Big news in the wind

[Sioux-cia]

Have things been that bad in the athletic department?

I have no idea. Unless someone names names as to who their 'sources' are I'm just reading posts and withholding personal opinions. Without names to validate the info, it's all speculation as far as I'm concerned.

[fs1]

I have no idea. Unless someone names names as to who their 'sources' are I'm just reading posts and withholding personal opinions. Without names to validate the info, it's all speculation as far as I'm concerned.

An average of 2 something out of seven doesnt validate the info for you?

[Sioux-cia]

An average of 2 something out of seven doesnt validate the info for you?

That's not what I'm referring to. My posts had to do with his LOA. Please don't read anything else into my posts.

[Stromer]

So I came across a facebook group dedicated to Bunning today, in case anyone cares. Regardless if it was time for him to leave of not, the way this situation is being handled by the administration is horrendous. Botched executions aren't even as badly performed as this fiasco is.

[UND92,96]

It seems like there are a lot of parallels between Buning's tenure at UND, and Alfonso Scandrett's at MSU-Moorhead. After about two years, Scandrett was "re-assigned" within the MSU athletic department, his contract wasn't renewed, and he apparently went away without a peep. I honestly thought the Buning situation would go down in a similar fashion, but clearly I was wrong.

[fs1]

So I came across a facebook group dedicated to Bunning today, in case anyone cares. Regardless if it was time for him to leave of not, the way this situation is being handled by the administration is horrendous. Botched executions aren't even as badly performed as this fiasco is.

Dont blame the administration, blame the man who came up with the LOA route. He should have just accepted that his actions led to his firing, we are held accountable at our jobs for our actions, and in his case they brought about his being fired. He should have accepted it and let it run its course rather than the lame LOA route he took. The administration cant be held responsible for the route he decided to take this. To me it clearly shows the real person he is, and it isnt the politician/rah rah pushup guy we see in public. To me it just validates the survey results.

[7NationalTitles]

I have no idea. Unless someone names names as to who their 'sources' are I'm just reading posts and withholding personal opinions. Without names to validate the info, it's all speculation as far as I'm concerned.

Maybe I'm stupid, but I don't think journalists (or reporters or members of the media for that matter ) tend to reveal their sources. I'm not a journalist (or reporter or member of the media for that matter) but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night and my understanding is that the rule of thumb for all good "journalists" is to never reveal their sources. If you do, you usually don't have those sources for information in the future. So let's see....I can reveal my sources to you and name names so you'll be satisfied or I can choose to ignore your clamoring for sources and continue to have inside information in the future. Um duh that's a tough one......which one would you do?

I know you think Buning is great in your eyes and that is why you choose not to believe any information without "sources". Face the facts, for the most part you are never going to get any revealing of sources and no one should ever reveal their sources to you or anyone else for that matter. You can cry for "sources" all you want because you too realize in the end you won't get any "source" and that makes you feel better because you can go on believing Buning is a great AD and you won't have to face the music that he is in fact not as great as you think he is or will be missed as much as you think he will be. Bottom line, you sleep better at night knowing you haven't put your faith into someone who isn't competent because no one named names for you.

But sometimes, you have to take people at their word even if it's not what you want to hear especially in this case since you like Buning (I'm gathering this because you consider he has done a great job and he'll be missed). Too many people know the facts and know the inside information to blow it off as message board rumors.

I'm sorry, but I can't help you any more than that. What's the saying..........you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink.

[Sioux-cia]

I know you think Buning is great in your eyes and that is why you choose not to believe any information without "sources".

Holy crap!!! Show me a post where I said anything about the AD 'being great'. I have not posted an opinion either way. I have posted, I think, that I like the man. But I have posted NOTHING about his role as AD because I know nothing about it other what what I have read here! Geeze Louise!!!!

Just because I don't take sports forum member posts as gospel you jump down my throat. Get a grip!! This type of post just validates Stomers post

Regardless if it was time for him to leave of not, the way this situation is being handled by the administration is horrendous. Botched executions aren't even as badly performed as this fiasco is.

