The unofficial online home for fans of the UAB Blazers. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

(02-10-2015 06:17 PM)backyardblazer Wrote:  

(02-09-2015 09:03 PM)blazers9911 Wrote:  

(02-09-2015 01:42 PM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  Mountain Brook is populated by those who can afford to buy or to build there, often to take advantage of their highly regarded school system (well supported by highest in the state LOCAL property taxes used only for their LOCAL school district) for their kids, not to mention those who value the several walled & gated communities. Not all are "rich", but they are generally among the upper 25% income group. The state of Alabama is where they live, but not necessarily what they feel defines them as individuals. Many send their kids to colleges all over the world, not just instate or even in the south.

we get it, you hate mountain brook and what you perceive it to be. They aren't the only rich area in Birmingham or the state, but you sure love reminding us of everything they do wrong. I didn't graduate from mountain brook, but I am sure as hell not as focused on them as I am on improving my own community. We all get it, mountain brook is nice and there is money there. That ain't changing. Move on and worry about something you can control.

No, You don't "get it". I have family and friends who live there and , besides, there is nothing "hateful" about what I said. There is the truth that you can solve problems with quality education by "throwing money at it" IF that money is sufficient to the need. In return for investing in their schools, Mountain Brook residents get higher property values and their kids get more vocational opportunities. I have a niece and two nephews who finished MB schools and EACH today makes 6 figure incomes. Of my 3 stepchildren, the two who finished school there also make that kind of income. Your "Ray Watts approach" to applying a perjorative to someone with whom you disagree makes it easier to dismiss their point. People who live in MB have more because they invest more. Alabama has yet to learn that lesson.

Speaking of back on topic, has anyone contacted or heard back from any of the UA senators?

(02-11-2015 11:58 AM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  Speaking of back on topic, has anyone contacted or heard back from any of the UA senators?

Yes. We are having an impact. Keep it up.

I sent an email to all of them. Got three "out of office" replies.

(02-11-2015 12:30 PM)Smaug Wrote:  I sent an email to all of them. Got three "out of office" replies.

I'd be shocked if any of them actually replied. I'm sure most have the same reservations about their email being monitored as our faculty

That's fine. I heard from exactly one of our senators, exactly once.

When I thanked them for their courage after the no-con vote, one of them told me he appreciated it.

Can there be a vote of no confidence in the BOT regarding governance of the system and/or UAB? Again, I know it wouldn't necessarily have much teeth, but adds to the political pressure.

(02-11-2015 12:48 PM)Blazer85 Wrote:  Can there be a vote of no confidence in the BOT regarding governance of the system and/or UAB? Again, I know it wouldn't necessarily have much teeth, but adds to the political pressure.

The bylaws allow a vote of "No Confidence" in anyone they like. In practical terms, they'll only do that for people or entities in their direct chain of command. UA's Senate will not judge Ray Watts or the Board's actions here, but awareness of them puts the Board's actions regarding Tuscaloosa in a harsh light.

The back-of-the-hand dismissing of the Epps report, and the backwoods-level crudity of Finis St. John IV's reaction to Anjali Wagle, have not gone unnoticed. St. John believes himself the cultured better of Bryant Junior, but he proved he's just a redneck with a Roman number.

(02-11-2015 11:55 AM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 06:17 PM)backyardblazer Wrote:  

(02-09-2015 09:03 PM)blazers9911 Wrote:  

(02-09-2015 01:42 PM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  Mountain Brook is populated by those who can afford to buy or to build there, often to take advantage of their highly regarded school system (well supported by highest in the state LOCAL property taxes used only for their LOCAL school district) for their kids, not to mention those who value the several walled & gated communities. Not all are "rich", but they are generally among the upper 25% income group. The state of Alabama is where they live, but not necessarily what they feel defines them as individuals. Many send their kids to colleges all over the world, not just instate or even in the south.

we get it, you hate mountain brook and what you perceive it to be. They aren't the only rich area in Birmingham or the state, but you sure love reminding us of everything they do wrong. I didn't graduate from mountain brook, but I am sure as hell not as focused on them as I am on improving my own community. We all get it, mountain brook is nice and there is money there. That ain't changing. Move on and worry about something you can control.

No, You don't "get it". I have family and friends who live there and , besides, there is nothing "hateful" about what I said. There is the truth that you can solve problems with quality education by "throwing money at it" IF that money is sufficient to the need. In return for investing in their schools, Mountain Brook residents get higher property values and their kids get more vocational opportunities. I have a niece and two nephews who finished MB schools and EACH today makes 6 figure incomes. Of my 3 stepchildren, the two who finished school there also make that kind of income. Your "Ray Watts approach" to applying a perjorative to someone with whom you disagree makes it easier to dismiss their point. People who live in MB have more because they invest more. Alabama has yet to learn that lesson.

