-
Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts access private forums and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!
AD finalist names starting to surface
- Thread starter BWahlberg
- Start date
I know UM benefits greatly by the publicity of the football team and other sports. But, to call for the resignation of the president because of his decisions re: UM athletics and the football team is over the top. I will agree that UM football and UM sports are a prime part of UM, but it still does not determine UM's success as an educational institution. UM will and has been an excellent provider of higher education for MT, and this was true even in the days when UM football was a laughing stock.Spanky said:
I do not know how the enrollment at UM would be affected by (heaven forbid) a losing football team. I don't think it would be affected as much as you think. What I'm saying is that all the $millions put into the football program by boosters is FOR FOOTBALL, ONLY. Yes, some revenues from football assist other UM programs.
But, let's not confuse support for UM football as support for UM. There are people on this board, in the community, in the state, who don't give a damn about the broader UM mission. They only care about UM football, and that's where their money goes. That's all to the good. I don't question that. But, let's not confuse success of the UM football team with the success of UM, nor imply that lack of success of the football team means lack of success of UM as an educational institution.
To me, UM football is icing on the cake; it's not the cake, itself. Yes, like all of you, I'm a fan of UM sports, including football. If I were not, I would not read or post on this board. And, yes, I do read the newspapers, and everything else I can find online or in print re: The Griz. But, too many think that UM is more dependent on UM football than it is.
On the other hand, it was the athletic programs and their success that reignited my interest in UM, having left there for graduate work at another great university. I hardly think the Arabian Student given a pass, is the kind of leadership I would support at UM. I am chalking that one up to gross incompetence due to a short learning on the job curve. The UM is a full package and some of the academic programs are weak while others, including athletics are strong. As they saying goes, there is no bad publicity and athletics gives Montana a presence. I can't recall any one asking me if I went to Montana State..a good school, to be sure, but not on a recognizable list.Grizzoola said:
Grizbacker1
Well-known member
Spanky said:
I am beginning to feel like i am speaking to a teenager who doesn't listen! I NEVER said we should just hand the job to Kent, in fact, what I did say was that I am not privvy to who the other finalists are, so there is no way I am saying it should be handed to Kent. I am saying the pigeon holing him because he works there now is pretty petty, especially when also admit you don't even know the man you are making judgements about. Thank God you are not on the committee. I want the person who is best qualified to lead UM Athletics, if that is Kent, great, if not, then i will support whomever is named.
None of us know or ever will know the mechanics behind the Saudi student. I continue to believe that was an international thing, governed by some kind of protocol between the U.S. State Dept. & the Saudi government, over which UM had no control. To me, that point is moot, and I'm bored by people bringing that up.GrizLA said:
Well, in re: there's no such thing as bad PR, which sometimes I've said on this board, the fans of Penn State football would not agree. But, I don't know what that has to do with this discussion. I really don't know your knock on MSU. I'm a Griz fan, not a Cat fan, but MSU offers many majors that by design UM does not have. Its engineering school and school of architecture provide an affordable opportunity for talented MT students not available at UM. I'll also say that MSU has a more balanced approach to football than UM.
The past does not matter to MSU football; it's the present, and preseason polls, for what little they're worth, project MSU finishing higher than UM in the BSC. I'm not rooting for the Cats; no way. But, I ignore on this board topics involving the Cats. It's a waste of time. I want the Griz to beat the Cats, but I don't obsess over it.
FOUR FINALISTS have made the cut. Two have been named. The other two are from areas far away from Montana.
The four are being interviewed. One will be chosen by Royce with influnce from the selection committee.
It would be unfair to name the other two but in my opinion they are very good. I am saying we will be in good hands with the final pick. Very good!
Kent H is a good guy and would make a good AD. I just doubt if he makes it, I have no inside info on that matter but with his past association and with the rape charges going around I sense he may not make it because of that.
I have been told we will have a new AD within 10 days if not sooner.
The four are being interviewed. One will be chosen by Royce with influnce from the selection committee.
It would be unfair to name the other two but in my opinion they are very good. I am saying we will be in good hands with the final pick. Very good!
Kent H is a good guy and would make a good AD. I just doubt if he makes it, I have no inside info on that matter but with his past association and with the rape charges going around I sense he may not make it because of that.
I have been told we will have a new AD within 10 days if not sooner.
It could well be that's this is what Spanky has been concerned about, altho he didn't say it: We need some outside blood, a clean break from the past. This could be in line with RE's thinking, given his firings of Pflu & O'Day. Just clean house.Umista said:
Delaney has been given 2 years, just to provide continuity for the kids. But, I would not be surprised if someone who replaces him is far outside the program, as well.
