! We got fire in the kitchen Bobby stay in touch, coach!!! Let's get real here folks! Let Connor have his day in court and let the judicial system handle this, misdemeanor, like everyone else! To hell with Krackwhore, who cares what he writes. He shouldn't influence what we do here at Montana,especially, with our football players, the guys a money hungry "Geek! He's still trying to make money off of JJ

 

[Diesel]

So, so many pious people! I think we have, way bigger concerns with Bob Stitt than we do Connor Strahm!!! They canned Jeome Sauers at NAU, mid season, who was doing a much better job than Stitt! We got fire in the kitchen Bobby stay in touch, coach!!! Let's get real here folks! Let Connor have his day in court and let the judicial system handle this, misdemeanor, like everyone else! To hell with Krackwhore, who cares what he writes. He shouldn't influence what we do here at Montana,especially, with our football players, the guys a money hungry "Geek! He's still trying to make money off of JJ

NAU wanting to give an opportunity to honor Jerome Souers...is not canning the guy mid season. Jerome is still HC for the rest of the season. You may want to get real on your facts before submit button is hit.

 

[AZGrizFan]

So, so many pious people! I think we have, way bigger concerns with Bob Stitt than we do Connor Strahm!!! They canned Jeome Sauers at NAU, mid season, who was doing a much better job than Stitt! We got fire in the kitchen Bobby stay in touch, coach!!! Let's get real here folks! Let Connor have his day in court and let the judicial system handle this, misdemeanor, like everyone else! To hell with Krackwhore, who cares what he writes. He shouldn't influence what we do here at Montana,especially, with our football players, the guys a money hungry "Geek! He's still trying to make money off of JJ

The stupid is strong in this one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[PlayerRep]

Enrollment statistics don't support your assertion that the decline began in 2007:

2007 12,140
2008 12,436
2009 12,784
2010 13,346
2011 13,917
2012 13,643
2013 12,830
2014 12,211
2015 11,823
2016 11,147
2017 10,478

Beat me to it...

Also feel that Coach Stitt is doing a near perfect job in terms of discipline.

Actually you boys should take a look at the freshman enrollment/retention reports http://www.umt.edu/institutional-research/documents/CSRDE%202016-17%20Master.pdf
and you will see the problem with enrollment did in Fact start in 2008/2009 when those events would have started to have an effect. Its also when the economy tanked but only an idiot (and Jim Foley who was basically running those areas likley qualified as did RE) would have missed what was going to (and did) happen. What is interesting to me though is that incoming SAT and ACT scores increased.

The frosh stats don't support what you say. The decline started and was drastic in 2011. Down to 1540 from 1709 the prior year. Down each year since 2010, except one year (went up by 11), to 1179 in 2016. Not one year after 2010 is higher than any year in 2010 or before going back to the beginning year in the chart, 2011.

The frosh numbers absolutely show that the decline incurred shortly after Engstrom became the president.

Also what events are you talking about in 2008/09? Back to back appearances in the national championship game?

 

[IdaGriz01]

So, so many pious people! I think we have, way bigger concerns with Bob Stitt than we do Connor Strahm!!! They canned Jeome Sauers at NAU, mid season, who was doing a much better job than Stitt! We got fire in the kitchen Bobby stay in touch, coach!!! Let's get real here folks! Let Connor have his day in court and let the judicial system handle this, misdemeanor, like everyone else! To hell with Krackwhore, who cares what he writes. He shouldn't influence what we do here at Montana,especially, with our football players, the guys a money hungry "Geek! He's still trying to make money off of JJ

The stupid is strong in this one.

Bingo! :clap:

And hilarious.
:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[tnt]

Enrollment statistics don't support your assertion that the decline began in 2007:

2007 12,140
2008 12,436
2009 12,784
2010 13,346
2011 13,917
2012 13,643
2013 12,830
2014 12,211
2015 11,823
2016 11,147
2017 10,478

Beat me to it...

Also feel that Coach Stitt is doing a near perfect job in terms of discipline.

Actually you boys should take a look at the freshman enrollment/retention reports http://www.umt.edu/institutional-research/documents/CSRDE%202016-17%20Master.pdf
and you will see the problem with enrollment did in Fact start in 2008/2009 when those events would have started to have an effect. Its also when the economy tanked but only an idiot (and Jim Foley who was basically running those areas likley qualified as did RE) would have missed what was going to (and did) happen. What is interesting to me though is that incoming SAT and ACT scores increased.

The frosh stats don't support what you say. The decline started and was drastic in 2011. Down to 1540 from 1709 the prior year. Down each year since 2010, except one year (went up by 11), to 1179 in 2016. Not one year after 2010 is higher than any year in 2010 or before going back to the beginning year in the chart, 2011.

The frosh numbers absolutely show that the decline incurred shortly after Engstrom became the president.

Also what events are you talking about in 2008/09? Back to back appearances in the national championship game?

The multiple arrests and "press started in 2007, the first year it would have effected new enrollment would have been 2008 -2009. Thats exactly when the female enrollment started to drop. by 2016 it was down by almost 40%. while overal retention of those who enrolled in that period improved slightly 3 year retention dropped significantly for all groups but even higher for female. None the less EVERY finalist for the presidents job EXCEPT RE withdrew after visiting campus. The hiring pool was 1 and for reasons we will never know they hired him.

 

[daGrizJ]

So, so many pious people! I think we have, way bigger concerns with Bob Stitt than we do Connor Strahm!!! They canned Jeome Sauers at NAU, mid season, who was doing a much better job than Stitt! We got fire in the kitchen Bobby stay in touch, coach!!! Let's get real here folks! Let Connor have his day in court and let the judicial system handle this, misdemeanor, like everyone else! To hell with Krackwhore, who cares what he writes. He shouldn't influence what we do here at Montana,especially, with our football players, the guys a money hungry "Geek! He's still trying to make money off of JJ

The stupid is strong in this one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, it is!! From his very first post. Growler? Is that you?

 

[AZDoc]

I fully expect Strahm to work his way back onto the field and have a good senior year. His dui was really bad judgement and caused a bit of embarrassment but surely isn't a capital offense.
Stitt's handling of the situation is exactly how it should be handled.

I said my piece earlier, but -- since this thread has just kept rolling -- I'll chime in again. He paid his dues on the infraction, but the bigger issue of "trust" also has to be dealt with. That's why having him "play his way back onto the field" is justified, IMO. And, since he has superior talent, that should not take long.

I agree, and think he is probably a better overall player. He will get some reps this weekend, work hard over the week, and get back into the starting lineup by next week. As long as he does what he is supposed to, he will earn it on the field. If he is NOT a better player, he will be playing special teams the rest of the season. I don't see that happening, though.

 

[Grisly Fan]

Enrollment statistics don't support your assertion that the decline began in 2007:

2007 12,140
2008 12,436
2009 12,784
2010 13,346
2011 13,917
2012 13,643
2013 12,830
2014 12,211
2015 11,823
2016 11,147
2017 10,478

Probably need to look at incoming frosh enrollment each year to come to a conclusion.

2007 (don't have)
2008 1,916
2009 1,774
2010 1,831
2011 1,638
2012 1,423
2013 1,445
2014 1,534
2015 1,338
2016 1,201
2017 (don't have)

 

[Ursus1]

I bash Stitt a lot....but that is because I have problems with his coaching *from his offense design itself to his choices in some defensive staff members....BUT I will not bash him on how he has handled Strahm. I think he has handled it A+.

 

[griz5700]

I don't know how Vika has played in the first 2 games, but his stat production is not so hot. 5 tackles total in 2 games, with 2 being solo. 1 TFL. He's tied for 12th in tackling on the team. At this rate, he would get 27.5 in 11 games.

Strahm had 70 tackles last year, 2d leading on the team behind Buss. 10 against the Cats. Never had fewer than 3.

Connor Strahm LB 21-49 70 0-8 2-2 4-7 1-5 2-2 1-4 2-1 3-4 3-6 1-2 2-8 - tackles

I understand discipline. However, suspending for 2 games, not playing in scrimmages or practices with the 1's, and not playing much in the scrimmages, seems like about 3 times the punishment that any Griz has ever gotten for a dui.

I vote for playing the best players, after the stated punishment is concluded. On the other hand, I'm fine with making him earn his spot back, assuming they give him a chance to earn it.

I agree with all of this.

Stitt has handled this situation poorly from day 1.

 

[tnt]

I don't know how Vika has played in the first 2 games, but his stat production is not so hot. 5 tackles total in 2 games, with 2 being solo. 1 TFL. He's tied for 12th in tackling on the team. At this rate, he would get 27.5 in 11 games.

Strahm had 70 tackles last year, 2d leading on the team behind Buss. 10 against the Cats. Never had fewer than 3.

Connor Strahm LB 21-49 70 0-8 2-2 4-7 1-5 2-2 1-4 2-1 3-4 3-6 1-2 2-8 - tackles

I understand discipline. However, suspending for 2 games, not playing in scrimmages or practices with the 1's, and not playing much in the scrimmages, seems like about 3 times the punishment that any Griz has ever gotten for a dui.

