Thoughts on our Athletic Direct Hardt

[UR80sfan]

I have never met our athletic director and don't know much about him, but he is frequently criticized on this board. Our Football and Lax teams are currently both top 20 in country. Not sure how other sports are doing. Is the only reason he is not liked by some people on this forum because of his support for Mooney or are there other things that justify your dissatisfaction?

 

[Gallipoli]

I have never met our athletic director and don't know much about him, but he is frequently criticized on this board. Our Football and Lax teams are currently both top 20 in country. Not sure how other sports are doing. Is the only reason he is not liked by some people on this forum because of his support for Mooney or are there other things that justify your dissatisfaction?

He is a great fit with our fine little University.

 

[SpiderDogg]

The way he/Mooney dealt with the St Louis covid situation was obviously sketchy and concerning

 

[wr70beh]

You've never met Hardt? How is that possible, Paul?

 

[UR80sfan]

You've never met Hardt? How is that possible, Paul?

The question is off topic, but will address it anyway.

I have attended about a dozen events Hardt was at, but never spoke to him. I have also never met Mooney. I do know Paul and a number of the other trustees and have served on a number of U of R boards and committees over the years. I have a high regard for those that have volunteered their time and/or money to make the school a better place.

 

[nathanw19]

I have never met our athletic director and don't know much about him, but he is frequently criticized on this board. Our Football and Lax teams are currently both top 20 in country. Not sure how other sports are doing. Is the only reason he is not liked by some people on this forum because of his support for Mooney or are there other things that justify your dissatisfaction?

I see Men’s Basketball as our flagship program. Therefore, I think it is fair to heavily way the AD’s performance on both the performance of the flagship program and how he has dealt with the flagship program.

I have nothing personally against Hardt, but I do think he has been shown wanting both with the performance of the flagship program (still no NCAA bid) as well as how he has handled the flagship program (st. Louis covid debacle, moving the goal posts on program goals, lack of accountability to fans).

As you point out, other teams are doing very well, but like I said, I think AD’s are and should be judged heavily on their flagship program (see: Duke and basketball, Notre Dame and Football, etc.).

 

[PASpider]

Isn’t half of our lax conference leaving? What’s his plan to deal with that?

 

[GKiller]

How much time do u have? I don’t have enough to list for pretentious Hardt.

btw wait until fall on football. We’ve played 3 games, vs Elon twice & W&M. We’ve been way down in football. The rankings in a fake spring practice season mean nothing.

 

[CarolinaSpider]

The way he/Mooney dealt with the St Louis covid situation was obviously sketchy and concerning

This left a very sour taste with me.

 

[MrTbone]

I’m not nearly as negative on Hardt here as others but he certainly has made some questionable calls:

1. Retaining CM after back to back 20 loss seasons
2. Retaining CM after above seasons and an 8/9/10 year absence from the ncaa tournament
3. Hiring a coach from his former university with what appeared to be little exploration elsewhere (fwiw this appears to be the right call but I get the criticism)
4. Extending CM in a covid year when you have total leverage to NOT extend him and literally everyone would understand why you didn’t.
5. Setting fan expectation that the expectation is we make the tournament in the next two years and then not making it and retaining the coach (apparently last year counted as making it, ok, but weak)
6. Complete bungling of the STL covid protocols
7. Subsequent neutering for the A10 playoffs

I’m posting the negatives/questionables only. I’m sure there are positives, but you asked why people are down on him. There you go.

 

[fan2011]

We are ranked 15th out of 74 lacrosse teams, which is equivalent to ~72nd in basketball where there are 355 teams. I think our basketball team this year was considered top 60 based on NIT seed.

 

[SpiderGuy]

I have never met our athletic director and don't know much about him, but he is frequently criticized on this board. Our Football and Lax teams are currently both top 20 in country. Not sure how other sports are doing. Is the only reason he is not liked by some people on this forum because of his support for Mooney or are there other things that justify your dissatisfaction?

The weight of evidence is far to the right side of mean, median, or mode re: his support for Mooney’s long term record of mediocrity. You answered your own post in your last question. Isn’t that enough justification? His supt for Mooney is standard deviations beyond what most other colleges would accept. Performance and results don’t matter, do they?

