ADVERTISEMENT

Mitch Barnhart wins AD of the year

Congrats to Barnhart. I know many are still critical of him as we can see already in this thread, but he really has done a fine job at Kentucky and we have been very competitive in sports across the board. He deserves credit for much of that success and for the current advances being made in the football program including all the improvements in facilities. I can't say I've always agreed with his moves but he has done a fine job and is deserving of this honor.
Helluva job in football where he takes the money and puts it, among other things, into a great softball stadium with excellent seats but leaves the bleachers in the NEW CWS. Not on my dime anymore, season ticket holders treated like crap and that is what was fielded this year as well.
 
Basically, it appears to one of those many "made up" awards that are given out to anyone and everyone like honorary doctorates. I wasn't impressed by reading the article:

LEXINGTON, Ky. –University of Kentucky Director of Athletics Mitch Barnhart was named a winner of the Under Armour Athletics Director of the Year Award on Tuesday by the National Association of Collegiate Directors of Athletics (NACDA).

Barnhart was one of four selected in the NCAA Football Bowl Subdivision, along with Chris Del Conte of TCU, Warde Manuel of Connecticut and Ian McCaw of Baylor. They will receive their honors on June 17 at the annual NACDA awards luncheon in Orlando, Fla.

I don't know. I just read the article and thought it seemed pretty impressive. Or at least Barhart's accomplishments that prompted the award were impressive.

$165M in football facility upgrades and funding two-thirds of a $100M academic building all while being completely self-funded and receiving no university support. That's simply amazing.

Almost all athletic departments receive a portion of their budget from their respective universities. A lot of times, a portion of students' fees are earmarked for athletics. For UK Athletics to have the success they've had without this same type of support is quite an accomplishment. And not only do they not receive any support, they actually give back and help fund things on the academic side. I'm impressed.
 
Barnhart couldn't hold the lead against Louisville and he let Wisconsin ruin our undefeated season. Far him!

In all seriousness, I think Stoops is on the cusp of fixing football. We were very close to beating Florida which pretty much never happens. Had UK won that game you could have seen a great season. I hope we are patient enough to let him continue what he is doing as I think he turns this thing around unless the far tubby crowd runs him off first then we're back to square one.

Hell, crazy LSU fans nearly ran off Les Miles so anything is possible, I guess. Next year we'll find out if football moves forward or regresses and that will be the time to evaluate Stoops a little more objectively.
 
Not pretty much.

IS.
Peevy is the Deputy Director of Athletics, a role he moved into when Rob Mullens went to Oregon. Peevy has many responsibilities, including the administrator for basketball. Speaking of Mullens, here at Oregon, he has a member of his staff who is the administrator for football. This is very common in intercollegiate athletics.
 
Barnhart couldn't hold the lead against Louisville and he let Wisconsin ruin our undefeated season. Far him!

In all seriousness, I think Stoops is on the cusp of fixing football. We were very close to beating Florida which pretty much never happens. Had UK won that game you could have seen a great season. I hope we are patient enough to let him continue what he is doing as I think he turns this thing around unless the far tubby crowd runs him off first then we're back to square one.

Hell, crazy LSU fans nearly ran off Les Miles so anything is possible, I guess. Next year we'll find out if football moves forward or regresses and that will be the time to evaluate Stoops a little more objectively.

How you watch UK football and think Stoops is on the verge of fixing anything is puzzling.
 
MB has done a good job with the sports programs overall at UK. Has he swung and missed on a couple of high profile hires? Yes. But a lot of AD's have done that. UF hiring Muschamp, Bama hiring Mike Shula, UT hiring Derek Dooley, etc. So it happens.
Yeah, he's really done great things for the football program. He's run that money maker into the ground .
 
I don't know. I just read the article and thought it seemed pretty impressive. Or at least Barhart's accomplishments that prompted the award were impressive.

$165M in football facility upgrades and funding two-thirds of a $100M academic building all while being completely self-funded and receiving no university support. That's simply amazing.

Almost all athletic departments receive a portion of their budget from their respective universities. A lot of times, a portion of students' fees are earmarked for athletics. For UK Athletics to have the success they've had without this same type of support is quite an accomplishment. And not only do they not receive any support, they actually give back and help fund things on the academic side. I'm impressed.

