MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: Tugg Speedman on May 05, 2008, 02:40:59 PM
-
Internal hiring at Marquette has pros, cons
By: James Teats and Steve Yanda
Posted: 5/1/08
http://media.www.marquettetribune.org/media/storage/paper1130/news/2008/05/01/News/Internal.Hiring.At.Marquette.Has.Pros.Cons-3358702.shtml
Internal hiring at Marquette
Pros and cons
Hiring from within at other universities
Upper level administrative postions that need to be filled at Marquette
Incoming Provost John Pauly is just one of a handful of recent hires Marquette made internally, sparking discussion over the legitimacy of such moves. In addition to Pauly, Dean William Cullinan of the College of Health Sciences, Athletic Director Steve Cottingham and Head Coach Brent "Buzz" Williams of the men's basketball team also are recent internal hires.
"In instances where internal candidates were hired, it was clearly a reflection of the excellent recruiting and retention of talented individuals that Marquette has done over time," said Brigid O'Brien Miller, director of university communication, in an e-mail. "It is natural to expect that these individuals would have potential for upward mobility. It is not surprising that Marquette would seek to advance into higher positions its most promising leaders."
Marquette currently has openings in five upper-level administrative positions: deans of the Colleges of Business Administration, Nursing and Arts & Sciences, as well as an interim dean for the College of Communication and vice president of Student Affairs.
Searches to fill these positions are underway, according to Miller.
Certainly, there are pros and cons to internal candidates, and the university undoubtedly will review such applications in the coming months.
In Pauly's case, he wasn't looking to move up the administrative ladder at Marquette. He was happy with his current job as dean of the College of Communication. But after people at Marquette nominated him for the university provost opening, he decided to apply for the position.
More than 50 applicants and a nationwide search later, university president the Rev. Robert A. Wild deemed Pauly the best person for the job.
Pauly said justifying internal hires depends on the position and context. He said with a university fostering the growth of its employees, internal leaders will emerge.
"But it's important not to be 'comfy,'" Pauly said. "Sometimes we have to reconsider whether we're as good as we think we are."
At his provost forum in March, Pauly said he told people not to choose him because they liked him and were comfortable with him, but because he was the best candidate to move the university forward.
Like Pauly, St. Louis University Provost Joe Weixlmann said he would not have applied for the position if he wasn't already a dean at the university. After being a dean for 10 years, he said he wasn't looking for the switch to provost.
Weixlmann served as interim provost in 2002 and assumed the position full-time a year later after a nationwide search.
He said a national search for new deans has always been conducted during his time as provost and that the university is typically more likely to choose external candidates.
"Sometimes you just have to go outside because of politics and things like that," Weixlmann said.
He said it is generally more expensive to hire external candidates from a salary standpoint.
Robert Doolittle, a communications professor at the University of Tulsa, described internal hiring as a "mixed bag." He said there are some times when internal hiring is good, while other times it turns out sour.
In his career, Doolittle said he has witnessed internal hires being chosen for the wrong reasons, such as the administration not wanting to spend the money for an outside search. He said internal hiring can be the quickest and easiest way to fill a position.
When a university chooses an interim administrator to move to the full-time position, Doolittle said the university sometimes commits to a national search to test how the interim measures up to other candidates. He said an advantage of internally hiring an interim is that the university gets to see firsthand what that person can do.
Bruce Rasmussen understands the scrutiny that sometimes accompanies an internal hire for a high profile position at a university. Almost 14 years ago, Rasmussen was named the director of athletics at Creighton University after a two-year stint as the school's associate athletic director. He had previously spent 12 years as the Creighton women's basketball coach.
Though Rasmussen was familiar with Creighton coaches, athletes, boosters, administrators and fans at the time he was hired as the director of athletics, he also heard the whispers. There was a contingent that wondered why the university hadn't gone outside its own athletic department to bring in someone with a more administrative background, said Rasmussen.
"In hindsight," Rasmussen said last week in a phone interview, "I think it turned out OK."
Rasmussen has made his share of hires - both external and internal. He said there needs to be a strong, established track record of involvement from the university president and athletic director in order to justify hiring internal candidates.
"In the absence of that, it is much more difficult," Rasmussen said. "People think you've taken the easy way out. They say, 'You tell me you looked outside, but you can't prove to me that you looked outside.' "
In February, Cottingham was named Marquette's athletic director after a 14-month interim stint during which he conducted the search for a permanent replacement. Though Cottingham stated throughout the search process that he was not interested in the full-time position, he eventually concluded he was the best person for the job.
Of the 60 candidates who applied for the full-time position, none were interviewed. As a private institution, Marquette is not required to conduct interviews with any specific number of applicants.
Before joining in 1995 Marquette's Office of the General Counsel, the principal representative for legal matters involving Marquette University, Cottingham worked in private practice for a law firm currently known as Reinhart, Boerner, Van Deuren, S.C., based in Milwaukee. He became the university's associate senior vice president in September 2003.
Less than two months into his term as athletic director, Cottingham had to hire a new men's basketball coach after Tom Crean left to take over the program at Indiana. A week-long search led to the announcement that Buzz Williams would be Crean's replacement. Williams served as one of Crean's assistant coaches during the 2007-'08 season.
Prior to assuming the reins at Marquette, Williams had one stint as a head coach. He led the University of New Orleans to a 14-17 record in 2006-'07.
