ouhoops.com
forums roster schedule stats rankings rpi bracketology big xII standings recruiting ouhoopstv

Go Back   OUHoops > Main Category > Women's Hoops Talk

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-11-2018, 08:51 PM   #1
Sooner81
Walk-on
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 206
Default Serious question about Sherri and 1.1 million salary

New to this board but I have watched Sherri become a second tier coach and OU ladies a second tier program in the Big-12 the last 4 or 5 years (not on Baylors level or WV and now not OSU). I hear Traber say that she is the most over paid coach in the country. So what is everyoneís opinion on this. Iím not bashing her but I can tell you I donít watch many of their games like I used to because of the mediocrity. She does make over a million a year and I donít see us compete at that level. Should we stay with her or could OU get a lot more energetic coach , recruiting etc, for that sum of money? Used to love watching because she had the talent to, at times, play with about anyone. Has she gotten lazy in recruiting or what has happened and DOES she deserve that kind of cash? Thoughts???
Sooner81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2018, 08:53 PM   #2
Oliver Hardy
All-American
 
Oliver Hardy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,095
Default

Oh, brother. This ought to generate some traffic.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Oliver Hardy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2018, 09:21 PM   #3
sybarite
National Champion
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 14,452
Default Re: Serious question about Sherri and 1.1 million salary

I thought these went to another board?
sybarite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2018, 09:24 PM   #4
Oliver Hardy
All-American
 
Oliver Hardy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,095
Default

I’m sure that’s what you’d like.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Oliver Hardy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2018, 08:10 AM   #5
BanjoCharley
Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,272
Default Re: Serious question about Sherri and 1.1 million salary

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sooner81 View Post
...I hear Traber say that she is the most over paid coach in the country...
Anyone who quotes Traber loses all credibility.
__________________
While you are entitled to your own opinions, you are not entitled to your own facts.
BanjoCharley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2018, 08:16 AM   #6
Sooner81
Walk-on
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 206
Default Re: Serious question about Sherri and 1.1 million salary

Sybarite, didnít know there is another board for this but thought this was the OU womenís hoops board so it seemed an appropriate topic.

Banjo, wow thatís harsh. I have thought this myself about Sherri but I will take note that you donít like Traber. I sure donít think I personally donít have credibility because of this but thatís on you.
Sooner81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2018, 08:16 AM   #7
tycat947
Elite Eight
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Norman, OK
Posts: 5,130
Default Re: Serious question about Sherri and 1.1 million salary

Quote:
Originally Posted by BanjoCharley View Post
Anyone who quotes Traber loses all credibility.
You got that right!!!
__________________
Quote:
If you spent half as much time in defending the team you claim to support, posters here might actually believe you're an OU fan. You're all over any mention of ............., but rarely say anything good about the Sooners. Even when you do, you're quick to throw in a backhanded positive to dilute its impact.
Quote:
...They are never around to support the team during good times but they never miss an opportunity to complain.
Quote:
Some people think being negative makes them sound like an expert.
tycat947 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2018, 08:25 AM   #8
Sooner81
Walk-on
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 206
Default Re: Serious question about Sherri and 1.1 million salary

Tycat and others, please remove your hate for Traber and I guess your hate for me out of it and please tell me your thoughts. Itís Sherri, the last 5 years, worth 1.1 million per year? I say I donít think so.

So I started this thread for a true discussion on the topic Not for people to attack Traber or myself. Also, the attendance is Way down so maybe very few care about OU womenís basketball anymore and if that is true, as it seems to be, then that brings more credibility to the argument against her high salary.

Any response on the topic??
Sooner81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2018, 09:44 AM   #9
Oliver Hardy
All-American
 
Oliver Hardy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,095
Default Re: Serious question about Sherri and 1.1 million salary

I actually don't care what her salary is. Whatever a person can contract in way of salary for any job, I say good for them.

I don't even care about debating whether she deserves that money.

All I want to talk about is the program, the players and the result.

The players, the recruiting and the play has been mediocre the last few years, inconsistent and troublesome. The result has really been nothing to write home about when you consider Oklahoma's history since Sherri's arrival.

Still, as others point out, we make the tournament and have winning records.

My points are this: player performance, coaching, consistency and the end result are not what we expect at OU.

Period. That's it.

