Saturday Column: KU struggles to establish winning football program

It’s anyone’s guess who will win this afternoon’s football game between Kansas University and Central Michigan. So far, the Jayhawks’ performance has been a tremendous disappointment, winning one and losing one, with today’s game a toss-up.

Really, it doesn’t matter that much who wins because it’s likely the Jayhawks will be heavy underdogs for the rest of the season when they face much stronger Big 12 Conference teams.

Unfortunately, this football season is a fairly accurate reflection of the past five Jayhawk football seasons.

The overall KU football effort probably is the university’s largest single program other than the KU School of Medicine. It is sustained at its present level by television revenues and it is failing.

Year after year, Kansas students, faculty, alumni and friends have been told brighter days were on the horizon. New coaches Turner Gill and Charlie Weis were brought in with multimillion-dollar salaries. The KU sports promotion machine pumped out news release after news release touting incoming recruits, quoting KU coaches who talked of improvements in player recruiting, player discipline, improved performance in the classroom, optimistic predictions about off-season training and improved performance on the playing field and other reasons why alumni and friends should be optimistic about the upcoming season.

Gill, the former Nebraska football standout and baseball player, was described as nicer, more friendly, religious and less hard-nosed than his predecessor, Mark Mangino. His record was five wins and 19 losses, and KU ended up spending millions to buy out his contract and send him on his way.

Weis had a winning record and good reputation with professional football teams but was fired from his head coaching job at Notre Dame. He was portrayed as an almost-genius with his coaching of quarterbacks and his creative offensive schemes. His record, so far, is five wins and 21 losses — the worst winning percentage in KU history.

The question today in Jayhawk land is whether, or when, he will be replaced. KU is getting used to buying out coaches’ contracts: Mangino, Gill and now perhaps Weis, although Mangino was forced out by then-Athletic Director Lew Perkins not because of his record — 50 wins and 48 losses — but due to personal animosity between the two along with a well-orchestrated plan by Perkins to force Mangino out.

Now, three years into Weis’ contract, Jayhawk alumni, friends, students and armchair quarterbacks again are trying to figure out what is wrong. Why can’t KU field a more respectable team — not a championship team every year, but at least one with a decent win-loss record that is competitive and reflects KU’s commitment to excellence rather than being an embarrassment?

It’s not a good situation and leaves a good percentage of fans and supporters close to giving up, saying they are tired of year-after-year disappointments. They can’t figure out why KU cannot have a reasonably good team. Its basketball team is a national leader; under its current coach, the track and field team is at a national level; volleyball is good; softball, baseball and soccer teams are strong. But football is bad, one of the worst among the nation’s state-aided research-based universities.

Who is at fault?

One thing is certain, and that is the majority of the players are trying their best. They want to win. They absorb injuries that may last the rest of their lives, and they spend hundreds, if not thousands, of hours in training rooms and on the practice fields. They want to be associated with a winning program. Their desire to win is far more intense than that of fans in the stands or those who write the big checks.

This leaves the coach, those who run the athletic department, the chancellor and fiscal contributors.

Coaches can say they are in the business because they enjoy working with young people, teaching responsibility, discipline and citizenship and that winning, in any endeavor, requires commitment and hard work.

That is true — to an extent.

However, big dollars, millions of dollars, public adulation, egos and fringe benefits also play a big role. Maybe there would be far more successful coaches if their contracts were based on achievements rather than on guaranteed multimillion-dollar packages: make so much the first season with increases year by year based on team performance. Added dollars, rather than a guaranteed contract, serve as a powerful motivation.

Coaches have the responsibility of recruiting players and, no matter how good a coach may be, he or she is not likely to win many games against teams with far better players. Was Gill a good recruiter? How about Weis?

One extremely important facet of Weis’ program is his emphasis on players attending classes and meeting their academic responsibilities.

The KU athletic director, whoever that may be, plays a critical role. It all depends on the ability of an AD to select the right person as the football coach. When looking for a replacement for former coach Gill, KU AD Sheahon Zenger told fans he was going to get in his car, scout the country and come back with a coach.

He may or may not have been rejected by some he interviewed, for whatever reason, but he came back to Lawrence with Weis. Maybe Weis was his first and only choice, maybe not, but the rest is history.

The chancellor, most any chancellor, is likely to approve whomever the AD proposes, believing the AD has made a thorough search and a deep background check. Based on numerous new hires, unversity-wide, one has to wonder about the depth of KU’s search efforts.

The coach is supposed to be able to recruit, attract good players, but, with KU’s record, how can a coach tell a compelling story to a truly outstanding high school or junior college football player? Some in the college athletics business believe the quality of facilities play a major role in attracting above-average players, so stadiums are enlarged and normal student housing facilities are converted into five-star quarters. Some schools, hopefully KU, emphasize the excellence of the academic and tutoring program, which should be of interest, if not to players, at least to their parents.

Private fiscal support for the KU football program is good, considering the win-loss record. A consistent winning program is sure to attract more dollars, but the longstanding loyalty and generosity of KU fans cannot be overstated.

If there’s any question about the importance or results of winning and turning around a traditional losing football program, there’s a perfect example about 90 miles west of Lawrence. Consider what former Kansas State University President Jon Wefald, Athletic Director Bob Krause and Coach Bill Snyder have done for their football program AND the university.

It can be done, but, so far, KU coaches, athletic directors and chancellors have not be able to put together the right components.

Zenger said all the right things when he hired Weis, but, so far, the results are a huge disappointment. What’s he going to do now? What does Chancellor Gray-Little have to say about the situation? How much longer will generous alumni and friends open up their checkbooks for the football program? There’s no use talking about lowering the field, adding more stadium seating and building a number of new suites to attract fans and dollars unless there are major changes and improvements — not just cosmetic efforts and nice-sounding predictions. Winning serves as a great tonic for the entire university.

The university deserves better IF football is to play a major role in the school’s athletic program.