 

[spider23]

Some of my issues are:

1. Retaining CM after back to back 20 loss seasons
2. Retaining CM after above seasons and an 8/9/10 year absence from the ncaa tournament
3. Hiring a coach from his former university with what appeared to be little exploration elsewhere (fwiw this appears to be the right call but I get the criticism)
4. Extending CM in a covid year when you have total leverage to NOT extend him and literally everyone would understand why you didn’t.
5. Setting fan expectation that the expectation is we make the tournament in the next two years and then not making it and retaining the coach (apparently last year counted as making it, ok, but weak)
6. Complete bungling of the STL covid protocols
7. Subsequent neutering for the A10 playoffs

 

[spider23]

Oops, sorry Tbone, I see you posted this first .

Hardt is failing at his number 1 priority, mens basketball.

 

[VT4700]

I’m not nearly as negative on Hardt here as others but he certainly has made some questionable calls:

1. Retaining CM after back to back 20 loss seasons
2. Retaining CM after above seasons and an 8/9/10 year absence from the ncaa tournament
3. Hiring a coach from his former university with what appeared to be little exploration elsewhere (fwiw this appears to be the right call but I get the criticism)
4. Extending CM in a covid year when you have total leverage to NOT extend him and literally everyone would understand why you didn’t.
5. Setting fan expectation that the expectation is we make the tournament in the next two years and then not making it and retaining the coach (apparently last year counted as making it, ok, but weak)
6. Complete bungling of the STL covid protocols
7. Subsequent neutering for the A10 playoffs

I’m posting the negatives/questionables only. I’m sure there are positives, but you asked why people are down on him. There you go.

1. And, then we went 24-7 after he did that. So, to me, that sounds like some credit should be given to the AD for believing in our coach and team after the back to back losing seasons.
2. He hasn't been here the whole time. If you want to go back that far, why not include the back to back tourney years as well?
3. Uh, yes, it was obviously a good decision. But, you still get the criticism???
4. Fine, but it is hard to say this wasn't the right decision. ADs will never please everyone, so it seems a little unfair to get on one for extending a coach who has gone 38-16 the past 2 years, including 20-9 IC.
5. No matter how much people on here try to act like last year did not happen, we went 14-4 and 24-7. No AD in the A-10 should ever be disappointed with that.
6. Maybe, maybe not, but unless you were there, you do not know the whole story.
7. Not sure what your point is with this one, so maybe I missed something here.

But, hey, it's mostly, if not all, opinion, so it's fine if people have a negative view of him, while others have a positive view of him. No AD will please everyone, and that is not his or her job.

 

[GKiller]

"National success in the men's basketball program is a rising tide that raises all boats in our athletics REGATTA."

-- John Hardt

 

[spider23]

Off season 4700 = Playoff Rondo.

And before Fan1 has a seizure, that is a compliment. Playoff Rondo is the bomb and is a thing.

 

[Spiders05]

To respond to original post...

I certainly don't judge an AD off men's lacrosse ranking. It's a tertiary NCAA sport. Caveat that I have a lot of fun watching it but it's not in the same stratosphere as the big two.

Speaking of big two...let's not get too excited about three Spring football games. Good things to build from, but not indicative at all of success as an AD.

 

[KE Spider]

See all this endless back and forth re: Mooney and it baffles me. Cherry picking stats by years to support an entrenched position, for or against.

Look at the entire data set. It is starkly revealing. 16 years with an average season record of 18 wins and 14.4 losses. Never won the A10 regular season. Only won the A10 tournament once. No NCAA appearances in 10 years (ok , CM gets a "maybe" for last year, but our selection wasn't a given). For this our school has paid well over $16 million in compensation. From a business standpoint, absolutely nuts.

If you believe 18W and 14.4L on average is acceptable year after year, you should support Mooney. If you believe the results are a shadow of what our once proud program was and what UR should aspire to be, I'm with you.

Hoping our Spiders have a stellar year next season, but CM's long term record is damning and to argue otherwise is to deny the reality of hard data.

Not sure where Hardt fits in this, but my faith in him is waning. Tolerating the intolerable in the flagship program is not a prescription for success for him personally or the school.

 

[MolivaManiac]

Well said, KE.

Back to the thread title, are SAF Donations and Number of donors up, down or even versus previous years? That's the ultimate metric that an AD is evaluated, right?

 

[MrTbone]

1. And, then we went 24-7 after he did that. So, to me, that sounds like some credit should be given to the AD for believing in our coach and team after the back to back losing seasons.
2. He hasn't been here the whole time. If you want to go back that far, why not include the back to back tourney years as well?
3. Uh, yes, it was obviously a good decision. But, you still get the criticism???
4. Fine, but it is hard to say this wasn't the right decision. ADs will never please everyone, so it seems a little unfair to get on one for extending a coach who has gone 38-16 the past 2 years, including 20-9 IC.
5. No matter how much people on here try to act like last year did not happen, we went 14-4 and 24-7. No AD in the A-10 should ever be disappointed with that.
6. Maybe, maybe not, but unless you were there, you do not know the whole story.
7. Not sure what your point is with this one, so maybe I missed something here.

But, hey, it's mostly, if not all, opinion, so it's fine if people have a negative view of him, while others have a positive view of him. No AD will please everyone, and that is not his or her job.

Well, you always have an interesting take.

Look, 80sfan asked for reasons, I’m giving him reasons. They’re all valid and I clearly pointed out that there are possibly positive reasons to like the AD. I think women’s bball is a positive so credit there.

AD said we are here to compete for championships. We have objectively not been in the hunt for championships in revenue sports during his tenure barring 2019-20 bball season and even then, you’d have to suspend disbelief that we would have won the A10 tournament having to surpass Dayton when we’ve done it once in our existence.

I mention 8/9/10 years but feel free to expand the narrative to all 16 years, it doesn’t shift the needle at this point if we’re talking 2 in 16 versus 0 in 10, it sucks badly in either lens. Hardt not only didn’t need to be here but should be competent enough to look at the entirety of CMs record and decide it didn’t project well towards championships. No one would have looked sideways if he went another direction. But two years later we are still having the same conversations about the program we had two years ago, and two years before that, and two years before that. This season certainly didn’t do him any favors in looking like he made the right call.

 

[Gospiders06]

I think mostly everyone understands the basics. 16 years of history somewhere. Our record against VCU is really bad. They continue to make the big dance. Consider how this past year went. VCU and St.Bonaventure are probably the favorites next year. Even with the talent we having coming back. I just don't trust Mooney in pivotal moments. He continues to lose at the wrong times. Between Lasalle and St.Joes last year. I still haven't recovered from those losses last year. We continue to accept being somewhat relevant. Winning championship or being at the highest level really is a big question mark? When you see other programs move on or find more success.

 

[AnnapSpider]

I have never met our athletic director and don't know much about him, but he is frequently criticized on this board. Our Football and Lax teams are currently both top 20 in country. Not sure how other sports are doing. Is the only reason he is not liked by some people on this forum because of his support for Mooney or are there other things that justify your dissatisfaction?

UR80’s don’t you realize that this is the board for negativity. We’re a small university and supposed to be equal to any and all P5 schools. And there hasn’t been an AD (living) that this board has liked. Come on UR80’s, pay attention.

 

[Gallipoli]

1. And, then we went 24-7 after he did that. So, to me, that sounds like some credit should be given to the AD for believing in our coach and team after the back to back losing seasons.
2. He hasn't been here the whole time. If you want to go back that far, why not include the back to back tourney years as well?
3. Uh, yes, it was obviously a good decision. But, you still get the criticism???
4. Fine, but it is hard to say this wasn't the right decision. ADs will never please everyone, so it seems a little unfair to get on one for extending a coach who has gone 38-16 the past 2 years, including 20-9 IC.
5. No matter how much people on here try to act like last year did not happen, we went 14-4 and 24-7. No AD in the A-10 should ever be disappointed with that.
6. Maybe, maybe not, but unless you were there, you do not know the whole story.
7. Not sure what your point is with this one, so maybe I missed something here.

But, hey, it's mostly, if not all, opinion, so it's fine if people have a negative view of him, while others have a positive view of him. No AD will please everyone, and that is not his or her job.

These are outstanding points. It is nice to see such a cogent rejoinder. Well done.