[LennonIsTheMan]

Holy crap!!! Show me a post where I said anything about the AD 'being great'. I have not posted an opinion either way. I have posted, I think, that I like the man. But I have posted NOTHING about his role as AD because I know nothing about it other what what I have read here! Geeze Louise!!!!

Just because I don't take sports forum member posts as gospel you jump down my throat. Get a grip!! This type of post just validates Stomers post

We could have every individual that is involved in the UND athletic department come on this message board and post their thoughts about this situation, and I'm still not sure you would buy it.

[Stromer]

Dont blame the administration, blame the man who came up with the LOA route. He should have just accepted that his actions led to his firing, we are held accountable at our jobs for our actions, and in his case they brought about his being fired. He should have accepted it and let it run its course rather than the lame LOA route he took. The administration cant be held responsible for the route he decided to take this. To me it clearly shows the real person he is, and it isnt the politician/rah rah pushup guy we see in public. To me it just validates the survey results.

So do we know for sure that he asked for the LOA? If so, and he is just doing it to avoid getting fired, than yes, it is cheap of him. If he is taking a leave for a legitimate reason or if somebody asked him to take a leave, then we have problems. You just can not make an announcement that the AD is taking a leave and then refuse (bound by legal or other reason) to speak about it. And then to have this survey come out it the middle of everything. It makes us look like fools and rightfully so.

At the very least they could have waited until Kup came back from his trip to the Soviet Bloc or wherever he is at to make this major announcement.

[fs1]

Holy crap!!! Show me a post where I said anything about the AD 'being great'. I have not posted an opinion either way. I have posted, I think, that I like the man. But I have posted NOTHING about his role as AD because I know nothing about it other what what I have read here! Geeze Louise!!!!

Just because I don't take sports forum member posts as gospel you jump down my throat. Get a grip!! This type of post just validates Stomers post

You dont have to come right out and pledge your support for Buning, your posts make it clear you are in his corner. Perhaps you shook his hand once, or heard him give a pregame speech, or maybe even counted his pushups! I dont know what it was but again from your posts you make your support for him obvious. You need to step back a bit and deal with the reality of the world, you will get no sources, it just wont happen, but it doesnt mean that the common message you get from several posters isnt the truth. Here is a hint for you, take post #200 as being as close to the facts as it can get. Accept it and believe it.

Mr Buning is soley responsible for the situation that has developed and for what led up to this situation in the first place. He made his bed and when time came he wasnt man enough to sleep in it. We all would not choose have happen to us, what has happened to him, but if our own actions are responsible for it, then when the boss comes knocking we should be man enough to accept it. In this case he wasnt!

Another hint, this post or 7nationaltitles post have nothing to do with validating stromer's post. His post was as far off base as yours is.

[fs1]

"So do we know for sure that he asked for the LOA?" We know that UND didnt and in that case whether it was him,his wife or his dog isnt important. He or someone on his behalf did,thats all that matters. The fact that the LOA came at the exact moment he was going to be fired is more than just a coincidence. To believe otherwise would be like believing Hillary Clinton knew nothing about the whereabouts of the missing law firm papers that mysteriously were found on her desk in the private residence of the White House. If you are one who believes that then I cant help you with this one, but if not then yes it is cheap. A cheap ploy by a desperate person. Again we are all held accountable for our actions and when the time comes one would expect a LTC to stand accountable.

So again, he and he alone is responsible for the situation. And it seems to speak volumes as to the person he is when he is not giving his rah rah speech or doing his pushups.

[Stromer]

"So do we know for sure that he asked for the LOA?" We know that UND didnt and in that case whether it was him,his wife or his dog isnt important. He or someone on his behalf did,thats all that matters. The fact that the LOA came at the exact moment he was going to be fired is more than just a coincidence. To believe otherwise would be like believing Hillary Clinton knew nothing about the whereabouts of the missing law firm papers that mysteriously were found on her desk in the private residence of the White House. If you are one who believes that then I cant help you with this one, but if not then yes it is cheap. A cheap ploy by a desperate person. Again we are all held accountable for our actions and when the time comes one would expect a LTC to stand accountable.

