Thank you for providing that link, which clearly states that we have 2 - only 2 - profitable sports in our entire athletics program - football and MENS basketball. No surprise, the biggest drain we have on our total revenue of over $140,000,000, is WOMENS BASKETBALL. It is costing us and all other programs a fortune to sustain the nonrevenue sports like WOMENS BASKETBALL due to Title IX. Seems like you'd want to reduce expenses on nonrevenue programs in order to free resources to bolster the big revenue generating programs which pay for all the other sports. Yet we just hugely increased the contract of the coach of a nonrevenue generating sport at a time when our revenue generating sports are hurting. It's nice to have a good women's basketball team IF you can afford it, but it should be considered a luxury item provided by the largesse of successful and profitable revenue generating programs which we do not have at this point in time. To me, that's just plain old common sense, but that kind of thinking has given way to the feeling-based, antilogical, insanely WOKE attitudes that seem to permeate the minds of our top decision makers.
I'll be kind and not call out anyone for prior ignorant statements that indicate that since we pay for Staley with revenue from one dedicated revenue stream, that we are somehow constrained from allocating spending from other sources to achieve greater success and resulting revenue increases by winning more football and MENS BASKETBALL games and improving the overall reputation and brand of Gamecock sports. That opinion is frankly obtuse, ignoring the reality that our peer competitors aren't spending a ton more than we are on head coaches, coordinators, and staff, in addition to much larger recruiting budgets. We actually need to out spend them in order to play catch up. We need to hire the kinds of coaches and staffs for those sports which are comparable to our most successful competitors. That indicates in a public way that we intend to actually compete for championships and not be the bottom feeders of the SEC.
We need more bold, aggressive, and pragmatic leadership. Can't any of you remember how it was when we were beating the snot out of Clemson five years in a row? It felt GOOD! We were on a roll, but we need unflinching leaders who are 100% committed to getting us back to excellence and keeping us there. I'm just not seeing that kind of commitment anywhere on the horizon and in fact it looks like our trajectory is continuing downward. Already said this, but look up the road to Clemson - do they spend a lot more money than we do on recruiting, staffing, and facilities? Damn right they do. I thought we were supposed to be competing with them! Unfortunately though, they are committed to doing whatever it takes to kick our butts in perpetuity and they know we aren't going to fight back. Aren't you sick and tired of those snotty Clemson fans sneering at us all the time? It sucks.
We squandered an opportunity to replace Muschamp. We really didn't even go out and interview any worthwhile coaches then or when we hired Muschamp. We just settle on whomever is the first person willing to take the job. You can already see that there is no bump in our football recruiting. It's by and large about the same quality that Muschamp was getting. I love Frank Martin and I truly hope he can turn the basketball program around, but face it - enthusiasm for our basketball program is dwindling. If we force Martin out as the rumor mill suggests, what are the chances we would actually go out and hire a better coach than him? It just seems like we Gamecock fans get a whole lot more tricks than treats. It always amazes me that there are fans who would defend the status quo.
