Whoa: Tom Sakal disgusted by issues at U, "no way in hell" he'll leave athletics $

Donate To GopherHole
Job interviews are about more than just the specifics of the job. You're assessing the candidate's personality, his or her ability to think on their feet, and formulate answers to questions. I don't think you need to have all ex-FB players on the committee to evaluate an AD. In fact, having some people from outside the sports realm may be an asset - they could bring a different perspective to the search.

Teague's undoing was not a lack of knowledge. Teague was undone by a lack of judgement and personality.

I say again: there is more to the U of M than sports, and there is more to sports than just Football.
There is no problem with having a mix of backgrounds on the committee. Now, could it have been 10 people instead of 16 - that would have worked for me.
 

I'm sorry, but I see little positive value in all the criticism of the AD selection process. As alchemy2u points out, there is no reason to believe that the 16 member advisory committee is not interested in recommending a well qualified candidate, and they will be assisted by a professional head hunter in making that recommendation. There are a number of seemingly well qualified candidates that have been identified. Moreover, the final decision will be made by Kaler, who, I believe, understands the value of successful revenue sports. It's my understanding that it was under his leadership that Stony Brook University upgraded its sports programs to the Division 1 level, and he has supported the Athletic Village project. I think he understands the importance of the revenue sports. I doubt, moreover, that the size of the advisory committee is likely to prevent the making of a good hire, given the apparent number of attractive candidates. In my experience, committees of this nature, which I have served on, do not interview candidates individually, but as a group. I appreciate the past contributions of Sakal and his friends, but at this point he and his friends seem to be more interested in sabotaging the process because they haven't had more influence it, which, in my opinion, demonstrates the wisdom of ignoring them. If they, and other critics truly want to see Gopher sports succeed, I would urge that they withhold their criticism until the advisory committee has made its recommendation. All that is being accomplished now, is to diminish our chances of hiring a well qualified candidate.
 

vagopher said:
Moreover, the final decision will be made by Kaler, who, I believe, understands the value of successful revenue sports. It's my understanding that it was under his leadership that Stony Brook University upgraded its sports programs to the Division 1 level, and he has supported the Athletic Village project. I think he understands the importance of the revenue sports. I doubt, moreover, that the size of the advisory committee is likely to prevent the making of a good hire, given the apparent number of attractive candidates.
Click to expand...

Like you, I'm not put off by the use of an advisory committee. And, yes, as Stony Brook Provost Kaler worked to upgrade the sports programs. Of course, the Jim Fiore (deposed Stony Brook AD) tale is a cautionary one.
 

vagopher said:
I'm sorry, but I see little positive value in all the criticism of the AD selection process. As alchemy2u points out, there is no reason to believe that the 16 member advisory committee is not interested in recommending a well qualified candidate, and they will be assisted by a professional head hunter in making that recommendation. There are a number of seemingly well qualified candidates that have been identified. Moreover, the final decision will be made by Kaler, who, I believe, understands the value of successful revenue sports. It's my understanding that it was under his leadership that Stony Brook University upgraded its sports programs to the Division 1 level, and he has supported the Athletic Village project. I think he understands the importance of the revenue sports. I doubt, moreover, that the size of the advisory committee is likely to prevent the making of a good hire, given the apparent number of attractive candidates. In my experience, committees of this nature, which I have served on, do not interview candidates individually, but as a group. I appreciate the past contributions of Sakal and his friends, but at this point he and his friends seem to be more interested in sabotaging the process because they haven't had more influence it, which, in my opinion, demonstrates the wisdom of ignoring them. If they, and other critics truly want to see Gopher sports succeed, I would urge that they withhold their criticism until the advisory committee has made its recommendation. All that is being accomplished now, is to diminish our chances of hiring a well qualified candidate.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Let them do their job.
 

vagopher said:
I'm sorry, but I see little positive value in all the criticism of the AD selection process. As alchemy2u points out, there is no reason to believe that the 16 member advisory committee is not interested in recommending a well qualified candidate, and they will be assisted by a professional head hunter in making that recommendation. There are a number of seemingly well qualified candidates that have been identified. Moreover, the final decision will be made by Kaler, who, I believe, understands the value of successful revenue sports. It's my understanding that it was under his leadership that Stony Brook University upgraded its sports programs to the Division 1 level, and he has supported the Athletic Village project. I think he understands the importance of the revenue sports. I doubt, moreover, that the size okf the advisory committee is likely to prevent the making of a good hire, given the apparent number of attractive candidates. In my experience, committees of this nature, which I have served on, do not interview candidates individually, but as a group. I appreciate the past contributions of Sakal and his friends, but at this point he and his friends seem to be more interested in sabotaging the process because they haven't had more influence it, which, in my opinion, demonstrates the wisdom of ignoring them. If they, and other critics truly want to see Gopher sports succeed, I would urge that they withhold their criticism until the advisory committee has made its recommendation. All that is being accomplished now, is to diminish our chances of hiring a well qualified candidate.
Click to expand...

