Wow

How did we get stuck with that dud

And that.written transcript is disappointing

Now guys, there was no one else in the country that could have overseen the kyle renovation AND ensure continued success success in all other sports

Dp and Dp on success apparently

Nothing but a politician, and not too good at that it would appear.

Someone showed me some staph quotes from premium that were extremely critical of the guy, so not sure why they'd turn around and try to make him look better. Probably just an error on their part when doing the transcription.

quote:

---

I'm disappointed Hyman didn't wield more influence on the committee, for some reason I don't find it to be a lynching offense.

---

It is not just the committee crap for most Ags. It is other stuff like getting into a pissing match with Sumlin and letting basketball die on the vine by keeping a lousy HC when every other school in our conference and region is upgrading their coaches.

Byrne wasn't perfect but he also wasn't a guy just coasting to retirement trying to do as little as possible.

quote:

---

Someone showed me some staph quotes from premium that were extremely critical of the guy, so not sure why they'd turn around and try to make
him look better. Probably just an error on their part when doing the
transcription.

---

Even if they know otherwise, they still have to play nice with an incompetent AD. What were the nature of the quotes? If texags staph is critical of an AD, he is probably on his last legs.

The problem is lack of brain equity by the shot callers.

quote:

---

I didn't mind Byrne...the only thing I didn't care for Byrne about was the whole move to the SEC thing. The guy was committed to making A&M athletics the best all around

---

He was committed to making minor sports the best

He was terrible at football, underachieving at baseball, and got lucky 2 out of 3 times with mid-major hires in MBB.

quote:

---

quote:

---

I didn't mind Byrne...the only thing I didn't care for Byrne about was the whole move to the SEC thing. The guy was committed to making A&M athletics the best all around

---

He was committed to making minor sports the best

He was terrible at football, underachieving at baseball, and got lucky 2 out of 3 times with mid-major hires in MBB.

---

Is Hyman any better at any of these? I don't remember who made the Sumlin hire to be honest

And perhaps it wasn't luck on the MBB hires?

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

I didn't mind Byrne...the only thing I didn't care for Byrne about was the whole move to the SEC thing. The guy was committed to making A&M athletics the best all around

---

He was committed to making minor sports the best

He was terrible at football, underachieving at baseball, and got lucky 2 out of 3 times with mid-major hires in MBB.

---

Is Hyman any better at any of these? I don't remember who made the Sumlin hire to be honest

And perhaps it wasn't luck on the MBB hires?

---

Jim Wilson made the Sumlin hire.

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

I didn't mind Byrne...the only thing I didn't care for Byrne about was the whole move to the SEC thing. The guy was committed to making A&M athletics the best all around

---

He was committed to making minor sports the best

He was terrible at football, underachieving at baseball, and got lucky 2 out of 3 times with mid-major hires in MBB.

---

Is Hyman any better at any of these? I don't remember who made the Sumlin hire to be honest

And perhaps it wasn't luck on the MBB hires?

---

The BOR hired Sumlin

As for MBB, he had the same MO on all the hires. I don't doubt that he diligently researchrd and considered th candidates. But hiring mid-majors is hit and miss. 2 panned out, 1 didn't

And no, Hyman isn't any better than Byrne. He's probably worse

What's your point on that?

That stood out to me when I listened to the interview yesterday. Run that SOB off. It sounds like he still misses his glory days at South Carolina.

I wonder what it was about this guy that made Dr.Loftin think he was a good hire? I'd trust Dr. Loftin with the keys to Aggieland any day of the week. There had to be something about Hyman that he thought would make us stronger. It is getting harder to understand every time this guy opens his mouth or appears in public.

It sounds to me like he was asked to leave the room when the Ags were discussed. It also sounds like the committee locked the door and didn't let him back in the room. Can't say that I blame them as he had very little to contribute.

quote:

---

Also pathetic that Texags staph apparently felt it necessary to misquote him to make him look less bad.

---

I seriously doubt there was anything malicious in the posted transcript by staff. They actually originally quoted him correctly when he misspoke on TCU's top 50 record being similar to A&M's.

The man is just collecting a paycheck. He doesn't care anything about Texas A&M.

Well my guess Loftin figured he'd still be around to provide direction and leadership. Well that didn't happen so we have a vacuum where managing expectations are the order of the day

Given the way his contract was written, he had good reason to care about minor sports.

quote:

---

quote:

---

I didn't mind Byrne...the only thing I didn't care for Byrne about was the whole move to the SEC thing. The guy was committed to making A&M athletics the best all around

---

He was committed to making minor sports the best

He was terrible at football, underachieving at baseball, and got lucky 2 out of 3 times with mid-major hires in MBB.

---

This was the prevailing attitude on all boards that I remember on Byrne.

Explain to me how he was terrible at football? How much control over hiring and firing football coaches do you think the Athletic Director has at Texas A&M? BMA's including BOR drive the bus.

AD's role in the football program is contracts (2005 raise for franchione is my biggest criticism of Byrne), facilities and then trying to maximize revenue so it can carry other sports. I think he brought us light years from where we were under Groff.

Just an educated guess, but I would say AD has 100% say so in hires for minor sports and much more say so in hires for baseball and basketball than he does for football.. So 2 out of 3 MBB hires were good but he gets no credit? He overpays the track coach by a few hundred thousand and we crank out national championships. He hired Gary Blair and we win national championship.

I'm confused why everyone resents those championships. I would rather have football success, but I can never quite make the mental leap that if we sucked at WBB, Track, Tennis and Soccer that we would automatically be better at football. I would just assume be good at everything that we can be good at.

Sure BB went for 2-3 on MBB hires- but does anyone doubt BB would have pulled the trigger YEARS ago on the failed BK hire? And by the way, he hit absolute home runs on the other two. 1 hired by arguably the most prestigious program in basketball (obviously flamed out there, but speaks volumes about what he did at A&M) and the other hired by a top 20 program. When you make good hires at a non-destination job (A&M basketball), that's going to happen.(at least will happen for men's basketball coaches with ambition... On the flip side, for our lame duck basketball coach A&M is a destination, but that's a very bad thing),.

The big difference is the current AD doesn't really care near as much about A&M winning or losing- it's a job. It's just about having coaches that don't rock the boat so he can ride this gravy train out to retirement. Say what you want about BB, but there's no doubt he was working his a** every day to make our athletic department better. Yes, he was wrong about the proposed SEC move- but he was opposing it from the perspective of protecting our athletic department's current level of performance.. Not about doing what's convenient.. which appears to be really important to Hyman. It's easy to not fire coaches that simply stay out of trouble. It's also easy to not rock the boat at the baseball committee meeting, even if our conference is getting screwed.

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

I didn't mind Byrne...the only thing I didn't care for Byrne about was the whole move to the SEC thing. The guy was committed to making A&M athletics the best all around

---

He was committed to making minor sports the best

He was terrible at football, underachieving at baseball, and got lucky 2 out of 3 times with mid-major hires in MBB.

---

This was the prevailing attitude on all boards that I remember on Byrne.

Explain to me how he was terrible at football? How much control over hiring and firing football coaches do you think the Athletic Director has at Texas A&M? BMA's including BOR drive the bus

---

Byrne hired Sherman

It is well known and has been discussed

He also renewed Fran, and was adamantly against going to the SEC

He was a terrible manager of the program

No one is saying it has to be either/or. They are saying that small sports were the only thing Byrne gave a **** about.

quote:

---

What I didn't understand was that throughout the entire interview, when talking about the committee, he kept saying "they". What the hell? YOU are the committee. He never once said "We tried to get it right". He only said "They" did this, "they" did that? You were there!

---

According to him, they got to present their case and then when it came to actually ranking the teams and deciding the seeds, he, the UCLA AD, and another guy who had a son coaching one of the teams had to leave the room, for over 2 hours, while the other 7 ranked the national seeds. That, to me is really odd. I get not being in the room when your school is specifically being discussed, but it's odd that they didn't even get to be a part of the final rankings of any of the 8 seeds...at least according to him. This may be why he kept saying "they" in terms of the committee.

I don't hate the interview nearly as much as y'all do. I love to pile on Hyman, but we are really projecting so much hate and vitriol about a subject in which none of us were there and have absolutely no clue about.

IMO, you read between the lines of the interview yesterday, not just listen for every word.

What bothered me more than anything else were the references to the RAC. Sounds like the entire committee relied on the RAC' teleconferences the last few weeks and specifically how they ranked the teams, and how they ranked head to head when deciding on one or 2 spots to be a national seed, or to be a regional host/last team in the field, etc.

To me, it sure sounded like they used the RAC specifically to help be the tiebreaker for all of that. The RAC is a bunch of coaches, so they are naturally supposed to "know more." What concerns me is the RAC will definitely have its biases, and it is weak for the committee to basically sublet their authority to a different committee in the RAC.

You could clearly tell though, based off 2 or 3 answers, that the committee just took the RAC suggestions and rolled with it almost exclusively. He said the RPI was merely a starting point. That sucks.

When he did list the negatives though, it may anger some, but to me it just reinforced that the Ags played themselves right out of a national seed. 10-8 to finish the year after the 35-3 start, winning only 1 of your final 5 series, and a weak non-conference schedule.

In the end, I still think the Ags deserve a national seed. But this time around I'm not going to just assume I know everything about what happened at the committee meetings. He is only 1 of 10, so he could raise all the hell he wants and still not get his way.

For those saying the UCLA AD "got them the #1 overall seed" and "got Oregon in," ....that's also speaking in facts based on zero knowledge of the situation. It certainly is convenient that the UCLA AD was on the committee, but the way Hyman answered the #1 overall seed as basically saying "UCLA was clearly the #1 team," It sounds like they were mostly in agreement of that...again, most likely due to the RAC.

So long story short, while I'm a "Hyman generally sucks" guy, this isn't the moment I'll choose to yell at him about. The interview gave me enough to confirm my suspicions that they relied heavily on the words of the RAC, and the committee as a whole basically let another group of folks decide the final national seeds/hosts.