I vote for playing the best players, after the stated punishment is concluded. On the other hand, I'm fine with making him earn his spot back, assuming they give him a chance to earn it.

I agree with all of this.

Stitt has handled this situation poorly from day 1.

You do know the suspension is dictated by the "athletic code" and not Stitt right? that it is the same for all UM athletes as well. But all that aside how much sense does it make for a player who can't play with the ones to practice/scrimmage with them instead of the player that can?

 

[PlayerRep]

Beat me to it...

Also feel that Coach Stitt is doing a near perfect job in terms of discipline.

Actually you boys should take a look at the freshman enrollment/retention reports http://www.umt.edu/institutional-research/documents/CSRDE%202016-17%20Master.pdf
and you will see the problem with enrollment did in Fact start in 2008/2009 when those events would have started to have an effect. Its also when the economy tanked but only an idiot (and Jim Foley who was basically running those areas likley qualified as did RE) would have missed what was going to (and did) happen. What is interesting to me though is that incoming SAT and ACT scores increased.

The frosh stats don't support what you say. The decline started and was drastic in 2011. Down to 1540 from 1709 the prior year. Down each year since 2010, except one year (went up by 11), to 1179 in 2016. Not one year after 2010 is higher than any year in 2010 or before going back to the beginning year in the chart, 2011.

The frosh numbers absolutely show that the decline incurred shortly after Engstrom became the president.

Also what events are you talking about in 2008/09? Back to back appearances in the national championship game?

The multiple arrests and "press started in 2007, the first year it would have effected new enrollment would have been 2008 -2009. Thats exactly when the female enrollment started to drop. by 2016 it was down by almost 40%. while overal retention of those who enrolled in that period improved slightly 3 year retention dropped significantly for all groups but even higher for female. None the less EVERY finalist for the presidents job EXCEPT RE withdrew after visiting campus. The hiring pool was 1 and for reasons we will never know they hired him.

So, TNT, you are trying to argue that bad press from the burglary in 2007 involving 3 football players, none of whom every played a down for UM again and none of whom were even on campus much longer (and certainly not when any women arrived in fall 2008 or thereafter) caused the enrollment of frosh women to decline significantly? First, note that enrollment for frosh women actually increased from 899 to 934 from 2007 to 2008. Based on your reasoning, the 2007 burglary actually caused enrollment of frosh women to increase.

Frosh female enrollment started to decline in 2011, so before any of the sexual assault press. From 878 to 800. Then to 704 in 2012. Okay, that was after the sexual assault press started. Then it went up in 2013 and 2014, to only 12 before it was in 2011. How do you explain that?

Then down to 739 and 633 in 2015 and 2016. What do you attribute that to? The arrival of Stitt, in Dec. 2014? Ha. Kraukaer's book wasn't published until mid-April 2015. Most applicants would have already applied by then for fall 2016. I suppose a few could have decided to go elsewhere.

 

[PlayerRep]

From the link in TNT's earlier post. While frosh enrollment bounced around a bit, the frosh decline seems to have gotten bigger and consistent after 2008 (1789). The big drops were in 2011, 2012, and then again in 2015 and 2016. Engstrom was hired in Sept. 2010. From 2010 to 2016, frosh enrollment declined from 1709 to 1179. That's 31%. Nice job, Royce.

– All Bachelor Degree-Seeking First-Time Full-Time Freshmen
Fall Head Count
2001 1756
2002 1749
2003 1719
2004 1749
2005 1696
2006 1588
2007 1655
2008 1789
2009 1675
2010 1709
2011 1540
2012 1333
2013 1344
2014 1441
2015 1300
2016 1179
Avg 1576

 

[uofmman1122]

For those that can't do stats in their head:

Year-over-year pct change from the previous year
2009: -7.41%
2010: +3.21%
2011: -10.5%
2012: -13.13%
2013: +1.55%
2014: +6.16%
2015: -12.78%
2016: -10.24%

Change each year relative to 2008 high:
2009: -7.41%
2010: -4.44%
2011: -14.51%
2012: -25.73%
2013: -24.58%
2014: -19.94%
2015: -30.17%
2016: -37.32%

 

[tnt]

Now you are getting my point PR There was a problem from day one with and for RE. As uofmman1122 pointed out it didn't bounce around. IT was steady and dramatic. It had already started. I can promise you RE was made aware by my cousin (a HUGE donor) who told him and even gave him the numbers. Perhaps the connection with the Bad Press that started in 2008 is anecdotal at best. And perhaps its even more anecdotal that every finalist withdrew from the presidential hiring process. But that point is had the problem been dealt with BEFORE the Bartz report, enrollment dealt with firmly realizing there was trouble ahead There may never have been a Bartz report, Instead two presidents left it up to a senile Dean, and ex Pat Williams Political hack, and a coach to keep everything under wraps and in house. The job was beyond Pflu (not that it was his job to begin with) and Oday was forced to walk both sides of a deep crevice. As I predicted here before the Bartz report came out we could expect both the DOJ and NCAA to get involved. There was no one driving the boat, so Outsiders and the Press did.

