I listened to the interview and the part about 30% of the committee not being in the room for long periods of time, is just plain stupid. If that's the case, they need to not choose the committee until after the season. They should either choose ten individuals who have ZERO ties with all teams involved, or, choose ten individuals who ALL have ties. It sounds like instead of there being ten voters, there were only seven. Like you stated, the seven relied heavily on the RAC since they did not have any ties to the teams involved. Let them all have ties so they can each state their case and come up with an agreement based on the knowledge they have.

Yep, I agree. And also, I believe he said they have had teleconferences with the RAC for the last several weeks in preparation. This would also lend you to believe they did in fact have many of the ideas for how and who they would award seeds to pretty much sewn up, save for 1 or 2 spots for a top 8, 1 or 2 spots for a regional host, and a few spots for "last four in" or something like that.

Again, I didn't like the process, but at least he provided us with some insight into how the actual process occurred, whether we like it or not. A bunch of his answers were deflections, etc., but there were a few key things he said that can definitely help get a better picture on how it all went down. The RAC and the committee's dependence on them spoke most importantly to me, and also angered me the most.

Listen to the interview with Gabe.

Hyman is Bill Clinton without the intellect and charm. He couldn't give a concise direct answer to anything. Lots of tap dancing. He doesn't sound mildly competent. The "it wasn't me"... "I wasn't there" bit was weak at best. He tripped and stumbled over himself when Gabe brought up Oregon getting in.

Some people confuse longevity with excellence or even good. Hyman has been around a while as an AD. That is about all I can say for him. He hasn't done anything here except collect a paycheck. He needs to be shown the exit.

The thing about Hyman is that we are paying more than we did for Byrne for a guy who handles his job with all the vision and enthusiasm of Wally Groff. I think we could get a myopic, spineless, bean counter for a lot less than we are paying Hyman.

Barnes - I said it reveals that he has no association or attachment to Aggies. This is an observation not vitriol and certainly not jealousy of his salary.

In my two private conversations with EH I found him to be kind, smart, affable, yet lacking in knowledge of any details or able to add to the conversation. The first time it was early in his tenure and I have been in a similar place, but the second time was well into his tenure and I was stunned. Even more surprising is the candor in which he happily professed his lack of knowledge on AD matters. I understood the hire initially as he has SEC experience when only Pat Henry and GB had much otherwise. He had the SEC connections and that was very important for us. This reason alone may still have made the hire worth it in year1 without us knowing all the details but I think he needs to engage top donors and spirited fans better, and be a stronger public leader. This was a very strong skill BB brought so the glaring weakness of EH looks even worse coming right after.

I like BB both personally and as AD. He was great at hiring coaches and he began the unpopular but critical transition to the higher cost of championship athletics. If you have ever been a CEO who makes 99% of the decisions but is expected to resign or publicly get behind your Chairman when he makes the biggest decisions, you will know why he put his name on Sherman and resigned before SEC move. His downfall was offending some members of the BOR through his strong will and a lack of humility in speaking bluntly about his areas of expertise.

Who wrote the written summary?

Hey eric
Go fudk yourself! You suck!

MF Barnes > Hyman.

There may be legitimate reasons this guy sucks, but I don't really care whether he calls us "us", "them", or "those ****ing c**ksuckers".

Fair enough, nJohn! That's a man who knows how he feels!

Who changed up the audio clip and wrote the "edited summary"? If true, what was the intent/motivation?

quote:

---

For the record, I loved Bill Byrne. He was visible and one of the people. I emailed him several times and he emailed me right back. He and I got into a spirited debate (argument) about Javorskie Lane not being recocnized when he broke the touchdown record. He vehemently disagreed with me but kept communicating.

He didn't know me from Joe on the street but at a baseball regional one year, he walked up to me and asked if he could sit next to me and we had a blast watching the game. He came back the next day because he said it was bad luck to change seats when the Ags were winning. In our many conversations all weekend, he showed a passion for winning and a sense of humor (cherished the Dollar Bill moniker).

My family and I saw him at one of the Nebraska football games outside the stadium in Lincoln and he was so proud to see so many Aggies there he was like a kid in a candy store.

Hymen is a jackass. He's an empty suit. He needs to be gone yesterday.

I'd take Byrne every day and twice on Sunday!!

---

quote:

---

There may be legitimate reasons this guy sucks, but I don't really care whether he calls us "us", "them", or "those ****ing c**ksuckers".

---

Just find it interesting that the original interview was modified...by whom and why?

I want to know why the transcript was edited.

Even with the original it appears he just has trouble with noun cases.

We definitely need someone who is gooder with English.

quote:

---

Even with the original it appears he just has trouble with noun cases.

We definitely need someone who is gooderwith English.

---

It's "weller", Sir Isaac Einstein

Indeed

So who wrote the "edited" article?

Hyman was hired to help with the transition to the SEC with his experience at USC. He has a great relationship with Mike Slive which was defiantly a bonus. He had a good track record at TCU and USC, however many fans had the same thoughts of him at those places. Hyman is a proven fundraiser and that was his primary job at A&M when he was hired. I'm not saying he is the best AD out there, simply saying there were definite reason he was hired.

Hyman will never appear to be overly involved with the department and the nuances of what is going on. He has people on his staff for that, aka chief of staff. This is a different approach than many schools across the country. Hyman doesn't wear maroon shaded glass for his job. That's fine with me, I would rather have smart, unbiased business decisions that will help the department be the best it can be... even if a few of us koolade drinkers don't agree.

I have meet with Hyman several times in a work capacity. He is very hard to have a conversation with, and does not have the personality and charisma an AD "should have". I didn't enjoy interacting with Hyman like I did in with Byrne in his last few years. I can understand how Hyman comes of as so out of touch, and some of it is defiantly justified.