Somewhat true. It's one of the weird complexities we face at Minnesota and part of the give and take of University politics. The stadium is a great first step, the largest immediate hurdle and the largest in terms of dollar investment. It got done, grudgingly by the legislature by an invigorated Dr. Bruininks and AD Maturi with a major push from Glen Mason. It took an excellent effort on their part to generate the donations and political support needed to make that happen. Kudos to them for it. That said, the commitment came from a relatively small number of boosters, the state legislature and a united Senior Management team. It was a job well done and a major win on the greatest piece of the puzzle. The problem is this: building a stadium is not the end of the job. It is one step in the process, and one that was done largely outside the University bureaucracy. Now the process has to be driven internally. Its not unlike working with an outside management firm to change your business model. It is a great investment, but if at the end of the day you don't have buy in or the stomach to kick some people out the door, its largely an exercise in futility, done at great cost to the firm. Within the University structure, there is enough longstanding opposition to athletics that allow for the death by a thousand cuts syndrome. At my shop we call it the "Go Slow". Regardless of the terminology, its the reason why Parking and Transportation Services won the battle to keep gameday parking revenue over the athletic department, its the reason why a Coach like Tubby Smith is fighting tooth and nail for a practice facility the athletic department desparately wants to build, its the reason the football parking lots are being redeveloped into the bio-district despite other open pieces of land the University owns, its the reason we did a telethon at MOA to save programs, its the reason we fund Women's Rowing before building a baseball field, its the reason the athletic department had to take out a loan to fire Glen Mason. When you have a committed group of opponents with just enough leverage to win a few battles that hamper your best efforts and goals from being achieved, you need a strong leader who will beat them down or push them out the door, or run the risk of failure despite the very best of efforts. We have yet to see that from our top management. I am hopeful we will see that from the next team. Unless you've been part of the University professionally or know people within it its hard to understand or explain, because frankly it is a very strange dynamic. End point- building the stadium and getting the funding was the easy part compared to making a long term on-going commitment. It can and should happen, but whether it does is TBD.
