I can name 3, maybe 4 ... 1. Morgan Burke, 2. the Purdue BOT, 3. Frances Cordova, and 4. Mitch Daniels?
Maybe I'm being a little rough on Mitch but the others are beyond dispute.
Drew Brees as next (or near future) Purdue AD?
- Thread starter bonefish1
- Start date
I can name 3, maybe 4 ... 1. Morgan Burke, 2. the Purdue BOT, 3. Frances Cordova, and 4. Mitch Daniels?
Maybe I'm being a little rough on Mitch but the others are beyond dispute.
It shows, because Purdue is TERRIBLE at marketing Purdue Athletics and is even worse at the branding aspect of it.
Just curious, where do you get the impression that Captain Morgan has a "loser/negative mentality"?
Let's not forget, Morgan is the genius who decided that Purdue was at such a huge "disadvantage" in the B1G that he needed to model the Purdue Athletic Department off Billy Beane's Moneyball. And that's what led to the hiring of Danny Hope, at the lowest salary in the B1G, low balling Painter as well as all the football and men's basketball assistants, and delayed investments in football, necessary to recruit competitively, while we blew $20M on a women's softball stadium.
Last edited:
The only reason anyone after Morgan would be on that list is that they kept Morgan as AD. The athletic department has operated the exact same way through multiple BOTs and 4 Presidents. There's one consistent factor.
I liked Greg from what I heard, but I do not know him well at all. But....would he just be an extension of Morgan Burke? Quite frankly, I think when MB retires, there's going to be a good amount of people that go (or should) when he does. Or at least the current structure should be blown up. Purdue needs a "refresh" big time.
MB did not "run" a company. He was the lead manager of the department that "hires and fires." His responsibility stopped there. He didn't the make decisions at a CEO level. Now he is the lead director of an approximately $90 million enterprise that depends mostly on donations and contributions. This reminds me of Planned Parenthood. He doesn't have anyone to answer to until we get to big decisions like the head coaches of football and basketball and major renovations to facilities. His communications department is old school and out of touch with the alumni and students. I am fortunate to live close enough to get a radio broadcast. But it isn't one of those 50K Watt flame throwers we used to have. So the range of this radio station is lucky to be 30 miles. Oh, I am rambling cause it drives me nuts. The head of the BOT was on the radio during halftime last game. He was asked if the BOT cared about athletics. He was positive and said President Daniels was also into it. He promised some things would be done to put Purdue athletics back on the + side of all this with winning teams. Let's sit back and see how they do.
I believe Drew still has a home in San Diego and lives there part of the year. Drew will do what is best for his family - and I support him.
This is another reason why the Purdue Ath Dept and Univsersity needt to get on the same page financially with the Ath Dept being able to tap some of the endowment funds (which are in the billions, with a B!). Granted, Purdue is well known globally as a solid academic institution, but like it or not, the face of most universities is the AD and that can have a direct correlation on applications, admissions, donations, etc.. Just ask Butler.
I don't have a loser mentality. I have a winner's mentality. That's why I want to compare Purdue's financial situation with the richest conference in the nation. I want Purdue to be judged against the best. But even with that great head start you mention, Purdue is 45th in the nation in revenue. A rough calc (64-45 / 64) shows that we are in the bottom 30% of P5 schools.
I say Purdue is poor, with adequate backup, and you jump up and down saying I'm wrong. But then you say "Purdue has challenges... it's not going to be easy." It seems like we're saying the same thing.
One can be realistic and not burdened with the label of having a "loser mentality". In fact, as you've done, I think it's critical to acknowledge certain disadvantages in order to overcome them.
I understand that these boards are overly critical, but does anyone stand 100% behind Burke anymore? Has he lost all his die-hard supporters? Has he given any indication that he's close to retiring?
The endowment is not a source of unrestricted funds that the university can do anything they want with. In most cases the donor has made a stipulation. It may be to endow a chair in a particular department, to fund a scholarship in a particular department, to fund an athletic scholarship, to provide travel funds to students doing a study abroad, to name a department (like Krannert) so that department decides what to use the funds for, etc.
Edit: I don't know exactly, but the majority (maybe most), of these endowments, will by at the department, school, or college level. So they are controlled by department heads and deans, not the president of the university. It would be illegal to use these funds in violation of the endowment agreements.
Edit 2: Garth Brooks made a $500k donation to a hospital and felt the money was not used as intended. He sued and not only got his $500k back but $500k in damages. The same thing could happen to a university not being a good steward of an endowment.
Last edited:
I don't really care who it is as long he/she is solidly grounded in business principles and comes from a football or basketball background. I'm starting to think some of the problem with Morgan is that he was a swimmer and is getting payback for his envy of what the big boys had that he felt he didn't when he was a student athlete.
But again, it's not a black and white issue. Purdue's revenues right now are basically as low as they could be. So you're looking at a snapshot in a bad year. In the last financial year available that you're looking at, it should NOT be a typical year for Purdue.
Our football revenue is KILLING us right now. To act like this should be our norm and we have no hope of increasing revenue is silly. Our football revenue is basically on par with IU right now. If Purdue has a decently good football program selling 35,000 season tickets (Purdue was eclipsing 40k for years and was at 35k in 2011) and we maintained pretty solid figures in basketball - we would be right there with IU, which would jump us to being 30th in revenue.
We have nowhere to go but up in revenue. To act like our current revenue is "what we're given" is just not true. As I said, Big Ten schools get equal distribution and the highest conference distribution in the country - by far. That's our baseline which we can count on year after year, no matter what happens in terms of winning and losing.
Purdue is NOT in an unfair position. It is in a bad position currently because of the quality of product it has put forward - which it controls.
I know nobody wants to hear it - but in 2005, Purdue had higher ticket revenue and donations than Oregon. Purdue HAS the capability of growing, it HAS the capability of doing better, it HAS the capability of of changing for the better by its OWN control.
Yes, Purdue has challenges. Almost every school in the nation does. There's a handful of schools that absolutely have been given what they need on a silver platter. But it is NOT a significant number.
Michigan State didn't sit on its hands and see its budget grow double the amount Purdue's has in the last 10 years. What's driven that? Ticket sales and donations. They've built successful programs. Ten years ago, Michigan State's budget was $10 million more than ours. That's a chunk of money, but Michigan State's athletic department is also significantly larger than Purdue's. Today, Michigan State's revenue is $30 million more.
Are we going to be Michigan State? Maybe, maybe not. Do we have potential to vastly improve our revenues by building a successful football program? Absolutely. Schools like Minnesota and Illinois are vastly above us in ticket revenue - that's absurd. Neither have amazing programs. That shows how BAD football is killing us.
And building a football program is not just on a head coach's shoulders. Michigan State's done a tremendous job of building a brand around it - and they did so going against "big brother" Michigan. I don't think you disagree on this - it takes an entire athletic department to create success. Look at Painter - what did he want more than anything? Additional staff. This seems minor, but look at the great work Purdue Basketball has done on social media. Is Purdue Basketball's "PR machine" as good as it can be? No, but again, it takes an entire athletic department. Purdue won't be ballsy. Purdue won't be aggressive. Purdue won't be confident. Until Purdue's own athletic department acts like it wants to be the best, it absolutely won't be.
Just passing this along as it is a side note to this conversation about what to look for in an AD.
http://www.sbnation.com/college-foo...horns-athletic-director-steve-patterson-fired
Patterson gained a reputation for being cheap. He cut free meals for Texas coaches, netting pretty much nothing (relatively) in savings. He also reportedly began charging opponents to bring their bands to games. Like ousted Michigan athletic director Dave Brandon, he was seen as too corporate and business-like for the job.
dont get me wrong i'd love to see Drew back at Purdue in some capacity- but wouldnt they want someone with some management experience?
You mean we don't have our own network?? What exactly have we been watching all this time?
Oh yeah, now I remember:
"LOSER MENTALITY" FULL STEAM AHEAD!! COMMENCE THE FAIL...
Well said, Ibodel. What it really BOILS down to is this: Too many EXCUSEMAKERS, not enough PUR-DOERS!
This reminds me of a great movie called "Shenedoah" starring Jimmie Stewart; a scene where Stewart's character is chewing-out another guy, he gets in his face and yells "IF YOU DON'T TRY, YOU DON'T DO!! AND IF YOU DON'T DO, THEN WHY ARE YOU HERE??!!
Last edited:
