But my alma mater (Penn State) is going to name a new President on Friday. There seems to be a whole lot of smoke that Nancy Zimpher will be the choice.

I only moved to Cincinnati (late 2007) towards the end of her UC reign, so I didn't experience it all before she moved northeast. But what should we generally be expecting, in terms of her philosophy towards both academics and athletics' role in the University?

Thanks!

She is all flash and no substance.

All hat. No cattle.

But what should we generally be expecting,.....

Trustees have to be smoking something to name Zimpher. Get ready
for a run on toolkits.

Yikes. I almost wish that JoePa was still around to see what would happen with that power struggle!

Other names of note,
Gordon Gee
Mark Emmert
Condy Rice (not bad)

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.s...e_pen.html

That would be so funny, what a match. The school that almost wrecked its football program with the death penalty because it covered up a child predator hires the person that sent our basketball program into a self imposed probation period. Good Luck!

Academics.... get ready house for a cleaning on the academic side, plus an agenda that is even a little too left for this academic liberal.

(10-30-2013 10:58 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Other names of note,
Gordon Gee
Mark Emmert
Condy Rice (not bad)

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.s...e_pen.html

Mark Emmert. State College may literally spontaneously combust if that is the choice!

I'd love for Rice to be the choice, that's my personal pick. She would provide instant credibility as we try to re-gain our footing post-scandal.

(10-30-2013 11:02 AM)NittanyLion Wrote:  

(10-30-2013 10:58 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Other names of note,
Gordon Gee
Mark Emmert
Condy Rice (not bad)

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.s...e_pen.html

Mark Emmert. State College may literally spontaneously combust if that is the choice!

I'd love for Rice to be the choice, that's my personal pick. She would provide instant credibility as we try to re-gain our footing post-scandal.

Condy would be a good hire. Sullivan initially resigned from UVA in a similar manner as Greg Williams at UC.

This is the wrong board to ask that question. Most here never got over her involvement with firing Bob Huggins, and the manner it which is was done. So here it will be about "Bob Huggins" and pretty much nothing else, though I'm sure these words will instigate some to chime in. Back when Huggins was fired, there was some pretty hate-filled (and I'd argue seriously misogynistic and bothersome) banter on here.

But if you go beyond that - which is impossible for many on here to do - she did some things which ended up being very important for the future of the University of Cincinnati. Unfortunately, those things upset existing culture and the way things were always done.

Under her tenure, minimum admissions standards were instituted on the main campus. Those who didn't meet those standards were forced to go to UC's two-year schools. The Main Campus's open-admission University College was disbanded - it had a 17% graduation rate. The result is that graduation rates, retention rates, admission scores began to rise - a trend that has continued to this very day. A number of overarching goals were created, and the beginning of the annual progress report on achieving those goals continues to this day.

I would argue that Zimpher finalized the separation from UC being a "commuter school."

Zimpher was highly involved on a lot of community boards, and promoted the benefits of the urban university (not sure how that works with Penn State).

I personally give her credit for being able to withstand the withering criticism and be the lightning rod while doing all the dirty work to make the University better - including disposing of Bob Huggins, even if it was very sloppy and poorly done. Under her tenure, Brian Kelly was hired and UC went to its first BCS Bowl, and came within a hair of going to the national championship game. Mick Cronin was hired, who brought the basketball team back from the dead along with some academic respectablility.

As both a 1985 and a 2010 graduate, the difference of UC between those two time periods is remarkable. It's like two different schools. The attitude in the classroom, the attitude of the administration was SO much different when I began taking classes again in 2005.

Zimpher may not be the most likable person, but I think she's tough. Without her efforts, we wouldn't be on the radar for any conference expansion. We wouldn't have President Ono right now. Or the new, more aggressive set of goals, UC|19. Our academic rankings would not have risen so much in the past 5 years (21 spots in USNews). She laid the groundwork for that and took the heat from a populous notorious for their inability to deal with change.

Now let the barage begin...3...2...1...

It would be quite a show to watch from afar....Nancy might try to take on a troubled football program at PSU. Can you imagine the fireworks?

(10-30-2013 11:18 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(10-30-2013 11:02 AM)NittanyLion Wrote:  

(10-30-2013 10:58 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Other names of note,
Gordon Gee
Mark Emmert
Condy Rice (not bad)

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.s...e_pen.html

Mark Emmert. State College may literally spontaneously combust if that is the choice!

I'd love for Rice to be the choice, that's my personal pick. She would provide instant credibility as we try to re-gain our footing post-scandal.

Condy would be a good hire. Sullivan initially resigned from UVA in a similar manner as Greg Williams at UC.

I'd like to see rice get the job if it would keep her off the final 4 selection committee.

My impression is that Nancy does not respect the positive impact athletics has on a university and it's her way or the highway. My condolences - Penn State has been through enough already.

(10-30-2013 11:18 AM)BearcatsUC Wrote:  This is the wrong board to ask that question. Most here never got over her involvement with firing Bob Huggins, and the manner it which is was done. So here it will be about "Bob Huggins" and pretty much nothing else, though I'm sure these words will instigate some to chime in. Back when Huggins was fired, there was some pretty hate-filled (and I'd argue seriously misogynistic and bothersome) banter on here.

But if you go beyond that - which is impossible for many on here to do - she did some things which ended up being very important for the future of the University of Cincinnati. Unfortunately, those things upset existing culture and the way things were always done.

Under her tenure, minimum admissions standards were instituted on the main campus. Those who didn't meet those standards were forced to go to UC's two-year schools. The Main Campus's open-admission University College was disbanded - it had a 17% graduation rate. The result is that graduation rates, retention rates, admission scores began to rise - a trend that has continued to this very day. A number of overarching goals were created, and the beginning of the annual progress report on achieving those goals continues to this day.

I would argue that Zimpher finalized the separation from UC being a "commuter school."

Zimpher was highly involved on a lot of community boards, and promoted the benefits of the urban university (not sure how that works with Penn State).

I personally give her credit for being able to withstand the withering criticism and be the lightning rod while doing all the dirty work to make the University better - including disposing of Bob Huggins, even if it was very sloppy and poorly done. Under her tenure, Brian Kelly was hired and UC went to its first BCS Bowl, and came within a hair of going to the national championship game. Mick Cronin was hired, who brought the basketball team back from the dead along with some academic respectablility.

As both a 1985 and a 2010 graduate, the difference of UC between those two time periods is remarkable. It's like two different schools. The attitude in the classroom, the attitude of the administration was SO much different when I began taking classes again in 2005.

Zimpher may not be the most likable person, but I think she's tough. Without her efforts, we wouldn't be on the radar for any conference expansion. We wouldn't have President Ono right now. Or the new, more aggressive set of goals, UC|19. Our academic rankings would not have risen so much in the past 5 years (21 spots in USNews). She laid the groundwork for that and took the heat from a populous notorious for their inability to deal with change.

Now let the barage begin...3...2...1...

The bolded part was pushed by the Ohio Board of Regents. Marginal HS students being pushed to branch campuses or community colleges with an option to transfer to main campus if their grades were good enough.

Ohio Board of Regents mad b/c the academic numbers/ranking improved? Board of Regents do not want us competing with "that school up north."

(10-30-2013 11:18 AM)BearcatsUC Wrote:  This is the wrong board to ask that question. Most here never got over her involvement with firing Bob Huggins, and the manner it which is was done. So here it will be about "Bob Huggins" and pretty much nothing else, though I'm sure these words will instigate some to chime in. Back when Huggins was fired, there was some pretty hate-filled (and I'd argue seriously misogynistic and bothersome) banter on here.

But if you go beyond that - which is impossible for many on here to do - she did some things which ended up being very important for the future of the University of Cincinnati. Unfortunately, those things upset existing culture and the way things were always done.

Under her tenure, minimum admissions standards were instituted on the main campus. Those who didn't meet those standards were forced to go to UC's two-year schools. The Main Campus's open-admission University College was disbanded - it had a 17% graduation rate. The result is that graduation rates, retention rates, admission scores began to rise - a trend that has continued to this very day. A number of overarching goals were created, and the beginning of the annual progress report on achieving those goals continues to this day.

I would argue that Zimpher finalized the separation from UC being a "commuter school."

Zimpher was highly involved on a lot of community boards, and promoted the benefits of the urban university (not sure how that works with Penn State).

I personally give her credit for being able to withstand the withering criticism and be the lightning rod while doing all the dirty work to make the University better - including disposing of Bob Huggins, even if it was very sloppy and poorly done. Under her tenure, Brian Kelly was hired and UC went to its first BCS Bowl, and came within a hair of going to the national championship game. Mick Cronin was hired, who brought the basketball team back from the dead along with some academic respectablility.

As both a 1985 and a 2010 graduate, the difference of UC between those two time periods is remarkable. It's like two different schools. The attitude in the classroom, the attitude of the administration was SO much different when I began taking classes again in 2005.

Zimpher may not be the most likable person, but I think she's tough. Without her efforts, we wouldn't be on the radar for any conference expansion. We wouldn't have President Ono right now. Or the new, more aggressive set of goals, UC|19. Our academic rankings would not have risen so much in the past 5 years (21 spots in USNews). She laid the groundwork for that and took the heat from a populous notorious for their inability to deal with change.

Now let the barage begin...3...2...1...

I think that is a pretty honest and true assessment.

It is very hard to see past her handling of the Huggins situation. However it absolutely needed to be handled, the method just ended up being so unnecessarily destructive.

Hopefully she has toned down the joker look and lost the fishnets.

(10-30-2013 11:33 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(10-30-2013 11:18 AM)BearcatsUC Wrote:  This is the wrong board to ask that question. Most here never got over her involvement with firing Bob Huggins, and the manner it which is was done. So here it will be about "Bob Huggins" and pretty much nothing else, though I'm sure these words will instigate some to chime in. Back when Huggins was fired, there was some pretty hate-filled (and I'd argue seriously misogynistic and bothersome) banter on here.

But if you go beyond that - which is impossible for many on here to do - she did some things which ended up being very important for the future of the University of Cincinnati. Unfortunately, those things upset existing culture and the way things were always done.

Under her tenure, minimum admissions standards were instituted on the main campus. Those who didn't meet those standards were forced to go to UC's two-year schools. The Main Campus's open-admission University College was disbanded - it had a 17% graduation rate. The result is that graduation rates, retention rates, admission scores began to rise - a trend that has continued to this very day. A number of overarching goals were created, and the beginning of the annual progress report on achieving those goals continues to this day.

I would argue that Zimpher finalized the separation from UC being a "commuter school."

Zimpher was highly involved on a lot of community boards, and promoted the benefits of the urban university (not sure how that works with Penn State).

I personally give her credit for being able to withstand the withering criticism and be the lightning rod while doing all the dirty work to make the University better - including disposing of Bob Huggins, even if it was very sloppy and poorly done. Under her tenure, Brian Kelly was hired and UC went to its first BCS Bowl, and came within a hair of going to the national championship game. Mick Cronin was hired, who brought the basketball team back from the dead along with some academic respectablility.

As both a 1985 and a 2010 graduate, the difference of UC between those two time periods is remarkable. It's like two different schools. The attitude in the classroom, the attitude of the administration was SO much different when I began taking classes again in 2005.

Zimpher may not be the most likable person, but I think she's tough. Without her efforts, we wouldn't be on the radar for any conference expansion. We wouldn't have President Ono right now. Or the new, more aggressive set of goals, UC|19. Our academic rankings would not have risen so much in the past 5 years (21 spots in USNews). She laid the groundwork for that and took the heat from a populous notorious for their inability to deal with change.

Now let the barage begin...3...2...1...

The bolded part was pushed by the Ohio Board of Regents. Marginal HS students being pushed to branch campuses or community colleges with an option to transfer to main campus if their grades were good enough.

That may very well be true, but she's the one who had to put it into place. One common refrain on this board at the time was that she was trying to "turn UC into Harvard," and "she's violating UC's mission as a city-based school." I would argue that UC|19 is much closer to that than Zimpher's UC|21.

I would also argue a lot of the crap she took the blame for was done on behalf of other people (BOT, Regents).

Remember, I never claimed she was likable. I never said she did things perfectly. But unlike her immediate successor, she at least did things.

I'd also add, that if Penn State does hire her, no one is safe, and she doesn't care who she pisses off.

(10-30-2013 10:57 AM)mlb Wrote:  Yikes. I almost wish that JoePa was still around to see what would happen with that power struggle!

He would have died the second he laid eyes on her.