Our recruiting seems to have gotten better the last couple of seasons, so let's wait a couple of more years and see what happens. Doing that isn't going to kill us, it may just delay a complete return to prominence again.
Oliver Hardy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2018, 11:25 AM   #10
scrybe
All-American
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,906
Default Re: Serious question about Sherri and 1.1 million salary

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sooner81 View Post
I started this thread for a true discussion on the topic
Of course you did.
__________________
Sent from my MacMini using my left index finger.
scrybe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2018, 11:29 AM   #11
inoref
All-Conference
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,097
Default Re: Serious question about Sherri and 1.1 million salary

I think OU should pay her more..
inoref is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2018, 11:44 AM   #12
sybarite
National Champion
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 14,452
Default Re: Serious question about Sherri and 1.1 million salary

I don't know how many times we have had this discussion on this board, and it ends up being just another thread to complain about Sherri.

I think Lady Gaga makes too much money. I can't believe Mark Zuckenberg and Mark Cuban got over a billion dollars for an internet site. How dumb are people who are out of work to buy Yankee tickets to see a $250,000,000 shortstop, even though he was pretty good a year or two earlier? It's unbelieveable that New Kids on the Block had four teenage boys worth about $75,000,000 each off of a couple of albums. Can you believe how much was made off of Star Wars?

Then, we get into colleges in which some faculty make less than highschool teachers. We built schools as soon as we settled the territory. We knew it was important. We even built a university almost immediately. We just never thought to pay the teachers that much. Then, someone discovered that alums would contribute more money if they had a winning football team. Really, is that true?

Have you ever looked at the Endowments of Harvard and Yale and compared them to OU and Alabama? Any guesses which is larger? Harvard could buy Oklahoma and Alabama's football team. But, somehow, we thought they were connected, and the alums invented Bud Wilkinson who was the perfect fit on which to build a program. But, then, half the colleges in the country had now decided that it was more important to pay football coaches than Nobel Prize winners.

Sometime, go out into the faculty parking lots to see what they are driving. Then, go to the lot for the coaches and the football players. Fascinating. And, some clown says college professors get rich off of grants proving their case. But, the real purpose of the university, to teach kids to live in our society, is performed by a lot of underpaid people who don't even have the luxury of tenure as much any more since we generated so many PhDs in response to the Viet Nam Era Draft. A bunch of underpaid people are doing a very underappreciated job, but none of the parents visiting their kids at campus really want to meet the faculty, only the coach.

So, there is too much money around the sports program that has no business at an educational institution in the first place. It really doesn't help anyone learn to write proper English, obviously (despite the fact that Bud and Sherri were English teachers), and rarely teaches any history. You wonder what would happen to OU if we went the Harvard route and took pride in our product from the classrooms and research labs. Would we have a $100 billion endowment? I think we finally did hit a billion.

Now, if you are the President of the university or the Athletic Director, you are accustomed to dealing with large sums of money. There is a reason that university professors rarely are invited to the university president's house for dinner (at least since George Lynn Cross who was a botany researcher in his heart). Professors just aren't into the discussions of interest rates, tax shelters, and 501Cs.

Then, you get a wringer thrown at you. You have always maintained a basketball program which lost money. Nobody really came to the games, except for Oklahoma A&M and Kansas. Nobody came to the wrestling matches, except when A&M was in town. Nobody even knew when we had track or swimming meets. I think they had three rows of bench seats for each, mostly empty. But, we kept the swimming teams going until about 1960. I think we either needed a new pool with Olympic dimensions or----, and we decided or. But, we kept track teams, wrestling teams, and a couple of others going, even build a fledgling gymnastics team. Then, suddenly, we got Title IX, and people started screaming about non-revenue sports.

Apparently, nobody noticed that we had always had non-revenue sports. We even had a band that wasn't generating a profit. But, suddenly, some people didn't like it that women's sports didn't generate a profit. Well, we never tried football. Wonder what outcry that would have brought? Now, we resented all of these things that took money away from football, now that profit was the primary purpose of the university, either that or football. It get's confusing. There was a little resentment of this non-football loss of money that didn't seem to be noticed until it became involved with women's sports. The track and wrestling teams weren't closed.

But, someone noticed that nobody came to the women's basketball games. Well, nobody went to the track meets, gymnastics events, swimming meets, or wrestling meets unless A&M was there. But, they closed women's basketball. Now, let's get a picture of relevance. We have a university that is costing a fortune, an athletic department managing millions of dollars, and they are making a decision on peanuts? Kind of reminds me of the guy who declares he can't pay his food bills with a case of beer in his refrigerator.

