Well how about that, I stand corrected.
Well how about that, I stand corrected.
John Candy wrote:
It doesn't happen in football and basketball before practice even begins!!!
PRACTICE PROBABLY BEGAN. Jeez dude. 8 hours a week can start almost right after school starts. The girls probably got about two or so weeks of practice, or about 15-20 hours. Sure, that's not a lot, but think before you speak
If you read the newspaper article you would see that they had began working out 2 weeks prior with the strength and conditioning coaches - not track coaches.
Le sigh wrote:
For the record "dye". The dye has been cast.
it's "die."
If they saw something in these kids that they genuinely didn't like, I can understand why she wanted rid of them. It is not an easy thing to take over an established program (TN's recent struggles notwithstanding) and win all the athletes over. If a kid felt especially loyal to the old coach they might just make it difficult...and the coach has every right to nip that in the bud.
But the move seems calculated specifically to keep these young women from showing upon another SEC roster where they could hurt TN in a conference meet...and that is what makes it so awful.
You'd have to be a real narcissist to pull a stunt like that. Oh wait...
She needs to surround herself with loyalty. If she has athletes or coaches who are not that's a cancer. She may have given the most professional reason for the cut. It's easier and more PC to say that the girls don't stack up in the SEC than to just say that she didn't want those bit ches around because they were constantly undermining her workouts.
She cut people that weren't performing. Sucks, but good for her. Welcome to the real world. New bosses come in and ax people. I commend her for her commitment to excellence, and not pc bs.
road rashed wrote:
She cut people that weren't performing. Sucks, but good for her. Welcome to the real world. New bosses come in and ax people. I commend her for her commitment to excellence, and not pc bs.
Good to see everyone is READING the article before posting nonsense.
road rashed wrote:
She cut people that weren't performing. Sucks, but good for her. Welcome to the real world. New bosses come in and ax people. I commend her for her commitment to excellence, and not pc bs.
Please cite where it says any of the 6 weren't performing.
People suggesting college athletic programs are a business and should be run as such have a compelling argument. But a business decision should have a justifiable reason behind it. Sullivan's decision to cut 6 athletes is cruel, unethical, etc. But it also seems incredibly dumb from a performance perspective. Ignoring the bad press, which is significant, what do you gain in cutting six athletes? You're banking on them leaving to a non-SEC school (which seems unlikely for the 3 walk-ons assuming they're from the area) after the first semester. Most likely she'll still have to fund whatever scholarship money they were originally entitled.
And I still think you have to have a reason to take away scholarships a month into the school year. Still waiting for someone with knowledge on the matter to back that up.
They did not take away their scholarships for THIS year. They just kicked them off the team without giving them a chance because they wanted them to quit now so the school can bring in immediate NCAA point scoring kids at semester.
tse wrote:
road rashed wrote:She cut people that weren't performing. Sucks, but good for her. Welcome to the real world. New bosses come in and ax people. I commend her for her commitment to excellence, and not pc bs.
Please cite where it says any of the 6 weren't performing.
People suggesting college athletic programs are a business and should be run as such have a compelling argument. But a business decision should have a justifiable reason behind it. Sullivan's decision to cut 6 athletes is cruel, unethical, etc. But it also seems incredibly dumb from a performance perspective. Ignoring the bad press, which is significant, what do you gain in cutting six athletes? You're banking on them leaving to a non-SEC school (which seems unlikely for the 3 walk-ons assuming they're from the area) after the first semester. Most likely she'll still have to fund whatever scholarship money they were originally entitled.
And I still think you have to have a reason to take away scholarships a month into the school year. Still waiting for someone with knowledge on the matter to back that up.
This has been unbelievable to read with regards to the administration allowing Beth to do this but the following are facts.
1. A scholarship is renewable yearly and can be non-renewed for any reason whatsoever by NCAA rules.
2. Most every school in the entire country, and moreso when not talking about football or basketball, make very clear to coaches that they can't reduce aid for any reason other than academic ineligibility or breaking the law.
I was surprised that BAS took the job at Tennessee, but to her credit, probably likes the challenge of building something in the best conference in the country. She is certainly political, savvy, and evil to do so, just surprised the Administration is allowing her to have this little patience.
Because that team has been underachieving for years now. It sends a message. "I don't care who you are, where you came from or what kind of aid you're on. Either you meet expectations or you will no longer be allowed to represent UT". It's not unethical, it's not a running club it's a varsity sport. The same decisions are made in the corporate world and they are very effective. She's has the extremely important job of creating a culture, and what she does now will impact her team forever. Tennessee has the potential to be a good team, but lately they've just been a sorority.
tse wrote:
[quote]road rashed wrote:
But a business decision should have a justifiable reason behind it. Sullivan's decision to cut 6 athletes is cruel, unethical, etc. But it also seems incredibly dumb from a performance perspective. Ignoring the bad press, which is significant, what do you gain in cutting six athletes?