So again, he and he alone is responsible for the situation. And it seems to speak volumes as to the person he is when he is not giving his rah rah speech or doing his pushups.

Thank you for clearing that up. My next question is when was he to be fired? We heard rumors about him being gone over the weekend but then it comes out as a LOA on Monday. So was he going to be fired on Monday and he asked for a LOA to postpone the firing, or was he thinking he was going to be fired in the future so he took a LOA over the weekend, and that was really the rumor all along? I guess I am just trying to figure out how much time he had left before he got canned.

[Sioux-cia]

We could have every individual that is involved in the UND athletic department come on this message board and post their thoughts about this situation, and I'm still not sure you would buy it.

Buy what??? Because I'm not a lemming on this board, you think you can state my opinion on this or any issue?

Any opinion I have on any issue is not made based on what anonymous members of a sport forum who cite anonymous sources post. Clear enough for you and yours?

[7NationalTitles]

Thank you for clearing that up. My next question is when was he to be fired? We heard rumors about him being gone over the weekend but then it comes out as a LOA on Monday. So was he going to be fired on Monday and he asked for a LOA to postpone the firing, or was he thinking he was going to be fired in the future so he took a LOA over the weekend, and that was really the rumor all along? I guess I am just trying to figure out how much time he had left before he got canned.

The first one.

[bisonguy]

"So do we know for sure that he asked for the LOA?" We know that UND didnt and in that case whether it was him,his wife or his dog isnt important. He or someone on his behalf did,thats all that matters. The fact that the LOA came at the exact moment he was going to be fired is more than just a coincidence. To believe otherwise would be like believing Hillary Clinton knew nothing about the whereabouts of the missing law firm papers that mysteriously were found on her desk in the private residence of the White House. If you are one who believes that then I cant help you with this one, but if not then yes it is cheap. A cheap ploy by a desperate person. Again we are all held accountable for our actions and when the time comes one would expect a LTC to stand accountable.

So again, he and he alone is responsible for the situation. And it seems to speak volumes as to the person he is when he is not giving his rah rah speech or doing his pushups.

Where was it stated that it was not UND that asked for the LoA?

The last report from the media using public records stated it was an employee of UND, but it was not Buning.

[UND92,96]

Where was it stated that it was not UND that asked for the LoA?

The last report from the media using public records stated it was an employee of UND, but it was not Buning.

Has that ever been verified? See post #165 questioning it.

[bisonguy]

Has that ever been verified? See post #165 questioning it.

See post #166.

"I am requesting that he be placed on immediate..."- note the lack of a first-person pronoun at the end of the fragment.

[PCM]

Maybe I'm stupid....

Yes, I'm afraid you are stupid. Not even your Holiday Inn Express stay made any difference.

...but I don't think journalists (or reporters or members of the media for that matter ) tend to reveal their sources.

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

Sometimes, reporters don't reveal their sources, but almost always, they do. Watch the news. Listen to the news. Read the news. Practically everything on the news is attributed to a named source. Why? Because news is much more credible and believable when the public knows where it comes from. Without a named source, the public has no way of knowing if the person or organization the information came from was qualified or had the necessary expertise to make the comments or conclusions made. The public has no way of knowing if the source was objective, had an ax to grind or reason to engage in self-serving spin. That's why attribution is an important cornerstone of good journalism.

You see, if Patrick C. Miller writes a story for USCHO citing an anonymous source who says that the Gophers will be very good this year, nobody would have any idea what that means. For all the readers know, PCM could be getting his information from some obscure accountant in Minneapolis. But if the story quotes UND Fighting Sioux coach Dave Hakstol as saying that the Gophers will be the team to beat in the WCHA during the upcoming season, then it means something. Most people -- even Gopher fans -- understand that Hakstol is a credible source of information on the strength of the WCHA.

Sometimes journalists do stories in which it's important to protect anonymous sources. However, those stories are the exception, not the rule. Even when journalists use anonymous sources, it's their names and the names of their news organizations on the story. They are held accountable for what they write and broadcast. If it turns out that the anonymous sources a journalist cites are wrong or lied, the reporters and news organizations suffer the loss of credibility and reputation. And if you don't have credibility in the news business, you don't have anything. In addition, the threat of being sued for libel is always there. So even when journalists cite anonymous sources, they have a great deal of incentive to make certain that those sources are telling the truth because their names on on the stories they produce!

I'm sorry for the lesson in Journalism 101, but I'm sick of people who have absolutely no idea what they're talking about pretending that they're experts on subjects on which they're totally clueless. While I'm the first to admit that I don't know all the gory details of the Buning situation, I do know a little bit about journalism and the news media.

This will come as a shock to some loyal SiouxSports.com regulars, but anonymous people citing anonymous sources for the express purpose of discrediting a person, damaging his reputation and causing him to lose his job is not viewed favorably by the outside world. While I know that within the echo chamber of this board, the "get Buning" effort was viewed as a great and noble cause, "outsiders" (i.e. "the public") tend to form opinions based on what they know. And what they know hardly paints a flattering portrait of the situation. Even worse, UND's detractors are having a field day with the Buning affair. It will be a gift that keeps on giving for years.

[UND92,96]

This will come as a shock to some loyal SiouxSports.com regulars, but anonymous people citing anonymous sources for the express purpose of discrediting a person, damaging his reputation and causing him to lose his job is not viewed favorably by the outside world. While I know that within the echo chamber of this board, the "get Buning" effort was viewed as a great and noble cause, "outsiders" (i.e. "the public") tend to form opinions based on what they know. And what they know hardly paints a flattering portrait of the situation. Even worse, UND's detractors are having a field day with the Buning affair. It will be a gift that keeps on giving for years.

A couple of questions:

1. In your opinion, had nothing ever been mentioned about problems within the athletic department on this board, would the end result have been substantially different for Buning? Put another way, were the whispers a substantial cause of Buning's problems, or merely a result of his actions?

2. In your opinion, how should the administration have handled this matter?

[Eskimos]

This will come as a shock to some loyal SiouxSports.com regulars, but anonymous people citing anonymous sources for the express purpose of discrediting a person, damaging his reputation and causing him to lose his job is not viewed favorably by the outside world.

A question about this statement, do you believe that a few anonymous posters on this message board are the reason for Buning's problems?

[PCM]

1. In your opinion, had nothing ever been mentioned about problems within the athletic department on this board, would the end result have been substantially different for Buning? Put another way, were the whispers a substantial cause of Buning's problems, or merely a result of his actions?

Your question appears to assume that prior to the advent of Internet message boards, there was no way for incompetent people to be removed from their jobs.

2. How should the administration have handled this matter?

I don't know enough to make that determination.

[DamStrait]

f s1 and 7 National Titles: You two, with your exceedingly snide and condescending posts, are doing more to generate sympathy for Buning than any of his supporters could hope to do on their own.

I am not a supporter of Buning, nor was I calling for his head. I simply don't know enough about the situation to form that strong of an opinion.

I know it is unlikely that sworn statements from all of the main players in this story will be produced for public consumption. On the surface and to the average Sioux fan, things seemed to be relatively ship-shape: UND was moving to DI. Department was in the black. The two biggest name coaches were signed to new contracts. Success on the field of competition was high (as it was before Buning arrived). UND gained entrance into the Great West.

There was also a lot of rumored grumbling going on under the surface: Lennon interviewed at MSU because he was unhappy. Lennon was unhappy because Buning scheduled UNI without consulting Lennon. Coaches were unhappy because they had to do all the scheduling themselves. Buning didn't think Hak deserved an extension prior to the final year of his current contract. Coaches were upset because their staffs and their staffs pay were being cut (or paltry raises were awarded). Buning provided no leadership or decision making. Buning was an inflexible leader that brooked no opposition in his decisions. Etc, etc.

I have no way of knowing whether these rumors were true. Some, in fact, seemed contradictory. There was, however, one hell of a lot of smoke, and generally, where there's smoke, there's fire.

I really don't have a dog in this fight. I want what is best for UND as a whole, not just for any one individual. But in my candid opinion, none of the rumors listed above seemed concrete enough to warrant his immediate dismissal. Obviously people in his department were not happy with his performance - but again - why were they unhappy?

I know what follows will go unheeded, but NONE OF THE ABOVE SHOULD BE CONSTRUED AS A STATEMENT OF SUPPORT FOR BUNING. Nor should be construed as a statement of support for his dismissal.

[PCM]

A question about this statement, do you believe that a few anonymous posters on this message board are the reason for Buning's problems?

No.

[7NationalTitles]

Yes, I'm afraid you are stupid. Not even your Holiday Inn Express stay made any difference.

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

Sometimes, reporters don't reveal their sources, but almost always, they do. Watch the news. Listen to the news. Read the news. Practically everything on the news is attributed to a named source. Why? Because news is much more credible and believable when the public knows where it comes from. Without a named source, the public has no way of knowing if the person or organization the information came from was qualified or had the necessary expertise to make the comments or conclusions made. The public has no way of knowing if the source was objective, had an ax to grind or reason to engage in self-serving spin. That's why attribution is an important cornerstone of good journalism.

You see, if Patrick C. Miller writes a story for USCHO citing an anonymous source who says that the Gophers will be very good this year, nobody would have any idea what that means. For all the readers know, PCM could be getting his information from some obscure accountant in Minneapolis. But if the story quotes UND Fighting Sioux coach Dave Hakstol as saying that the Gophers will be the team to beat in the WCHA during the upcoming season, then it means something. Most people -- even Gopher fans -- understand that Hakstol is a credible source of information on the strength of the WCHA.

Sometimes journalists do stories in which it's important to protect anonymous sources. However, those stories are the exception, not the rule. Even when journalists use anonymous sources, it's their names and the names of their news organizations on the story. They are held accountable for what they write and broadcast. If it turns out that the anonymous sources a journalist cites are wrong or lied, the reporters and news organizations suffer the loss of credibility and reputation. And if you don't have credibility in the news business, you don't have anything. In addition, the threat of being sued for libel is always there. So even when journalists cite anonymous sources, they have a great deal of incentive to make certain that those sources are telling the truth because their names on on the stories they produce!

I'm sorry for the lesson in Journalism 101, but I'm sick of people who have absolutely no idea what they're talking about pretending that they're experts on subjects on which they're totally clueless. While I'm the first to admit that I don't know all the gory details of the Buning situation, I do know a little bit about journalism and the news media.

This will come as a shock to some loyal SiouxSports.com regulars, but anonymous people citing anonymous sources for the express purpose of discrediting a person, damaging his reputation and causing him to lose his job is not viewed favorably by the outside world. While I know that within the echo chamber of this board, the "get Buning" effort was viewed as a great and noble cause, "outsiders" (i.e. "the public") tend to form opinions based on what they know. And what they know hardly paints a flattering portrait of the situation. Even worse, UND's detractors are having a field day with the Buning affair. It will be a gift that keeps on giving for years.

You're teaching journalism to me? I thought you told me at one time you weren't a journalist? Sorry, I forgot, reporter / member of the media. How can someone who hasn't worked in journalism teach journalistic standards.

OK, sorry....to pacify people let's call my source "Deep Throat". There, he's got a name. Now the journalist (I mean reporter or member of the media) in you can go about speculating and writing who Deep Throat is.