So, there is a national outcry. You cancelled the women's basketball program, a staple of Title IX, what it was all about. You notice how long it took to undo that. But, twenty-five years later, it still is in the lead paragraph in Wiki about OU women's basketball. Now, what is the price of repairing that image?

You have a retiring university President who has done a masterful job of pulling a lot of new infrastructure into the university. He's talked of creating a group somewhat like Harvard at OU, at least for some students and faculty. He was trying to build a dream. He was looking for a new conference. Everything was about image.

One of the things that he had solved was that he and his AD had got lucky. That image problem they had about closing a program had actually become an asset. The cheap hire they had made, a highschool coach because no well-known coach would have the job, built it into a respected program. But, it was more than just winning. She had generated an image around the program. She became President of the Coaches Association and a Member of the Hall of Fame. Now, exactly what is that worth? Put a price on it.

I suspect that Boren and Joe C were so relieved to have that off their backs that they were willing to pay her double what they are. She didn't approach the university with a gun. They decided what to pay her, what she was worth to them.

It becomes a bit silly to talk of profit and loss when you look at the history of minor sports at OU. If you aren't football, you have operated at a loss. If you operate as a track coach with a bad reputation, you probably won't last long. We have even found that men's basketball coaches who run afoul of the NCAA have a short shelf life. But, wrestling coaches who lose may be here for years, despite the fact that we were a storied program that has won six or seven titles. Just don't hurt the image, become a nuisance. But, if you actually enhance the image by becoming a Hall of Famer, you might be appreciated by those who have bigger fish to fry.

This is a long way to say that Boren and Joe C appear to be quite willing to pay Sherri whatever it takes to keep her happy. They offered it to her. She didn't rob them. They have that monkey off their back. Not only that, a lot of people like the way she does it. Makes them look good. I suspect that if she were as unpleasant as some other coaches, and the coaching community didn't like her, she would be gone.

But, the parts of the wheel that are doing all of the squeaking----I don't know that they think it is even worth greasing. They got the overall machine moving the way they want. There is a lot of squeaking that would have to be done to draw their attention to the difference between #3 and #30 when they are a whole lot more concerned about other matters. You are going to have to wait for it to be a 5-25 team or for Sherri to begin throwing things at refs.
sybarite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2018, 12:10 PM   #13
Oliver Hardy
All-American
 
Oliver Hardy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,095
Default Re: Serious question about Sherri and 1.1 million salary

Slow morning, Syb? That may be longest post you've ever made.

I actually agree by-in-large. They can pay her whatever the heck they want to.

I just want the team to be as great as her salary is. If it isn't, then I have a problem -- but not with the salary.
Oliver Hardy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2018, 12:12 PM   #14
Sooner81
Walk-on
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 206
Default Re: Serious question about Sherri and 1.1 million salary

Quote:
Originally Posted by sybarite View Post
I don't know how many times we have had this discussion on this board, and it ends up being just another thread to complain about Sherri.

I think Lady Gaga makes too much money. I can't believe Mark Zuckenberg and Mark Cuban got over a billion dollars for an internet site. How dumb are people who are out of work to buy Yankee tickets to see a $250,000,000 shortstop, even though he was pretty good a year or two earlier? It's unbelieveable that New Kids on the Block had four teenage boys worth about $75,000,000 each off of a couple of albums. Can you believe how much was made off of Star Wars?

Then, we get into colleges in which some faculty make less than highschool teachers. We built schools as soon as we settled the territory. We knew it was important. We even built a university almost immediately. We just never thought to pay the teachers that much. Then, someone discovered that alums would contribute more money if they had a winning football team. Really, is that true?

Have you ever looked at the Endowments of Harvard and Yale and compared them to OU and Alabama? Any guesses which is larger? Harvard could buy Oklahoma and Alabama's football team. But, somehow, we thought they were connected, and the alums invented Bud Wilkinson who was the perfect fit on which to build a program. But, then, half the colleges in the country had now decided that it was more important to pay football coaches than Nobel Prize winners.

Sometime, go out into the faculty parking lots to see what they are driving. Then, go to the lot for the coaches and the football players. Fascinating. And, some clown says college professors get rich off of grants proving their case. But, the real purpose of the university, to teach kids to live in our society, is performed by a lot of underpaid people who don't even have the luxury of tenure as much any more since we generated so many PhDs in response to the Viet Nam Era Draft. A bunch of underpaid people are doing a very underappreciated job, but none of the parents visiting their kids at campus really want to meet the faculty, only the coach.

So, there is too much money around the sports program that has no business at an educational institution in the first place. It really doesn't help anyone learn to write proper English, obviously (despite the fact that Bud and Sherri were English teachers), and rarely teaches any history. You wonder what would happen to OU if we went the Harvard route and took pride in our product from the classrooms and research labs. Would we have a $100 billion endowment? I think we finally did hit a billion.

Now, if you are the President of the university or the Athletic Director, you are accustomed to dealing with large sums of money. There is a reason that university professors rarely are invited to the university president's house for dinner (at least since George Lynn Cross who was a botany researcher in his heart). Professors just aren't into the discussions of interest rates, tax shelters, and 501Cs.

Then, you get a wringer thrown at you. You have always maintained a basketball program which lost money. Nobody really came to the games, except for Oklahoma A&M and Kansas. Nobody came to the wrestling matches, except when A&M was in town. Nobody even knew when we had track or swimming meets. I think they had three rows of bench seats for each, mostly empty. But, we kept the swimming teams going until about 1960. I think we either needed a new pool with Olympic dimensions or----, and we decided or. But, we kept track teams, wrestling teams, and a couple of others going, even build a fledgling gymnastics team. Then, suddenly, we got Title IX, and people started screaming about non-revenue sports.

Apparently, nobody noticed that we had always had non-revenue sports. We even had a band that wasn't generating a profit. But, suddenly, some people didn't like it that women's sports didn't generate a profit. Well, we never tried football. Wonder what outcry that would have brought? Now, we resented all of these things that took money away from football, now that profit was the primary purpose of the university, either that or football. It get's confusing. There was a little resentment of this non-football loss of money that didn't seem to be noticed until it became involved with women's sports. The track and wrestling teams weren't closed.

But, someone noticed that nobody came to the women's basketball games. Well, nobody went to the track meets, gymnastics events, swimming meets, or wrestling meets unless A&M was there. But, they closed women's basketball. Now, let's get a picture of relevance. We have a university that is costing a fortune, an athletic department managing millions of dollars, and they are making a decision on peanuts? Kind of reminds me of the guy who declares he can't pay his food bills with a case of beer in his refrigerator.

So, there is a national outcry. You cancelled the women's basketball program, a staple of Title IX, what it was all about. You notice how long it took to undo that. But, twenty-five years later, it still is in the lead paragraph in Wiki about OU women's basketball. Now, what is the price of repairing that image?

You have a retiring university President who has done a masterful job of pulling a lot of new infrastructure into the university. He's talked of creating a group somewhat like Harvard at OU, at least for some students and faculty. He was trying to build a dream. He was looking for a new conference. Everything was about image.

One of the things that he had solved was that he and his AD had got lucky. That image problem they had about closing a program had actually become an asset. The cheap hire they had made, a highschool coach because no well-known coach would have the job, built it into a respected program. But, it was more than just winning. She had generated an image around the program. She became President of the Coaches Association and a Member of the Hall of Fame. Now, exactly what is that worth? Put a price on it.

I suspect that Boren and Joe C were so relieved to have that off their backs that they were willing to pay her double what they are. She didn't approach the university with a gun. They decided what to pay her, what she was worth to them.

It becomes a bit silly to talk of profit and loss when you look at the history of minor sports at OU. If you aren't football, you have operated at a loss. If you operate as a track coach with a bad reputation, you probably won't last long. We have even found that men's basketball coaches who run afoul of the NCAA have a short shelf life. But, wrestling coaches who lose may be here for years, despite the fact that we were a storied program that has won six or seven titles. Just don't hurt the image, become a nuisance. But, if you actually enhance the image by becoming a Hall of Famer, you might be appreciated by those who have bigger fish to fry.

This is a long way to say that Boren and Joe C appear to be quite willing to pay Sherri whatever it takes to keep her happy. They offered it to her. She didn't rob them. They have that monkey off their back. Not only that, a lot of people like the way she does it. Makes them look good. I suspect that if she were as unpleasant as some other coaches, and the coaching community didn't like her, she would be gone.

