- November 18th, 2016, 6:58 am
#522252
Liberty has never been known to do things like this the right way.
Moderators: jcmanson, Sly Fox, BuryYourDuke
thepostman wrote:He had an important meeting to go to. He couldn't be bothered to do things the right way.Seems like I read somewhere that a double minded man is unstable in all his ways. Maybe we are dealing with something like that?
LUnpretty11 wrote:PH, your BJ skills impress me.
Jonathan Carone wrote:You can not buy the scaling back but it's happening across the entire school, even while we build great buildings. There has been a 3% cut University wide the past couple years. They're finding where we have inefficient spending and eliminating it. And it's a good thing! We can't just throw money at problems and hope it fixes them. We have to be smart about how we use our resources.
Jonathan Carone wrote:You can not buy the scaling back but it's happening across the entire school, even while we build great buildings. There has been a 3% cut University wide the past couple years. They're finding where we have inefficient spending and eliminating it. And it's a good thing! We can't just throw money at problems and hope it fixes them. We have to be smart about how we use our resources.I completely agree with the above. What I am not buying is the "give up on competing at the highest levels in all areas" slant. Streamlining and removing inefficiencies is just good business and if any head of a department can't see that then they need to be fired.
Jonathan Carone wrote:You can not buy the scaling back but it's happening across the entire school, even while we build great buildings. There has been a 3% cut University wide the past couple years. They're finding where we have inefficient spending and eliminating it. And it's a good thing! We can't just throw money at problems and hope it fixes them. We have to be smart about how we use our resources.Jon- while curtailing spending can be good, just hatcheting every department by 3% is a very poor way to accomplish this. I know the person who first got these cuts rolling and he has since resigned (on his own terms). I also know that the way the administration did this sickens him and there are plenty of people who have been carrying more than there share of burdens who have seen the negative impacts of the cuts. Meanwhile, the VP of construction gets demoted because he is too much of a budget hawk and the higher ups see this as an impediment to their construction plans. How in the world the school chose Randy Smith to get involved in these types of changes is beyond me. I don't know him, but he certainly doesn't have the managerial chops to be in his position. There has not been a push to identify inefficiencies- just a mandate to cut. Many departments don't have inefficiencies; they are actually not even able to serve the students in the way they should because their profs don't have the time.
rogers3 wrote:Wait. Are you telling me that the school is putting people in positions they are not qualified for while cutting back on the people who are in qualified positions? Why I never....Jonathan Carone wrote:You can not buy the scaling back but it's happening across the entire school, even while we build great buildings. There has been a 3% cut University wide the past couple years. They're finding where we have inefficient spending and eliminating it. And it's a good thing! We can't just throw money at problems and hope it fixes them. We have to be smart about how we use our resources.Jon- while curtailing spending can be good, just hatcheting every department by 3% is a very poor way to accomplish this. I know the person who first got these cuts rolling and he has since resigned (on his own terms). I also know that the way the administration did this sickens him and there are plenty of people who have been carrying more than there share of burdens who have seen the negative impacts of the cuts. Meanwhile, the VP of construction gets demoted because he is too much of a budget hawk and the higher ups see this as an impediment to their construction plans. How in the world the school chose Randy Smith to get involved in these types of changes is beyond me. I don't know him, but he certainly doesn't have the managerial chops to be in his position. There has not been a push to identify inefficiencies- just a mandate to cut. Many departments don't have inefficiencies; they are actually not even able to serve the students in the way they should because their profs don't have the time.
This should have its own thread, because the issues are beyond just the AD's resignation.
Jonathan Carone wrote:This was sudden for Jeff. That doesn't mean it was sudden for Jerry.Then explain why he would fire JB on a Thursday, the day of a big game? I don't doubt that you have sources but the explanation sounds more like someone wanting to keep things quiet.
VAGolf wrote:Nope. LU will be going with an outsider for AD.Jonathan Carone wrote:This was sudden for Jeff. That doesn't mean it was sudden for Jerry.Then explain why he would fire JB on a Thursday, the day of a big game? I don't doubt that you have sources but the explanation sounds more like someone wanting to keep things quiet.
I also don't buy the "scaling back" argument. Not because we shouldn't do it...we absolutely should. I just know that the person who made the decision yesterday, has the same power over our budget...and it would be out of their nature to scale back our entire athletics department.
Based on Margaux's tweet, and other signs, if Gill is still our head coach for next season...I think it's pretty easy to see what happened with JB.
At this point, I hope we don't find an outsider for AD. The past year or so has been a roller coaster for athletics, we haven't replaced TG yet and it's possible that Jerry is on his way out. We need consistency somewhere. Mickey has been around LU for a long time and does a great job. Give him the position and clean up the messes.
Jonathan Carone wrote:If you think Margaux Gill has any objective idea on what's going on then I don't know what to tell you.I didn't say that...you're smart enough to know what I said.
Jonathan Carone wrote:I know what you said. But you aren't the first to imply this was a difference in opinion with Jeff and Jerry about Gill or that Margaux was hinting something. Jerry has actively been working with the University lawyers all year to determine if we can lessen Gill's buyout. He agrees with Jeff that a change needs to be made. The decision to remove Jeff was made because we will be paying coaches in our main three sports who no longer coach here.Apparently...not. I didn't say Margaux was hinting at anything. However, that doesn't mean that her tweet means nothing...and to assume such is incredibly naive. We know Gill's job is on the line...or at least was...Margaux's tweet showed excitement and relief about the AD being fired. I don't think she would be that excited if she felt Daddy's job was still on the line. Of course, that tweet doesn't mean everything but it shows what was being discussed at home.
Jonathan Carone wrote:I know what you said. But you aren't the first to imply this was a difference in opinion with Jeff and Jerry about Gill or that Margaux was hinting something. Jerry has actively been working with the University lawyers all year to determine if we can lessen Gill's buyout. He agrees with Jeff that a change needs to be made. The decision to remove Jeff was made because we will be paying coaches in our main three sports who no longer coach here.If JB and JLFJR were\are on the same page as far as firing them is concermed, and JB was fired because we are paying coaches who no longer work for us, it's all about the extensions and whether they should have been offered or not and for how long, which leads to the question, did JB have the authority to grant those extensions on his own, or were they approved by his boss Everything I have heard about JR's management style would indicate the latter, in which case
VAGolf wrote:Jerry jr isn't known for his tact. I get what you're saying and it makes total sense but when it comes go major moves liberty rarely makes sense.Jonathan Carone wrote:I know what you said. But you aren't the first to imply this was a difference in opinion with Jeff and Jerry about Gill or that Margaux was hinting something. Jerry has actively been working with the University lawyers all year to determine if we can lessen Gill's buyout. He agrees with Jeff that a change needs to be made. The decision to remove Jeff was made because we will be paying coaches in our main three sports who no longer coach here.Apparently...not. I didn't say Margaux was hinting at anything. However, that doesn't mean that her tweet means nothing...and to assume such is incredibly naive. We know Gill's job is on the line...or at least was...Margaux's tweet showed excitement and relief about the AD being fired. I don't think she would be that excited if she felt Daddy's job was still on the line. Of course, that tweet doesn't mean everything but it shows what was being discussed at home.
Even if what you're stating above is the actual reasoning, there is still no logical explanation as to why it had to be done yesterday. You would tell him on Friday, let him have a weekend with his family and then break the news to the athletic department on Monday, while allowing Jeff to finish out the week if he desired. You don't ask someone to resign, effective immediately for the reason stated above.
Just remember that fine academic institution, Loui[…]