I've been reading with interest the Slappy version of things. I've made limited comments because I'm trying to keep calm and let other people get their blood pressure out of whack.

I will point out the glaring issue: Wins and Losses Start in the President's Office

Mr. Slappy, before you start questioning my sanity and pointing out what an idiot I am for making this statement, it's a well-known issue in college football.

I want to qualify something and be very clear about it, I harbour no ill-will toward Dr. Stanton. He had an agenda, he had politically-based pressures to do certain things, he wanted to advance projects that served his own paradigm, and he did it while smiling and patting people on the backs to keep the majority of people happy. I was very fond of Dr. Stanton but will never forgive him for destroying something that really did mean more than just the bottomline of a spreadsheet. I wish him well in his retirement.

After studying and observing this situation for years, I feel that football under Dr. Stanton, was doomed from the beginning. The time and progression of the downgrade of football was under his watch is measureable and well documented. Without the true benefit of "shared governance" that Dr. Noland kept bringing up, you can have a President make these kinds of misguided decisions without the type of fall-out that other campus leaders would face. In the UT system, the President's of the campuses don't blink without running it past the Board. It's a checks-and-balance system, if you will.

I heard it first hand from Dr. Stanton in 1999 when he thought he'd get the rubber stamp from the Task Force. He didn't get it but sure did use the slanted version of the mandates to justify the killing of the program.

It also didn't stop him (and others) from talking to people behind closed doors and putting professional Athletic Director's in a position where they had to choose between staying on a sinking ship and killing their own careers or leaving in order to have any type of professional life ahead of them.

By failing to address the lack of a student fee allocation in 2002 while turning around in 2003 and getting one put into place, shows the lack of vision needed to creating and sustaining a viable Department of Athletics. Unfortunately, his continued hands-off attitude toward Athletics AFTER football was killed saw a doubling of their budgets and more than doubling of the restricted student fee, etc.

I saw Keener Frye get shown the door after football had reached new levels when Dr. Nix was at the helm with Coach Cavin. Frye didn't see it coming and it cost him when he spent more than he was making. He'd learned from being at Marshall that you had to spend money to make money, but he didn't understand that at ETSU, Dr. Stanton had seen money being diverted while he was in the Med School to Athletics. When he took office, that ended and the Pirate Club had to start borrowing money and "repaying money" advanced from the Foundation.

Enter Frank Pergolizzi. He was hired to bring the budgets under control, harness the restricted giving to 'spread the wealth,' and manage Title IX and facilities at the cost of Football (and other men's sports) fiscal needs. He never warmed up to people, tried to launch a fundraising (more of a facilities naming campaign) effort that never got off the ground (enter the Manahan fits after Pirate Club was moved from his area to Athletics), and eventually left because he was banging his head against the wall. Many say that he was shown the door, probably true. He and I have spoken many times over the years and he keeps those details very close to the vest.

Along comes Todd Stansbury. He had connections, he had ideas, he had energy, and he had the balls to say to people on campus that football would not be on the chopping block on his watch. He worked to bring things to the department that would help all the teams but he knew that there were two sports that drove the ultimate success of any Athletics Department. He even had Jim Powell coming to away games in his nice RV, Stansbury knew that you keep your friends close and your enemies even closer. In 2002, when football hadn't moved forward under Coach Hamilton, there were closed door discussions that he was involved in that would have forced changes in the coaching staff, including the rumour that Torbush wanted to come to ETSU. That's the point when Oregon State came knocking and made him a deal he couldn't refuse. He wasn't forced out, he took a much better job.

Had he stayed, I don't think we ever have this 8 year long conversation about football being killed. I think right now we'd be talking about stadiums and tailgating and whether the band needed to play during timeouts. It would have been a totally different place.

Stansbury seat wasn't even cold yet when the real hammer came down. I want to make clear that I never wanted Mullins in the job. I smiled and tapped my hands because that's just what you do when you get a new boss. I learned my lesson about crossing a new boss when I worked at Marshall, but it didn't take me long to reach the decision that I wouldn't be staying at ETSU, before we even knew that football was on it's way down.

Mullins was never prepared to lead an entire department. He was picked to be a "yes man" and that has been to his benefit and his own personal gain. Killing football was not his idea or his decision. Does he like football, who cares? He did what he was told to do. He's shown that he will do whatever his boss wants and whatever is required for him to keep his 6-figure salary. I dislike him for reasons that I won't bore you with on here and it goes far beyond having to see him kill football and intimidate people who don't agree. If only people knew what I know.

So, under Stanton, we had ebbs-and-flows with regard to Athletics. His lack of involvement at the Conference level were one of the primary reasons that ETSU was laughed out of the conference. He had every opportunity to help make football better but he was too busy looking at the long-range of Pharmacy schools and Dental schools and Honors Colleges. All important, but all things that could/would happen even with football in place.

I've rambled on too long, lost my train of thought about 4 paragraphs ago, I'm getting old Doc! But the fact exists, that wins-and-losses start with the President of any University. ETSU is the case study of "what not to do."

Great post!

Amen and Amen, Momma Bear.......

It will be satisfying to see our university make its favorite conjunction "and" instead of "or".

(11-03-2011 04:25 PM)ReturnOfMommaBear Wrote:  I've been reading with interest the Slappy version of things. I've made limited comments because I'm trying to keep calm and let other people get their blood pressure out of whack.

I will point out the glaring issue: Wins and Losses Start in the President's Office

Mr. Slappy, before you start questioning my sanity and pointing out what an idiot I am for making this statement, it's a well-known issue in college football.

I want to qualify something and be very clear about it, I harbour no ill-will toward Dr. Stanton. He had an agenda, he had politically-based pressures to do certain things, he wanted to advance projects that served his own paradigm, and he did it while smiling and patting people on the backs to keep the majority of people happy. I was very fond of Dr. Stanton but will never forgive him for destroying something that really did mean more than just the bottomline of a spreadsheet. I wish him well in his retirement.

After studying and observing this situation for years, I feel that football under Dr. Stanton, was doomed from the beginning. The time and progression of the downgrade of football was under his watch is measureable and well documented. Without the true benefit of "shared governance" that Dr. Noland kept bringing up, you can have a President make these kinds of misguided decisions without the type of fall-out that other campus leaders would face. In the UT system, the President's of the campuses don't blink without running it past the Board. It's a checks-and-balance system, if you will.

I heard it first hand from Dr. Stanton in 1999 when he thought he'd get the rubber stamp from the Task Force. He didn't get it but sure did use the slanted version of the mandates to justify the killing of the program.

It also didn't stop him (and others) from talking to people behind closed doors and putting professional Athletic Director's in a position where they had to choose between staying on a sinking ship and killing their own careers or leaving in order to have any type of professional life ahead of them.

By failing to address the lack of a student fee allocation in 2002 while turning around in 2003 and getting one put into place, shows the lack of vision needed to creating and sustaining a viable Department of Athletics. Unfortunately, his continued hands-off attitude toward Athletics AFTER football was killed saw a doubling of their budgets and more than doubling of the restricted student fee, etc.

I saw Keener Frye get shown the door after football had reached new levels when Dr. Nix was at the helm with Coach Cavin. Frye didn't see it coming and it cost him when he spent more than he was making. He'd learned from being at Marshall that you had to spend money to make money, but he didn't understand that at ETSU, Dr. Stanton had seen money being diverted while he was in the Med School to Athletics. When he took office, that ended and the Pirate Club had to start borrowing money and "repaying money" advanced from the Foundation.

Enter Frank Pergolizzi. He was hired to bring the budgets under control, harness the restricted giving to 'spread the wealth,' and manage Title IX and facilities at the cost of Football (and other men's sports) fiscal needs. He never warmed up to people, tried to launch a fundraising (more of a facilities naming campaign) effort that never got off the ground (enter the Manahan fits after Pirate Club was moved from his area to Athletics), and eventually left because he was banging his head against the wall. Many say that he was shown the door, probably true. He and I have spoken many times over the years and he keeps those details very close to the vest.

Along comes Todd Stansbury. He had connections, he had ideas, he had energy, and he had the balls to say to people on campus that football would not be on the chopping block on his watch. He worked to bring things to the department that would help all the teams but he knew that there were two sports that drove the ultimate success of any Athletics Department. He even had Jim Powell coming to away games in his nice RV, Stansbury knew that you keep your friends close and your enemies even closer. In 2002, when football hadn't moved forward under Coach Hamilton, there were closed door discussions that he was involved in that would have forced changes in the coaching staff, including the rumour that Torbush wanted to come to ETSU. That's the point when Oregon State came knocking and made him a deal he couldn't refuse. He wasn't forced out, he took a much better job.

Had he stayed, I don't think we ever have this 8 year long conversation about football being killed. I think right now we'd be talking about stadiums and tailgating and whether the band needed to play during timeouts. It would have been a totally different place.

Stansbury seat wasn't even cold yet when the real hammer came down. I want to make clear that I never wanted Mullins in the job. I smiled and tapped my hands because that's just what you do when you get a new boss. I learned my lesson about crossing a new boss when I worked at Marshall, but it didn't take me long to reach the decision that I wouldn't be staying at ETSU, before we even knew that football was on it's way down.