But, the parts of the wheel that are doing all of the squeaking----I don't know that they think it is even worth greasing. They got the overall machine moving the way they want. There is a lot of squeaking that would have to be done to draw their attention to the difference between #3 and #30 when they are a whole lot more concerned about other matters. You are going to have to wait for it to be a 5-25 team or for Sherri to begin throwing things at refs.


WOW, a lot of time on someoneís hands. Back to the topic, yes she does make too much money imo, of course all coaches these days make too much as well. She has become mediocre and the program has as well. But Iím done unless anyone actually wants to discuss this issue - is she still doing a good job and should we keep going down the path with her and is she worth the financial investment? But if you all are ok with 13-12 or even Just making the tourney and getting booted like the last several years and having 1,500 to 2000 butts in the seats then more power to you.
Sooner81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2018, 12:23 PM   #15
inoref
All-Conference
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,097
Default Re: Serious question about Sherri and 1.1 million salary

Quote:
Originally Posted by sybarite View Post
I don't know how many times we have had this discussion on this board, and it ends up being just another thread to complain about Sherri.

I think Lady Gaga makes too much money. I can't believe Mark Zuckenberg and Mark Cuban got over a billion dollars for an internet site. How dumb are people who are out of work to buy Yankee tickets to see a $250,000,000 shortstop, even though he was pretty good a year or two earlier? It's unbelieveable that New Kids on the Block had four teenage boys worth about $75,000,000 each off of a couple of albums. Can you believe how much was made off of Star Wars?

Then, we get into colleges in which some faculty make less than highschool teachers. We built schools as soon as we settled the territory. We knew it was important. We even built a university almost immediately. We just never thought to pay the teachers that much. Then, someone discovered that alums would contribute more money if they had a winning football team. Really, is that true?

Have you ever looked at the Endowments of Harvard and Yale and compared them to OU and Alabama? Any guesses which is larger? Harvard could buy Oklahoma and Alabama's football team. But, somehow, we thought they were connected, and the alums invented Bud Wilkinson who was the perfect fit on which to build a program. But, then, half the colleges in the country had now decided that it was more important to pay football coaches than Nobel Prize winners.

Sometime, go out into the faculty parking lots to see what they are driving. Then, go to the lot for the coaches and the football players. Fascinating. And, some clown says college professors get rich off of grants proving their case. But, the real purpose of the university, to teach kids to live in our society, is performed by a lot of underpaid people who don't even have the luxury of tenure as much any more since we generated so many PhDs in response to the Viet Nam Era Draft. A bunch of underpaid people are doing a very underappreciated job, but none of the parents visiting their kids at campus really want to meet the faculty, only the coach.

So, there is too much money around the sports program that has no business at an educational institution in the first place. It really doesn't help anyone learn to write proper English, obviously (despite the fact that Bud and Sherri were English teachers), and rarely teaches any history. You wonder what would happen to OU if we went the Harvard route and took pride in our product from the classrooms and research labs. Would we have a $100 billion endowment? I think we finally did hit a billion.

Now, if you are the President of the university or the Athletic Director, you are accustomed to dealing with large sums of money. There is a reason that university professors rarely are invited to the university president's house for dinner (at least since George Lynn Cross who was a botany researcher in his heart). Professors just aren't into the discussions of interest rates, tax shelters, and 501Cs.

Then, you get a wringer thrown at you. You have always maintained a basketball program which lost money. Nobody really came to the games, except for Oklahoma A&M and Kansas. Nobody came to the wrestling matches, except when A&M was in town. Nobody even knew when we had track or swimming meets. I think they had three rows of bench seats for each, mostly empty. But, we kept the swimming teams going until about 1960. I think we either needed a new pool with Olympic dimensions or----, and we decided or. But, we kept track teams, wrestling teams, and a couple of others going, even build a fledgling gymnastics team. Then, suddenly, we got Title IX, and people started screaming about non-revenue sports.

Apparently, nobody noticed that we had always had non-revenue sports. We even had a band that wasn't generating a profit. But, suddenly, some people didn't like it that women's sports didn't generate a profit. Well, we never tried football. Wonder what outcry that would have brought? Now, we resented all of these things that took money away from football, now that profit was the primary purpose of the university, either that or football. It get's confusing. There was a little resentment of this non-football loss of money that didn't seem to be noticed until it became involved with women's sports. The track and wrestling teams weren't closed.

But, someone noticed that nobody came to the women's basketball games. Well, nobody went to the track meets, gymnastics events, swimming meets, or wrestling meets unless A&M was there. But, they closed women's basketball. Now, let's get a picture of relevance. We have a university that is costing a fortune, an athletic department managing millions of dollars, and they are making a decision on peanuts? Kind of reminds me of the guy who declares he can't pay his food bills with a case of beer in his refrigerator.

So, there is a national outcry. You cancelled the women's basketball program, a staple of Title IX, what it was all about. You notice how long it took to undo that. But, twenty-five years later, it still is in the lead paragraph in Wiki about OU women's basketball. Now, what is the price of repairing that image?

You have a retiring university President who has done a masterful job of pulling a lot of new infrastructure into the university. He's talked of creating a group somewhat like Harvard at OU, at least for some students and faculty. He was trying to build a dream. He was looking for a new conference. Everything was about image.

One of the things that he had solved was that he and his AD had got lucky. That image problem they had about closing a program had actually become an asset. The cheap hire they had made, a highschool coach because no well-known coach would have the job, built it into a respected program. But, it was more than just winning. She had generated an image around the program. She became President of the Coaches Association and a Member of the Hall of Fame. Now, exactly what is that worth? Put a price on it.

I suspect that Boren and Joe C were so relieved to have that off their backs that they were willing to pay her double what they are. She didn't approach the university with a gun. They decided what to pay her, what she was worth to them.

It becomes a bit silly to talk of profit and loss when you look at the history of minor sports at OU. If you aren't football, you have operated at a loss. If you operate as a track coach with a bad reputation, you probably won't last long. We have even found that men's basketball coaches who run afoul of the NCAA have a short shelf life. But, wrestling coaches who lose may be here for years, despite the fact that we were a storied program that has won six or seven titles. Just don't hurt the image, become a nuisance. But, if you actually enhance the image by becoming a Hall of Famer, you might be appreciated by those who have bigger fish to fry.

This is a long way to say that Boren and Joe C appear to be quite willing to pay Sherri whatever it takes to keep her happy. They offered it to her. She didn't rob them. They have that monkey off their back. Not only that, a lot of people like the way she does it. Makes them look good. I suspect that if she were as unpleasant as some other coaches, and the coaching community didn't like her, she would be gone.

But, the parts of the wheel that are doing all of the squeaking----I don't know that they think it is even worth greasing. They got the overall machine moving the way they want. There is a lot of squeaking that would have to be done to draw their attention to the difference between #3 and #30 when they are a whole lot more concerned about other matters. You are going to have to wait for it to be a 5-25 team or for Sherri to begin throwing things at refs.
Speaking of salary..you must get paid per word
inoref is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2018, 02:15 PM   #16
sooner8693
Walk-on
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 270
Default Re: Serious question about Sherri and 1.1 million salary

Quote:
Originally Posted by sybarite View Post
I don't know how many times we have had this discussion on this board, and it ends up being just another thread to complain about Sherri.

I think Lady Gaga makes too much money. I can't believe Mark Zuckenberg and Mark Cuban got over a billion dollars for an internet site. How dumb are people who are out of work to buy Yankee tickets to see a $250,000,000 shortstop, even though he was pretty good a year or two earlier? It's unbelieveable that New Kids on the Block had four teenage boys worth about $75,000,000 each off of a couple of albums. Can you believe how much was made off of Star Wars?

Then, we get into colleges in which some faculty make less than highschool teachers. We built schools as soon as we settled the territory. We knew it was important. We even built a university almost immediately. We just never thought to pay the teachers that much. Then, someone discovered that alums would contribute more money if they had a winning football team. Really, is that true?

Have you ever looked at the Endowments of Harvard and Yale and compared them to OU and Alabama? Any guesses which is larger? Harvard could buy Oklahoma and Alabama's football team. But, somehow, we thought they were connected, and the alums invented Bud Wilkinson who was the perfect fit on which to build a program. But, then, half the colleges in the country had now decided that it was more important to pay football coaches than Nobel Prize winners.

Sometime, go out into the faculty parking lots to see what they are driving. Then, go to the lot for the coaches and the football players. Fascinating. And, some clown says college professors get rich off of grants proving their case. But, the real purpose of the university, to teach kids to live in our society, is performed by a lot of underpaid people who don't even have the luxury of tenure as much any more since we generated so many PhDs in response to the Viet Nam Era Draft. A bunch of underpaid people are doing a very underappreciated job, but none of the parents visiting their kids at campus really want to meet the faculty, only the coach.

So, there is too much money around the sports program that has no business at an educational institution in the first place. It really doesn't help anyone learn to write proper English, obviously (despite the fact that Bud and Sherri were English teachers), and rarely teaches any history. You wonder what would happen to OU if we went the Harvard route and took pride in our product from the classrooms and research labs. Would we have a $100 billion endowment? I think we finally did hit a billion.

Now, if you are the President of the university or the Athletic Director, you are accustomed to dealing with large sums of money. There is a reason that university professors rarely are invited to the university president's house for dinner (at least since George Lynn Cross who was a botany researcher in his heart). Professors just aren't into the discussions of interest rates, tax shelters, and 501Cs.

Then, you get a wringer thrown at you. You have always maintained a basketball program which lost money. Nobody really came to the games, except for Oklahoma A&M and Kansas. Nobody came to the wrestling matches, except when A&M was in town. Nobody even knew when we had track or swimming meets. I think they had three rows of bench seats for each, mostly empty. But, we kept the swimming teams going until about 1960. I think we either needed a new pool with Olympic dimensions or----, and we decided or. But, we kept track teams, wrestling teams, and a couple of others going, even build a fledgling gymnastics team. Then, suddenly, we got Title IX, and people started screaming about non-revenue sports.

Apparently, nobody noticed that we had always had non-revenue sports. We even had a band that wasn't generating a profit. But, suddenly, some people didn't like it that women's sports didn't generate a profit. Well, we never tried football. Wonder what outcry that would have brought? Now, we resented all of these things that took money away from football, now that profit was the primary purpose of the university, either that or football. It get's confusing. There was a little resentment of this non-football loss of money that didn't seem to be noticed until it became involved with women's sports. The track and wrestling teams weren't closed.

But, someone noticed that nobody came to the women's basketball games. Well, nobody went to the track meets, gymnastics events, swimming meets, or wrestling meets unless A&M was there. But, they closed women's basketball. Now, let's get a picture of relevance. We have a university that is costing a fortune, an athletic department managing millions of dollars, and they are making a decision on peanuts? Kind of reminds me of the guy who declares he can't pay his food bills with a case of beer in his refrigerator.

So, there is a national outcry. You cancelled the women's basketball program, a staple of Title IX, what it was all about. You notice how long it took to undo that. But, twenty-five years later, it still is in the lead paragraph in Wiki about OU women's basketball. Now, what is the price of repairing that image?

You have a retiring university President who has done a masterful job of pulling a lot of new infrastructure into the university. He's talked of creating a group somewhat like Harvard at OU, at least for some students and faculty. He was trying to build a dream. He was looking for a new conference. Everything was about image.

One of the things that he had solved was that he and his AD had got lucky. That image problem they had about closing a program had actually become an asset. The cheap hire they had made, a highschool coach because no well-known coach would have the job, built it into a respected program. But, it was more than just winning. She had generated an image around the program. She became President of the Coaches Association and a Member of the Hall of Fame. Now, exactly what is that worth? Put a price on it.

I suspect that Boren and Joe C were so relieved to have that off their backs that they were willing to pay her double what they are. She didn't approach the university with a gun. They decided what to pay her, what she was worth to them.

It becomes a bit silly to talk of profit and loss when you look at the history of minor sports at OU. If you aren't football, you have operated at a loss. If you operate as a track coach with a bad reputation, you probably won't last long. We have even found that men's basketball coaches who run afoul of the NCAA have a short shelf life. But, wrestling coaches who lose may be here for years, despite the fact that we were a storied program that has won six or seven titles. Just don't hurt the image, become a nuisance. But, if you actually enhance the image by becoming a Hall of Famer, you might be appreciated by those who have bigger fish to fry.

This is a long way to say that Boren and Joe C appear to be quite willing to pay Sherri whatever it takes to keep her happy. They offered it to her. She didn't rob them. They have that monkey off their back. Not only that, a lot of people like the way she does it. Makes them look good. I suspect that if she were as unpleasant as some other coaches, and the coaching community didn't like her, she would be gone.

