Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum
SiouxVolley

New AD posting and hiring process

Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, UND Fan said:

I know and like Mike and while I know he would work his rear off, I am not sure he is quite ready for the job.  Being successful at the job would require him (due to his limited experience) to surround himself with talented assistants. I have some concern whether Mike has the contacts/knowledge to know who can handle specific duties.  

IMO - he can not rely on some who are currently in the department. 

This is a very reasoned assessment. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, fightingsioux4life said:

Careful, you'll be accused of "spending other people's money". :silly:

Well, when your solution to getting rid of a coach who just signed a 4-year extension is to have other people pay for it, then yeah you're just spending other people's money.  That coach just led UND to its biggest tournament ever.  I don't want to turn this into a bashing of Jones thread, but at some point we are going to be stuck with coaches people don't like and the solution is not to always buy them out instantly.  And that's not an attitude of accepting mediocrity, it's an attitude of accepting that we can't do a buyout without funding from other sources.  And I'm not ready to take money that could have been donated to other programs just to get rid of a coach that won the conference tournament last year.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, southpaw said:

Well, when your solution to getting rid of a coach who just signed a 4-year extension is to have other people pay for it, then yeah you're just spending other people's money.  That coach just led UND to its biggest tournament ever.  I don't want to turn this into a bashing of Jones thread, but at some point we are going to be stuck with coaches people don't like and the solution is not to always buy them out instantly.  And that's not an attitude of accepting mediocrity, it's an attitude of accepting that we can't do a buyout without funding from other sources.  And I'm not instantly ready to take money that could have been donated to other programs just to get rid of a coach that won the conference tournament last year.

Private fundraising is becoming the biggest funding source for intercollegiate athletics. How do you think the IPF was funded? The ND Legislature? I don't think so.

If you are against raising private funds to pay for stuff like this, then you don't have a problem with me. You have a problem with the funding model for intercollegiate athletics in general.

And this thread isn't about MBB, it's about the AD position. And whomever gets hired will have to ask for "other people's money" to help us reach our goals as an athletic department.

I return everyone to their regularly scheduled speculating. :p

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, fightingsioux4life said:

Private fundraising is becoming the biggest funding source for intercollegiate athletics. How do you think the IPF was funded? The ND Legislature? I don't think so.

If you are against raising private funds to pay for stuff like this, then you don't have a problem with me. You have a problem with the funding model for intercollegiate athletics in general.

And this thread isn't about MBB, it's about the AD position. And whomever gets hired will have to ask for "other people's money" to help us reach our goals as an athletic department.

I return everyone to their regularly scheduled speculating. :p

So he question Kennedy asks is do you go with guy that has experience fundraising or go with the guy that has experience making fairly solid hires.  

I think you are both right that with our last AD and old athletic dept. structure the money wasn’t there to buy out anyone.  I’m not sure that with schools our size a multi year buyout will be there in the future.  

Should be an interesting rest of the week. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, fightingsioux4life said:

Private fundraising is becoming the biggest funding source for intercollegiate athletics. How do you think the IPF was funded? The ND Legislature? I don't think so.

If you are against raising private funds to pay for stuff like this, then you don't have a problem with me. You have a problem with the funding model for intercollegiate athletics in general.

And this thread isn't about MBB, it's about the AD position. And whomever gets hired will have to ask for "other people's money" to help us reach our goals as an athletic department.

I return everyone to their regularly scheduled speculating. :p

If it's not about MBB, then why bring up a post that was specifically about buying out the MBB coach?

I work in intercollegiate athletics with a school that created a non-profit organization to handle all of the donations that come into the athletic department, so I'm very familiar with how things get funded.  

Private funding is extremely important to any athletic department and the new AD will need to rely on that private funding if they want to sustain and improve the athletic department and its facilities.  However, the new AD also has to prioritize those private donations and I'm assuming buying out the reigning conference champion basketball coach is a lot lower on the list than a lot of other coach related financial issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, southpaw said:

If it's not about MBB, then why bring up a post that was specifically about buying out the MBB coach?

I work in intercollegiate athletics with a school that created a non-profit organization to handle all of the donations that come into the athletic department, so I'm very familiar with how things get funded.  

Private funding is extremely important to any athletic department and the new AD will need to rely on that private funding if they want to sustain and improve the athletic department and its facilities.  However, the new AD also has to prioritize those private donations and I'm assuming buying out the reigning conference champion basketball coach is a lot lower on the list than a lot of other coach related financial issues.

My biggest problem with the characterization of private financing as "spending other people's money" is that nobody is forcing these people to write checks. They do it because they want to. If they don't want to fund something, they don't have to. The key word is "voluntary".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, homer said:

I think you are both right that with our last AD and old athletic dept. structure the money wasn’t there to buy out anyone.  I’m not sure that with schools our size a multi year buyout will be there in the future.

Assuming your point is correct, the next AD has to resist the temptation to give out multi-year contract extensions like candy. It backfired with Mussman and it is backfiring with Jones right now.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/6/2018 at 10:23 AM, jdub27 said:

The nickname was literally a public vote.

With significant changes to the process during the process. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, fightingsioux4life said:

My biggest problem with the characterization of private financing as "spending other people's money" is that nobody is forcing these people to write checks. They do it because they want to. If they don't want to fund something, they don't have to. The key word is "voluntary".

And that's where I think my snarky post should have been more clear.  I wasn't characterizing all private funding as spending other people's money, just you saying "we need to buy him out" but not actually contributing to that buyout.  I think we all want to prioritize other people's money into the sport or category we think it best fits, be it IPF part 2, higher coaches salaries, or buying out the coach.  But for some of us, two of those things are necessary at some point but the third one is more of a trivial/personal opinion thing.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, homer said:

So he question Kennedy asks is do you go with guy that has experience fundraising or go with the guy that has experience making fairly solid hires.  

I think you are both right that with our last AD and old athletic dept. structure the money wasn’t there to buy out anyone.  I’m not sure that with schools our size a multi year buyout will be there in the future.  

Should be an interesting rest of the week. 

 

 

Or or you could have both lol

 

chaves to ad Mannausau in current position 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Idc how the new ad is but as much o want jones gone too the new ad is going to do any knee jerk reactions in first year

 

to risky for him to do that. He gives jones and brew one more year to prove them selves 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One common theme that all three candidates have stated is that firing a coach is not an issue. If you are in constant communication with coaches, both sides know what they need to be doing and where they need to be at. That also means it is a two-way street with the coaches getting the resources they need in order to meet the benchmarks set. None of the candidates are going to have knee-jerk reactions and buying out multi-year contracts because fans want them to. There are going to be up and down years and some of that will be dictated by outside circumstances (injuries, players transferring, etc) and despite people claiming those are excuses or accepting mediocrity, a good athletic director takes them into account when working with coaches and making decisions for the future.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, The Sicatoka said:

When I'm interviewing someone to run a multi-faceted organization I love to ask, "Have you done 'the manager big four'' in past jobs?"

When they ask, "What's that?" I say:

  • set budget
  • made budget
  • hired someone
  • fired someone

You're not qualified to run a multi-department organization (especially one with a $25M+ budget) unless you answered "Yes" four times. 

Can these four finalists do that? 

One for sure.  He has a public forum at 4:30 today

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, The Sicatoka said:

When I'm interviewing someone to run a multi-faceted organization I love to ask, "Have you done 'the manager big four'' in past jobs?"

When they ask, "What's that?" I say:

  • set budget
  • made budget
  • hired someone
  • fired someone

You're not qualified to run a multi-department organization (especially one with a $25M+ budget) unless you answered "Yes" four times. 

Can these four finalists do that? 

 

9 minutes ago, gfhockey said:

I don’t think mannsaua has done any of those?

............and Elliot hasn't been in one spot long enough to have done any of those.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, The Sicatoka said:

When I'm interviewing someone to run a multi-faceted organization I love to ask, "Have you done 'the manager big four'' in past jobs?"

When they ask, "What's that?" I say:

  • set budget
  • made budget
  • hired someone
  • fired someone

You're not qualified to run a multi-department organization (especially one with a $25M+ budget) unless you answered "Yes" four times. 

Can these four finalists do that? 

Great post! And watching for that candidate that interviews “too smooth.”  Once that was a bad one.... he got the job. I mean absolutely NO ONE talks to the local paper at 9:40 am before it goes to press and then leaves a message on my work answering machine at 5:10 pm about disciplining my child. Did I mention his child was involved, no discipline, and he did not pass the incident off laterally or up the food chain,. My mother said, ”Cream floats.” and he was gone in a year or so. His interview was perfect. So, just another issue when someone looks too good to be true. Interesting week ahead....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, southpaw said:

And that's where I think my snarky post should have been more clear.  I wasn't characterizing all private funding as spending other people's money, just you saying "we need to buy him out" but not actually contributing to that buyout.  I think we all want to prioritize other people's money into the sport or category we think it best fits, be it IPF part 2, higher coaches salaries, or buying out the coach.  But for some of us, two of those things are necessary at some point but the third one is more of a trivial/personal opinion thing.

Okay, that is fair.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Oxbow6 said:

............and Elliot hasn't been in one spot long enough to have done any of those.

She still isn't my top candidate but she has plenty of experience in the budget portion of her previous jobs along with overseeing quite a few people in her previous jobs.

I get (one of) the reasons people don't like her is the amount of jobs she's had. She addressed that by pointing out a handful were term jobs (2 Olympic appointments and some fundraising projects). Frankly, her experience is easily the most impressive of the 3 who have interviewed so far, which by no means makes her the best candidate but is probably the main difference she has. 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, gfhockey said:

 

 

Or or you could have both lol

 

chaves to ad Mannausau in current position 

This.  Or give Mannausau a slight pay raise and get him more involved in other aspects of the athletic department.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something to consider:

Have any of the current candidates had the media of their current university cover the possibility of that candidate leaving? 

I know Chaves' candidacy has been covered: https://www.google.com/amp/www.spokesman.com/stories/2018/jan/04/eastern-washington-ad-bill-chaves-a-finalist-at-no/%3famp-content=amp

This certainly doesn't mean everything, but it may be interpreted as EWU appreciates the work he does and his leaving would be a big deal for that school. I suppose one could also interpret it as Chaves is the only current AD of the bunch. With that said, I think he would be a very good fit for UND athletics, specifically addressing the major national sports (football, basketball) that best fit the vision of President Kennedy.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, jdub27 said:

She still isn't my top candidate but she has plenty of experience in the budget portion of her previous jobs along with overseeing quite a few people in her previous jobs.

I get (one of) the reasons people don't like her is the amount of jobs she's had. She addressed that by pointing out a handful were term jobs (2 Olympic appointments and some fundraising projects). Frankly, her experience is easily the most impressive of the 3 who have interviewed so far, which by no means makes her the best candidate but is probably the main difference she has. 

Some people think the WMU guy has been there too long.

Others complain that Elliot hasn't been at one job long enough.

Obviously, you can't have it both ways.

So do we look for someone in the middle of the spectrum?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×