You refuse to even acknowledge there are issues other than money at play here. Until you can get past that we won't even begin to see eye to eye on this.

For example, if bubba lives in bfn Alabama and is a farmer and his kids are going to grow up to be farmers and will be taken out of school at 16, how do you educate that kid with boatloads of money?

(02-11-2015 12:35 PM)biglizard Wrote:  

(02-11-2015 12:30 PM)Smaug Wrote:  I sent an email to all of them. Got three "out of office" replies.

I'd be shocked if any of them actually replied. I'm sure most have the same reservations about their email being monitored as our faculty

Absolutely. And really, we don't care if they answer us. We care if they contact their colleagues 60 miles up the road using non-.edu addresses to ask, "What the hell is happening over there?"

Unless you're Ray Watts with your two pricey homes (and how the hell does he afford them even as the 11th highest paid public college prez in the US??), you didn't get into this game for the money. Prestige matters. I have zero doubt that faculty from both campuses will attend professional conferences this year and cut the bottom off their name tags (the "Institution" line).

The Trustees obviously have no clue what an embarrassment they are to anyone associated with UA, UAB or UAH.

(02-11-2015 01:49 PM)58-56 Wrote:  

(02-11-2015 12:48 PM)Blazer85 Wrote:  Can there be a vote of no confidence in the BOT regarding governance of the system and/or UAB? Again, I know it wouldn't necessarily have much teeth, but adds to the political pressure.

The bylaws allow a vote of "No Confidence" in anyone they like. In practical terms, they'll only do that for people or entities in their direct chain of command. UA's Senate will not judge Ray Watts or the Board's actions here, but awareness of them puts the Board's actions regarding Tuscaloosa in a harsh light.

The back-of-the-hand dismissing of the Epps report, and the backwoods-level crudity of Finis St. John IV's reaction to Anjali Wagle, have not gone unnoticed. St. John believes himself the cultured better of Bryant Junior, but he proved he's just a redneck with a Roman number.

well said!

Tomorrow's meeting appears to be going forward as scheduled, no weather delay.

We've definitely gotten our point across; good work by all who wrote. Now to see if enough of them realize their own vulnerability to a corrupt and self-serving Board of Trustees.

(02-16-2015 10:44 PM)58-56 Wrote:  Tomorrow's meeting appears to be going forward as scheduled, no weather delay.

We've definitely gotten our point across; good work by all who wrote. Now to see if enough of them realize their own vulnerability to a corrupt and self-serving Board of Trustees.

Meeting? You mean SACS?

UA Faculty/Senate meeting I think.

(02-16-2015 11:03 PM)the_blazerman Wrote:  UA Faculty/Senate meeting I think.

Correct. The UA Senate needs to be every bit as concerned as ours.

SACS lands a week from tomorrow (Tuesday). We need to be ready.

Did anyone have any feedback from this?

Nada.

It definitely attracted notice, but this is an effort at agitation and propaganda: we want the UA Faculty Senate aware of events at UAB, paying attention to media reports, and discussing events with friends and colleagues at UAB. It's a long-term effort.

One of the keys to winning our battle with the Trustees will be to destroy their perceived legitimacy. That's not going to happen overnight; inertia is a powerful force. There are a number of fronts on which we can work on their foundation like little green and gold termites.

Every time something sleazy happens at UAB that falls within the UAB Faculty Senate's purview, we want the UA Faculty Senate aware of it. So that when the Trustees next do something outrageous - and we know that's a "when," not an "if" - the ground will be thoroughly prepared for pushback from that quarter.

(02-16-2015 11:09 PM)58-56 Wrote:  

(02-16-2015 11:03 PM)the_blazerman Wrote:  UA Faculty/Senate meeting I think.

Correct. The UA Senate needs to be every bit as concerned as ours.

SACS lands a week from tomorrow (Tuesday). We need to be ready.

And it is going to be gnarly when SACS gets here. Normally third-party complaints are handled in 1/2 of a day during an on site visit. SACS has dedicated 1.5 days of their 2.5 day total visit to third-party complaints. There will be 4 reviewers. One reviewer was specifically added due to their past experience with NCAA issues.

(02-18-2015 11:55 AM)Blazing Saddles Wrote:  

(02-16-2015 11:09 PM)58-56 Wrote:  

(02-16-2015 11:03 PM)the_blazerman Wrote:  UA Faculty/Senate meeting I think.

Correct. The UA Senate needs to be every bit as concerned as ours.

SACS lands a week from tomorrow (Tuesday). We need to be ready.

And it is going to be gnarly when SACS gets here. Normally third-party complaints are handled in 1/2 of a day during an on site visit. SACS has dedicated 1.5 days of their 2.5 day total visit to third-party complaints. There will be 4 reviewers. One reviewer was specifically added due to their past experience with NCAA issues.

Where did this information come from?