It's clear some don't understand or want to understand the criticisms that led to their public stand. And that's fine, you are welcome to your opinion. I'm sure there are widely varying opinions. I cannot imagine a candidate for any high level position in any industry thinks the waters will be smooth for them. Those people generally do better in less public positions.
 


Pompous Elitist said:
It's clear some don't understand or want to understand the criticisms that led to their public stand. And that's fine, you are welcome to your opinion. I'm sure there are widely varying opinions. I cannot imagine a candidate for any high level position in any industry thinks the waters will be smooth for them. Those people generally do better in less public positions.
Click to expand...

You are spot on.
 

Pompous Elitist said:
It's clear some don't understand or want to understand the criticisms that led to their public stand. And that's fine, you are welcome to your opinion. I'm sure there are widely varying opinions. I cannot imagine a candidate for any high level position in any industry thinks the waters will be smooth for them. Those people generally do better in less public positions.
Click to expand...


Denial is a powerful thing.
 

MNGoldenGophers1 said:
I think his frustration goes well beyond Maturi and Teague. I'm guessing it is a culmination of bad presidents and a number of ineffective ADs and HCs over the past 50-years. Kaler doesn't inspire a lot of confidence to many longtime fans which is disheartening at times. Hopefully we finally get it right with the next AD and TC exceeds expectations.
Click to expand...
He has every reason to be pissed, but guys who go public and rip the school rather than confronting the people in charge are useless. I have no problem with what Jim Carter is doing even though I don't think he has a clue about how to fix it. The 16 member committee is a joke, and if they are really tryig to get that many people in the interview process they are nuts.I have assumed that is not true.
I have respect for some of the things Kaler has done, but his miss on Teague was a big one and he can have 1000 people on the search committee, if they pick the wrong person it is still his fault. He is in charge of results, not just inclusive feel-good processes.
 

I agree but they are ripping Kaler, not the school. I would also imagine now that schools have become flush with tv money the perception or reality they are throwing money around or negotiating poorly doesn't sit well. Affluent industries attract a lot of middlemen and interlopers. If the department wasn't a multimillion dollar enterprise "non-profit" would they still be hiring 150k head hunters (that contractually state they have no responsibility for the vetting or quality of their candidates?). Would they be wasting many people's time with an unwieldy committee? An example of Parkinson's Law all around?

When a school doesn't cater to the fans and boosters then what should they think?
 



Pompous Elitist said:
It's clear some don't understand or want to understand the criticisms that led to their public stand. And that's fine, you are welcome to your opinion. I'm sure there are widely varying opinions. I cannot imagine a candidate for any high level position in any industry thinks the waters will be smooth for them. Those people generally do better in less public positions.
Click to expand...

The problem isn't that there is criticism of Kaler or the selection process. The problem is that it is being express publicly at a point in time when its not likely to have any positive effect. The process isn't going to be changed as a result of the criticism, and criticizing Kaler and the process publicly at this point in time can only serve to deter candidate interest. I would urge critics to communicate their concerns directly to Kaler and/or save them until the advisory committee makes its recommendation. I would hope that our common objective would be to achieve the best possible outcome; not to vent frustrations at any cost.
 

Besides the Athletic Dept, what University department asks alumni and boosters for money, gets it and then tells them to eff off?

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
 


Ewert86PC said:
Besides the Athletic Dept, what University department asks alumni and boosters for money, gets it and then tells them to eff off?

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Who says they are telling them to eff off? Another interpretation is that just because you contribute doesn't mean you get to run the department.
 



alchemy2u said:
Who says they are telling them to eff off? Another interpretation is that just because you contribute doesn't mean you get to run the department.
Click to expand...
This is the eternal problem: no amount of alumni money is too much and no amount of alumni input is too little.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
 


You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom