forums

Here's what I know

Advertisement
TheOriginalCane said:
It is not.

I wish this board (CIS) could have more consistency with analyzing certain key UM leaders (not a knock against you, just pointing this out).

I have posted very specific critiques of Beta Blake for 5 or 6 years. When we got the IPF built, plenty of people on CIS were rushing to crown Beta Blake and shouted me down. Now everybody is happy that Beta Blake is gone.

I have posted very specific critiques of Julio Frenk for 5 or 6 years. When Julio stood up for "let's play football during COVID", plenty of people on CIS were rushing to crown Julio and shouted me down. Now everybody is happy again that Julio appointed an assassin and a sidekick, AFTER SIX YEARS OF DOING NOTHING, to clean up the AD mess.

Bottom line, Beta Blake and Julio always were, and always will be, the people that they are. Ineffective Betas who are only as good as the guys they hire or delegate to.

As for the BOT, that's a mess. Some good people, some not so good people. Not sure who will win the war. Lots of good intentions, but very little vision and follow-through. But it's not going to change overnight, without some sort of "UM constitutional convention" that completely revises how the Board is selected, operated, and empowered. And THAT is not happening any time soon. Not with Jellyfish Julio working on a month-to-month contract.
Click to expand...
So, for us mere mortals, the BOT are basically bag men/women who contribute funds to the university for particular causes they deem important. The heavier the bag, the more influence said donor may wield.

Depending on their standing, a particular BOT member can influence decisions but ultimately, the final decision lies with the University President.

Is this the basic premise of the decision making process?
 
tsimonitis said:
Who is President of BoT?
Click to expand...


1637765836129.webp




Johnny is a great guy, I went to UM with him and was in the Student Government Senate with him.

Manny Kadre was previously mentioned earlier in the thread (part of the Hire Manny crew).

Not as familiar with Laurie, her priorities, her style. But I think it's safe to say that a lid needs to be put on this public battle.
 
423Hurricane said:
So, for us mere mortals, the BOT are basically bag men/women who contribute funds to the university for particular causes they deem important. The heavier the bag, the more influence said donor may wield.

Depending on their standing, a particular BOT member can influence decisions but ultimately, the final decision lies with the University President.

Is this the basic premise of the decision making process?
Click to expand...
If this was the case, between Mas brothers, Echevarría, Ruiz, Lambert, Soffer, etc. Jurich would have been hired already.
 
mojoxd said:
So to try and keep all these things straight from the different threads on this board, would love clarification where necessary.

- Blake and Manny were done to many BOT members after Michigan state, back channeling begins

- Frenk fires Blake after FSU

- the BOT voted on the new AD this past sunday and the results were revealed (as per your thread jackbenimble)

- the events that have transpired since would indicate that Jurich won the vote over Hernandez, to the incredible disappointment to Epstein and his folk

- Epstein and folk leak misinformation to the media and tantrum to force Frenk’s hand or get him to pursue an alternative option?

- the search committee stuff seemed to come to light around the same time as the “manny could possibly be retained narrative sprouted. Is the search committee also misinformation? Or is the search committee the alternative option that is now in motion?

- if the results of a vote can be protested so heavily to the point that it nullifies said result, what protections are in place to protect such a thing from happening again? Isn’t the result still the result, regardless of what resistance Epstein is putting up? And conversely, what's to stop the Mas Brothers and company to doing the same thing should there ever be a result from a vote that they oppose?

Appreciate it. This has been a wild thing to follow
Click to expand...


---Blake/Manny "done" - basically yes

---Frenk fires Blake - welllll, sort of, but the details are not super-relevant

---BOT vote - be careful on this idea, it's not some formal irrevocable vote, but I believe that it was a "progress approval" to take the next step(s) in the process

---Results revealed - again, be careful. A lot of people overlook the CONTINGENT and multi-step nature of the process. If you think "recruiting is fluid", then you have never contemplated AD/HC searches...

---The leaks - yes, in the face of overwhelming info/logic, suddenly the story did a 180. Why? Clearly, there are leaks from those unhappy with the current momentum and direction

---Search committee - this one has a couple of possible explanations, the most logical of which is this...imagine you are winning a costly/bloody battle, and then the other side says "hey, here's a reasonable request, let's hire a search committee", and you think "fine, I'm gonna let you have this one". There is literally nothing WRONG with using a search committee (and who cares about tens of thousands of dollars when you are about to spend tens of millions). I want to see where this whole thing ends up before I judge whether the "old guard" had a master stroke of brilliance that blocked the guys they didn't want, or the "new guard" brilliantly let the "old guard" have an unimportant concession before ultimately winning the war

---Results of the vote nullified - have you READ THE NEWS for the past year? Hello?

Still some time on the clock, let's see what the next moves are.
 
423Hurricane said:
So, for us mere mortals, the BOT are basically bag men/women who contribute funds to the university for particular causes they deem important. The heavier the bag, the more influence said donor may wield.

Depending on their standing, a particular BOT member can influence decisions but ultimately, the final decision lies with the University President.

Is this the basic premise of the decision making process?
Click to expand...

Two sides to every coin.

"Hey, you have given our University millions, we want to work with you in partnership, we appreciate your commitment, we want you to help guide us into the future, would you like to join the Board?"

Happens 24-7-365 across this great planet. How sausage is made.

Also, I said it somewhere else, do NOT expect "the final decision" to "like with the University President", particularly when he wants a new 5-year contract from the Board.
 
JD08 said:
It's like when two people start to argue in public until people point out that everybody's looking at them.

Hopefully, last night's Twitter space was that warning.
Click to expand...


I still think Epstein will get explosive diarrhea when someone finally tells him no, but I otherwise agree with you.
 
TheOriginalCane said:
I had this separate conversation with a few other posters.

There are lots of people who conflate their own particular goals/ambitions with bigger picture "I'm doing the right thing here". You often see this in politicians. Yes, the roads get built, but they also get their kickbacks.

With Epstein, I think he can acknowledge that Blake's passivity was not serving UM well. But he is also threatened by the activist nature of Jurich, to the point where he can fall back on "but what about the Louisville investigation" to serve the dual purpose of "protecting UM from a bad guy" while also "protecting Alpha Epstein from another Alpha".

Yes, to outside observers, it's all about ego. But it's hard for Epstein to have perspective. When is the last time you think that someone gave him a firm no? Told him that his brilliant idea really sucks? Refused to give him the best table in the restaurant?
Click to expand...
Well… if he looks at Twitter today he’ll find a lot of people telling him such things.

I see your point. In a situation like this, where objective measures like W/L don’t really tell the story, it’s easy to sell a false narrative. Even to yourself.

That said, to not jump at the opportunity to improve the program because of ego and misplaced loyalty is malpractice.
 
I wonder what a search committee entails. Is it a couple of BOT going around searching for the best candidates or it’s a company. If it’s a company, do they even know or hve an idea what makes a great AD and qualifies to make your football team great? Sounds like a I know Juancito that has a “company” give him some money for his company BS.
 
Advertisement
TheOriginalCane said:
---Blake/Manny "done" - basically yes

---Frenk fires Blake - welllll, sort of, but the details are not super-relevant

---BOT vote - be careful on this idea, it's not some formal irrevocable vote, but I believe that it was a "progress approval" to take the next step(s) in the process

---Results revealed - again, be careful. A lot of people overlook the CONTINGENT and multi-step nature of the process. If you think "recruiting is fluid", then you have never contemplated AD/HC searches...

---The leaks - yes, in the face of overwhelming info/logic, suddenly the story did a 180. Why? Clearly, there are leaks from those unhappy with the current momentum and direction

---Search committee - this one has a couple of possible explanations, the most logical of which is this...imagine you are winning a costly/bloody battle, and then the other side says "hey, here's a reasonable request, let's hire a search committee", and you think "fine, I'm gonna let you have this one". There is literally nothing WRONG with using a search committee (and who cares about tens of thousands of dollars when you are about to spend tens of millions). I want to see where this whole thing ends up before I judge whether the "old guard" had a master stroke of brilliance that blocked the guys they didn't want, or the "new guard" brilliantly let the "old guard" have an unimportant concession before ultimately winning the war

---Results of the vote nullified - have you READ THE NEWS for the past year? Hello?

Still some time on the clock, let's see what the next moves are.
Click to expand...
So I only follow UM athletics so I don't know if this is consistent across the college landscape. But is this normal or is it unique to UM? Every single BOT member has had a fair amount of success in whatever business venture they've been apart of. This kind of behavior, posturing, and in fighting, though it happens, would not be tolerated in the business world. There are always policies and processes employed to prevent conflicts of interest and other unsavory (just wanted to use the word) developments. None of that seems to be present at UM.

And another thing; why are there so many BOT members for a university with less than 15k enrolled? What, does each undergrad get their own BOT member?
 
hoops156 said:
he can give his opinion in the search but in college, the HC is the GM, president, etc of football. id only bring in Zo if the HC is comfortable with him (which we know Mario would be).
Click to expand...

If Zo is hired he is the GM not the HC. So it's a little different in this case. So it's a relationship that may work with Mario because of the mutual respect and trust. Other HC candidates will just have to accept it.
 
TheOriginalCane said:
Yes, David Epstein and Gloria Estefan each have one vote. But they do not have equal power on the Board.

And, yes, Julio Frenk DOES need BOT approval to make a significant hire at a significant pay level. In the past, and/or with a more powerful/respected President, this might have been more of a formality, but given the current BOT WWIII, Julio is not just going to be able to do what he wants. Remember, he ALSO wants another 5-year contract from these people.
Click to expand...
i've said this before, gloria estefan doesn note on stuff like this.

there is a small executive board that votes on most matters. i don't know who is the executive board, but A Rod, Bernie and Gloria don't vote on this.
 
TheOriginalCane said:
---Blake/Manny "done" - basically yes

---Frenk fires Blake - welllll, sort of, but the details are not super-relevant

---BOT vote - be careful on this idea, it's not some formal irrevocable vote, but I believe that it was a "progress approval" to take the next step(s) in the process

---Results revealed - again, be careful. A lot of people overlook the CONTINGENT and multi-step nature of the process. If you think "recruiting is fluid", then you have never contemplated AD/HC searches...

---The leaks - yes, in the face of overwhelming info/logic, suddenly the story did a 180. Why? Clearly, there are leaks from those unhappy with the current momentum and direction

---Search committee - this one has a couple of possible explanations, the most logical of which is this...imagine you are winning a costly/bloody battle, and then the other side says "hey, here's a reasonable request, let's hire a search committee", and you think "fine, I'm gonna let you have this one". There is literally nothing WRONG with using a search committee (and who cares about tens of thousands of dollars when you are about to spend tens of millions). I want to see where this whole thing ends up before I judge whether the "old guard" had a master stroke of brilliance that blocked the guys they didn't want, or the "new guard" brilliantly let the "old guard" have an unimportant concession before ultimately winning the war

---Results of the vote nullified - have you READ THE NEWS for the past year? Hello?

Still some time on the clock, let's see what the next moves are.
Click to expand...
Lord knows using a search firm has worked so well for us in the past. Can we just skip ahead to the part where they recommend we promote T-Rob to HC or hire a G5 coach who has never won his own conference?
 
Advertisement
Salt said:
If Zo is hired he is the GM not the HC. So it's a little different in this case. So it's a relationship that may work with Mario because of the mutual respect and trust. Other HC candidates will just have to accept it.
Click to expand...
I geti but it doenst work with high level coaches (again we know Mario is diff in this case). coaches in college are the GM. its not like the NFL
 
Hegemon said:
You sound like my Brazilian counterparts at work.

If the American model is so trash why do we consistently win in international sports? No one can answer that. So we win inspite of ourselves? What does that say about the rest of planets athletes?

"Americans do not have the finesse to play soccer." (Insert any non American here)

Wait but we can in Basketball? The Brazilian national sports of Beach Volleyball and jiujitsu are dominated routinely by Americans.

If American Football players decided to play Rugby right now we would BUTT**** the planets Rugby teams. It would be America vs America.

Top level soccer players are not the best athletes on the planet. Stop it. Id put anyone on the Tour De France in that category (including drugs), endurance racers etc etc. The hyperbole is a bit much here.

Brazilians play:

Soccer
Beach Volleyball
Jiujitsu

And? What other national sport?

The only sport that really applies too is soccer. That robotic mentality does not work for the Chinese that is why whenever they play a major sport they look like an AI version of humanity.

I will hang up and listen.
Click to expand...

Your work colleagues sound like smart people, you should listen to them more.

Good athletes can be found all over the world, the difference is how they are trained. In the America, you go to high school and play your sport on the side. You go to college, and play your sport on the side. You only go full-time when you go pro (except baseball I think).

In Latin America and Europe, for soccer, if you have skills at a young age they pull your *** out of school and you do nothing but play soccer 24/7 in a development league. The best time to develop any motor skill is when you're a kid, but in USA they split their time with school.

That's why I read these articles about how the US is improving at soccer and I'm like "nope." The only way you ever catch up to Europe and Latin America is if they wake up one day and decide it's more important for little Johnny to learn how to read than dribble a soccer ball. But for now, that ain't happening. And if your kid is practicing 3 hours a day and the Brazilians are practicing 12 hours when they're kids and their motor skills are developing, that's the difference and it ain't changing.

It's also why if you had an American college football team from the 80's and they played one from today, the 80's team would destroy today's team. Put the '87 Hurricanes in a time machine and have them play last year's Alabama team, and the Canes would destroy them. Most would disagree - people by nature just want to believe that things are always improving and moving forward, they would talk about training methods etc getting better, but that's not true. The fact is they practiced longer and harder in the 80's, because the NCAA allowed it. The new rules limiting practice time makes for worse athletes.

As for Olympic sports, US is the best because you have Title 9 and so you have money going in to it. Other countries (besides maybe the old USSR) don't have academy models for olympic sports like they do for soccer, so that's not really relevant to compare.

So that's a long answer all just to say.... how good you are at a sport is directly related to how long and hard you practice. Especially when you're young.
 
Back
Top