Mullins was never prepared to lead an entire department. He was picked to be a "yes man" and that has been to his benefit and his own personal gain. Killing football was not his idea or his decision. Does he like football, who cares? He did what he was told to do. He's shown that he will do whatever his boss wants and whatever is required for him to keep his 6-figure salary. I dislike him for reasons that I won't bore you with on here and it goes far beyond having to see him kill football and intimidate people who don't agree. If only people knew what I know.

So, under Stanton, we had ebbs-and-flows with regard to Athletics. His lack of involvement at the Conference level were one of the primary reasons that ETSU was laughed out of the conference. He had every opportunity to help make football better but he was too busy looking at the long-range of Pharmacy schools and Dental schools and Honors Colleges. All important, but all things that could/would happen even with football in place.

I've rambled on too long, lost my train of thought about 4 paragraphs ago, I'm getting old Doc! But the fact exists, that wins-and-losses start with the President of any University. ETSU is the case study of "what not to do."

some truth...some...mmmm...not so much. the not so much, i will say is your perception of how things went down. you are certainly within your rights to percieve things as you wish and inspire those that want to follow

some truth...some...mmmm...not so much. the not so much, i will say is your perception of how things went down. you are certainly within your rights to percieve things as you wish and inspire those that want to follow
[/quote]


I think someone asked you this before, what qualifies you to say "some truth...some...mmmm...not so much"?? Were you there? Identify yourself, I have. My "perception" was due to a front row seat. Where is your seat?

Tell me what you think is "mmmm...not so much" I think we are at the point that if you want people to actually "buy what you are selling" you should be willing to stand by it with a name and a face. I've talked to dozens of people who were around way before there was a sports message board fussing about things, back to the origins of the Dome, the Bellar years (I was there for most of his era), documents, library archives, files from the business office that was next to my office, meetings that I sat in, Task Force notes.

Tell me what I'm missing that you can clarify. I was short and sweet on most of the points, I'll be happy to go into depth on every Athletic Director since Buddy Sasser.

By the way, this is about the point when I usually see the henchmen come out of the wood work. Please do, I have some good stuff that I've been holding for three years. Dish it only if you can take it. Perhaps I should use a BASEBALL analogy, Swing batter-batter-Swing.

Reveal identities on this message board? Step from behind a cloak of anonymity?

Why, what would the self-appointed "board policeman" ever say?

What would the moderator?

Slap- You don't want to mess with Kim. I'm less than enthused about the "MommaBear" persona, but regardless.

And stop bending the shaft.

(11-04-2011 07:43 AM)ReturnOfMommaBear Wrote:  By the way, this is about the point when I usually see the henchmen come out of the wood work. Please do, I have some good stuff that I've been holding for three years. Dish it only if you can take it. Perhaps I should use a BASEBALL analogy, Swing batter-batter-Swing.

This sounds like the last few clicks on the roller coaster, before....

(11-04-2011 07:57 AM)PittsburghBucs Wrote:  Reveal identities on this message board? Step from behind a cloak of anonymity?

Why, what would the self-appointed "board policeman" ever say?

What would the moderator?

Slap- You don't want to mess with Kim. I'm less than enthused about the "MommaBear" persona, but regardless.

And stop bending the shaft.

Now Pitt, we know that won't happen for many reasons and I understand the part about people not wanting their identity revealed but I do have a problem with not standing behind comments that are being used to dismiss or discredit.

Slappy didn't attack, he's not messing with me, just dismissing things as my "perspective." He didn't come out and call me a liar, but I'd just be curious to know how he/she thinks he/she knows so much. Just clarify and give your source for such knowledge. If there's no fear of being fired or losing access to the sources, shouldn't be a problem. I think his/her credibility was questioned before in terms of how he/she knows all this wonderful Athletics related information.

I've spent the last 13 years watching, documenting, sitting in the seat, reading, digging, asking, talking everything around ETSU Athletics. At first it was academic, now it's professional and personal.

I'm a kinder, gentler MommaBear now Pitt, much more chilled out and much more amused that we've had to endure the past 8 years. Things will change when it's time and it's because there are people who've continued to push the issue and not let it be forgotten.

It's also nice to know things that people would DIE if they knew I knew, goes so much further than just killing football and being a jerk to people who care about football and seeing it back on campus.

easy mb, slow down a bit. Im ultimately on your side here.

where to start...ok, lets get this out of the way. the comment of "well...not so much" can be found anywhere throughout your post. For example, you speak of stanton's "agenda" like you are the man. How can you possibly know his agenda? Did he send you an agenda? Can you read his mind or actually "connect" to his brain and gather this information? Or perhaps, is it just what you percieve his agenda was in regards to football? it is as simple as that, i wouldnt make any more or less of it than that.

To ease your mind, i can assure you that i am not part of these "henchmen" you speak of, I really dont care that much.

im not here to get you, or anybody else to "buy what im selling", i dont need that validation.

You have a perception and a story to tell, and i can respect that. I may not agree with all of what you say, and thats my right. You can take it or leave it. I figured you would come out eventually with this defensive, attack style like the rest of the footballers. it was a matter of time, and i commend you for holding out so long.

if you go back thru my posts, ALL of my posts, you may be able to find why i came on here in the first place. It was not to support the current AD, or direction of the program. Nor was it to try to stiffle the possible re-instatement of football. It was simply to try to get the footballers to look for a plan B, in the event that a new president did not see things the way that they do in respect to etsu athletics. that this mob mentality has not worked and will not work in the future, and you may want to try a different approach.

but seeing with your last post, the defacto leader still thinks this is the best way to get it done. so good luck and keep hammering away...

(11-04-2011 08:26 AM)abuc90 Wrote:  

(11-04-2011 07:43 AM)ReturnOfMommaBear Wrote:  By the way, this is about the point when I usually see the henchmen come out of the wood work. Please do, I have some good stuff that I've been holding for three years. Dish it only if you can take it. Perhaps I should use a BASEBALL analogy, Swing batter-batter-Swing.

This sounds like the last few clicks on the roller coaster, before....

thats a great post...sorry to disapoint.

(11-04-2011 12:20 PM)slappywhite Wrote:  easy mb, slow down a bit. Im ultimately on your side here.

where to start...ok, lets get this out of the way. the comment of "well...not so much" can be found anywhere throughout your post. For example, you speak of stanton's "agenda" like you are the man. How can you possibly know his agenda? Did he send you an agenda? Can you read his mind or actually "connect" to his brain and gather this information? Or perhaps, is it just what you percieve his agenda was in regards to football? it is as simple as that, i wouldnt make any more or less of it than that.

To ease your mind, i can assure you that i am not part of these "henchmen" you speak of, I really dont care that much.

im not here to get you, or anybody else to "buy what im selling", i dont need that validation.

You have a perception and a story to tell, and i can respect that. I may not agree with all of what you say, and thats my right. You can take it or leave it. I figured you would come out eventually with this defensive, attack style like the rest of the footballers. it was a matter of time, and i commend you for holding out so long.

if you go back thru my posts, ALL of my posts, you may be able to find why i came on here in the first place. It was not to support the current AD, or direction of the program. Nor was it to try to stiffle the possible re-instatement of football. It was simply to try to get the footballers to look for a plan B, in the event that a new president did not see things the way that they do in respect to etsu athletics. that this mob mentality has not worked and will not work in the future, and you may want to try a different approach.

but seeing with your last post, the defacto leader still thinks this is the best way to get it done. so good luck and keep hammering away...

Slappy, we can agree to disagree about the motives/agenda. I know what I've been told and I know what's come at the expense so it's based more on history and conversations rather than just my haunches.

I really don't think we are too far from each other but I saw you go from a very rational posts during the conversation of posts about the Presidential candidates with great dialog back to the insults directed toward those that aren't buying what you are selling. Your "opinion" is valid but we've got several posters on here that are informed with their own set of data and facts.

If this was just an "opinion" discussion, it would be one thing, but the football proponents have been armed with good information for the past 8 years and at some point that information won't be ignored. It wasn't ignored in Nashville when the BFFF met with the governor, he actually asked follow-up questions. At some point, information becomes power and the rhetoric out of Athletics becomes muted.

Given that my background is in Athletics, I'm supportive of all types of sports and the benefits of participation in those sports, but there are different philosophies of collegiate sports and for the past 8 years we've witnessed a real shift to a very DII or even DIII (given the level of scholarships and spending, can't really give it a full DIII salute) at ETSU.

As others have pointed out, when you hang your accomplishments on minor sports and the "student athlete experience" then you aren't operating on a real Division I level experience. I've made it my life's work to assist student athletes and help create an environment for them that helps them find a way to be successful and gain positive things out of their time in collegiate sports, but again, at ETSU it was done at the expense of a whole group of student athletes who also deserved the opportunity to compete, earn a scholarship, and have the college experience.

I don't think you are part of the "henchmen" so I wasn't directing that toward you at all. You've stated before that you aren't linked to the "establishment" and I believe you. They will surface, but this time I won't retreat. People in glass houses, as they say.