• The KillerFrogs

Bye Donati

What has he done that makes you think he has done well? He lost our baseball coach and almost lost the current coach. He screwed up the exit of our most successful football coach to hire a lame duck coach. He has held on to Jamie Dixon who hasn't done squat. What has he done?
I still haven't seen anybody explain exactly what Donati could have done to create a wholly different outcome here.
 

Eight

Member
I still haven't seen anybody explain exactly what Donati could have done to create a wholly different outcome here.

bingo, we keep hearing how he should have handled it different and how gary was basically given no choice but to resign immediately and yet not real details as to what could have been done differently
 
bingo, we keep hearing how he should have handled it different and how gary was basically given no choice but to resign immediately and yet not real details as to what could have been done differently
As for the firing, he was simply doing what he was tasked to do by his superiors (though I think our leadership at the board level made a mistake having Boschini and Donati deliver the blow). That's all water under the bridge now.

Now as for the hiring of Dykes...

Donati can't really 'sell' a program to people he can't talk to...especially when they are in the middle of a season. Dykes benefited by being 40 miles away and having coached here. He already knew the lay of the land and who and what he'd be getting into. He could drive over one evening to meet with the committee/AD/Boschini and nobody would notice. Advantage Dykes. The others could only mostly rely on perception and reputation -- and Donati couldn't do anything at this point to change that without getting them here to campus and putting the full court press on them, a task made impossible by the early signing period.

I'm not thrilled by this hire. There are a lot of question marks. Maybe Dykes is a guy who is just hitting his stride as a coach, maybe he's not. I do think there is a talent base here that, with a new breath of fresh air, has the potential to be competitive next year. But I don't see how a different AD could have magically produced the home run hire so many are demanding
 

HFrog1999

Member
WTH get your own profile photo.


Spider-Man-Gif.gif
 

OmniscienceFrog

Full Member
What has he done that makes you think he has done well? He lost our baseball coach and almost lost the current coach. He screwed up the exit of our most successful football coach to hire a lame duck coach. He has held on to Jamie Dixon who hasn't done squat. What has he done?
What lame duck coach is he going to hire. Do you have any clue what "lame duck" means?

He didn't have a damned thing to do with the previous baseball coach leaving. That was going to happen even if whoever you think is the top AD in the country was here. How did he almost lose the current baseball coach?
 

gofor2

Active Member
What has he done that makes you think he has done well? He lost our baseball coach and almost lost the current coach. He screwed up the exit of our most successful football coach to hire a lame duck coach. He has held on to Jamie Dixon who hasn't done squat. What has he done?
Well coach Schlossnagle wanted out and it wasn't a secret, either. He had been coaching here since 2003 and was getting the itch to make a change as far back as 2016, perhaps even earlier than that.
I do agree the exit of GP could have been handled better, but with time, some of that will heal.
Dixons first 8 years at Pitt were really good, then his last 5 were meh and coming to the B12 just hasn't worked out for him yet. To be fair, the two coaches prior to Dixon just weren't getting it done. Christian was meh in the MWC and the move to the Big12 proved rather brutal. That happened to coincide when Trent showed up - and the program sank even further, which was kind of expected based on the move up in competition. So Dixon has had his work cut out for him and is already a massive improvement over Trent. Unless they bottom out, which I find unlikely, Dixon will get another 2-3 years to show what he can do before his seat gets hot.
 

gofor2

Active Member
As for the firing, he was simply doing what he was tasked to do by his superiors

That's a strange management dynamic. Most board members don't know [ #2020 ] about running athletic departments and its likely they got on the board for being an expert in something else. I would think the AD, being the expert in his department, others would seek his opinion on matters. I don't see why someone that is not an expert, would be telling an expert what to do.
I don't claim to know the inner workings and communication dynamics at the top, but there is little point in bringing in someone to fill a specific role, to then go over their head and tell them what to do. I'm not implying that an AD should operate in a vacuum and I'm sure as many organizations work, things are collaborated on with others. Still seems odd to me to go over a guys head and task him on who he fires and hires, though.

Jerry Jones comes to mind. He may think he knows a lot about winning super bowls. How has that worked out for him since getting into a pissing match with Johnson?
 