 

[wr70beh]

1. And, then we went 24-7 after he did that. So, to me, that sounds like some credit should be given to the AD for believing in our coach and team after the back to back losing seasons.
2. He hasn't been here the whole time. If you want to go back that far, why not include the back to back tourney years as well?
3. Uh, yes, it was obviously a good decision. But, you still get the criticism???
4. Fine, but it is hard to say this wasn't the right decision. ADs will never please everyone, so it seems a little unfair to get on one for extending a coach who has gone 38-16 the past 2 years, including 20-9 IC.
5. No matter how much people on here try to act like last year did not happen, we went 14-4 and 24-7. No AD in the A-10 should ever be disappointed with that.
6. Maybe, maybe not, but unless you were there, you do not know the whole story.
7. Not sure what your point is with this one, so maybe I missed something here.

But, hey, it's mostly, if not all, opinion, so it's fine if people have a negative view of him, while others have a positive view of him. No AD will please everyone, and that is not his or her job.

It seems like you want to go farther than the last 10 years to make an argument about success <#2>, but only talk about the last two years to make another argument about success <#4>. That's cherry-picking facts to make your argument. Fact is, there are more facts on TBones side to show a stronger argument to cut him loose. Maybe you need to face facts and realize that 25% of his tenure has been good, and 75% bad.

Where are the job offers from other schools since 2011 to give Mooney leverage in contract negotiations? The school had all the leverage and they blew it and gave him an unmerited extension. That should disqualify Hardt from ever running an athletic department again.

 

[8legs1dream]

See all this endless back and forth re: Mooney and it baffles me. Cherry picking stats by years to support an entrenched position, for or against.

Look at the entire data set. It is starkly revealing. 16 years with an average season record of 18 wins and 14.4 losses. Never won the A10 regular season. Only won the A10 tournament once. No NCAA appearances in 10 years (ok , CM gets a "maybe" for last year, but our selection wasn't a given). For this our school has paid well over $16 million in compensation. From a business standpoint, absolutely nuts.

If you believe 18W and 14.4L on average is acceptable year after year, you should support Mooney. If you believe the results are a shadow of what our once proud program was and what UR should aspire to be, I'm with you.

Hoping our Spiders have a stellar year next season, but CM's long term record is damning and to argue otherwise is to deny the reality of hard data.

Not sure where Hardt fits in this, but my faith in him is waning. Tolerating the intolerable in the flagship program is not a prescription for success for him personally or the school.

Very well stated. The only piece of the puzzle that you didn't hit on was CM's 7-20 record against our crosstown "rivals"

Sometimes it is easier for facts like these to sink in with the brainwashed crowd when you actually see it so breathe it in pom-pom mafia:

 

[GKiller]

Very well stated. The only piece of the puzzle that you didn't hit on was CM's 7-20 record against our crosstown "rivals"

Sometimes it is easier for facts like these to sink in with the brainwashed crowd when you actually see it so breathe it in pom-pom mafia:

didn’t u get the memo “pom poms” was canceled

 

[SpiderTrap]

It is very simple for basketball. The expectations or standards of measure should be as follows.

1) Make the NCAA tourney
2) Win the A10 regular season or Tourney
3) Beat VCU

Here is where we stand
1) NCAA Tourney - 2.5 for 16 (giving .5 for the COVID Cancelled year)
2) Win A10 Regular Season or Tourney - 1 for 16 (1 tourney win)
3) Beat VCU - 7-20 as mentioned above

If we achieved NCAA tourney more - you would expect 2 and 3 better, but they don't have to be. We could in theory make the NCAA tourney every year, but have a losing record to VCU and come in 2nd in the league each year. I would be fine with that - if we were making the tourney. Likewise, if you achieve 2 (win A10 regular season or tourney) chances are you are making the NCAA tourney. Lastly - beat you rival. I could go into 4 and 5 being make the NIT and graduate your players but I think these top 3 are the main measurements and they stand for Hardt as well. Because he is the one who allows it to get to 2.5-16, 1 for 16, or 7-20.

 

[nathanw19]

Very well stated. The only piece of the puzzle that you didn't hit on was CM's 7-20 record against our crosstown "rivals"

Sometimes it is easier for facts like these to sink in with the brainwashed crowd when you actually see it so breathe it in pom-pom mafia:

The stat that blew my mind earlier this year is that we had the same number of NCAA births as VCU in our history when Mooney took over (7 appearances).

Now we have 9, and VCU has 18...

