What's going on at MU, bigger picture

[brandx]

Outside of basketball, when the only national news I read about Marquette are:

1.  The production of the "Vagina Monlogues," and
2.  Interviews with Jesuits and other faculty who signed the "Repeal Walker," petition,

I do wonder about Catholic values.  But hey, I could be really old school.

They missed the "Recall Walker" petition? That was the one that counted.

[ChicosBailBonds]

They missed the "Recall Walker" petition? That was the one that counted.

And resoundingly rejected by the good people of the state.

[warriorfred]

And resoundingly rejected by the good people of the state.

Rightfully, and appreciatively rejected by the good people of Wisconsin.  But I still find it odd that my former Marquette academic advisor was so vehement in his contempt for Walker (Marquette's most notable semi-alumnus).

Maybe the house cleaning is not such a bad idea?

[Mutaman]

And resoundingly rejected by the good people of the state.

Just like our Scotty was  resoundingly rejected by the good people of Marquette when he "attended".

[Eldon]

And resoundingly rejected by the good people of the state.

I have to say that Wisconsinites made me proud on that day.

I'm no Walker fan, by any means (nor am I a hater), but even my left-leaning friends were saying things along the lines of "I don't like Walker.  Didn't vote for him.  But short of committing a crime, he deserves to serve out his term."  Apparently, many of the folks of Wisconsin felt the same way.  IMO, that's the way it should be.

[ChitownSpaceForRent]

His son is a jagoff.

[Warriors4ever]

I found that info on the BOT highly interesting, thank you for posting it.  Love the company that's named for the Ardmore.
I graduated in the 70's, I have no idea what this Catholic stuff that some of you think is missing is all about.  I'm active in my parish, which my good experiences at Marquette contributed, although I suspect that some of you would think my parish is not "traditional" enough, but if MU started stuffing doctrine down student's throats I would close my meagre checkbook in a heartbeat, as I have done to my own parish so that not a dime goes to the archdiocese or the bishop's. 
If they want to strive to be academically elite good for them.
And while my view of Scott Walker can probably be guessed, I wish that yet another thread wouldn't fall victim to political discussion irrelevant to the topic.

[warriorfred]

I have to say that Wisconsinites made me proud on that day.

I'm no Walker fan, by any means (nor am I a hater), but even my left-leaning friends were saying things along the lines of "I don't like Walker.  Didn't vote for him.  But short of committing a crime, he deserves to serve out his term."  Apparently, many of the folks of Wisconsin felt the same way.  IMO, that's the way it should be.

Agree, and that is my broader point.  Disagreeing with Walker is one thing, but for Administration and faculty to air such disputes in the media, knowing how it would be portrayed, was bad form.  Short of a capital offense, a person in an "official" capacity at Marquette should not disparage current students and alumni.

Back to basketball.  

A coach that supports Marquette's mission is integral to the success of the program.

[Warrior_2002]

Back to basketball.  

A coach that supports Marquette's mission is integral to the success of the program.

Yes and may the mission hold to it's traditional Catholic values, amen. 

Sincerely,
A 21st Century Grad

[Marquette Gyros]

I found that info on the BOT highly interesting, thank you for posting it.  Love the company that's named for the Ardmore.
I graduated in the 70's, I have no idea what this Catholic stuff that some of you think is missing is all about.  I'm active in my parish, which my good experiences at Marquette contributed, although I suspect that some of you would think my parish is not "traditional" enough, but if MU started stuffing doctrine down student's throats I would close my meagre checkbook in a heartbeat, as I have done to my own parish so that not a dime goes to the archdiocese or the bishop's.  
If they want to strive to be academically elite good for them.
And while my view of Scott Walker can probably be guessed, I wish that yet another thread wouldn't fall victim to political discussion irrelevant to the topic.

I found this very interesting as well...

What are the qualifications for nomination to the Board?  The roster looks a bit deep, no?  Perhaps overrecruited in years past in preparation for Buzzcutting?

Put another way: how many of these folks could get board spots at your average Fortune 1000 firm?  Ten? Five?  

[willie warrior]

I found this very interesting as well...

What are the qualifications for nomination to the Board?  The roster looks a bit deep, no?  Perhaps overrecruited in years past in preparation for Buzzcutting?

Put another way: how many of these folks could get board spots at your average Fortune 1000 firm?  Ten? Five?  

So are you saying that the qualification should be on the Board of a huge firm? Then join the donor list and offer your input.

[willie warrior]

I have to say that Wisconsinites made me proud on that day.

I'm no Walker fan, by any means (nor am I a hater), but even my left-leaning friends were saying things along the lines of "I don't like Walker.  Didn't vote for him.  But short of committing a crime, he deserves to serve out his term."  Apparently, many of the folks of Wisconsin felt the same way.  IMO, that's the way it should be.

It figures. He only stood by the state and saved it from insane bankruptcy.

[Marquette Gyros]

So are you saying that the qualification should be on the Board of a huge firm? Then join the donor list and offer your input.

Not what I said....just sincerely interested in the qualifications for the spots on the board.

Even more interested in the dynamics of how decisions are made, which we probably won't get here.

[warriorchick]

There appears to be a ton of political correctness and diversity box-checking involved in choosing the BOT. It is near impossible to have a small board once you get those people on there, add the requisite number of Jesuits, and include all of the whales who have either explicitly or implicitly tied their donations to board membership.

Call me cynical.

[Tugg Speedman]

I found this very interesting as well...

What are the qualifications for nomination to the Board?  The roster looks a bit deep, no?  Perhaps overrecruited in years past in preparation for Buzzcutting?

Put another way: how many of these folks could get board spots at your average Fortune 1000 firm?  Ten? Five?  

Note that the board is very diversified.  It has successful business people (some of which bought their way on).  It has members from academic, health, public policy, diversity, religion, sports and so on.  They are all there to provide input to the board on their area of expertise.  (example, Doc Rivers has considerable sway when hiring a basketball coach.  Not so much when they are deciding to build a new nursing school.)

Most Fortune 1000 boards want "rain-makers."  They want someone that knows their business and can immediately help them make money.  They don't necessarily want a minority with expertise in diversity issues.  This issue is important to a major university.  So to answer you question directly, all of them are qualified for Fortune 1000 boards if they are looking for their area of expertise.  If you click through to the detailed bios, you will many of them have, or are now, on Fortune 1000 boards.

Now, who "runs the University?"  Not all of them buy a long shot.  See the first three names.

[Marquette Gyros]

There appears to be a ton of political correctness and diversity box-checking involved in choosing the BOT. It is near impossible to have a small board once you get those people on there, add the requisite number of Jesuits, and include all of the whales who have either explicitly or implicitly tied their donations to board membership.

Call me cynical.

Then call me cynical too.

So back to the original point... Can we trust that this group of curiously assembled folks is in the midst of executing a defined strategy to upgrade leadership talent, with the goal of making MU more elite?

Same folks who signed off on Pilarz, right? Just checking. So much of this goes back to one monumentally poor hire.

[WellsstreetWanderer]

Fortune  500 companies have to answer to shareholders. Universities where they have the luxury of board members for diversity , religion do not.  Anybody remember the movie " Putney Swope" ?   Funny Robert Downey(Sr.) directed movie about Wall street and bods.

[warriorchick]

Then call me cynical too.

So back to the original point... Can we trust that this group of curiously assembled folks is in the midst of executing a defined strategy to upgrade leadership talent, with the goal of making MU more elite?

Same folks who signed off on Pilarz, right? Just checking. So much of this goes back to one monumentally poor hire.

To be honest, it's hard to tell if we can trust them without knowing the God's-honest reason why Pilarz left.

[Tugg Speedman]

Then call me cynical too.

So back to the original point... Can we trust that this group of curiously assembled folks is in the midst of executing a defined strategy to upgrade leadership talent, with the goal of making MU more elite?

Same folks who signed off on Pilarz, right? Just checking. So much of this goes back to one monumentally poor hire.

See my post above, it is only the first 2 or 3 that you need to focus on.

Regarding Pilarz ... most successful businesspeople will tell you its not about avoiding mistakes, they all make them.  It's about what you do when you realize you made one.  Most people rationalize, cross their fingers, and hope for the best.  The successful correct it.

It doesn't bother me they made a mistake with Pilarz (ditto the rest, including Buzz).  I am impressed they did something about it, and did so quickly.  The board 10 to 20 years ago might have left Pilarz to run the University for 15 to 20 years.  This board corrects and moves on.

How you handle a mistake that separates the good from the bad.  On this front, I'm impressed.

[Tugg Speedman]

To be honest, it's hard to tell if we can trust them without knowing the God's-honest reason why Pilarz left.

Let me be blunt to get my point across.

It's not enough that he was fired (or asked to leave, same thing) after two years.  Now you want the board to be completely classless and destroy the man in a public press release? 

You really want MU to publicly say we fired him because (and I'm making this up for illustrative purposes) spent too much time reading poetry, could not connect with big donors, had trouble making decisive decisions, did not share our vision, did not support the basket team enough?

If MU did want you want, his career would be over, is that what you want?  Remember his career is running large educational institutions.  To publicly humiliate or rebuke him would end that.

In the end all that matters is what Georgetown Prep thought.  The head of GP had a long discussion with Swoobda and was satisfied that Pilarz deficiencies that caused him to part ways with MU would not prevent him from being successful at GP. 

The rest of us are not entitled to anything more.

[augoman]

This was an answer to another thread but thought it was worth it's own discussion ...

--------------

Their is no doubt MU is transitioning.  Go back and see the 12 page tread about MU adopting a vision for the future.

http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=38621.0

They are attempting to remake the University into an elite institution.  Step 1, get rid of the deadwood.  With the director of admission going to Regis, and Pilarz going to GU prep, I'll let you decide if they were in the right positions for this transition.

So, the leaderless University is not accurate, it is changing by design.  Apparently part of that design did not include Buzz.

Their is a bigger picture going here, possibly the biggest in MUs 125 years.

Question, do you want MU to be a top flight instruction, one that, frankly, many of us probably could not get into?  If so, grin and bear this transition.

Or, were you happy with the stays quo? 

I was not happy with the stays quo and I'm happy for this attempt.  But I completely understand it means tough times and growing pains.  One of them is Buzz, he became expendable.

I must point out the error in your statement.  Getting rid of deadwood would not include the Dean of Admissions..., He has done and continues to do a great job.  He was recruited back to Regis where he was many years ago, and will be a vice-president of the University.  Marquette's loss.

[warriorchick]

Let me be blunt to get my point across.


You really want MU to publicly say we fired him because (and I'm making this up for illustrative purposes) spent too much time reading poetry, could not connect with big donors, had trouble making decisive decisions, did not share our vision, did not support the basket team enough?

Actually, yes.  Maybe not that bluntly, but we were told that he resigned (and quickly left campus mid-semester) because he wanted to do something else entirely, and it wound up being extremely disruptive to the University, Then he wound up accepting the same position at a different school (notwithstanding the huge demotion).  I feel that the BOT was less than transparent and forthright, and yes, as an alum, a parent of two students, and a donor, I believe I am entitled to a an honest answer.

[Tugg Speedman]

Actually, yes.  Maybe not that bluntly, but we were told that he resigned (and quickly left campus mid-semester) because he wanted to do something else entirely, and it wound up being extremely disruptive to the University, Then he wound accepting the same position at a different school (notwithstanding the huge demotion).  I feel that the BOT was less than transparent and forthright, and yes, as an alum, a parent of two students, and a donor, I believe I am entitled to a an honest answer.

Actually your not, and their are laws to protect Pilarz's privacy to consider as well.

[Eldon]

Actually, yes.  Maybe not that bluntly, but we were told that he resigned (and quickly left campus mid-semester) because he wanted to do something else entirely, and it wound up being extremely disruptive to the University, Then he wound accepting the same position at a different school (notwithstanding the huge demotion).  I feel that the BOT was less than transparent and forthright, and yes, as an alum, a parent of two students, and a donor, I believe I am entitled to a an honest answer.

Honest question.  Did you see Fr. Pilarz second resignation e-mail?  He euphemistically stated that he wasn't good enough to fund raise. 

[warriorchick]

Honest question.  Did you see Fr. Pilarz second resignation e-mail?  He euphemistically stated that he wasn't good enough to fund raise. 

If that was it, I don't understand why he wouldn't stay to do the rest of the job until he was replaced.  Look at the domino effect his leaving has had.