Big news in the wind

[sIoUxPeRsTiTiOuS]

Almost unbelievably (at least to me), if you read the "comments" to the Herald story on the Buning survey, they're mostly supportive of Buning! I guess we're supposed to bring him back and get rid of everybody else in the department and start over.

How about just using the "surround yourself with good people" approach from the beginning. Everyone has to remember, by and far, the people that supposedly blew it for him are the people he brought in and hired himself. I hope nobody tries to make a martyr out of Buning.

[Eskimos]

Almost unbelievably (at least to me), if you read the "comments" to the Herald story on the Buning survey, they're mostly supportive of Buning! I guess we're supposed to bring him back and get rid of everybody else in the department and start over.

I read the comments and thought the same thing as you.

[UND92,96]

I read the comments and thought the same thing as you.

I had a long "comment" telling off these people all ready to submit, but then I decided against it. What's the point? Anybody who still supports Buning after all we now know (and most of us don't know the half of it) must not have much regard for UND coaches. I choose to believe that if most of the coaches are saying that things are bad, then things must be bad.

[UNDProud]

What am I missing here regarding the survey? His overall rating on a scale of 1-7 was a 2. something. If 7 is the highest, how do you calculate that the comments were supportive?

[UND92,96]

What am I missing here regarding the survey? His overall rating on a scale of 1-7 was a 2. something. If 7 is the highest, how do you calculate that the comments were supportive?

I was referring to the comments left by readers on the Herald website.

[Siouxmama]

I was referring to the comments left by readers on the Herald website.

I'm going to have to take a guess and say that the people that left comments on the Herald site were not invited to take the survey, and haven't worked with Buning, to give an honest "work related" opinion.

[7NationalTitles]

I'm going to have to take a guess and say that the people that left comments on the Herald site were not invited to take the survey, and haven't worked with Buning, to give an honest "work related" opinion.

They probably are the ones who saw him doing push-ups at a football game or saw him give a "rah rah" speech at a booster or other athletic event.......so yeah, he must be a great guy if he does those things.

[UND92,96]

Harmeson explains why he can't talk about Buning's "leave of absence." [url="http://www.grandforksherald.com/articles/index.cfm?id=50980

[GeauxSioux]

Harmeson explains why he can't talk about Buning's "leave of absence." [url="http://www.grandforksherald.com/articles/index.cfm?id=50980

[UND92,96]

They probably are the ones who saw him doing push-ups at a football game or saw him give a "rah rah" speech at a booster or other athletic event.......so yeah, he must be a great guy if he does those things.

I have to stop reading the comments to that article. If these people are representative of the Herald's readership, I'm starting to think that roughly 80% of them must be insane.

[so.cal.sioux]

How about just using the "surround yourself with good people" approach from the beginning. Everyone has to remember, by and far, the people that supposedly blew it for him are the people he brought in and hired himself. I hope nobody tries to make a martyr out of Buning.

Most of the people that Buning supposedly surrounded himself with left because they couldn't stand it there any longer...

I have a hard time blaming the troops when the General, or in this case LTC, gives no leadership or direction.

[Hawkster]

The only comment I'm going to make is that this is every bit as damaging to UND public relations as the fight over keeping the name.

[Cratter]

Really?

In five years people will barely remember this...

(the majority of UND shareholders; siouxsports.comers are a minority) let alone care.

[Diggler]

The only comment I'm going to make is that this is every bit as damaging to UND public relations as the fight over keeping the name.

You really are a one-trick pony, aren't you? It's too bad your one trick isn't very good.

[star2city]

The only comment I'm going to make is that this is every bit as damaging to UND public relations as the fight over keeping the name.

So all-in-all, the AD situation is a positive, too.

[Hawkster]

You really are a one-trick pony, aren't you? It's too bad your one trick isn't very good.

I just like to avoid negative publicity. This isn't helping, and Judge Jahnke is getting the lawsuit in the news again. Look how this is all drawing attention away from football games.

[star2city]

I have to stop reading the comments to that article. If these people are representative of the Herald's readership, I'm starting to think that roughly 80% of them must be insane.

UND92,96,

As close as you are to the programs, you probably have many stories/rumors that validate your opinion. Most people don't have that luxury.

When UND hired LtCol Buning, my first reaction was, "oh crap, just how will UND and GF culture be able to deal with an ex-military officer?" There's been innuendo strewn about his leadership practically since he arrived, including athletic department employees on this board. Some of it appeared directed at him because of sour grapes over Bollinger not being hired. Some of it appeared to be whining by employees and boosters because their sense of importance was displaced. I have heard second- and third-hand instances of leadership behavior that seemed to destroy, rather than build, trust so Buning's likely imminent departure really probably needed to happen.

But there remains a strong perception, however unfair, that an small element within the Sioux booster community wanted him to fail even before he arrived because he wasn't one of "them". The question remains, how much of the "lack of trust" issue actually resides with Sioux boosters, who help create a distrustful environment even before Buning arrived? Buning may have failed as a leader, but we as an entire community bear a level of responsiblity.

[UND92,96]

UND92,96,

As close as you are to the programs, you probably have many stories/rumors that validate your opinion. Most people don't have that luxury.

When UND hired LtCol Buning, my first reaction was, "oh crap, just how will UND and GF culture be able to deal with an ex-military officer?" There's been innuendo strewn about his leadership practically since he arrived, including athletic department employees on this board. Some of it appeared directed at him because of sour grapes over Bollinger not being hired. Some of it appeared to be whining by employees and boosters because their sense of importance was displaced. I have heard second- and third-hand instances of leadership behavior that seemed to destroy, rather than build, trust so Buning's likely imminent departure really probably needed to happen.

But there remains a strong perception, however unfair, that an small element within the Sioux booster community wanted him to fail even before he arrived because he wasn't one of "them". The question remains, how much of the "lack of trust" issue actually resides with Sioux boosters, who help create a distrustful environment even before Buning arrived? Buning may have failed as a leader, but we as an entire community bear a level of responsiblity.

There's no question that this isn't an easy situation to step into for an "outsider." However, what I think people need to keep in mind, especially now that we know how poorly Buning was graded by athletic department employees, is that by defending Buning, those people are essentially impugning the intregrity of those employees. If this were simply boosters who were unhappy (again, the Wanless example comes to mind), or just a few coaches, then perhaps one could make the claim that Buning was being wronged. However, it was apparently the nearly unanimous sentiment of coaches and staff that he simply wasn't a good leader. Whether intentionally or not, defending Buning now as "just doing his job", as many of the comments on the Herald site basically stated, is essentially a slap in the face to the coaches. Not that they need people like me to defend them, but it just rubs me the wrong way for people who really don't have a good grasp of the situation to think so little of the coaches to suggest that they would try to get somebody fired over something as trivial as cutting a few perks.

[The Walrus]

Survey right or wrong...? But By discrediting the survey you are bringing into question the integerity of our coaches and their staffs. I have been a Sioux fan for 30 years (not sure if I am a good old boy) I have a great deal of respect for Dale Lennon, Gene Roebuck, Dave Hakstol and their staffs. Over the years Presidents have come and gone, Athletic Directors have come and gone, Adminstratrion help has come and gone, the one thing that has remained constant is great coaches, coaches with character. I can not remember a Head Coach (major sports) over that time that did not carry themselves with Dignity, Class, and Intergerity at all levels. Our current coaches and their staffs are extensions of this proud history. If Mr.Buning was not doing his job, they would know more than anyone. I do not believe this is about budgets cuts, personallities, or anything like that. It's about being a team, all on the same page, heading in the same direction, under someone you can respect, communicate with, work with and work for, someone that provides leadership. On that simple formula Mr. Buning (great guy) has seemingly failed.

[Cratter]

Survey right or wrong...? But By discrediting the survey you are bringing into question the integerity of our coaches and their staffs. I have been a Sioux fan for 30 years (not sure if I am a good old boy) I have a great deal of respect for Dale Lennon, Gene Roebuck, Dave Hakstol and their staffs. Over the years Presidents have come and gone, Athletic Directors have come and gone, Adminstratrion help has come and gone, the one thing that has remained constant is great coaches, coaches with character. I can not remember a Head Coach (major sports) over that time that did not carry themselves with Dignity, Class, and Intergerity at all levels. Our current coaches and their staffs are extensions of this proud history. If Mr.Buning was not doing his job, they would know more than anyone. I do not believe this is about budgets cuts, personallities, or anything like that. It's about being a team, all on the same page, heading in the same direction, under someone you can respect, communicate with, work with and work for, someone that provides leadership. On that simple formula Mr. Buning (great guy) has seemingly failed.

Nicely Said!

[Matt]

If, and i'm not sure this is true...if UND officials were intent on firing Bunning, then how was it in the interest of UND to grant Bunning a leave in the first place? Wouldn't they just ask for a resignation or be terminated, and deny the request for a leave? After all, a leave of absence is in itself a big deal. AD's don't just pick up a leave of absence at the receptionist's desk with a piece of hard candy.

[Sioux-cia]

If, and i'm not sure this is true...if UND officials were intent on firing Bunning, then how was it in the interest of UND to grant Bunning a leave in the first place? Wouldn't they just ask for a resignation or be terminated, and deny the request for a leave? After all, a leave of absence is in itself a big deal. AD's don't just pick up a leave of absence at the receptionist's desk with a piece of hard candy.

Terminating someone is a much bigger deal!! The U has to make sure all their documentation is complete, accurate, and follows all the rules/policies/procedures that all government institutions have in place. Those rules/policies/procedures are there to proctect the employee from unjust termination and the institiution from a lawsuit.

Granting the AD a LOA tells me the U does not yet have all their ducks in a row for a 'lawful' termination.

[DI IN FARGO]

How is it that no one on this board has questioned the survey itself? I'm not talking about the reults or the questions and answers but the fact that the survey was done at all? This doesn't appear to be a normal operating procdure of UND therefore why now and only with one univeristy employee? If this was Standard Operating Procdure for all employees of the University I would say go for it and have fun. That by all reports is not the rule fo thumb and this survey isn't SOP. Sure makes one from the outside looking in wonder who Bunning must be visiting regarding legal action. I cannot imagine an employer using a survey for one employee and worse yet with anonymous resposnses being used to determine if one keeps his job or not. I can see lawsuit written all over this or at the very minimum a very lucrative buyout for Bunning. This last comment has nothing to do with UND either but if that was me and I had any employer pull that stunt I'd be talking to an attorney about it for sure. Very poorly handled by UND for sure.

[Matt]

Terminating someone is a much bigger deal!! The U has to make sure all their documentation is complete, accurate, and follows all the rules/policies/procedures that all government institutions have in place. Those rules/policies/procedures are there to proctect the employee from unjust termination and the institiution from a lawsuit.

Granting the AD a LOA tells me the U does not yet have all their ducks in a row for a 'lawful' termination.

Certainly it is. However, UND still could get it's ducks in a row, then fire him without granting a leave. Why does UND need the leave? Unless Bunning's actions on the job are so detrimental to the department they are that much better off without him there? Have things been that bad in the athletic department?

[fs1]

I would assume Buning,realizing his being fired was just a matter of time(a day or so away), and as stated earlier that process takes a bit of time, requested the LOA to stop/delay that process. If he could make his LOA request to be or at least seem "legitimate", UND would be required to give it to him, whether they wanted to or not, due to the fact he had not yet been techinically fired.

This would seem to be the way it happened. It is now common knowledge that he was being fired. And now he is on a LOA, which was not initiated on UND's part. I see it as a delay tactic by a desperate person. There is no way he could think the firing will not happen, its just a matter of time, when and if he comes back from his LOA. One can only assume his delay tactic is being used to determine what if any legal options he thinks he can pursue.