Welcome to the HornSports Forum

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our Texas Longhorns message board community.

SignUp Now!

Steve Patterson - Athletics Director

That is a really good article. DeLoss didn't give the common man the warm fuzzies, either, but he didn't alienate people in mass. Patterson may have been hired to make some unpopular changes, but the manner, timing, and communication appears to be poorly conceived and executed.

Our athletes deserve the best, and we should demand the best for them.

Hook 'em!

 
java said:
That is a really good article. DeLoss didn't give the common man the warm fuzzies, either, but he didn't alienate people in mass. Patterson may have been hired to make some unpopular changes, but the manner, timing, and communication appears to be poorly conceived and executed.

Our athletes deserve the best, and we should demand the best for them.

Hook 'em!
Click to expand...
The thought that Patterson was hired to make "unpopular decisions" and that there are a group of us resisting his dilligent efforts to do what is best for the university is pure horseshit. Cutting back on the student and athlete experience to bloat administrative overhead by millions is not what the UT experience is supposed to be about. Lying to the alumni about facilities funding is a firing offense. Materially harming university/alumni relations is the opposite of Patterson's job responsibilities.

Claiming Patterson is trying to do the Lord's work while those of us objecting to his job performance don't have the best interests of the university as our highest priority is pure bullshit.

This has nothing to do with the popularity of Patterson's decisions and everything to do with Patterson's priority of coveting corporate interests, whoring out the program and alienating the alumni.

The objections to the direction Patterson is taking the athletics program and the objections to his his utter refusal to instill any sort of fiscal responsibility to Bellmon's spending aren't rooted on the "popularity" of Patterson's decisions. They are rooted in the the fact Patterson doesn't share basic values with a large group of the alumni and that he doesn't value university/alumni relations. Patterson is a cancer on the program and unquestionably the wrong individual for the job.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Per R. Duke...

"Cutting back on the student and athlete experience to bloat administrative overhead by millions is not what the UT experience is supposed to be about. ...

.... the fact Patterson doesn't share basic values with a large group of the alumni and that he doesn't value university/alumni relations."

 
I amsolutely understand what is going on here. There are individuals whose paycheck is dependent on currying favor with Steve Patterson and to do so they are attempting to minimalize the ligitimake objections of the alumni to how Patterson has been running Bellmont by insinuating these are alumni so petulant as to attempt to undermine decisions seemingly made in the best longterm interests of the university because we find them "unpopular."

For a long time, the expense-per-athlete ration of UT athletics had been the highest in the nation and more than twice the average for all public universities. UT had long been spending far more on "unallocated expenses" than many other programs with better facilities and with more on-field success. Let's not kid oursevles. Overall debt for UT athletics if far below $250 million and annual debt service is under $18 million on total revenues of $165 million, yet the university claims debt service was the driver for the deficit of the program last year. A&M is servicing almost $400 million in debt against total revenues of barely $100 million. The problem at UT isn't revenues. It is out of control spending and horrific mismanagement.

Is it true Steve Patterson lied to the alumni about tennis center construction claiming that if only $6 million was raised, only a $6 million facility would be built when he knew at least $15 million in funding was already allocated for that project?

When Patterson was running ASU athletics, he did so on an expense ratio of $135,000/athlete/year. Was UT spending at over $240,000/athlete per year when he cut back on funding for student and athlete activities and bloated the administrative payroll by a further $4 million/year? Hell yes. Did he penalize UT golf by taking away from their recruiting budget to buy advertising for UT athletics after a former UT athlete and outstanding university ambassador achieved a significent professional accomplishment? Hell yes.

These are not popularity issues. These are substantive manegerial decisions.

Steve Patterson is not dealing with "popularity issues." He is being asked to defend this stewardship of UT athletics.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Anybody got a list of potential replacements...

LuckO_zpsgypwmsyy.jpg


 
He's working at NCAA Headquarters, although that may not be the most secure position in college athletics at this point. He always appeared to be charming and very classy. He is the anti-Steve Patterson.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Randolph Duke said:
The thought that Patterson was hired to make "unpopular decisions" and that there are a group of us resisting his dilligent efforts to do what is best for the university is pure horseshit. Cutting back on the student and athlete experience to bloat administrative overhead by millions is not what the UT experience is supposed to be about. Lying to the alumni about facilities funding is a firing offense. Materially harming university/alumni relations is the opposite of Patterson's job responsibilities.

Claiming Patterson is trying to do the Lord's work while those of us objecting to his job performance don't have the best interests of the university as our highest priority is pure bullshit.

This has nothing to do with the popularity of Patterson's decisions and everything to do with Patterson's priority of coveting corporate interests, whoring out the program and alienating the alumni.

The objections to the direction Patterson is taking the athletics program and the objections to his his utter refusal to instill any sort of fiscal responsibility to Bellmon's spending aren't rooted on the "popularity" of Patterson's decisions. They are rooted in the the fact Patterson doesn't share basic values with a large group of the alumni and that he doesn't value university/alumni relations. Patterson is a cancer on the program and unquestionably the wrong individual for the job.
Click to expand...

This may be the all time record for number of strawmen in 1 post.

 
AD Steve Patterson: I'm making 'tough decisions' for Texas

AUSTIN, Texas -- Texas athletic director Steve Patterson made no apology on Friday for making "tough decisions" that have angered some fans in his first year and a half on the job, and insisted his goal is to make the Longhorns' program the best in the country.

Patterson sat down with reporters Friday amid multiple reports that his job could be in jeopardy, and a public acknowledgment earlier from school President Greg Fenves that some fans and key donors are frustrated. Fenves and Patterson met earlier in the day for the third time in less than two months.

"We have an excellent working relationship," Patterson said. "He's an engaged CEO. We have broad-ranging and candid conversations about academics, athletics and financing, buildings and operations ... I feel really good about it."

Patterson took over the Texas program in November 2013, replacing DeLoss Dodds, who retired after 32 years. Where Dodds had a casual, folksy personality, Patterson has been more direct with aggressive attempts to raise money at a program that already ranks among the wealthiest in the country.

Among his most contentious decisions was raising football ticket prices and steep new charges for parking after a losing season. Patterson also has forced significant changes in the ticket policies for faculty and staff and pushed to expand marketing of the Texas brand. One of his key initiatives is to build an endowment for each sport.

"Some people may like what we are doing and some people may not," Patterson said. "Somebody's got to make tough decisions ... What can you count on? Death, taxes and change. If we are going to provide the best in services, we are going to have to evolve."

Patterson said he's willing to meet with any donors who may have been upset by any of the changes to explain them. He said a lunch meeting with a donor on Friday ended with a $750,000 donation.

"If there is somebody out there we need to go talk to, (women's athletic director Chris Plonsky) and I aren't shy about that," Patterson said.

http://www.foxsports.com/college-football/story/texas-longhorns-steve-patterson-tough-decisions-athletic-director-ad-speaks-071715

 
ps - in case youve never seen this, here is video-deposition by the self-styled "Joe DiMaggio of the courtroom" (off camera)

pretty funny if you have 2.5 minutes


 
Last edited by a moderator:
If Patterson has been rude and cold he deserves some time. his hires so far have been grand slams. once football and basketball get into contention and we see what type of facilities Steve builds those are his main tasks and probably spend lots of time checking for right name for new baseball coach any suggestions ?

 
Patterson deserves some time based on his hires, but he needs to realize that there are other people who are probably better suited for the job he has. If he had to hire people to do the job he should be doing, his salary is too high. Really, is he doing more than DeLoss always did?

DeLoss managed to substantially upgrade Memorial Stadium, build many of the facilities we have in place, conceive and develop the LHN, and negotiate conference realignment more than once. He did all of that while making substantially less than Patterson, and he didn't alienate donors while doing it.

Steve is going to have to adapt if he wants to survive. Whether he likes it or not, he's in a people business-at a very high level.

 
"DeLoss managed to substantially upgrade Memorial Stadium, build many of the facilities we have in place, conceive and

develop the LHN, and negotiate conference realignment more than once. He did all of that while making substantially less

than Patterson, and he didn't alienate donors while doing it."

Good post, java. 

 
Thank you, Etex and bcherry.

I realize that in professional athletics the GM must keep the owner and a few others happy, such as valued coaches, sponsors, and VIPs. College athletics is a whole 'nother animal, particularly at a beast like Texas. We have what we have due to the loyalty of the fans and some very influential and generous alums. No employee of The University is more important than those who have contributed to the success and history of the program, including athletes, coaches, faculty, and former students.

I'm not certain that a professional sports background prepares an individual for the AD at Texas. The job requirements are unique, and it takes a unique person, not a bean counter. I'm concerned that Steve is just a bean counter. He's alienated more people in less time than John Mackovic-that is some heavy lifting. He has burned all of his goodwill without downsizing. What is the encore?

Hook 'em!

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Latest Texas Longhorns News

Nic Codie and Simeon Wilcher to enter Transfer Portal

By HornSports Staff

Series Preview: Schlossnagle Returns to College Station as No. 2 Texas takes on No. 18 Texas A&M

By Mitch Lovell

No. 2 Texas Baseball Rolls to 16-4 Run-Rule Victory Over Incarnate Word

By HornSports Staff

About Us

Quick Links

Forum statistics

Threads
24,283
Messages
471,142
Members
5,697
Latest member
Rlawlis

Follow Us

Back
Top Bottom