I’m sure you have some pat answers for these two things since you’ve pretty much become entrenched on taking shots at our AD.
TLDR: I want the program to succeed and I want Oats and Byrnes to get the support they need to enable that.
The only issue I have with the AD at all, is that I'm not entirely sure the choice he made to remove Avery was done without duress and with full understanding of what his options were. My only issue with firing Avery is I didn't see how merely firing him was going to fix the issues, that it will take bigger steps to do that. It's up to Oats to lay out what he needs for success and it's up to Byrne to see that he gets that. Oats might work out, but Oats is playing from behind in terms of issues within the program that you, yourself outlined. The biggest reason, and I said this a full ten years ago, I wanted a more experienced major program guy was because I thought they would be best qualified to rebuild the basketball program (not just coach the players better). We both know basketball needs more support, and we both know if things are not going well they'll tune Byrne and Oats out quickly.
Some of your statements indicate a more negative connotation than I intended, and I apologize if I let my frustration sound like personal attacks. Byrne inherited a program, and once again you've alluded to this a number of ways, along with others, that simply hasn't had the best support. Mismanagement in terms of stuff that happened prior to Byrne obviously isn't on Byrne, that would be ludicrous for me to blame that on him. But it's still the same program, it's still the same facilities, and it's still the same boosters that are behaving in basically the same manner. I don't think I ever said he mismanaged things though my frustration might not have always been well focused. I was however critical of a coaching search that seemed built more around going big on a fire than going big on a hire, but I'm not sure he was given a choice unfortunately (and I recognize Oats might be the best option available to him).
You outline the problems, you point out that the program can't even attract certain candidates, so on so forth and when I say the program needs more support, it's not because I have something against the AD. I've been saying this stuff before he was ever hired. It's that the team needs more than people who can come up with 5.5 million (payable almost immediately) to fire a coach but not much else.
To give another take on the finances, last year I saw the revenue total was around 170 million. Around 30 million was from donations, leaving 140 million. It isn't that I think they have a ton more money to spend on basketball, but as I understand it things like basketball facilities should actually be Title IX neutral since they'd be for both male and females. Furthermore, while basketball last time I saw was profitable to the tune of around 10 million a year, there are programs that profit over 20 million a year while spending more than Alabama. So Alabama could actually invest more in basketball and make that right back if it's done well.
I never said that was an easy task for Byrne. He inherited this mess. I never said this was an easy thing for Oats (my concern actually was that it would be
too hard), he inherited this. But, it is a mess. The only way it gets better, and I'm speaking in particular of the people who demanded change, is if those people decide they want to be a part of making something better. My issue is not with Oats or Byrne, it's with the paradox of an expectation of basketball success without investing in basketball success (and to reiterate that investment isn't purely financial, it's patience, it's non-financial forms of support, etc...).
I hope Byrne and Oats are the ones to break this trend (they can't do it by themselves), because I fully believe Alabama has everything in terms of capacity, to reclaim the spot as the #2 SEC team and in the process make a lot more money in basketball as well. I will also add that I do think that intellectually Byrne and Oats have the capacity to figure out what the program needs, but that's just the start of the challenge.