Last edited:

froginaustin

Active Member
That's a strange management dynamic. I would think the AD would be the expert in his department, and others would seek his opinion on matters. Certainly, your superior can tell you they don't like the direction that things are going - and you have discussions and make plans and what not. Good communication is always key. That said, most board members don't know [ #2020 ] about athletics.

but at least a handful know a great deal about athletics. And pay a significant portion of the bills for same. And are effectively the ultimate deciders for matters athletic. At least the big deals, like hiring-firing head football coaches.
 

gofor2

Active Member
but at least a handful know a great deal about athletics.
I find that hard to believe. It would be a rarity for most schools. Board members are not typically made of people who have excelled in athletics and running athletic departments. Their expertise can be all over the map. I guess we are just uncommon :)
 
Last edited:

BrewingFrog

Was I supposed to type something here?
That's a strange management dynamic. I would think the AD would be the expert in his department, and others would seek his opinion on matters. Certainly, your superior can tell you they don't like the direction that things are going - and you have discussions and make plans and what not. Good communication is always key. That said, most board members don't know [ #2020 ] about athletics.
1.) 21 years is a long time. It isn't surprising at all that there's no institutional memory of firing/hiring a Head Football Coach.
2.) ADJD likely consulted others in his peer group for guidance, just as they have likely asked his counsel on matters they have dealt with.
3.) We don't know the internal deliberations because ADJD maintains good comms discipline. This is both good and bad, in that while your secrets stay secret, rumors and crap run rampant in the absence of facts.
4.) Board Members got there because they were successful in a particular area of expertise. What many successful people fail to realize is that this expertise does not translate well to other areas. This is why small aircraft are know as "Doctor/Lawyer Killers" because they know it all, and will fly into a hillside convinced that they are right, while the level-flight indicator is a lying little [ hundin].
 
I find that hard to believe. It would be a rarity for most schools. Board members are not typically made of people who have excelled in athletics and running athletic departments. Their expertise can be all over the map. I guess we are just uncommon :)
TCU's situation is not unique. Everybody is accountable to someone, and they get their general direction from someone. This is how most large businesses are run. Donati and Boschini may have the most expertise, but they answer to, and they are at the whim of, a board of directors on the big issues.

Look at the Apple board of directors and tell me how many of those people really know operating systems, microchips, industrial design, etc. Yet they have oversight of the CEO and President. The skill that they bring to the table is the ability to see the big picture without getting twisted up with the details.

It would be a tragic mistake to let an AD run off and hire a coach without oversight and direction. There are no ADs out there making unilateral hiring decisions for football coaches.
 

gofor2

Active Member
Everybody is accountable to someone,

It would be a tragic mistake to let an AD run off and hire a coach without oversight and direction. There are no ADs out there making unilateral hiring decisions for football coaches.
I agree, there does need to be accountability and oversight and I would add collaboration to that as well. Those are cornerstones of a successful organization. I'm not suggesting that an AD should get to make decisions in a vacuum. I'm thinking more along the lines of the AD evaluating his staff and department in regular intervals, then having discussions with his bosses on his findings. Something like "I think GP has taken us as far as he can go and we need to make a change". Then further discussion and a green or red light given. I suppose that can go both directions.
 

lowfrog

Active Member
That's a strange management dynamic. Most board members don't know [ #2020 ] about running athletic departments and its likely they got on the board for being an expert in something else. I would think the AD, being the expert in his department, others would seek his opinion on matters. I don't see why someone that is not an expert, would be telling an expert what to do.
I don't claim to know the inner workings and communication dynamics at the top, but there is little point in bringing in someone to fill a specific role, to then go over their head and tell them what to do. I'm not implying that an AD should operate in a vacuum and I'm sure as many organizations work, things are collaborated on with others. Still seems odd to me to go over a guys head and task him on who he fires and hires, though.

Jerry Jones comes to mind. He may think he knows a lot about running a football team. How has that worked out for him?
Actually, it's worked out well for Jerry. He is much more wealthy now than he was before and the Dallas Cowboy's franchise is worth much more now than it has ever been. It's not all about winning football games. It's about how you define winning.
 
Top