It really comes down to perspective. From a fan perspective only, I am unimpressed with what he has done. From a business/academic perspective, it is far more impressive.
 
It really comes down to perspective. From a fan perspective only, I am unimpressed with what he has done. From a business/academic perspective, it is far more impressive.

That's a fair point, though I think the business of running the department is more central to his mandate from the university.

However, I can understand your perspective. I don't agree with your perspective as I think he's done a pretty good job across the board, but I do see where you're coming from. We'll probably just have to agree to disagree on this one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jazzycat
That's a fair point, though I think the business of running the department is more central to his mandate from the university.

However, I can understand your perspective. I don't agree with your perspective as I think he's done a pretty good job across the board, but I do see where you're coming from. We'll probably just have to agree to disagree on this one.

BTW, for the record, my opinion is fairly weak. I have never had any strong views one way or the other on MB. Even if it is true that he didn't go after Cal and was "forced" into it as some have said, I can at least understand why he was reluctant. I probably would have been as well.

But, on the other hand, I have NO idea how in the world we ended up with a problem like BCG. It is hard to imagine that some of the bad info wasn't known. I hope MB learned from that mistake.
 
We could do a lot worse than MB. I just was under the impression that he was more of a Football AD than he appears to be... meaning I thought he had connections to get us a big name coach.
 
Peevy is the Deputy Director of Athletics, a role he moved into when Rob Mullens went to Oregon. Peevy has many responsibilities, including the administrator for basketball. Speaking of Mullens, here at Oregon, he has a member of his staff who is the administrator for football. This is very common in intercollegiate athletics.

You're mischaracterizing again.

Mitch Barnhart was taken out of all negotiations for basketball after the Gillispie hire. He was a PR suit sitting at the table. Cal does not WANT to go through Mitch Barnhart, and he preferred Peevy, making Peevy the athletic director of men's basketball without the title. You can ignore that, and I'm sure you'll continue, but it's not a common theme. Athletic directors don't give up their biggest sport and defer to an assistant. Mitch Barnhart has absolutely nothing to do with baskrtball since the Caliapri hire. It's damning on his overall resume.

I agree from a business/administration/Presidents point of view, he's good to go. But the way they are looking at it will ensure WE NEVER COMPETE IN FOOTBALL. I mean, it's that simple. And no disrespect intended, but fans like you don't help. From a business standpoint, having fans like you is excellent. They don't have to compete, they get sec pie money, and you are happy. GREAT BUSINESS PRODUCT.

Mitch should be gone "if" winning is your goal. As a fan, that's my goal. Winning, and winning where it matters. I'm absolutely ashamed at some of our football fans. Losers, with a losers mentality.

You live in Oregon yes? I'm sure you enjoy Oregon football and have that to watch. You seem to work for the university in some capacity.
I watch UK football only. I go to UK football games only. My family and I have invested, as in dollars, interest in Kentucky football. You and I? We aren't the same type of fan.

Please don't speak for UK football fans. You don't believe UK fans are entitled to competing in football. You feel Mitch does good enough for you and some "academic" president.

That's not good enough for most of us. We should leave it at that and respect those of us who spend our money on this abomination and demand a better product.
 
When an athletic director is pulled from all basketball decisions, and Mitch was, there is a problem. He has zero to do with baskrtball, as has been verified over and over. You have no answer for that.
What is your proof of that, other than saying it over and over and over?
 
For those who insist Barnhart had nothing to do with hiring Cal, here are some reports to the contrary. I've asked this over and over, that one of you give me something - a newspaper account, a blogger, your Uncle Denny who eavesdropped, something, anything - to corroborate your story. Crickets. Here you go:

First, from a Tipton column on the process:

Barnhart and UK President Lee Todd will be the driving forces in the search for a coach to succeed Billy Gillispie, who was fired on Friday. Pratt sees himself as someone who can bring an insider’s basketball knowledge to the process.

“I’m not advocating anybody,” he said on Saturday. “I’m looking at the big picture for them.”

Pratt is willing to do whatever Barnhart and Todd feel can be of help — make a call, voice an opinion.

When UK looked for a coach two years ago, Barnhart used little outside input. Two trusted lieutenants from the UK Athletic Department and an outside search firm helped him hire Gillispie.

At this year’s Southeastern Conference Tournament, Barnhart noted the importance of learning and adjusting to life experiences. Pratt’s involvement sends the signal that the UK AD will practice what he preached by making the process less insular.

“I think Mitch is pretty prepared for this thing,” Pratt said. “Like all ADs, they all have short lists.”

Second, from Cal's press conference when he was hired, Cal confirms what Tipton says:

Q. You mentioned a little bit about what the last 48 hours were like for you. Could you walk us through the process when you first got involved with Kentucky, how it all played out from there.

COACH CALIPARI: Well, I got the call, Would I have an interest in this job? I said, I absolutely would have an interest. But I also said, If it takes a long time, I have no interest. If there's any doubt, I have no interest. But if you guys want to do this, I do have an interest because it would be a dream job for me. I got the call that Dr. Todd and Mitch wanted to meet with me on Monday, and I said no, we're going to have to meet earlier than that. We went through the process of having a meeting. Mike Pratt was there. Do you mind me telling? He was a former coach. I see him in the back. We had things in common in people that we worked with, had worked with Mike. From that meeting, it was, Call me, get back, then from there it went fast. With all did our due diligence. I did mine. I did mine.


From an interview Lee Todd gave at the 2011 final four:

“I know you’ve got some concerns about Cal,” Dr. Todd recalled Barnhart saying. “He’s going to be in a hotel for three hours in Chicago. I’ve got a plane lined up in Bardstown, Ky. Nobody will know we go. And we’re gonna go hire him.”

From an interview Cal gave when notified he'd made the Hall of Fame:

“I don't know,” he went on. “If Dr. (Lee) Todd and (UK athletic director) Mitch (Barnhart) didn't come to me and say, ‘Let's talk about this Kentucky job,' if this happens. If I'm not at Kentucky, I'm not sure it happens, maybe it does, I don't know.”

From Cal's speech at the Hall of Fame induction ceremony:

Then I received the call that all coaches wait for: Mitch Barnhart calls me from Kentucky. He calls and asks if I’m interested in their job, but he also said, “I want you to understand this is a different place.” And he was right.

Mitch, his wife, Connie, are here with the president at the time, Dr. Todd, and his wife, Patsy, are all here tonight. Let me thank them for placing their faith in me.


If Cal doesn't like Barnhart, he surely has a hard time showing it - giving him that much credit on arguably the biggest night of his life, as he's inducted into the HoF. You'll notice he didn't mention Pratt. Which is odd, considering how Pratt single-handedly engineered the whole thing!

It's pretty clear how this worked out, for anyone with an iota of common sense. Barnhart screwed up the BG hire by doing it himself. He heard that criticism, wanted to involve others, and trusted Pratt. Pratt was involved, making calls, acting as a go-between perhaps at first. Soon, though, Barnhart was the one who told Todd they should and would hire Cal, and made the call to Cal to ask if he was interested. Cal - read the above accounts - confirms this often. Again, I say, if Barnhart "hates Cal", if Cal "doesn't like Barnhart", if Cal has had Barnhart "removed from basketball operations", then all of the above quotes make no sense, and all of those quoted must be drunk or insane.

Some knucklehead somewhere, no doubt one who fancies himself important, heard that Pratt was involved, added 2+2 and got 5 and deduced that must mean the boosters have taken over and Barnhart was pushed aside and had nothing to do with the hire. Which is idiocy.
 
Would LOVE to see the transcript of the "call" Billy Clyde received from Mitch.[laughing]

He never did "understand this is a different place" until it was too late.:weary:
 
You're mischaracterizing again.

Mitch Barnhart was taken out of all negotiations for basketball after the Gillispie hire. He was a PR suit sitting at the table. Cal does not WANT to go through Mitch Barnhart, and he preferred Peevy, making Peevy the athletic director of men's basketball without the title. You can ignore that, and I'm sure you'll continue, but it's not a common theme. Athletic directors don't give up their biggest sport and defer to an assistant. Mitch Barnhart has absolutely nothing to do with baskrtball since the Caliapri hire. It's damning on his overall resume.

I agree from a business/administration/Presidents point of view, he's good to go. But the way they are looking at it will ensure WE NEVER COMPETE IN FOOTBALL. I mean, it's that simple. And no disrespect intended, but fans like you don't help. From a business standpoint, having fans like you is excellent. They don't have to compete, they get sec pie money, and you are happy. GREAT BUSINESS PRODUCT.

Mitch should be gone "if" winning is your goal. As a fan, that's my goal. Winning, and winning where it matters. I'm absolutely ashamed at some of our football fans. Losers, with a losers mentality.

You live in Oregon yes? I'm sure you enjoy Oregon football and have that to watch. You seem to work for the university in some capacity.
I watch UK football only. I go to UK football games only. My family and I have invested, as in dollars, interest in Kentucky football. You and I? We aren't the same type of fan.

Please don't speak for UK football fans. You don't believe UK fans are entitled to competing in football. You feel Mitch does good enough for you and some "academic" president.

That's not good enough for most of us. We should leave it at that and respect those of us who spend our money on this abomination and demand a better product.

Thanks for the post. I want to be clear in that I think Mitch has made some major mistakes as AD, most notably hiring BCG and giving Stoops the extension which will be almost impossible for us to make any sort of move next year and most likely the year after if things don't improve. I agree 100% that from a fans perspective, he isn't the most desireable (or the worst to some).

My posts concerning Mitch and him not going anywhere because he is a President's dream is to make people aware that the person that counts the most, his boss, is happy with the AD. It's not to say that fans should be, it's to say that he isn't going anywhere unless he decides to leave on his own. For a lot of people on this board, they don't know the ins and outs of University Administrations and Athletics Departments. I have worked at 3 universities, spent 8 years working in Intercollegiate Athletics, and the last 7 working at the University of Oregon, where my supervisor chaired the search committee that hired Rob Mullens a few years ago. I always enjoy when people who have certain backgrounds can provide information that I probably didn't think of. I enjoy hearing people with a coaching background talk about mistakes the coaches make on formations, decisions, etc. It's enlightening to me.

I will tell you that it is very common for the head basketball and/or football coach to not report to the AD. Just up the road at Louisville, Pitino and Petrino do not report directly to the Jurich. They actually report to Kevin Miller, the Executive Associate AD. As I mentioned, here at Oregon, Helfrich doesn't report to Mullens, he reports to another person on staff who works for Mullens. There are many examples of this. The Athletic Director job has changed drastically through the years and that's why you see universities going a completely different direction when hiring AD's than you used to. You are very invovled in so many aspects of a University, that you intrust others to oversee many, if not all of the coaches. Do you have a say in everything? absolutely. Are they in the day-to-day management of every aspect of every sport? absolutely not.

Trust me when i say I am sick of the losing too, but I am also a realist and know Mitch isn't going anywhere. That's why I chime in on posts that say Mitch should be fired and try and give a perspective (even if it's not popular), that others don't give or know about.

My head isn't in the sand in all of this. Prime was calling me out yesterday about not having answers and just disagreeing with people. In short, I do have a strategy that I think will work, but it invovled thinking outside the box, and quite honestly, Mitch isn't the guy to do that. I would welcome a change at the top, I just don't think it will happen unlessMitch decides to do it on his own.
 
BTW, for the record, my opinion is fairly weak. I have never had any strong views one way or the other on MB. Even if it is true that he didn't go after Cal and was "forced" into it as some have said, I can at least understand why he was reluctant. I probably would have been as well.

But, on the other hand, I have NO idea how in the world we ended up with a problem like BCG. It is hard to imagine that some of the bad info wasn't known. I hope MB learned from that mistake.

it's called "hiring a search firm" and going by what they say
i cringe every time i see or hear someone suggest that for FB

Yeah, he's really done great things for the football program. He's run that money maker into the ground .

Really? please tell us all how he ran it into the ground
tell us all how great our facilities and our FB program were before MB got here
i am guessing you are one of our fans that loved just getting 6-7 wins a year and going to some insignificant bowl
 
No it wasn't...NO HEAD COACHING EXPERIENCE...why do people still think joker was 'a good hire' that is laughable.
You mean like Jimbo Fisher, Chip Kelley and Bret Bielema? The fact is AT THE TIME the coaches in waiting thing had become a new thing to do and with the circumstances at UK it really did seem like a good fit for it with Joker's success as OC, history with the program, recruiting success as recruiting coordinator, and the fact Mitch wanted to elevate a black coach in the SEC. All of that came together to make it a reasonable move and a lot of us thought the same AT THE TIME.

Mitch's fault if any in that was waiting too long to cut the ties as he is a very loyal person. But the move didn't seem that out of place AT THE TIME.
 
My question to those of you who have more experience than I do is WHY would UK ever need to hire a search firm?

Let's be honest, this board could come up with a good list of names and have it down to 3 or 4 within a week. If we can do it, why can't our AD with all of his staff do it??

It was obvious from the last search that some of these firms are incompetent to do what is necessary. Otherwise, how can anyone explain BCG?
 
My question to those of you who have more experience than I do is WHY would UK ever need to hire a search firm?

Let's be honest, this board could come up with a good list of names and have it down to 3 or 4 within a week. If we can do it, why can't our AD with all of his staff do it??

It was obvious from the last search that some of these firms are incompetent to do what is necessary. Otherwise, how can anyone explain BCG?

a lot of schools use them (i have no idea why)
i read that UGA is hiring a search firm for their new FB coach
 
Thanks for the post. I want to be clear in that I think Mitch has made some major mistakes as AD, most notably hiring BCG and giving Stoops the extension which will be almost impossible for us to make any sort of move next year and most likely the year after if things don't improve. I agree 100% that from a fans perspective, he isn't the most desireable (or the worst to some).

My posts concerning Mitch and him not going anywhere because he is a President's dream is to make people aware that the person that counts the most, his boss, is happy with the AD. It's not to say that fans should be, it's to say that he isn't going anywhere unless he decides to leave on his own. For a lot of people on this board, they don't know the ins and outs of University Administrations and Athletics Departments. I have worked at 3 universities, spent 8 years working in Intercollegiate Athletics, and the last 7 working at the University of Oregon, where my supervisor chaired the search committee that hired Rob Mullens a few years ago. I always enjoy when people who have certain backgrounds can provide information that I probably didn't think of. I enjoy hearing people with a coaching background talk about mistakes the coaches make on formations, decisions, etc. It's enlightening to me.

I will tell you that it is very common for the head basketball and/or football coach to not report to the AD. Just up the road at Louisville, Pitino and Petrino do not report directly to the Jurich. They actually report to Kevin Miller, the Executive Associate AD. As I mentioned, here at Oregon, Helfrich doesn't report to Mullens, he reports to another person on staff who works for Mullens. There are many examples of this. The Athletic Director job has changed drastically through the years and that's why you see universities going a completely different direction when hiring AD's than you used to. You are very invovled in so many aspects of a University, that you intrust others to oversee many, if not all of the coaches. Do you have a say in everything? absolutely. Are they in the day-to-day management of every aspect of every sport? absolutely not.

Trust me when i say I am sick of the losing too, but I am also a realist and know Mitch isn't going anywhere. That's why I chime in on posts that say Mitch should be fired and try and give a perspective (even if it's not popular), that others don't give or know about.

My head isn't in the sand in all of this. Prime was calling me out yesterday about not having answers and just disagreeing with people. In short, I do have a strategy that I think will work, but it invovled thinking outside the box, and quite honestly, Mitch isn't the guy to do that. I would welcome a change at the top, I just don't think it will happen unlessMitch decides to do it on his own.

Fair enough.
 
What is your proof of that, other than saying it over and over and over?

This has already been proven, even by the one and only Matt Jones. I've personally spoken to Pratt about it at ole miss 3 or 4 years ago. I talked to leach about it. I've spoken to people who know. My family and I are in an alumni chapter and speak to lots of UK people all the time. One thing is certain, Mitch is t in charge of basketball, and Cal doesn't like him. Believe it, don't believe it, read fluff articles and ignore the proof. I don't care.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ZaytovenCat
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT