ADVERTISEMENT

Big $$$ Raise for Barnhart

I would love to see those statistics from say 2000 to 2013. Those are the years we were ranking high nationally in football attendance, yet it certainly seemed the investment was not going back into football. I think we can all agree that 14,000 paying fans showing up for the Vanderbilt game before Jocker was removed was a slap UK needed to open the purse strings for football, but in my opinion it was too late.

Ever heard the old expression a day late and a dollar short?

Well mitch was about ten years and tens of millions of dollars short for football------but the Midnight Madness that cost as much as the entire football recruiting budget some years was a nice touch, probably got him a lot of votes for best AD in the world.

Not that the best basketball program in the world really needed any more help, compared to football.
 
Mitch got a contract extension and raise going up to $925,000.00 per year. At a time when UK is going through layoffs for teachers while tuition is being raised, that is a bold raise for Barnhart. Considering the poor performance of the football team under Mitch's guidance, I'm surprised that he got such a massive raise. I don't think the AD at most SEC schools could survive such a bad result in football.

Considering athletics' money has nothing to do with academics' money, how is that related? They built up their own money to pay their own people. Btw, athletics donates money to campus (and they don't have to), so not sure of your point is. This comparison is like someone at Amazon getting a raise when Home Depot is slashing jobs. No correlation.
 
I am not a fan of Barnhart, but I don't give a rat's ass what they pay him. The complete dismantling of what little football program UK has should be complete by 2022, then we can be the basketball-only school that so many of you desire. Well done.
Yup, $200 million in facilities upgrades in the last few years shows how the football program is be dismantled. I can't believe he'said allowed to destroy the monster that Cliff Hagan, CM Newton, and Larry Ivy built. I am just sick to my stomach.
 
Yup, $200 million in facilities upgrades in the last few years shows how the football program is be dismantled. I can't believe he'said allowed to destroy the monster that Cliff Hagan, CM Newton, and Larry Ivy built. I am just sick to my stomach.

None of our previous ADs built built the mighty UK football program at UK, the loyal fans that averaged 67,00,00 in 07 for a team that (again) didn't break even in the SEC did, even though they were shortchanged for decades. And the facilities upgrades and loosening the purse strings were necessitated by those same loyal fans giving up tickets in the family for generations in protest of his policies, thank you again fans.

Name ONE thing above the bare minimum (With LOTS of examples of WAY below adequate support) for everything football from 2002 until the TWO YEARS overdue and twelve year old scoreboards in about his tenth year running the program.

And don't be afraid to name that ONE (if you can find it) because you are afraid I will come back with ten ways he screwed football. Most of you are bored with hearing them, probably better left unsaid, but your choice.

The two hundred million was spent because he had no choice, we were losing money hand over fist because of him PLUS the SEC and TV contracts (from SEC football) brought in more money than he could spend-----although he is throwing money around like a drunken sailor. Not counting the $30,000,000 or so when IMG was replaced. And on top of that he got the legislature to approve the$120,000,000 loan by obligating the athletic department to repay that in full but also be responsible for about another $100.000.000 for academic improvements------always a good thing, huh jurich. AND $45,000,000 was in DONATIONS from fans for the football facilities when they saw that UK was FINALLY doing something for football AND that their donations would actually be used for football instead of being controlled by mitch, when his policies in the past isolated most potential football donars.

Do you really believe that he had ANY choice but to take drastic measures to try to salvage the real money cow?
 
Some of you claim that Mitch is so good/great.

The NACDA Directors' Cup (formerly the Sears Cup) ranks all the collegiate athletic programs.

In Mitch's 14 years of being (over)paid at UK, Kentucky has NEVER ONCE been ranked in the top ten.

He is another in a long list of bad/mediocre UK athletic directors. But he is BY FAR the most overpaid.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NACDA_Directors'_Cup
You're right they were ranked #8 TWICE in 2007. You don't even know your school's history but you have an opinion.
 
You're right they were ranked #8 TWICE in 2007. You don't even know your school's history but you have an opinion.

Wrong again.

Since you didn't look at the link I posted, I will provide it again.

Kentucky has never been ranked in the top 10 of collegiate athletic programs...even though we have an (overpaid) award-winning athletic director.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NACDA_Directors'_Cup

(Au contraire...I DO know UK's athletic history. The 2007 team was talented and exciting, but like our recent teams peter'd out...and went 3-5 in the SEC).
 
Wrong again.

Since you didn't look at the link I posted, I will provide it again.

Kentucky has never been ranked in the top 10 of collegiate athletic programs...even though we have an (overpaid) award-winning athletic director.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NACDA_Directors'_Cup

(Au contraire...I DO know UK's athletic history. The 2007 team was talented and exciting, but like our recent teams peter'd out...and went 3-5 in the SEC).
You don't if you won't acknowledge Kentucky was ranked #8 in the nation by AP twice that year. But yes I did make the mistake in thinking you were trying to make a point about football. Still when you compare Barnhart's performance to our past AD's handling of football he looks pretty shiny. You are not being honest if you do not acknowledge the good Barnhart has overseen as well as the bad. On balance he has been very good for UK in spite of the bonding limitations that have hamstrung UK in the recent past.
 
None of our previous ADs built built the mighty UK football program at UK, the loyal fans that averaged 67,00,00 in 07 for a team that (again) didn't break even in the SEC did, even though they were shortchanged for decades. And the facilities upgrades and loosening the purse strings were necessitated by those same loyal fans giving up tickets in the family for generations in protest of his policies, thank you again fans.

Name ONE thing above the bare minimum (With LOTS of examples of WAY below adequate support) for everything football from 2002 until the TWO YEARS overdue and twelve year old scoreboards in about his tenth year running the program.

And don't be afraid to name that ONE (if you can find it) because you are afraid I will come back with ten ways he screwed football. Most of you are bored with hearing them, probably better left unsaid, but your choice.

The two hundred million was spent because he had no choice, we were losing money hand over fist because of him PLUS the SEC and TV contracts (from SEC football) brought in more money than he could spend-----although he is throwing money around like a drunken sailor. Not counting the $30,000,000 or so when IMG was replaced. And on top of that he got the legislature to approve the$120,000,000 loan by obligating the athletic department to repay that in full but also be responsible for about another $100.000.000 for academic improvements------always a good thing, huh jurich. AND $45,000,000 was in DONATIONS from fans for the football facilities when they saw that UK was FINALLY doing something for football AND that their donations would actually be used for football instead of being controlled by mitch, when his policies in the past isolated most potential football donars.

Do you really believe that he had ANY choice but to take drastic measures to try to salvage the real money cow?
I hate that these arguments continue to persist. What difference does the past make now. Why continue to rehash the same tired old arguments? Since you have, I feel the need to respond and point out the flaws in how you think an athletic department is run. First, the AD cannot spend money at his will. He first has to get internal approval from the President and the Board. Second, he has to get approval from the legislature. There is no way to say with any degree of certainty how much money Mitch wanted to invest in football over the years because neither you or I are privy to the internal conversations that went on inside the University. We do know that during the years when the hospital was under construction, UK had no appetite to spend large sums of money on athletic facilities. During those years the athletic department was pretty much forced to spend on smaller dollar items on its wish list. Other than that, we really have no idea who was an impediment to football investment within the University.

Second, the fans not showing up to football games may have played a role in UK investing in football, but I think that is largely overblown in how important it really was. Mitch had said several years ago that football would get its turn once the academic side got its projects completed. More than likely the completion of the hospital and other projects on campus freed up capital to be invested in football. More than likely, those plans had already been discussed and approved internally and were going to happen no matter what the fan reaction was in the Joker era. It just so happened that the "fan revolt" and the freeing up of capital at UK happened around the same time, which gave people the impression that the "fan revolt" was the reason behind the football investment.

The bottom line is that all ADs want to win in every sport. There is no such thing as an AD who doesn't care if he wins in a particular sport. They are all competitive and want to win in every sport in which they field a team. But there are constraints on every AD when it comes to spending money. To suggest that you know who was responsible for the lack of spending is just disingenuous.
 
You don't if you won't acknowledge Kentucky was ranked #8 in the nation by AP twice that year. But yes I did make the mistake in thinking you were trying to make a point about football. Still when you compare Barnhart's performance to our past AD's handling of football he looks pretty shiny. You are not being honest if you do not acknowledge the good Barnhart has overseen as well as the bad. On balance he has been very good for UK in spite of the bonding limitations that have hamstrung UK in the recent past.


Really?

Our football record with Barnhart at the helm -- he did hire three of the head coaches -- is 71-100.

Do you really call that SHINY?
 
And though you have suggested I don't know much about UK sports history...we Kentucky fans have endured losing records the last six seasons.

I am uncomfortably optimistic, but realistically we have seen nothing to suggest that Kentucky football is getting better -- just more expensive.
 
I like how Barnhart detractors cite the lack of success in football as if the other AD's we had managed to get the football team to championships and BCS bowls. UK athletics as a whole have never been better than they have under Barnhart. Rifle, Track and Field, Softball, Women's Volleyball and Women's Basketball have all enjoyed a lot of success. You may not care about those sports, but the AD does. Those sports, and probably some others as well, have succeeded under Barnhart, more so than any other time in UK's history.
 
  • Like
Reactions: reflaine
I like how Barnhart detractors cite the lack of success in football as if the other AD's we had managed to get the football team to championships and BCS bowls. UK athletics as a whole have never been better than they have under Barnhart. Rifle, Track and Field, Softball, Women's Volleyball and Women's Basketball have all enjoyed a lot of success. You may not care about those sports, but the AD does. Those sports, and probably some others as well, have succeeded under Barnhart, more so than any other time in UK's history.


Rifle?

Softball?

Women's volleyball?

Can you link a major sports site that has (ever had) those sports on their front page?

You are right about this: "You may not care about those sports"...Its because NOBODY cares about those sports except for those athletes and their families!

Kentucky fans have been humiliated year after year for being a laughingstock in football.

We lose to Vanderbilt. We have lost to Mississippi State SEVEN years in a row!

We are worse than the mediocre SEC schools. Recently we lost BOTH games in a two-year series with Western Kentucky!

Many of us wouldn't feel so bad if we felt Barnhart was doing the best he could. But instead he hides under his desk. He doesn't respond to mail or e-mails. He demeans our long-suffering fans with his "microwave fans" responses.

And when attendance drops precipitously, he offers fans who buy tickets an "incentive" of a free Coke!

We were already stuck with overpaying him for 3.5 more years.

Now we are stuck with overpaying him (and his smirk) even more for 6.5 more years.

(He should get on his knees and thank John Calipari every single day!)
 
Last edited:
The Mitch argument on the football board is similar to the Tubby argument on the basketball board. It brings out the best in everyone. I always say this when the Mitch argument comes up. From a University/President/Board of Trustees perspective, he is exactly what they want:

1. Zero issues with probation while at the head of the Athletic Department
2. Gives $5.4 million back to the University annually.
3. They have maintained a very good academic standing as a department, with athletes averaging better than a 3.0 GPA for awhile now
4. They have put significant money into athletic facilities without using general funds.

As a comparison, from 1990 - 2002, UK athletics put a little over $30 million into athletic facilities. Since Mitch arrived in 2002, they have put over $240 million into athletic facilities. That should clearly open up some eyes as to the magnitude that has been happening. Is some of it overdue? of course it is. Do we know what factors played into why there was no bond money available for athletics? we do not.

Mitch has some areas where he needs some work, i agree 100%. But this notion that he is a piss poor AD is crazy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ClockCalamity
Mitch hired Billy Clyde, which was just as ethically questionable as Petrino. only his performance was so bad he didn't last anywhere near as long. The football team excels at nothing but arrests right now, far more than U of L's. I wouldn't cast stones at Jurich. Especially with the performance circles he's made around Barney.
The difference is that MB didn't know, BEFORE hiring BC, that he was a $hithead. Jurich knew, but did it anyway, solely to win games.
 
  • Like
Reactions: robo222
Rifle?

Softball?

Women's volleyball?

Can you link a major sports site that has (ever had) those sports on their front page?

You are right about this: "You may not care about those sports"...Its because NOBODY cares about those sports except for those athletes and their families!

Kentucky fans have been humiliated year after year being a laughingstock in football.

We lose to Vanderbilt. We have lost to Mississippi State SEVEN years in a row!

We are worse than the mediocre SEC schools. Recently we lost BOTH games in a two-year series with Western Kentucky!

Many of us wouldn't feel so bad if we felt Barnhart was doing the best he could. But instead he hides under his desk. He doesn't respond to mail or e-mails. He demeans our long-suffering fans with his "microwave fans" responses.

And when attendance drops precipitously, he offers fans who buy tickets an "incentive" of a free Coke!

We were already stuck with overpaying him for 3.5 more years.

Now we are stuck with overpaying him (and his smirk) even more for 6.5 more years.

(He should get on his knees and thank John Calipari every single day!)
His job isn't to make you happy. His job is to make UK athletics the best it can be possible be. Outside of one sport, he's done very well. I don't think I need to tell you that UK has sucked in football since before Barnhart was even born much less the AD here. To blame him for 1 bad sport is insane. Especially considering we've been atrocious in football for decades. We were cheating and still couldn't win the SEC.

He's made an attempt to bring the football back up. He renovated CWS, he's upgraded practice facilities, and he's invested in Mark Stoops and given him a chance to succeed.

I know you don't care about those sports and they get very little media attention. I recently graduated from UK and I knew a lot of people that played those sports you care so little about. It may be a surprise to you, but they are just as dedicated, talented and hardworking as our basketball and football players. The things that were required of the football team were required of them. They were held to the same standards. They deserve to have their chance to compete in their sport, no matter how little it interests you. It's also required by law that the university does certain things for these other sports. Mitch isn't the greatest, but he's done well. Take a look at the numbers bthaunert just posted. Those should say something to you.
 
The Mitch argument on the football board is similar to the Tubby argument on the basketball board. It brings out the best in everyone. I always say this when the Mitch argument comes up. From a University/President/Board of Trustees perspective, he is exactly what they want:

1. Zero issues with probation while at the head of the Athletic Department
2. Gives $5.4 million back to the University annually.
3. They have maintained a very good academic standing as a department, with athletes averaging better than a 3.0 GPA for awhile now
4. They have put significant money into athletic facilities without using general funds.

As a comparison, from 1990 - 2002, UK athletics put a little over $30 million into athletic facilities. Since Mitch arrived in 2002, they have put over $240 million into athletic facilities. That should clearly open up some eyes as to the magnitude that has been happening. Is some of it overdue? of course it is. Do we know what factors played into why there was no bond money available for athletics? we do not.

Mitch has some areas where he needs some work, i agree 100%. But this notion that he is a piss poor AD is crazy.

Different world today, different money available, thanks SEC football factories. FOOTBALL the driviving force in the SEC network and TV contracts, how much of the BONUS $5,000,000 from the new TV contract several years ago went back to the ones responsible for it (FOOTBALL). I would bet a lot of the $30M spent on facilities from 1990 to 2002 went to the Nutter center------name one FOOTBALL facility that had more than didley squat improvements in the TEN YEARS under mitch before he was FORCED to do something------and yes, the scoreboards were also done under duress, well past their scheduled time to be replaced when built, and the money that couldn't possibly be available any sooner was replaced in a day or so when the jealous faculty refused to LOAN some of the millions UK football has GIVEN to them over the years.

I think the THIRTY ONE MILLION that football brought in was before the $5M bonus from the TV contract, in a year which football expenses were about $13M (about the same for EIGHTY FIVE RIDES as for the THIRTEEN RIDES in basketball)------which already had EVERYTHING and IS the best program in the land------but still cleared less than a third of what football did even though UK football was already in decline.

Well, perhaps the "recruiting room" would qualify as something improved, I do think they had to replace a couple of the FOLDING CHAIRS some overweight player bent. Although I still think mitch should have bought new furniture and donated some of his old stuff to the "recruiting room" when he got his big raise for ?????? I still argue that if he had reinvested a little of the MILLIONS football brought in into FOOTBALL there would have been a lot more money for new facilities for the other sports.

Bottom line, he put us ten years behind any other SEC football program that didn't sleep through football's emergence as the money sport. Did anyone notice at the SEC media days the new USC coach mentioning the new $50,000,000 football facility, what is ours costing? Weren't they already miles ahead of us, and wouldn't you think they would be in a better position to reduce seating capacity by 6,000 than us, since they already had a stadium 15 or 20 thousand larger than us?