Loyalty wrote:
Because that team has been underachieving for years now. It sends a message. "I don't care who you are, where you came from or what kind of aid you're on. Either you meet expectations or you will no longer be allowed to represent UT". It's not unethical, it's not a running club it's a varsity sport. The same decisions are made in the corporate world and they are very effective. She's has the extremely important job of creating a culture, and what she does now will impact her team forever. Tennessee has the potential to be a good team, but lately they've just been a sorority.
tse wrote:[quote]road rashed wrote:
But a business decision should have a justifiable reason behind it. Sullivan's decision to cut 6 athletes is cruel, unethical, etc. But it also seems incredibly dumb from a performance perspective. Ignoring the bad press, which is significant, what do you gain in cutting six athletes?
So you are saying that it sends a message to drop six freshmen (one of which she tried to get to Penn State), before they have really been a part of the program, after they gave up other opportunities to go to Tennessee???
Actually, you are right, it definitely sends a message. Not the one you think it does though. It sends a message of low ethics and stupidity. It sends a message to any kid, parent or coach to stay away from Tennessee.
[quote]Loyalty wrote:
Because that team has been underachieving for years now. It sends a message. "I don't care who you are, where you came from or what kind of aid you're on. Either you meet expectations or you will no longer be allowed to represent UT". It's not unethical, it's not a running club it's a varsity sport. The same decisions are made in the corporate world and they are very effective. She's has the extremely important job of creating a culture, and what she does now will impact her team forever. Tennessee has the potential to be a good team, but lately they've just been a sorority.
[quote]tse wrote:
Again, cheers on the good job of READING before posting. "3 signed freshman were cut just after arriving to school" How can 3 kids that have been on campus for 2 weeks underachieve?
Jay Bilas weighing in on it via twitter:
Jay Bilas @JayBilas · 19h 19 hours ago
Were I Tennessee, I'd decline comment, too...out of embarrassment.
NCAA members, tell us more about athlete welfare.
Reply0 replies Retweet215 retweets215 Favorite143 favorites143
More
and this:
Jay Bilas retweeted
Deadspin @Deadspin · Oct 13
New Tennessee track coach cuts freshmen three weeks into the school year, because "I wouldn't have recruited you":
View summary
Reply0 replies Retweet406 retweets406 Favorite176 favorites176
More
This thing is growing in press and outrage.
http://trackandfieldnews.com/discussion/showthread.php?143693-Alford-Sullivan-
(Tenn)-cuts-Six-athletes-2-weeks-in&s=31aeb3c60ef07c718a957fc1d539bada
http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=7&f=1372&t=13246990
http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=7&f=1372&t=13251496
http://www.si.com/more-sports/2014/10/13/tennessee-track-coach-cuts-scholarship-athletes
Loyalty wrote:
Because that team has been underachieving for years now. It sends a message. "I don't care who you are, where you came from or what kind of aid you're on. Either you meet expectations or you will no longer be allowed to represent UT". It's not unethical, it's not a running club it's a varsity sport. The same decisions are made in the corporate world and they are very effective. She's has the extremely important job of creating a culture, and what she does now will impact her team forever. Tennessee has the potential to be a good team, but lately they've just been a sorority.
You're just talking to yourself now. How were any of the 6 allowed to "meet expectations" or "underperform" or as you said?
In the "corporate world", costs and benefits are analyzed and used to make a decision. I fully support universities cutting T&F if it no longer makes fiscal sense to support the team. But you're just rambling about capitalism and winning and feelings. Cutting 6 athletes before they could prove themselves doesn't give BAS any tangible benefit. It also is difficult to justify, especially from your criteria of "proving yourself" or "underperforming".
Fred Gwynne wrote:
Since Sullivan has been coaching for a long time why is there no former athletes that ran for her saying anything positive or negative about what it is like to be coached by her.
I know she is generally not liked but is that by former runners of hers or just observers?
Former athlete of hers. No one is surprised by this. All my former teammates I've talked to have said "sounds about right for her". It's about her being the greatest (she thinks shes a gift to the world). Athletes are an means to an end to her.
malmo wrote:
26mi235 wrote:Next year in the Big Ten this would not be allowed.
I want to see what malmo has to say!
Only an evil person would f**k with the lives of 18 year-olds. She is the polar-opposite of all of the great coaches I've been privileged to meet during my lifetime. Great coaches all have the same psychological profile. Their motivations are all about and for their athletes. Bad coaches are all about themselves. BAS is all about one and only one thing -- the creeper in the mirror.
I don't see how Tennessee could possibly be "the vision" of any young athletes in the future. The fine print at the bottom of the scholarship contract is now exposed in BOLD-FACED TYPE at the top.
Anyone who goes to Tennessee in the future is like the hapless fool who walks into an abandoned house on a dark and stormy night. If you see blood seeping from out between the seams of wallpaper, and you hear noises upstairs, you don't continue on to investigate -- you turn around and run like hell!
Looking at her endless creeper-grinning self-promo face shots, if she was an actor she would be in constant demand for dark protagonist roles - menopausal mid-western housewife axe-murderers/psychopathic cheerleader moms and such.
Image:
http://mediaassets.knoxnews.com/photo/2014/10/11/alfordsullivan_8910636_ver1.0_640_480.jpg
She put some weight on lol. It should be noted that literally no one at Penn State was upset that she left. Most were actually relieved for a fresh start from her evil ways.