Senior Vice President Greg Kliebhan, who played a major role in the hirings of both Cottingham and Williams, declined an interview request.
-
In February, Cottingham was named Marquette's athletic director after a 14-month interim stint during which he conducted the search for a permanent replacement. Though Cottingham stated throughout the search process that he was not interested in the full-time position, he eventually concluded he was the best person for the job.
Of the 60 candidates who applied for the full-time position, none were interviewed.
absolutely remarkable for all the wrong reasons
-
absolutely remarkable for all the wrong reasons
None interviewed....NONE. Amazing
-
Senior Vice President Greg Kliebhan, who played a major role in the hirings of both Cottingham and Williams, declined an interview request.
I'll bet he did.
-
None interviewed....NONE. Amazing
Mind numbing. It's bizarre, really.
-
That pretty confirms my fears. MU really is out of touch with the business of college sports. They believe that 16K idiots, like me, will show up forever and be the golden goose. Everyday that goes by I see my bar for success is quite higher than the school's.
Am I the only one that thinks this is a business? MU runs this thing like it is a hobby. Sooner or later that arrogance will get them. At least I hope it is arrogance and not just that they are out of touch.
I dislike UW quite a bit, but their success started with AD Pat Richter. If the AD is a dolt chances are the sports will follow.
-
I don't know where to begin except to say, it sounds like amateur hour.
An organization is destined for failure when there are really bad decisions made and there are no negative consequences for those making them. The problem is, in this case, we won't see the results of the decisions for a couple of years.
There is no way Cottingham is more qualified than all 60 candidates.
-
Mind numbing. It's bizarre, really.
Bizarre is one word. unnatural carnal knowledgeing disaster is a phrase I'd like to use.
Blind faith fans wonder why some of us questioned the hiring process. When it's been well known for the last 2 months that Cottingham never interviewed anyone for a position he himself had no interest in only to name himself to the position everyone knew the basketball coach hiring would be a unnatural carnal knowledge-up.
By all accounts, we don't have issues with Buzz Williams. We have issues with an inept administration conducting a bird-brained hiring process. Seriously, how do you only interview one person for a Big East coaching job?
-
There is no way Cottingham is more qualified than all 60 candidates.
HE thinks he is.
"Though Cottingham stated throughout the search process that he was not interested in the full-time position, he eventually concluded he was the best person for the job."
-
absolutely remarkable for all the wrong reasons
YIKES.
That is not encouraging.
What is encouraging is the writing that the tribune is putting out there. Fantastic stuff.
Much, much better analysis that any of the other local rags.
-
HE thinks he is.
"Though Cottingham stated throughout the search process that he was not interested in the full-time position, he eventually concluded he was the best person for the job."
And he is really objective. Oy vey! ?-(
-
The problem as I see it is the admin and BOT arrogance. MU like any other university has seen great revenue years in the past ten years. It is almost like they believe they are doing something special. They are not!!! Every school worth a damn has benefited from a wide range of financial windfalls recently.
Good schools look at for it is worth. You would have had to be a complete fool in the 2000's not to see endowment grow in records numbers. Now, with weaker economy schools will need to market themselves better to stay ahead.
It looks to me that MU leadership fails in this economic environment. There is no accountability and we as alums, fans, parents of students or all of the above should not accept it.
-
HE thinks he is.
"Though Cottingham stated throughout the search process that he was not interested in the full-time position, he eventually concluded he was the best person for the job."
How does anyone make that conslusion when nobody was interviewed? That is almost impossible to believe. Really a discouraging admission.
-
HE thinks he is.
"Though Cottingham stated throughout the search process that he was not interested in the full-time position, he eventually concluded he was the best person for the job."
He concluded that because Wild told him he was. Wild wanted Cottingham from the beginning and he is the reason no other candidates were interviewed. Wild was just waiting him out until he finally decided to take the job.
-
How do you run a multi-million dollar business like this? Larry, Curly, and Moe would do a better job.
-
None interviewed....NONE. Amazing
I am all for hiring internal candidates, but you have to do so after running a proper search where they are put up against other candidates. Mostly because it adds legitimacy to their candidacy. I have a hard time believing that, of the 60, none were worth an interview. Or maybe they should have hired a search firm to help with the process.
And Cottingham might turn out to be the best choice and a great AD. My problem isn't with him, it's with the people that make these decisions.
-
He concluded that because Wild told him he was. Wild wanted Cottingham from the beginning and he is the reason no other candidates were interviewed. Wild was just waiting him out until he finally decided to take the job.
So you are saying he didn't want the job at first and then a year later changed his mind. I'm not saying that isn't the case but why wasn't he interviewing other people if he thought he wasn't going to take the job. I have a hard time thinking that he didn't plan on taking it the entire time.
-
Of the 60 candidates who applied for the full-time position, none were interviewed.
Here's a link to the 60 applicants
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?action=mlist
-
Here's a link to the 60 applicants
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?action=mlist
Good one.
In all seriousness, I know three folks in the sports business that applied that have very solid qualifications....two with MU ties, all three with college sports administration backgrounds (one of them with a pro sports background). From my conversations with them, they got a letter recognizing their application and that was it. All three still live in the Midwest as well, so going to Milwaukee would not have been an issue.
Oh well.
-
Maybe this is just because I am a proud grad of the journalism program, but I am extremely impressed with the quality of reporting and writing in that story. In fact, there have been several recent articles from the Trib that have been nothing short of outstanding. It's good to see our student media is thriving. Hopefully, a few newspapers will still be around so these kids can get jobs when they graduate.
-
Good one.
In all seriousness, I know three folks in the sports business that applied that have very solid qualifications....two with MU ties, all three with college sports administration backgrounds (one of them with a pro sports background). From my conversations with them, they got a letter recognizing their application and that was it. All three still live in the Midwest as well, so going to Milwaukee would not have been an issue.
Oh well.
Just curious as to what you mean by "very solid qualifications". Did any of them serve as head Athletic Director at a major D1 university? Or would this be a step up for them? How big a step?
For all the criticism of Cottingham on this board, he DID have the job for 14 months before the interim title was removed from his name. People got to see him perform in the same role that Bill Cords held. I'm not aware of anything that suggests he fell short of Cords in any aspect of his performance.
Until we know the qualifications and experience of those 60 other applicants--especially with regards to serious issues like NCAA compliance, legal agreements, enforcement, etc--I'm not willing to automatically assume that those others were more qualified.
-
Just curious as to what you mean by "very solid qualifications". Did any of them serve as head Athletic Director at a major D1 university? Or would this be a step up for them? How big a step?
For all the criticism of Cottingham on this board, he DID have the job for 14 months before the interim title was removed from his name. People got to see him perform in the same role that Bill Cords held. I'm not aware of anything that suggests he fell short of Cords in any aspect of his performance.
Until we know the qualifications and experience of those 60 other applicants--especially with regards to serious issues like NCAA compliance, legal agreements, enforcement, etc--I'm not willing to automatically assume that those others were more qualified.
One has served as an AD at a DI university that also has football, I'd call that major. It was not a BCS conference, but good enough that their winner goes to a bowl game, let's put it that way.
The other two spent years in athletics administration at the college level, on the business end primarily. Raising revenues, etc.
Steve may be the right guy, but it is incredibly troubling to me that no one was interviewed for such a high profile position. It's kind of the old school way MU used to do things with Al as AD in the mid '70's, Hank as AD for about 10 years.
-
Flashback .. Dick Cheney heads a Republican Nominee GWBush's vice-presidential running-mate search in 2000.
Surprise! Cheney is tops on the list for VP candidates.
Although .. at least Cheney probably interviewed a few guys.
If that quote is right .. that the author really heard Cottingham explain that "he eventually concluded he was the best person for the job" holy crap. That's just no way to run an organization.
-
Just curious as to what you mean by "very solid qualifications". Did any of them serve as head Athletic Director at a major D1 university? Or would this be a step up for them? How big a step?
For all the criticism of Cottingham on this board, he DID have the job for 14 months before the interim title was removed from his name. People got to see him perform in the same role that Bill Cords held. I'm not aware of anything that suggests he fell short of Cords in any aspect of his performance.
Until we know the qualifications and experience of those 60 other applicants--especially with regards to serious issues like NCAA compliance, legal agreements, enforcement, etc--I'm not willing to automatically assume that those others were more qualified.
Come on, not one of the 60 was more qualified? Cottingham is a lawyer by trade with very limited experience in athletics administration and you'd like to believe that not one of the 60 applicants didn't have better qualifications then the present AD.
Either your head is in the sand or MU writes your paycheck.
-
I remember hearing Majerus talk at NCAA pre- game dinner in Indy - one comment stood out(paraphrase)...all universities WANT to win, but very few really understand the commitment required TO Win. I think settling on an AD without extensive external search leads me to believe we my fail to understand what it will take to compete. I hope I am wrong, but am not encouraged by what I am seeing here....
-
Come on, not one of the 60 was more qualified? Cottingham is a lawyer by trade with very limited experience in athletics administration and you'd like to believe that not one of the 60 applicants didn't have better qualifications then the present AD.
Either your head is in the sand or MU writes your paycheck.
The simple question is whether you believe the influence of law on sports is going to increase or decrease over the next several years.
I don't think the influence of law will decline at all. I see it playing an even larger role--look at what we've seen in the last few years, with Academic Progress reports, FERPA, HIPPA, etc. Then look at the size of the contracts--even mid-level schools are seeing 7-figure coaching salaries and 10 figure packages. Then look at the complex public/private partnerships that are running the arenas these days.
If the 60 candidates were all of the "I was the assistant AD running the ticket office at State U" ilk, I can easily see why MU might pass on them.
It doesn't seem a stretch to me to think that a school that runs the nation's premier sports law programs just might have greater appreciation for legal aspects of the job as compared to experience in athletics administration.
When I see the risks that college programs face, having a legal background is becoming more important:
--NCAA Compliance issues
--Sports marketing agreements with external firms
--Negotiation of leases with increasingly complex ownership and control of public sports venues
--Negotiation of television contracts
--Negotiation of membership agreements with the Big East Conference
--Title IX considerations
--Student-Athlete privacy considerations
Finally, let me suggest that if Indiana hired a lawyer rather than an experienced AD in 2004, they might have properly assessed the risks of hiring Kelvin Sampson, which would have spared us the angst of the past month.
I don't think I'm off base in suggesting that the athletics department is filled with a whole lot of people with athletic administration background, and not many with strong legal backgrounds.
So I don't knee-jerk buy into the notion that simply because 60 people applied means that they're better than the guy who's been performing the job for the past 14 months--especially if one belives that legal aspects o are going to play an increasing role in the job.