Oh well, we are still ahead of Vandy in most things, although not in head to head wins recently, and how many BB championships do they have?

And I fully approve of the money invested in basketball, it makes money-----just not NEARLY as much as the same money invested in football would have.

Case in point, mitch's non support (and general attitude toward football fans) cost UK literally millions in attendance and ticket sales not just under Joker but continuing to this day, ticket sales 6,000 under what they were when Joker took over, even though we have arguably the most talented and exciting players to watch in our history and everything IS looking up IMO.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: mktmaker
He deserves it. He's a great AD and we're lucky to have him. Anyone bashing Barnhart is just silly, close minded and doesn't really understand what a good AD is. Not every hire is going to be a home run. Not every sport is going to be great every year. It's the body of work as a whole. And Barnhart is deserving of any extension or raise he's given.

Yep..he's definitely deserving. We have gone from being the state's preeminent football program to having Louisville and Western Kentucky pass us in the nation's most popular sport (all while doing so with a fraction of the resources, fan support, tradition and existing facilities). Heck, Louisville football doesn't have a quarter of the tradition that Kentucky football has. It wasn't even that long ago that they were playing in the Missouri Valley and Conference USA, but have now trumped a founding member of the SEC (and a state's flagship program) because they have an AD that's willing to do anything and everything that it takes to become a relevant football program on the national stage. Do any of you really think that if Jurich were hired as our AD instead of Barnhart that we wouldn't be a relevant or semi-relevant football program at this point? I mean just look at the list of coaches that the two guys have hired for crying out loud.

When you say look at his work "as a whole" do you ever consider the fact that Tommy Jurich has literally owned us at every single sport other than men's basketball during Barnhart's tenure? What would happen if Cal ever left?

Football and basketball are the breadwinners (football far more than basketball as far as revenue and national popularity is concerned), so when you judge a coach you have to look at those two sports far above and beyond the olympic or Title XI sports when you are "judging his work as a whole", and to say he has failed miserably--other than Cal falling into his lap--is the understatement of the century, especially when compared to what schools like Louisville, WKU and even EKU are doing with a fraction of the resources.

It's sickening to me and many others to see just how little Barnhart has done when compared to Jurich. It's like having a son that's super talented but lacks any real motivation and push from his parents while you see a far less talented kid across the street (UofL) whose parents provide him with more resources and push him harder and he ends up achieving more all because of the lack of want-to and gumption on the part of the more talented kid. It's truly sickening to watch and has become even more sickening when watching Western Kentucky of all people pass us up because of Mitch's lack of killer instinct or creative thinking. Sickening.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: jauk11 and mktmaker
BTW isnt it amazing this contract got inked at all? during the dark days at the end of the Joker era and right after hiring Stoops Barnhart hand-fed stories to friendly UK media folks about how he was not going to do this much longer, how he had a higher calling for his life, he would be retiring soon to do volunteer and mission work. yeah, so much truth in those leaks. one could even say how hypocritical it is for a man to wrap himself in his christian faith saying oh i'm going to go do good in the world soon & stop cashing these huge paychecks.
I completely forgot about the "greater calling" proclamation. I guess the missionary work is on the back burner now. Barnhart is a pompous, sanctimonious fraud. Not even an average AD....and not even a Kentuckian. He's done well with non-revenue sports, but who cares? It's hard to overlook all the millions in buyouts of which he is responsible. And another buyout is more than likely forthcoming. Plus, how anyone could spend more than 10 minutes with Billy Clyde Gillispie and not realize he didn't have both oars in the water is beyond me.
 
Different world today, different money available, thanks SEC football factories. FOOTBALL the driviving force in the SEC network and TV contracts, how much of the BONUS $5,000,000 from the new TV contract several years ago went back to the ones responsible for it (FOOTBALL). I would bet a lot of the $30M spent on facilities from 1990 to 2002 went to the Nutter center------name one FOOTBALL facility that had more than didley squat improvements in the TEN YEARS under mitch before he was FORCED to do something------and yes, the scoreboards were also done under duress, well past their scheduled time to be replaced when built, and the money that couldn't possibly be available any sooner was replaced in a day or so when the jealous faculty refused to LOAN some of the millions UK football has GIVEN to them over the years.

I think the THIRTY ONE MILLION that football brought in was before the $5M bonus from the TV contract, in a year which football expenses were about $13M (about the same for EIGHTY FIVE RIDES as for the THIRTEEN RIDES in basketball)------which already had EVERYTHING and IS the best program in the land------but still cleared less than a third of what football did even though UK football was already in decline.

Well, perhaps the "recruiting room" would qualify as something improved, I do think they had to replace a couple of the FOLDING CHAIRS some overweight player bent. Although I still think mitch should have bought new furniture and donated some of his old stuff to the "recruiting room" when he got his big raise for ?????? I still argue that if he had reinvested a little of the MILLIONS football brought in into FOOTBALL there would have been a lot more money for new facilities for the other sports.

Bottom line, he put us ten years behind any other SEC football program that didn't sleep through football's emergence as the money sport. Did anyone notice at the SEC media days the new USC coach mentioning the new $50,000,000 football facility, what is ours costing? Weren't they already miles ahead of us, and wouldn't you think they would be in a better position to reduce seating capacity by 6,000 than us, since they already had a stadium 15 or 20 thousand larger than us?

Oh well, we are still ahead of Vandy in most things, although not in head to head wins recently, and how many BB championships do they have?

And I fully approve of the money invested in basketball, it makes money-----just not NEARLY as much as the same money invested in football would have.

Case in point, mitch's non support (and general attitude toward football fans) cost UK literally millions in attendance and ticket sales not just under Joker but continuing to this day, ticket sales 6,000 under what they were when Joker took over, even though we have arguably the most talented and exciting players to watch in our history and everything IS looking up IMO.
Just a few thoughts:

1. Our football facility is costing $45 million, right in the same ballpark as the USC facility.
2. Nutter cost $8.5 million.
3. Prove that Mitch was FORCED to do something and that the University wasn't allowing him to utilize bond capacity needed on campus prior to major improvements to the football facilities.
4. Football will always pay for improvements in other sports. Football paid for softball, soccer, baseball and track and field improvements.
5. I agree that it is overdue...I said that in my post. This should have been done awhile ago.
6. As I mentioned, from an administration perspective, he is a great AD
7. I understand why diehard football fans disagree
8. He is not as bad as many make him out to be
 
Just a few thoughts:

6. As I mentioned, from an administration perspective, he is a great AD
7. I understand why diehard football fans disagree
8. He is not as bad as many make him out to be


What do you mean?

Our detractors claim that Cal is not a great coach because he has won only one national championship.

UK has NEVER been ranked in the top ten athletic programs in the country under Mitch's "leadership."

Not once.

What are the criteria you use to classify him as a "great AD"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NACDA_Directors'_Cup
 
Last edited:
UK is 71-100 in football since 2002. Guess that requires a raise / contract extension.

[laughing]
Barnhart is responsible for the damage Joker did but he inherited Mumme and the damage he left which was considerable. Since Barnhart has been here Kentucky has not come near the damning scandals and controversy that plagued us before his arrival. Kentucky has also refitted the University's tangible assets, built a billion dollar research hospital and medical facility and is just now finishing the retrofit of the football facilities. Some people ignore and belittle all of this to pound out their negative connotation of all things Barnhart. The entire University has had a major facelift utilizing most of the bonding capacity at times and some people are simply blind to the transformation that has happened in the past 15 years at UK.
 
And another thing...

Why was this extension and HUGE raise kept quiet -- for FOUR MONTHS?

If Coach Cal was given an extension it would be big news and received with celebration by UK fans.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shavers48
And released on a Friday at 9:00? Because they knew it was ridiculous and didn't want people talking about it. UK is well aware of the unpopularity of MB. Again, I don't think he's a terrible AD. He's just mediocre. I don't why it has to be a guy is great or horrible. He's not either, he's bottom half but not bottom quarter IMO.
 
What do you mean?

Our detractors claim that Cal is not a great coach because he has won only one national championship.

UK has NEVER been ranked in the top ten athletic programs in the country under Mitch's "leadership."

Not once.

What are the criteria you use to classify him as a "great AD"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NACDA_Directors'_Cup
I mentioned this in an earlier post. From the University President and Trustees (administrative perspective), he is a great AD. I think you might have been reading it differently.
 
Just a few thoughts:

1. Our football facility is costing $45 million, right in the same ballpark as the USC facility.
2. Nutter cost $8.5 million.
3. Prove that Mitch was FORCED to do something and that the University wasn't allowing him to utilize bond capacity needed on campus prior to major improvements to the football facilities.
4. Football will always pay for improvements in other sports. Football paid for softball, soccer, baseball and track and field improvements.
5. I agree that it is overdue...I said that in my post. This should have been done awhile ago.
6. As I mentioned, from an administration perspective, he is a great AD
7. I understand why diehard football fans disagree
8. He is not as bad as many make him out to be

I appreciate the fact that your position gives you a lot more insight into how big time athletics work now BUT:

1. Didn't we have a LOT more ground to make up than USC, don't they still have millions of dollars in facilities which they had already invested in football, similar to our basketball having the "basketball facility" for almost ten years, the "Coal House", Midnight Madness, etc etc etc.` Also the $240m invested is very misleading, almost all of it due to football, and also almost all of the investment in football after ten years of NOTHING invested in football AND after the STRIKE.

2. Nutter alone accounted for about 30% of the money spent on improvements in that era, surely even more was spent on football facilities during that period. And the money went a LOT farther back in the LAST century. What percentage of mitch's facilities improvements went to football in his first ten years, when it DESPERATELY needed help because of probation, 5%, 10 % on the high side? I can't think of anything substantial for football, and I still think the $156,000 spent to hang some pictures on a wall somewhere SHOULD have been used to replace the folding chairs in the "recruiting room", (or carpet the floor, or replace the folding projector screen, or--------) ALL of which it could have done. But it did show the microwave fans that wanted something done for football who was the boss. And the ONLY substantial investment, the scoreboards, two years late and 12 years old, was unavoidable.

3 LOL. Nothing to prove there, and as I have said, that strike cost UK literally millions of dollars AND still is, football season ticket sales still 6,000 short of Joker's first year with an unbelievable upgrade in our talent. Now there is unbelievable SEC level talent at many positions on BOTH sides of the ball, not just a chance to see visitors great talent and a lot of long suffering fans still aren't buying, they bought a big screen. TWO four stars (both JCs) that Joker inherited while the seven SEC teams we faced in 2010 (minus Vandy) averaged 38 four star commits the prior four classes.

mitch was being paid to lead our athletics department and be the PR man, he should have been pointing out to the powers that football was the emerging money cow (already was, due to other SEC programs), not a cent of the first UNEXPECTED $5M TV bonus (DUE to FOOTBALL) did anything for football that I am aware of.

If there was nothing he could do to improve football then why were (are) we paying him the big bucks? AND adding to it.

Ask anyone on here if there was a football fan revolt or not, by fans that cared enough, and ask them if our PR man didn't need a PR man for himself. He lost millions of dollars that football fans wanted to donate to FOOTBALL but wouldn't donate a dime for him to spend on his projects.

4. True, but no excuse to milk it dry with BARE MINIMUM support while basketball with the BEST of everything got MORE of a recruiting budget for usually 3 or 4 commits (before Cal) than football did for a minimum of 25 a year, when ALL the facilities improvements went to sports that DIDN'T bring in the money, the operating budget for football was about the same for EIGHTY FIVE rides as for THIRTEEN in basketball, etc etc. How are some of these numbers even possible? All while football, with laughable support, cleared THREE times the money bb (with literally EVERYTHING) did.

I still say that he should have noticed that football was the emerging "money cow" and given it some support, especially since everyone else was AND we were in such a hole with its support to start with (recruiting room, what a joke, and that was just the prime example). Was he brain dead, he didn't notice any of this? Football with a little more investment could have provided a lot MORE money for the other sports with even a small portion of the money it had EARNED a right to being reinvested.

5. No contest, thank you, not just late but ten years late.

6. Does that mean he is good at kissing A--? How much did the contract for CBC cost UK in severance pay because it was written on a piece of toilet paper? Not to mention his hire to start with.