But, the parts of the wheel that are doing all of the squeaking----I don't know that they think it is even worth greasing. They got the overall machine moving the way they want. There is a lot of squeaking that would have to be done to draw their attention to the difference between #3 and #30 when they are a whole lot more concerned about other matters. You are going to have to wait for it to be a 5-25 team or for Sherri to begin throwing things at refs.
Can someone summarize this mess in 25 words or less?
sooner8693 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2018, 03:59 PM   #17
scrybe
All-American
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,906
Default Re: Serious question about Sherri and 1.1 million salary

Quote:
Originally Posted by sooner8693 View Post
Can someone summarize this mess in 25 words or less?
Two words: Reading comprehension.
__________________
Sent from my MacMini using my left index finger.
scrybe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2018, 04:22 PM   #18
sooner8693
Walk-on
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 270
Default Re: Serious question about Sherri and 1.1 million salary

Quote:
Originally Posted by scrybe View Post
Two words: Reading comprehension.
Very good.
sooner8693 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2018, 07:40 PM   #19
bob the nailer
Walk-on
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Edmond
Posts: 125
Default Re: Serious question about Sherri and 1.1 million salary

Summary-
Our women's team isn't good enough
Sherri has not a good job of recruiting and retention lately(until this year)
Her salary, however, is irrelevant.
bob the nailer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2018, 09:01 PM   #20
giraffespots
Walk-on
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 81
Exclamation Re: Serious question about Sherri and 1.1 million salary

2 thoughts.

1. Bob the Nailer nailed that summary!! lol That post, Syb, was epic. Sorry I couldn't read it all, darn ADD

2. Is it a certain time of month? You guys are harsh on a newbie. I know this topic has been discussed ad nauseum on this board, but new folks don't know that. Geez. Talk about Mean Girls!!

Welcome Sooner81.
giraffespots is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2018, 06:46 AM   #21
Sooner81
Walk-on
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 206
Default Re: Serious question about Sherri and 1.1 million salary

Quote:
Originally Posted by giraffespots View Post
2 thoughts.

1. Bob the Nailer nailed that summary!! lol That post, Syb, was epic. Sorry I couldn't read it all, darn ADD

2. Is it a certain time of month? You guys are harsh on a newbie. I know this topic has been discussed ad nauseum on this board, but new folks don't know that. Geez. Talk about Mean Girls!!

Welcome Sooner81.
Thanks, Giraffespots
Sooner81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2018, 12:55 PM   #22
Oliver Hardy
All-American
 
Oliver Hardy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,095
Default Re: Serious question about Sherri and 1.1 million salary

Syb and a couple of others much more enjoy talking inside their own little boxes.
Oliver Hardy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2018, 08:47 PM   #23
betterstill
Walk-on
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 98
Default Re: Serious question about Sherri and 1.1 million salary

I pretty much agree with your comments about Sherri, Sooner81. I don't get into the salary issue. The point to me is that the team has been in decline for several years and the attendance as well. I do not know if some big doners are throwing money at the program, but I doubt that the financial support is strong right now.

Sooner81, I recommend you avoid quoting Traber, even if he makes a logical statement. The reason is that he has expressed so vehemently his hatred of the sport of women's basketball that he should recuse himself from making comments about it.

I am ready to see Sherri go. I do not think it will happen until we see how the new class pans out. I have hopes that out team will improve, maybe year after next, but do do not expect us to get beyond 3rd in the conference, our recent close game at Baylor notwithstanding, with the current coaching staff. I would be happy to be proven wrong, especially since I have season tickets and do go to the games.

That is my opinion and I certainly respect the right of others to disagree.

Sybarite said: "I thought these went to another board." I am glad to have Sooner81 on the board. Since I want to see Sherri go does this mean I am not welcome here? I ask the posters here to chime in and let me know and if the answer is please leave I will do so.
betterstill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2018, 09:29 PM   #24
Oliver Hardy
All-American
 
Oliver Hardy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,095
Default

If you don’t bow down to Syb and his like, who kiss the ground Sherri walks on, then you don’t support the program and you are a bad Sooner and know nothing and are NOT allowed to share your opinion here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Oliver Hardy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2018, 09:30 PM   #25
Oliver Hardy
All-American
 
Oliver Hardy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,095
Default

I resist the group think that has almost killed this board and probably soon will.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Oliver Hardy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:23 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Hosted By: URLJet.com