-
Random thesaurus entries to accompany the above article: lazy, uninspired, jayvee, irresponsible, embarrassing, second-rate, cheap, commonplace, namby-pamby, mom-and-pop operation, slack, remiss, lackadaisical, lethargic, narrow-minded, sorry.
-
The irony of it is that IU used to have a lawyer as their AD when I was there. Clarence Doninger. He also happened to be Bobby Knight's personal lawyer.
Most IU fans, in my opinion, would not say that was a very good idea either.
By the way, usually the folks that apply for an AD job are Associate AD's, Deputy AD's, or Associate Commissioner's from league offices. These are people that have often overseen millions of dollars in budgets as well as significant portions of the athletic part of the job. For example, many larger schools will put an Associate AD in charge of Men's Basketball, volleyball, baseball and track as an example. That person essentially runs those sports, including making the recommendation to hire and fire (ultimately done by the AD, but it all starts at the lower end). Not all schools do this, but many do as day to day sports lieutenants for the Athletic Director.
-
The irony of it is that IU used to have a lawyer as their AD when I was there. Clarence Doninger. He also happened to be Bobby Knight's personal lawyer.
Most IU fans, in my opinion, would not say that was a very good idea either.
By the way, usually the folks that apply for an AD job are Associate AD's, Deputy AD's, or Associate Commissioner's from league offices. These are people that have often overseen millions of dollars in budgets as well as significant portions of the athletic part of the job. For example, many larger schools will put an Associate AD in charge of Men's Basketball, volleyball, baseball and track as an example. That person essentially runs those sports, including making the recommendation to hire and fire (ultimately done by the AD, but it all starts at the lower end). Not all schools do this, but many do as day to day sports lieutenants for the Athletic Director.
But you are finding more and more lawyers in those Associate AD type positions too. One of UW's Associates is Shawn Eichorst, a MU Law alum and former part-time professor in the Law School, and he oversees many of the things that MU'84 pointed out above.
As I said earlier, nothing wrong with internal candidates, I just wish they would have done more interviewing.
-
Westwarrior---Your quote from Rick is right on. I believe MU wants to win as much as UNC does. My fear is that they have no idea how to do it. I said in earlier post that UW got it right with Richter when they hired him.
MU is spoiled because they great attendance, even with a crap schedule. College ball has changed 500% over the past two decades. Winning is easier in some ways a ton more difficult in other ways.
The way MU hired an AD/coach completely confirms what Majerus said. In my heart I believe that my desire to win and win big is greater than the school's. Granted they want it, but by all appearances it looks like they have their fingers crossed on winning.
-
The irony of it is that IU used to have a lawyer as their AD when I was there. Clarence Doninger. He also happened to be Bobby Knight's personal lawyer.
Most IU fans, in my opinion, would not say that was a very good idea either.
By the way, usually the folks that apply for an AD job are Associate AD's, Deputy AD's, or Associate Commissioner's from league offices. These are people that have often overseen millions of dollars in budgets as well as significant portions of the athletic part of the job. For example, many larger schools will put an Associate AD in charge of Men's Basketball, volleyball, baseball and track as an example. That person essentially runs those sports, including making the recommendation to hire and fire (ultimately done by the AD, but it all starts at the lower end). Not all schools do this, but many do as day to day sports lieutenants for the Athletic Director.
I sense you had no argument with the list of criticial issues facing the AD at MU. I also trust that you can see the strong legal component in each one of them.
The role of the AD is changing because of the growing impact of law. As you point out, an associate AD is capable of running the day-to-day operational aspects of a given sport. Knowing how to be successful (as Majeurs says) means prioritizing the critical issues and hiring based on those needs. It sure seems like those 60 candidates are predominantly associate and assistant ADs from the programs who want to win, but don't know how.
I don't understand such strenuous objection to a guy who's actually done the job at MU for the past 14 months, and been involved with the athletic department since 2003, and been with the MU administration for 12 years. And that there seems to be strong support for someone unknown who's prior experience was running the basketball, volleyball and track programs at a mid-major.
In my mind, the easy way out would have been to simply take one of those assitant ADs--a rah-rah guy who can talk up MU basketball just like he talked up women's curling at Mid-Major U. But I see that candidate as being WAY over his or her head when negotiating with the Bradley Center, determining the terms of renewal for the contract with Nelligan, representing MU when the Big East contract comes up for renewal, or understanding the Byzantine rules of NCAA recruting, eligiblity and academic acheivement.
-
Marquette84 -- Do you work for Marquette? Some of the positions you take strongly indicate that you do -- or are at least involved in some way.
-
None interviewed....NONE. Amazing
Certainly doesn't make me think that they handled the Buzz hiring any better.
-
Marquette84 -- Do you work for Marquette? Some of the positions you take strongly indicate that you do -- or are at least involved in some way.
There's a definite connection. Been like that for years.
I understand your love for MU, 84, but imo you're being extremely naive to think that a man who worked the job for 14 months whilst he didn't even want the job gave an appropriate sample size to warrant the position full-time. Especially when you add in that no one -- not even another internal candidate? -- was interviewed.
-
There's a definite connection. Been like that for years.
I understand your love for MU, 84, but imo you're being extremely naive to think that a man who worked the job for 14 months whilst he didn't even want the job gave an appropriate sample size to warrant the position full-time. Especially when you add in that no one -- not even another internal candidate? -- was interviewed.
If I did work for MU, would it make my point any less valid?
In reality, I have no connection other than a loyal alum since 1984. Emphasis on loyal. I can't bring myself to always rip every decision MU makes or assume the worst. Seeing the progress--on campus, in academics, and in the athletic program---that has taken place over the last decade has been amazing. I think the overall track record suggests that those in charge have earned the benefit of the doubt on their decision making. Have there been some mistakes? Sure, but the overall direction tells me that in the absence of solid evidence to the contrary, decisons are well thought out, with the future in mind.
In this specific situation, as an observer of college athletics in general and MU in particular, I see a greater emphasis on the legal aspects of the job, which just might mean that a lawyer with years of experience with MU in general and the athletic department specificially just might be the best qualified guy.
Instead of offering any evidence that other aspects of the job such as "athletic administration" are equally or more important, people simply try to dismiss my point by suggesting I work for MU!
This is really simply--whether or not I work for MU, if you believe that the legal aspects of the AD role are of tremendous importance and will increase in years to come, then it is certainly reasonable that Cottingam may well be the best qualified of the other 60 applicants.
If you believe that the job requires a guy who started his career running an intramural program, and has moved up through the ranks holding every other job in an AD office, then Cottingham probably isn't the best qualified.
At least I have told you up front that I think the legal aspects are more important.
I sense that most people here have never hired anyone--because the attitde I sense is that MU should post the job, see who applies, then adjust what is important to them based on who applies.
In this case, I simply posed that the legal expertise that Cottingham brings to the table might make him the best quailfied candidate IF you believe the legal aspects are most imporant. I support my view with a list of the largest challenges facing MU, almost all of which are based on a legal agreement.
The criticism of me seems to be based not on arguing that the legal aspects are relatively unimportant, but simply that Cottingham lacks atheltic administration experience therefore MU didn't carefully evaluate the 60 other candidates.
My question back to you: Don't you find it somewhat reasonable to think that Cottingham has more legal experience at a high-major level than any of the other 60 candidates?
Before you ask, I'll readily admit that he has less athletic administration expereience.
But I won't concede that athletic administration is more important than legal in today's enviornment.
-
If I did work for MU, My question back to you: Don't you find it somewhat reasonable to think that Cottingham has more legal experience at a high-major level than any of the other 60 candidates?
He may well have been.
However, I would want someone with a vision and leadership (as well as administrative) experience to lead MU now that we are in a BCS conference. Whether you agree with it or not, sports at a University in a major conference is a business. There are many disciplines involved: marketing, finance, management, legal, etc. I would think the most qualified candidate would bring together all of those disciplines, plus have experience managing a number of people or departments (i.e., have leadership experience). Quite frankly, in most businesses the legal department is a staff function that supports management. It is important but rarely the place where the value is added in a business. In hiring, I always prefer hiring a line manager who understands the business and comes from an area where the most value is added.
-
But you are finding more and more lawyers in those Associate AD type positions too. One of UW's Associates is Shawn Eichorst, a MU Law alum and former part-time professor in the Law School, and he oversees many of the things that MU'84 pointed out above.
As I said earlier, nothing wrong with internal candidates, I just wish they would have done more interviewing.
Correct, more and more AD's have a business or law background, nothing wrong with that. It's smart. But they often still come up through the ranks in athletics as well. Eichorst is an example, he has a law degree but has also spent years working his way up. He was an Associate AD at South Carolina for example, now at UW-Madison. He was the AD at UW-Whitewater, he was a former student athlete. He also has a degree in Sports Administration. He'll be an AD some day.
Would it surprise anyone if he was one of the applicants to be AD at MU?
-
I sense you had no argument with the list of criticial issues facing the AD at MU. I also trust that you can see the strong legal component in each one of them.
The role of the AD is changing because of the growing impact of law. As you point out, an associate AD is capable of running the day-to-day operational aspects of a given sport. Knowing how to be successful (as Majeurs says) means prioritizing the critical issues and hiring based on those needs. It sure seems like those 60 candidates are predominantly associate and assistant ADs from the programs who want to win, but don't know how.
I don't understand such strenuous objection to a guy who's actually done the job at MU for the past 14 months, and been involved with the athletic department since 2003, and been with the MU administration for 12 years. And that there seems to be strong support for someone unknown who's prior experience was running the basketball, volleyball and track programs at a mid-major.
In my mind, the easy way out would have been to simply take one of those assitant ADs--a rah-rah guy who can talk up MU basketball just like he talked up women's curling at Mid-Major U. But I see that candidate as being WAY over his or her head when negotiating with the Bradley Center, determining the terms of renewal for the contract with Nelligan, representing MU when the Big East contract comes up for renewal, or understanding the Byzantine rules of NCAA recruting, eligiblity and academic acheivement.
Actually, I would have preferred someone that has a legal background and an athletics management background, there are plenty of those around. If not, I'd have preferred someone with an athletics background who can use counsel to handle those legal issues.
Many of us do this daily in our work jobs. I'm not a lawyer, yet we deal with multi-million dollar deals all the time with lawyers and clients. That's what we pay our counsel to do, but I have enough of a background to get through most of the issues. A smart AD would do the same and would not need to have every legal answer in his own head, there are plenty of other people at the university that are paid to do those things.
-
Honestly guys,
I think this is simply a glass 1/2 full, glass 1/2 empty scenario.
Marquette84 assumes that most of MU's moves are correct because the track record over the past 10-15 years has been pretty good (high enrollment, new campus facilities, big east, etc.)
Some others assume MU is messing things up because of some of the questionable decisions made over the years (poor hires, nickname, etc.)
Neither is really right or wrong at this point as it remains to be seen what is going to happen.
I'm inclined to agree with Marquette84 in most instances because I don't think MU has "lucked" itself into the position it is in now. There are SOME people over there that know what they are doing.
However, I also have to admit that this article, if accurate (which I assume it is), isn't the most encouraging thing I've read.
Hopefully Cottingham and Buzz because MU legends and this will be a fun thread(s) to read in 20 years.
-
Pat Richter was not in athletic administration when he was chosen as UW's AD. In fact, he was not even in education. He worked for Oscar Mayer. He also has a law degree. His hiring turned out pretty well.
-
Correct, more and more AD's have a business or law background, nothing wrong with that. It's smart. But they often still come up through the ranks in athletics as well. Eichorst is an example, he has a law degree but has also spent years working his way up. He was an Associate AD at South Carolina for example, now at UW-Madison. He was the AD at UW-Whitewater, he was a former student athlete. He also has a degree in Sports Administration. He'll be an AD some day.
Would it surprise anyone if he was one of the applicants to be AD at MU?
No it wouldn't surprise me, but my guess is that Cottingham could have seemed a better choice having overseen the AD at MU, while Eichorst's experience is all at public universities with football programs. Given that, it also wouldn't suprise me if he wasn't interested at all.
-
He concluded that because Wild told him he was. Wild wanted Cottingham from the beginning and he is the reason no other candidates were interviewed. Wild was just waiting him out until he finally decided to take the job.
Much of the problem is Jesuit hubris. Jesuits are always the smartest guys in the room. Part of the O'Hara Hall disease.
-
Pat Richter was not in athletic administration when he was chosen as UW's AD. In fact, he was not even in education. He worked for Oscar Mayer. He also has a law degree. His hiring turned out pretty well.
Pat Richter was a student athlete and involved in college athletics for a long time. He was an All-American and played in the NFL for a number of years....first round draft choice. Stud athlete, Wisconsin hero, etc. He had an athletics background, a strong one. Involved in many UW-Madison projects in athletics as an alumnus, including various committees,etc.
On top of that, UW-madison was one of the worst athletic departments in the country when he took over. He made the strong and sound business case to the state and local officials that they had to make some serious reforms which they did.
I think if we're comparing Cottingham to Richter we're doing a great disservice to Cottingham and a great injustice to Richter.
-
This thread has evoled from the atypical hiring practices of MU to the support by those who say an attorney is a prerequisite as an AD because of the college sports environment. The pro-lawyer (AKA Cottingham) supporters are really missing the point. This focus shouldn't support the AD hiring, whether good or bad. Focusing on a function of the position - legal interpretation - is short sighted.
The AD position is about leadership, motivational management, marketing and fundraising skills. Legal Counsel can be hired in-house or outsourced. Lawyers are negotiators, and generally risk-averse - in my business, we call them "deal killers," even when recognizing that they bring something to the party. I see Cottingham as in way over his head, but he must be a good corporate politician in the world of the Jesuits.
Nothing that I have seen from Cottingham has shown me leadership, motivational management, marketing and fundraising skills. I hope that I am wrong for the sake of MU. From what I saw at the Buzz-hiring press conference, as well as at the Team Banquet, the new AD is less than an inspiring leader.
In fact, I feel we were fortunate to have Buzz Williams on staff, or Cottingham would have really had a sticky situation to muddle through.
Regardless of the new AD's handling of the hiring process, I am happy we have Buzz. I hope that the AD and staff provide all the support they can for Buzz, because he has a huge challenge in front of him.
I feel the department is now in the hands of a caretaker administrator versus a leader, and the BB hiring process reflects that. When TC was there, he drove the mens BB program like a chief marketing officer, and Bill Cords handled all the other critical leadership functions. We'll see what happens now.
-
This thread has evoled from the atypical hiring practices of MU to the support by those who say an attorney is a prerequisite as an AD because of the college sports environment. The pro-lawyer (AKA Cottingham) supporters are really missing the point. This focus shouldn't support the AD hiring, whether good or bad. Focusing on a function of the position - legal interpretation - is short sighted.
The AD position is about leadership, motivational management, marketing and fundraising skills. Legal Counsel can be hired in-house or outsourced. Lawyers are negotiators, and generally risk-averse - in my business, we call them "deal killers," even when recognizing that they bring something to the party. I see Cottingham as in way over his head, but he must be a good corporate politician in the world of the Jesuits.
Nothing that I have seen from Cottingham has shown me leadership, motivational management, marketing and fundraising skills. I hope that I am wrong for the sake of MU. From what I saw at the Buzz-hiring press conference, as well as at the Team Banquet, the new AD is less than an inspiring leader.
In fact, I feel we were fortunate to have Buzz Williams on staff, or Cottingham would have really had a sticky situation to muddle through.
Regardless of the new AD's handling of the hiring process, I am happy we have Buzz. I hope that the AD and staff provide all the support they can for Buzz, because he has a huge challenge in front of him.
I feel the department is now in the hands of a caretaker administrator versus a leader, and the BB hiring process reflects that. When TC was there, he drove the mens BB program like a chief marketing officer, and Bill Cords handled all the other critical leadership functions. We'll see what happens now.
Co-sign 100%
-
As someone who has looked for jobs online, after a while you get a feeling about employers. Like...whether I'm wasting my time even bothering to go to the trouble of applying or not.
Reading this, it sends chills down my spine about all the talented people that will not give MU the time of day. I mean, why the hell should they? There's no reason too. They had sixty. 6. 0. 60 applicants. Not one person interviewed. That's so over the top pathetic I can't even comprehend it.
And if there was ever proof why people like me were extremely concernced w/Cottingham's hiring, well...we got it. In spades.
Joke.
Obviously, hoping it works out with Buzz, but sooner or later this stuff catches up to you. Why am I donating money to these idiots again via season tix? Ugh. At least they haven't seen a dime of other money from me yet.
-
The AD position is about leadership, motivational management, marketing and fundraising skills. Legal Counsel can be hired in-house or outsourced. Lawyers are negotiators, and generally risk-averse - in my business, we call them "deal killers," even when recognizing that they bring something to the party.
That's good....in our business we call them the "business prevention department"
Same thing.
-
If you look at the Richter hire you have to go right to the top. Donna S. delivered the goods at UW. Like her or not she put an emphasis on athletics and paid off bigtime. She ran like a business, unlike current MU leadership.
Regarding the glass being 1/2 full...there are few universities that have not seen unbelievable success over the past 15 years. Baby oomers inherited tons, home equity loans and poor decision making by parents have made most schools look very smart. For many in the US no pricetag was going to scare them away. Our funny money economy the last 15 years helped colleges across the country. MU was not brilliant, just participated in an era of wild spending.
-
If you look at the Richter hire you have to go right to the top. Donna S. delivered the goods at UW. Like her or not she put an emphasis on athletics and paid off bigtime. She ran like a business, unlike current MU leadership.
Regarding the glass being 1/2 full...there are few universities that have not seen unbelievable success over the past 15 years. Baby oomers inherited tons, home equity loans and poor decision making by parents have made most schools look very smart. For many in the US no pricetag was going to scare them away. Our funny money economy the last 15 years helped colleges across the country. MU was not brilliant, just participated in an era of wild spending.
MU has been successful for two reasons. First, their enrollment is up because they have done a much better job marketing themselves to their target student markets. Second, they have raised a ton of money. Part of that is because the wealthiest 10% of Americans have gotten even more weathier over the past decade and those people are giving back. MU is participating in this. There is a reason they have dozens of people out raising money for them.
To claim that they are just riding a wave instead of actively shaping their future is a little myopic.
-
JCE---My point was virtually every university has seen enrollments/applicants increase. In addition, the size of endowments across the country have grown by leaps and bounds. MU is not on the cutting edge of this, every private school is benefiting from the wealth factor. Not saying MU is not good in this area, but all schools are or at least their endowments indicate the are as well.
I am not ripping MU, but I do not think they did anything out of the norm. Plus, DWade was their bst marketing move and I do not think that Fr. Wild was the mastermind of that excitement. If anyone should get credit on the marketing Wade it is TC.
MU and plenty of other private schools are going to need to reinvent themselves moving forward. Cost of college is crazy. In my opinion, and I love MU, Marquette is not a school to get in debt to graduate from. I believe that the economy is going to hurt school's like MU. People threw money around the last 15 years and not just at MU. Keeping that flow might be getting togher. Thus, a good ball team is the best marketing tool nationally.
-
MU has been successful for two reasons. First, their enrollment is up because they have done a much better job marketing themselves to their target student markets. Second, they have raised a ton of money. Part of that is because the wealthiest 10% of Americans have gotten even more weathier over the past decade and those people are giving back. MU is participating in this. There is a reason they have dozens of people out raising money for them.
To claim that they are just riding a wave instead of actively shaping their future is a little myopic.
+1 for sure.
Basketball is certainly MU's best marketing tool, and MU has capitalized on it.
However, the past 15 years at MU have been a good growth period compared to the previous 15. New facilities, larger applications, improved campus, better athletics, etc.
It's not by accident that these things happen. I'm not saying MU is a bunch of masterminds, but they have been accomplishing a lot... so pointing out basketball or the economy as the reason isn't really accurate.
While the economy certainly comes into play with private education, I'm not sure it's as easy as people are getting rich = MU's donations are up.
People can donate their money wherever they want...
-
2002mualum---I agree with your comments. I am not trying to say MU has done anything wrong because they have not. My only point is that MU does deserve credit but might have to change with the times. It appears to me the hiring of the AD or Buzz is not changing with the times.
Over the past 15 years I do believe there families that have paid private school tuition because of the economy. If the economy sours further it might change some parents minds on college choices. I have seen with friends that they are more concerned about college costs more than ever.
MU always has been great in fundraising. Raynor was master and it appears Wilde knows his schtick. The top 10% always will give and pay alot of the bills but the bottom 90% are needed as well. If MU balls is not successful it affects the whole school. People love supporting a winner.
-
My only point is that MU does deserve credit but might have to change with the times. It appears to me the hiring of the AD or Buzz is not changing with the times.
I think we agree on everything except for this point... I know it all "sounds" bad at this point... but I'm withholding judgment until I actually see what happens.
-
As someone who has looked for jobs online, after a while you get a feeling about employers. Like...whether I'm wasting my time even bothering to go to the trouble of applying or not.
Reading this, it sends chills down my spine about all the talented people that will not give MU the time of day. I mean, why the hell should they? There's no reason too. They had sixty. 6. 0. 60 applicants. Not one person interviewed. That's so over the top pathetic I can't even comprehend it.
And if there was ever proof why people like me were extremely concernced w/Cottingham's hiring, well...we got it. In spades.
Joke.
Obviously, hoping it works out with Buzz, but sooner or later this stuff catches up to you. Why am I donating money to these idiots again via season tix? Ugh. At least they haven't seen a dime of other money from me yet.
Probably the best post I've seen on these boards regarding the Cottingham/Buzz hires.
And the sad thing is, as that article demonstrates, is that this is a University-wide phenomena. Going to inside hires over and over and over again tells the rest of the academic / collegiate sports world that Marquette simply is an unstable environment with people terrified of outsiders who won't buy into the system or patronize the management. I don't know how anyone involved in NCAA sports from the outside world could look at the Cottingham hire news stories with the revelation that not one of 60 applicants was hired and not say "I don't see this as a place worth ever applying to, they don't want fresh ideas and they don't want to conduct business in a professional manner."
-
With an inability to listen to reasonable solutions from someplace other than Marquette Hall, it's no wonder Marquette has royally screwed up other rather high profile decisions. And have paid for it.
-
"In Rick Greenspan, Indiana University has found a consummate professional -- a successful, experienced athletics administrator of unquestioned integrity who embraces the values of this great institution," Herbert said.
"The success of our student-athletes, as measured by their performance on the field and in the classroom, is of paramount importance," Herbert said. "Rick not only understands that principle -- he has perfected it."
http://newsinfo.iu.edu/news/page/normal/1627.html
For every hire, there is a failure. The Jesuits like to go with what they know. They also believe in loyalty, not turmoil. I personally wouldn't approach a hire this way in business--or at least confine a search, but it is their plan for all hires. Forbes did a study of successful CEO's a while back...they found the most successful were ones no one heard of, that have been consistent performers and have been in their jobs at least 9 years--and were lower paid than the high profile flame outs.
-
Article interesting in many way.
The last sentence of the article , that Greg Kliebhan who hired both the AD and Buzz refused a request from the reporter of HIS OWN student news paper, really says it all. Can you imagine that! I guess he is afraid of difficult questions from the student. Is arrogance toooo strong a word?
-
Article interesting in many way.
The last sentence of the article , that Greg Kliebhan who hired both the AD and Buzz refused a request from the reporter of HIS OWN student news paper, really says it all. Can you imagine that! I guess he is afraid of difficult questions from the student. Is arrogance toooo strong a word?
I think it's important to realize that Kliebhan is the Darth Vader of the administrative team. As the enforcer who does the dirty work, his refusal to be interviewed simply reflects his carefully cultivated persona of the "bad cop." He's scary, man.
wildbill sb
"Renewable energy IS homeland security"
-
Article interesting in many way.
The last sentence of the article , that Greg Kliebhan who hired both the AD and Buzz refused a request from the reporter of HIS OWN student news paper, really says it all. Can you imagine that! I guess he is afraid of difficult questions from the student. Is arrogance toooo strong a word?
Maybe he just didn't see the value of being subjected to a series of "when did you stop beating your wife" type questions.
Kliebahn would have said something to the effect of "I looked at every one of those 60 resumes, and not one comes close to matching the qualifications of Steve Cottingham. Scheduling an interview with any of them would have been a waste of their time and ours."
As if THAT would have settled the issue! Even though it is as close to the truth as anything you're going to get.
What we have is that you (and a bunch of others here) feel you have more experience in running a major university than Greg Kleihban.
No, I don't think arrogance is "toooo[sic] strong a word." I just think it's better applied to you.
-
Maybe he just didn't see the value of being subjected to a series of "when did you stop beating your wife" type questions.
Kliebahn would have said something to the effect of "I looked at every one of those 60 resumes, and not one comes close to matching the qualifications of Steve Cottingham. Scheduling an interview with any of them would have been a waste of their time and ours."
As if THAT would have settled the issue! Even though it is as close to the truth as anything you're going to get.
What we have is that you (and a bunch of others here) feel you have more experience in running a major university than Greg Kleihban.
No, I don't think arrogance is "toooo[sic] strong a word." I just think it's better applied to you.
I don't think that's the case...but there are many people here that do run successful companies or departments / divisions (many that earn a ton more revenue then MU does or deals with more "customers" then MU does) that can have reasoned opinions, whether they are right or wrong they are still reasoned.
If that were his statement, which we all realize it isn't, it would be monumentally arrogant on so many levels.
Greg is a MU guy and has been at the university for 30+ years. He's part of the culture which can be a good thing and a bad thing. He thinks like the jebbies and helps to promote some of that same line of thinking throughout the university. This can be very beneficial, very steady, everyone knows what direction the ship is going. It can also backfire.
Greg has known Steve for two decades and he obviously thinks he's the right guy. He also knows that he wanted to bring in a guy that he had 100% control over, which he has with Steve. Don't underestimate that part of it.
Let's not forget it was Wild and Kliebhan who promoted Wake to Provost via an internal promotion only to have to fire her 5 years later (some would say 3 years to late). She was another lifer at the university that they knew, having been there for 25 years. Comfort with a candidate is a great thing, but it can also mean putting trust into someone that isn't up to the task.
Let's hope Wild and Kliebhan got it right with Buzz and not a repeat performance with the provost hiring of Wake.