Spanky said:
You are correct, it is a conspiracy.
You might be "bored" by the Arabian student rapist, but, I can assure you, many, are not. You seem too much an academic to grasp reality. I slept through seminars led by such people...if you think UM could have achieved stature without a winning athletic program, you are more dense than the usual academic prince. UM boasts a journalism school... a dying profession, a forestry school, nice, a pharmacy school funded by a successful corporation...compared to other "flagship" schools, the funding is low, and athletic programs make up a great deal of that need. I am sorry, you do not see the irony of my mention of 'no bad publicity. Academics miss much in life that is true. Penn State is still recognized as a top tier public university. Miami is given international accolades for its many outstanding programs..Deemphasize athletics at UM and you will disappear from the radar...we live in A competitive world that academia does not know...those who can't, teach, those who can, do...And, frankly, I do agree about the "rivalry" with MSU. In my mind, the real rivalry was with Idaho. You are so above thinking you missed my point. Let me spell it out. MSU is a fine school, it is not a great school. It is largely unknown outside the immediate area for all its achievements. UM is a good school, not great, that sends its mostly Liberal Arts grads out to the country and thereby gain immediate recognition for UM. People know MONTANA, and, mostly it is because of the far flung, successful alumni who turn out in thousands for a football game in some pretty well known academic circles. Deny it all you want, but when a Cal Davis or Cal Poly crowd sees huge turnouts in their own stadium supporting the Griz or just renewing old friendships that makes a difference. MSU? Sorry.Grizzoola said:
Well all that just isn't true. Over half the athletic program is funded by the University. I realiz areas such a chemistry and physics, Rhodes scholars. aren't much interest and granted the most recent Nobel prize was shared with Al Gore, and one of its other developments allowed the nuclear weapons to be developed that ended WW II.
If anything U of M did BETTER before the success of Athletics and did so at a time when it was seriously considered to drop them. But despite that they do co-exist. Our new athltic Director will have to know the difference between a tail and a dog to succeed . The University can do quite well without athletics. In fact the better ones do......
If anything U of M did BETTER before the success of Athletics and did so at a time when it was seriously considered to drop them. But despite that they do co-exist. Our new athltic Director will have to know the difference between a tail and a dog to succeed . The University can do quite well without athletics. In fact the better ones do......
tnt said:
Jeez, stop the lying. Over half the athletic program isn't funded by the university. I think I saw an article, perhaps today, that said that less than 30% is funded by the university/state. My recollection is that less that $4 million of a $15 or so million budget is funded by the university/state. And there's the money that the university siphons off of the athletic program for its own use.
Grizzoola said:
Actually Grizzoola you are incorrect. It IS a more critical time FOR THE UNIVERSITY than it is for just the football program. Please recall, the MAJORITY of the “assaults” (6 to 8 of 11) had NOTHING TO DO WITH THE FOOTBALL PROGRAM. These non-football program incidences are what brought 2 of the 3 parties from DC to Missoula (some might argue 2.5 of the 3 parties here are for non-football reasons).
PlayerRep said:
Might be one of the resons why JOD isn't around... Direct institutional support last year was 5.5 million not 4 contributions were less than 4..... Heres the report: http://mus.edu/board/meetings/2012/Jan2012/2011_MUS_SUMMARY_INCOME_STATEMENT-ByCampus.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
In any event the university spends more than it takes in on athletics.
There are thee forms of income for athletics state dollars, income dollars and donations.
tnt said:
Direct institutional support of $5.5 million, in a budget of $18.6 million is not 50% in any event. Ticket sales alone were $5.2 million. The university absolutely does NOT spend more than it takes in on athletics. The linked information you provided absolutely refutes what you are saying.
Why can't you stick with the facts? You constantly misstate, mislead, and even outright lie about things.
PlayerRep said:
70% of the ATHLETIC DEPARTMENT’S budget are GENERATED DOLLARS (not just the football program, but all athletics), meaning athletics generates all of this revenue on its own (tix, NCAA licensing, media, etc.). The other 30% comes from institutional contributions, private contributions, etc. “A goal at this level would be 50-50. I’m not sure anybody else is [even] at 50-50.” (Jim O’Day, the Missoulian, Wed Aug 15, 2012).
It doesn’t take a genius (nor a PhD student) to figure out which program generates the majority of that revenue, and keeps that figure at a very high 70%. And if juxtaposed, a P&L of each of the various programs will reveal that the football program is the only athletic program that generates a profit (surplus as they say in governmental/fund accounting) some of which is poured over into other University funds. And, it is quite the surplus, I might add.