 

[Gallipoli]

The question is off topic, but will address it anyway.

I have attended about a dozen events Hardt was at, but never spoke to him. I have also never met Mooney. I do know Paul and a number of the other trustees and have served on a number of U of R boards and committees over the years. I have a high regard for those that have volunteered their time and/or money to make the school a better place.

There is no need for you to respond.

 

[712_VT]

But, but, but what about our record over Davidson? That has to be a positive right?

 

[MrTbone]

There is no need for you to respond.

I don’t think he needs to respond. He was asking for data points (I think genuinely) which I and others have given, to varying degrees of objectivity. It’s his prerogative if he wants to let those color his view of the AD’s performance.

It’s ok to have opinion-based and fact-based discussions here. It’s called a discussion board for that reason. We don’t all have to share the same perspective.

 

[Eight Legger]

My main problem with Hardt is that he pretty much has acted like our athletic department began existing when he arrived. That's to say, I don't feel like he has weighed anything that happened before his time when making decisions for the future. He wiped everyone's slate clean and has evaluated based only upon what's happened these last few years. Not really the best way to operate.

 

[MrTbone]

My main problem with Hardt is that he pretty much has acted like our athletic department began existing when he arrived. That's to say, I don't feel like he has weighed anything that happened before his time when making decisions for the future. He wiped everyone's slate clean and has evaluated based only upon what's happened these last few years. Not really the best way to operate.

I had this point buried in my list. JH understandably wanted to take his mid year appointment to observe the programs, and men’s bball in particular. Fine. But after two years, he should have also been able to see the lack of top end success pretty easily in MBB.

He bet on CM two years ago and I guess he’s crediting him with at least one success for ncaa even though no tournament was played. He will have five years of hands on results next season to chart course with for the future.

 

[nathanw19]

I had this point buried in my list. JH understandably wanted to take his mid year appointment to observe the programs, and men’s bball in particular. Fine. But after two years, he should have also been able to see the lack of top end success pretty easily in MBB.

He bet on CM two years ago and I guess he’s crediting him with at least one success for ncaa even though no tournament was played. He will have five years of hands on results next season to chart course with for the future.

Exactly. Which is what makes next season such a make or break year, especially returning at least 4 starters and only potentially losing 1 player from last year (if Blake decides to move on). I’ve gotta think we’ll be one of the most experienced and oldest teams next season.

 

[8legs1dream]

Exactly. Which is what makes next season such a make or break year, especially returning at least 4 starters and only potentially losing 1 player from last year (if Blake decides to move on). I’ve gotta think we’ll be one of the most experienced and oldest teams next season.

 

[ChoppinBroccoli]

It is very simple for basketball. The expectations or standards of measure should be as follows.

1) Make the NCAA tourney
2) Win the A10 regular season or Tourney
3) Beat VCU

Here is where we stand
1) NCAA Tourney - 2.5 for 16 (giving .5 for the COVID Cancelled year)
2) Win A10 Regular Season or Tourney - 1 for 16 (1 tourney win)
3) Beat VCU - 7-20 as mentioned above

I like your expectations but would correct your math as follows.
1) 2 for 15. There was no NCAA tourney last year. Can't divide by zero. Can't assume anything.
2) 1 for 31. 0 for 16 opportunities to win the regular season, 1 for 15 A10 tourneys.

 

[DTSpider]

It does seem odd that someone as well connected and influential as 1980s, that clearly also cares athletics, hasn’t met the AD. That is a pretty damning intro right there. Wasn’t sure if that was the point or not but sure seems like he’s gunning for JH’s head the way the question was phrased.

 

[ChoppinBroccoli]

It does seem odd that someone as well connected and influential as 1980s, that clearly also cares athletics, hasn’t met the AD. That is a pretty damning intro right there. Wasn’t sure if that was the point or not but sure seems like he’s gunning for JH’s head the way the question was phrased.

I highly doubt he's gunning for JH, but that comment also struck me as odd.
My business partner is also a long-time benefactor of Spider Athletics - though I imagine not in 80's league, and has never met the man either.

 

[DTSpider]

I figured it was meant as an agenda item to stir up trouble. I’ll say that I know few people that have met JH. By comparison, the 3 most recent ADs were all pretty accessible. I gather he is focused on pleasing a very small group.