 

[PlayerRep]

I don't know how Vika has played in the first 2 games, but his stat production is not so hot. 5 tackles total in 2 games, with 2 being solo. 1 TFL. He's tied for 12th in tackling on the team. At this rate, he would get 27.5 in 11 games.

Strahm had 70 tackles last year, 2d leading on the team behind Buss. 10 against the Cats. Never had fewer than 3.

Connor Strahm LB 21-49 70 0-8 2-2 4-7 1-5 2-2 1-4 2-1 3-4 3-6 1-2 2-8 - tackles

I understand discipline. However, suspending for 2 games, not playing in scrimmages or practices with the 1's, and not playing much in the scrimmages, seems like about 3 times the punishment that any Griz has ever gotten for a dui.

I vote for playing the best players, after the stated punishment is concluded. On the other hand, I'm fine with making him earn his spot back, assuming they give him a chance to earn it.

I agree with all of this.

Stitt has handled this situation poorly from day 1.

You do know the suspension is dictated by the "athletic code" and not Stitt right? that it is the same for all UM athletes as well. But all that aside how much sense does it make for a player who can't play with the ones to practice/scrimmage with them instead of the player that can?

You do know that the code says suspension for 10% of regular season games, so 1.1 games. Not 2 games. Stitt imposed greater penalties. Don't think anyone, including Strahm, has any problem with that.

 

[PlayerRep]

Now you are getting my point PR There was a problem from day one with and for RE. As uofmman1122 pointed out it didn't bounce around. IT was steady and dramatic. It had already started. I can promise you RE was made aware by my cousin (a HUGE donor) who told him and even gave him the numbers. Perhaps the connection with the Bad Press that started in 2008 is anecdotal at best. And perhaps its even more anecdotal that every finalist withdrew from the presidential hiring process. But that point is had the problem been dealt with BEFORE the Bartz report, enrollment dealt with firmly realizing there was trouble ahead There may never have been a Bartz report, Instead two presidents left it up to a senile Dean, and ex Pat Williams Political hack, and a coach to keep everything under wraps and in house. The job was beyond Pflu (not that it was his job to begin with) and Oday was forced to walk both sides of a deep crevice. As I predicted here before the Bartz report came out we could expect both the DOJ and NCAA to get involved. There was no one driving the boat, so Outsiders and the Press did.

Okay, now for the actual facts.

1. Under RE, the enrollment decline occurred and increased. RE didn't even stop the decline. Enrollment was down again this fall.

2. Frosh enrollment was 1709 in 2010 when RE arrived. It had been 80 higher in one year, 2008 (which was the year after the 2007 bad press of the burglary). The next highest year going back to 2001 was 1756, so 47 higher. Sorry, but enrollment was not in steady decline before RE got here, based on the frosh numbers. A tiny decline only.

3. What was the bad press in 2008? I don't recall anything specific. Griz went to the national championship.

4. The Barz report actually didn't show much negative stuff. It confirmed that the sexual assault stuff on the UM campus was less than average compared to compared schools. There were any big things in the Barz report. It said there was some sexual assault at UM, just like at every other school. Don't know what problem you think needed to be dealt with prior to the Barz report.

5. I had always assumed that the other finalists withdrew because they knew RE was going to be selected, but I don't know.

6. How were the dean, AD and coach keeping anything in-house? Don't understand that. What crevice was O'Day walking between?

7. The NCAA didn't get involved in anything at UM related to the sexual assault. They came to investigate whether Tru/Kemp had gotten extra benefits, apparently because someone (perhaps Gee) told them about the situation.

8. RE certainly wasn't driving the boat, or at least in the right direction. The DOJ investigation was biased, basically stupid, and uncovered nothing. Van Valkenberg was correct to tell them to stuff it. The City and the University probably should have done that too.

9. I agree with your assessment of the dean.

 

[bgbigdog]

Seems weird having all these stats and none of them from BamaGriz. Just sayin.