7. And you would probably be surprised to know how many of them are, even though everything is going MUCH better now. Most don't want to stick their neck out like I do.

8. How in hell could he possibly be that bad, read my post. LOL

Wasted enough time, bye.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mktmaker
The guy went from 600+K to 900+K.... He must be good... Don't all of us get that kind of raise when we're good at what we do....?
He works for people... Those peeps think he's a crackerjack... What else is there to say........
Seems like a nice enough guy.... Maybe he gets lucky...
You don't see AD's out there chasing the $$$... They don't bounce around much... Only time they leave is when their school has a $hit Bomb go off.... (exception UofL/they don't mind)....
 
His job isn't to make you happy. His job is to make UK athletics the best it can be possible be. Outside of one sport, he's done very well. I don't think I need to tell you that UK has sucked in football since before Barnhart was even born much less the AD here. To blame him for 1 bad sport is insane. Especially considering we've been atrocious in football for decades. We were cheating and still couldn't win the SEC.

He's made an attempt to bring the football back up. He renovated CWS, he's upgraded practice facilities, and he's invested in Mark Stoops and given him a chance to succeed.

I know you don't care about those sports and they get very little media attention. I recently graduated from UK and I knew a lot of people that played those sports you care so little about. It may be a surprise to you, but they are just as dedicated, talented and hardworking as our basketball and football players. The things that were required of the football team were required of them. They were held to the same standards. They deserve to have their chance to compete in their sport, no matter how little it interests you. It's also required by law that the university does certain things for these other sports. Mitch isn't the greatest, but he's done well. Take a look at the numbers bthaunert just posted. Those should say something to you.


Realizing that this is a football board and football is a major sport in this nation it's easy to see why few of us care about people shooting 22 caliber rifles, etc., relative to football.

Just Mitch and darned few others. He competes where there's no competition or important interest. In the BIG YAWN ARENA.
 
  • Like
Reactions: catben
Realizing that this is a football board and football is a major sport in this nation it's easy to see why few of us care about people shooting 22 caliber rifles, etc., relative to football.

Just Mitch and darned few others. He competes where there's no competition or important interest. In the BIG YAWN ARENA.

It's literally his job to care about the rifle team.
 
It's literally his job to care about the rifle team.

It is literally his job to realize where the money for the rifle team comes from.

He would probably be right in reducing the size of the "arena" for a rifle match, not so sure what he did in football was the right thing to do at all now that football does have some much delayed support.
 
It is literally his job to realize where the money for the rifle team comes from.

He would probably be right in reducing the size of the "arena" for a rifle match, not so sure what he did in football was the right thing to do at all now that football does have some much delayed support.
The Rifle arena, lol. OK dude who doesn't go to games but bitches about the stadium we still can't fill being reduced in size but greatly updated for overall fan experience.
 
You had me til you said jurich. Jurich is a terrible AD who makes very unethical hires and keeps very unethical coaches around after multiple sex scandals because pitino 'didn't know about it' yet everyone with half a brain knows he knew and let's say he didn't it still happened under his watch so he should still be held accountable, he did hire McGee after all. But the fact remains no way he didn't know. Jurich is the worst AD. MB is definitely not good. He fails at football, fails at baseball, women's BB is starting to fail and BB he needed big time help to make the hire. Without John Calipari Mitch is trash. Mitch owes Coach Cal his life practically. But in no way is he near as bad as Jurich. MB is pretty bad. But he didn't hire Petrino when he had the chance, had he hired Petrino I do feel our FB program would be in much better shape, he's a way better coach than stoops. The man can and does coach circles around stoops, but he didn't make the hire because he felt it would be unethical. Which I give credit for. Had what happened to Pitino happened to cal. I promise he would fire cal under the same circumstances and not think twice about, he probably would've fired him after the sypher ordeal in which the McGee ordeal would've never happened. MB has morals, Jurich doesnt know what morals is. Huge difference. Counts for a lot.
agreed Tommy Turtleneck is a scumbag like his Coaches..He will stop at nothing to WIN..period..He uses money and advertising as leverage against the media..He may be the
most slimy dude around......[eyeroll][eyeroll][eyeroll][eyeroll][eyeroll][eyeroll][eyeroll]
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT