Todd Turner's shining moments at UW

BabsGilbyTawdTy · July 2015

1. Hired Tyrone Willingham
2. Confidently stood behind Willingham after 11 wins and 25 losses in three seasons
3. Raised exactly $0 to rebuild Husky Stadium
4. Quit while suggesting he could have taken a job in the NFL if he wasn't so devoted to helping student-athletes
5. What else?

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it

section8 · July 2015

6. Profit

Dardanus · July 2015

Inspired the term half-brains

dnc · July 2015

Why do you hate the Top Dawg Blog?

sjd · July 2015

Todd now shining Santa Clara

This...

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2015/06/24/santa-clara-athletics-renee-baumgartner-named-ad-ummmm/

Then this...

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2015/06/29/santa-clara-athletics-a-leadership-void-turners-influence-unanswered-questions-about-baumgartner/

Meek · July 2015

didn't i post this shit two weeks ago already?

LoneStarDawg · July 2015

Meek said:
plagerism.shit.fucko.

dnc · July 2015

firetoddturner.com

PurpleJ · July 2015

PostGameOrangeSlices · July 2015

PurpleJ said:

Tequilla · July 2015

I remember reading a lot of Turner's "Top Dawg Blog" and continued to come away from it with some serious questions about whether or not Turner "got it." There was one blog he wrote back in July of 2007 that was more or less a targeted plea for more donations, etc. because of the low levels of the endowments at the time. I wish I could find the blog online but I doubt that they exist anymore. Anyway, below is a letter I wrote to Turner at the time on the subject followed by his response (which in my mind completely missed the mark as a non-answer to the point that he would have been better to just simply not respond) ...

My communication

Mr. Turner:

Having read your blog today, I must admit that on one hand, I completely understand the dilemma that the Athletic Dept. faces. On the other hand, I do take issue with some of the comments made in the blog. Before I give me thoughts, let me give just a bit of a background to explain where I'm coming from.

I graduated from the University of Washington in 2002 with degrees in Mathematics and Business Administration (Finance emphasis). In 2005, I graduated from Texas Christian University with an MBA in Finance. Currently, I work in the finance field.

I completely understand the issues that the Athletic Dept. faces regarding the endowment. Quite simply, the increase in expenses (i.e. rising cost of tuition, room & board, books, etc.) have increase faster than the growth of the principal in the endowment. That's always a concern for an endowment - and clearly, a huge issue here. The main options to resolve the problem are to (1) increase the principal through excess returns on the endowment each year and (2) to increase the principal through increased donations, etc.

I read a few months ago about the Students First fund and think it's a tremendous idea. In reading your blog today, I'm glad to see that there will be a crossover into the Athletic Dept. as well. It's a great idea.

However, in reading your blog, I was troubled to see that all of the examples used were in the range of 6-figure donations. While I understand that a 6-figure donation allows the endowment to be named in whatever way the donor deems appropriate, I would believe that the fact is that the bulk of the people who read your blog and that support the University of Washington are individuals that are unable to make a 6-figure donation.

One concern that I've heard from many of my fellow alumni that are not able to make significant donations each year is that they feel that any moderate donation that they make is either not appreciated or more importantly, won't make much of a difference. While the University in my opinion has done a better job in many ways in the last few years to reach out more to the alumni base as a whole versus that of a select few, I think it's fair to say that the job isn't done.

I completely understand that for a University the size of the University of Washington, it is vital to secure donations, etc. from those that are able to give in the 6+ figure range. However, how many people take enough time to realize that if 1,000 individuals were to donate $100, collectively, they'd be able to provide a $100,000 endowment? In my opinion, these are things that I think are important to mention. While the large donors are incredibly important, and I would never suggest otherwise, in many ways, the overwhelming percentage of those that are supporters of this University are those that are much more likely to be able to contribute in the $100 - $1,000 range.

I would suggest to the University as a whole, it is important to remember these people and that while they may not be able to provide the support through large numbers by themselves, collectively, they have a significant mass to them. If these people feel like they are an important part of the program, and perhaps more importantly, have reason to BELIEVE THAT THEY CAN IN FACT MAKE A DIFFERENCE, I think most would be pleasantly surprised in the results.

Hopefully, these words make sense and will be helpful in the achievement of the goal that you proposed.

Response from Turner

Thank you for taking the time to write.

You are absolutely correct in that we should value the “non-6-figure” donations – and we do strive to acknowledge those contributions consistently and publicly on a regular basis.

Those who contribute at that level through their Tyee donations offset many of the department’s expenses. The focus of this particular blog, however, was not on donations in general,

but on the Students First initiative, which has provided for more than $8 million in ‘new money’ for the department.. The minimum established by the University for the 50% matching is

$100K ($50K is the usual minimum), but it gave us something to offer those donors who we thought might be ready to make a significant commitment – seeing their gift matched by the school.

We do have several “consortium” endowments (whereby many individuals can contribute) – including one established in Marv Harshman’s honor by his former players. These, too, are

eligible for the Students First program.

Thank you again for writing, and for your support of the Huskies.

Doogles · July 2015

Tequilla said:
I remember reading a lot of Turner's "Top Dawg Blog" and continued to come away from it with some serious questions about whether or not Turner "got it." There was one blog he wrote back in July of 2007 that was more or less a targeted plea for more donations, etc. because of the low levels of the endowments at the time. I wish I could find the blog online but I doubt that they exist anymore. Anyway, below is a letter I wrote to Turner at the time on the subject followed by his response (which in my mind completely missed the mark as a non-answer to the point that he would have been better to just simply not respond) ...

My communication

Mr. Turner:

Having read your blog today, I must admit that on one hand, I completely understand the dilemma that the Athletic Dept. faces. On the other hand, I do take issue with some of the comments made in the blog. Before I give me thoughts, let me give just a bit of a background to explain where I'm coming from.

I graduated from the University of Washington in 2002 with degrees in Mathematics and Business Administration (Finance emphasis). In 2005, I graduated from Texas Christian University with an MBA in Finance. Currently, I work in the finance field.

I completely understand the issues that the Athletic Dept. faces regarding the endowment. Quite simply, the increase in expenses (i.e. rising cost of tuition, room & board, books, etc.) have increase faster than the growth of the principal in the endowment. That's always a concern for an endowment - and clearly, a huge issue here. The main options to resolve the problem are to (1) increase the principal through excess returns on the endowment each year and (2) to increase the principal through increased donations, etc.

I read a few months ago about the Students First fund and think it's a tremendous idea. In reading your blog today, I'm glad to see that there will be a crossover into the Athletic Dept. as well. It's a great idea.

However, in reading your blog, I was troubled to see that all of the examples used were in the range of 6-figure donations. While I understand that a 6-figure donation allows the endowment to be named in whatever way the donor deems appropriate, I would believe that the fact is that the bulk of the people who read your blog and that support the University of Washington are individuals that are unable to make a 6-figure donation.

One concern that I've heard from many of my fellow alumni that are not able to make significant donations each year is that they feel that any moderate donation that they make is either not appreciated or more importantly, won't make much of a difference. While the University in my opinion has done a better job in many ways in the last few years to reach out more to the alumni base as a whole versus that of a select few, I think it's fair to say that the job isn't done.

I completely understand that for a University the size of the University of Washington, it is vital to secure donations, etc. from those that are able to give in the 6+ figure range. However, how many people take enough time to realize that if 1,000 individuals were to donate $100, collectively, they'd be able to provide a $100,000 endowment? In my opinion, these are things that I think are important to mention. While the large donors are incredibly important, and I would never suggest otherwise, in many ways, the overwhelming percentage of those that are supporters of this University are those that are much more likely to be able to contribute in the $100 - $1,000 range.

I would suggest to the University as a whole, it is important to remember these people and that while they may not be able to provide the support through large numbers by themselves, collectively, they have a significant mass to them. If these people feel like they are an important part of the program, and perhaps more importantly, have reason to BELIEVE THAT THEY CAN IN FACT MAKE A DIFFERENCE, I think most would be pleasantly surprised in the results.

Hopefully, these words make sense and will be helpful in the achievement of the goal that you proposed.

Response from Turner

TL, DR

dnc · July 2015

Tequilla said:
I remember reading a lot of Turner's "Top Dawg Blog" and continued to come away from it with some serious questions about whether or not Turner "got it." There was one blog he wrote back in July of 2007 that was more or less a targeted plea for more donations, etc. because of the low levels of the endowments at the time. I wish I could find the blog online but I doubt that they exist anymore. Anyway, below is a letter I wrote to Turner at the time on the subject followed by his response (which in my mind completely missed the mark as a non-answer to the point that he would have been better to just simply not respond) ...

My communication

Mr. Turner:

Having read your blog today, I must admit that on one hand, I completely understand the dilemma that the Athletic Dept. faces. On the other hand, I do take issue with some of the comments made in the blog. Before I give me thoughts, let me give just a bit of a background to explain where I'm coming from.

I graduated from the University of Washington in 2002 with degrees in Mathematics and Business Administration (Finance emphasis). In 2005, I graduated from Texas Christian University with an MBA in Finance. Currently, I work in the finance field.

I completely understand the issues that the Athletic Dept. faces regarding the endowment. Quite simply, the increase in expenses (i.e. rising cost of tuition, room & board, books, etc.) have increase faster than the growth of the principal in the endowment. That's always a concern for an endowment - and clearly, a huge issue here. The main options to resolve the problem are to (1) increase the principal through excess returns on the endowment each year and (2) to increase the principal through increased donations, etc.

I read a few months ago about the Students First fund and think it's a tremendous idea. In reading your blog today, I'm glad to see that there will be a crossover into the Athletic Dept. as well. It's a great idea.

However, in reading your blog, I was troubled to see that all of the examples used were in the range of 6-figure donations. While I understand that a 6-figure donation allows the endowment to be named in whatever way the donor deems appropriate, I would believe that the fact is that the bulk of the people who read your blog and that support the University of Washington are individuals that are unable to make a 6-figure donation.

One concern that I've heard from many of my fellow alumni that are not able to make significant donations each year is that they feel that any moderate donation that they make is either not appreciated or more importantly, won't make much of a difference. While the University in my opinion has done a better job in many ways in the last few years to reach out more to the alumni base as a whole versus that of a select few, I think it's fair to say that the job isn't done.

I completely understand that for a University the size of the University of Washington, it is vital to secure donations, etc. from those that are able to give in the 6+ figure range. However, how many people take enough time to realize that if 1,000 individuals were to donate $100, collectively, they'd be able to provide a $100,000 endowment? In my opinion, these are things that I think are important to mention. While the large donors are incredibly important, and I would never suggest otherwise, in many ways, the overwhelming percentage of those that are supporters of this University are those that are much more likely to be able to contribute in the $100 - $1,000 range.

I would suggest to the University as a whole, it is important to remember these people and that while they may not be able to provide the support through large numbers by themselves, collectively, they have a significant mass to them. If these people feel like they are an important part of the program, and perhaps more importantly, have reason to BELIEVE THAT THEY CAN IN FACT MAKE A DIFFERENCE, I think most would be pleasantly surprised in the results.

Hopefully, these words make sense and will be helpful in the achievement of the goal that you proposed.

Response from Turner

Thank you for taking the time to write.

You are absolutely correct in that we should value the “non-6-figure” donations – and we do strive to acknowledge those contributions consistently and publicly on a regular basis.

Those who contribute at that level through their Tyee donations offset many of the department’s expenses. The focus of this particular blog, however, was not on donations in general,

but on the Students First initiative, which has provided for more than $8 million in ‘new money’ for the department.. The minimum established by the University for the 50% matching is

$100K ($50K is the usual minimum), but it gave us something to offer those donors who we thought might be ready to make a significant commitment – seeing their gift matched by the school.

We do have several “consortium” endowments (whereby many individuals can contribute) – including one established in Marv Harshman’s honor by his former players. These, too, are

eligible for the Students First program.

Thank you again for writing, and for your support of the Huskies.

disagree

Muttzen · July 2015

Tequilla said:
I

My communication

Mr. Turner:

Having read your blog today, I must admit that on one hand, I completely understand the dilemma that the Athletic Dept. faces. On the other hand, I do take issue with some of the comments made in the blog. Before I give me thoughts , let me give just a bit of a background to explain where I'm coming from.
TLDR

TIL Tequilla is a pirate

seatownfunk · July 2015

A search committee is formed to replace Babs. The BOR, upper campus, and the big donor supporters of the school are sick of the egg showing up on their face. They are sick of the country club that Babs ran and the loose way she ran the department - particularly in light of what went on with Slick. They wanted someone prim, proper, and who they could count on would not sully the University name. ENTER TODD TURNER.

Now, this pretty much gets you up to the point where Emmert was hired. Did he have to sign off on the hiring of Turner? Most likely. But whatever.

At this point, Emmert isn't responsible for the on-field performance of the football program. There is a coach in place. It's not Emmert's job to oversee the football program or any other program in the athletic department. That job belongs to Todd Turner. It's Emmert's job to monitor the job performance of Todd Turner.

So 1-10 happens. Gilby is canned by Turner (rightfully so). Yes, the program went 1-10. But the actions of those charged with overseeing the program were correct. Turner fired the coach for poor performance. If I'm in Emmert's shoes, I can't complain.

PostGameOrangeSlices · July 2015

Tequilla said:
I remember reading a lot of Turner's "Top Dawg Blog" and continued to come away from it with some serious questions about whether or not Turner "got it." There was one blog he wrote back in July of 2007 that was more or less a targeted plea for more donations, etc. because of the low levels of the endowments at the time. I wish I could find the blog online but I doubt that they exist anymore. Anyway, below is a letter I wrote to Turner at the time on the subject followed by his response (which in my mind completely missed the mark as a non-answer to the point that he would have been better to just simply not respond) ...

My communication

Mr. Turner:

Having read your blog today, I must admit that on one hand, I completely understand the dilemma that the Athletic Dept. faces. On the other hand, I do take issue with some of the comments made in the blog. Before I give me thoughts, let me give just a bit of a background to explain where I'm coming from.

I graduated from the University of Washington in 2002 with degrees in Mathematics and Business Administration (Finance emphasis). In 2005, I graduated from Texas Christian University with an MBA in Finance. Currently, I work in the finance field.

I completely understand the issues that the Athletic Dept. faces regarding the endowment. Quite simply, the increase in expenses (i.e. rising cost of tuition, room & board, books, etc.) have increase faster than the growth of the principal in the endowment. That's always a concern for an endowment - and clearly, a huge issue here. The main options to resolve the problem are to (1) increase the principal through excess returns on the endowment each year and (2) to increase the principal through increased donations, etc.

I read a few months ago about the Students First fund and think it's a tremendous idea. In reading your blog today, I'm glad to see that there will be a crossover into the Athletic Dept. as well. It's a great idea.

However, in reading your blog, I was troubled to see that all of the examples used were in the range of 6-figure donations. While I understand that a 6-figure donation allows the endowment to be named in whatever way the donor deems appropriate, I would believe that the fact is that the bulk of the people who read your blog and that support the University of Washington are individuals that are unable to make a 6-figure donation.

One concern that I've heard from many of my fellow alumni that are not able to make significant donations each year is that they feel that any moderate donation that they make is either not appreciated or more importantly, won't make much of a difference. While the University in my opinion has done a better job in many ways in the last few years to reach out more to the alumni base as a whole versus that of a select few, I think it's fair to say that the job isn't done.

I completely understand that for a University the size of the University of Washington, it is vital to secure donations, etc. from those that are able to give in the 6+ figure range. However, how many people take enough time to realize that if 1,000 individuals were to donate $100, collectively, they'd be able to provide a $100,000 endowment? In my opinion, these are things that I think are important to mention. While the large donors are incredibly important, and I would never suggest otherwise, in many ways, the overwhelming percentage of those that are supporters of this University are those that are much more likely to be able to contribute in the $100 - $1,000 range.

I would suggest to the University as a whole, it is important to remember these people and that while they may not be able to provide the support through large numbers by themselves, collectively, they have a significant mass to them. If these people feel like they are an important part of the program, and perhaps more importantly, have reason to BELIEVE THAT THEY CAN IN FACT MAKE A DIFFERENCE, I think most would be pleasantly surprised in the results.

Hopefully, these words make sense and will be helpful in the achievement of the goal that you proposed.

Response from Turner

Thank you for taking the time to write.

You are absolutely correct in that we should value the “non-6-figure” donations – and we do strive to acknowledge those contributions consistently and publicly on a regular basis.

Those who contribute at that level through their Tyee donations offset many of the department’s expenses. The focus of this particular blog, however, was not on donations in general,

but on the Students First initiative, which has provided for more than $8 million in ‘new money’ for the department.. The minimum established by the University for the 50% matching is

$100K ($50K is the usual minimum), but it gave us something to offer those donors who we thought might be ready to make a significant commitment – seeing their gift matched by the school.

We do have several “consortium” endowments (whereby many individuals can contribute) – including one established in Marv Harshman’s honor by his former players. These, too, are

eligible for the Students First program.

Thank you again for writing, and for your support of the Huskies.

God, fuck off!

TierbsHsotBoobs · July 2015

He brought UW a natty...

Gladstone · July 2015

I bear him great ill will.

CFetters_Nacho_Lover · July 2015

TierbsHsotBoobs said:
He brought UW a natty...

And a perfect season.

BayDawg · July 2015

Todd Turner's shining moments at UW:

PostGameOrangeSlices · July 2015

Some of you lack the comportment necessary to have respect for molders of men

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Todd Turner's shining moments at UW

Comments