(11-06-2011 09:56 AM)Buc66 Wrote: [ -> ]http://www.johnsoncitypress.com/Living/a...p?id=95594
Do you think that this description is the protocol that this process will follow? Or, as is often the reality in politics, are there some serious back room dealings going on?
If there were to be real "back room deals" the process would not have ended up with 3 candidates no one predicted at the outset. Noland is as close to an "insider" as ended up on the list and he was not a common name before the finals. The one inside candidate who actually was on the list was eliminated quickly and Wilsie Bishop, who many thought was the heir apparent, didn't apply. Neither did Wayne Andrews who at the beginning some on campus though would be interested. At this point the process has been open and fair. It is the chancellor's job to pick the candidate he thinks is best suited and then negotiate with that person. The salary may not be high enough for Frank, but that is a pure guess on my part. Noland's experience reminds me of Nicks lite and Roy was an excellent president.
(11-06-2011 11:07 AM)OldGrayDog Wrote: [ -> ] (11-06-2011 09:56 AM)Buc66 Wrote: [ -> ]http://www.johnsoncitypress.com/Living/a...p?id=95594
Do you think that this description is the protocol that this process will follow? Or, as is often the reality in politics, are there some serious back room dealings going on?
If there were to be real "back room deals" the process would not have ended up with 3 candidates no one predicted at the outset. Noland is as close to an "insider" as ended up on the list and he was not a common name before the finals. The one inside candidate who actually was on the list was eliminated quickly and Wilsie Bishop, who many thought was the heir apparent, didn't apply. Neither did Wayne Andrews who at the beginning some on campus though would be interested. At this point the process has been open and fair. It is the chancellor's job to pick the candidate he thinks is best suited and then negotiate with that person. The salary may not be high enough for Frank, but that is a pure guess on my part. Noland's experience reminds me of Nicks lite and Roy was an excellent president.
I found it interesting that there will be no campus visits to the candidate's homebase. I may be wrong, but I've been led to believe that it's SOP for most President/Chancellor searches.
I think that Noland's runner up spot at UT makes him a fairly viable candidate for "insider" and a reason why the aforementioned individual's may have decided not to throw their hat in the ring. I could be wrong about that too. I hope Noland is more like a Nicks and less like a Bellar or a Stanton.
This is very exciting to watch and discuss. I gave up on national politics.
(11-06-2011 11:07 AM)OldGrayDog Wrote: [ -> ]If there were to be real "back room deals" the process would not have ended up with 3 candidates no one predicted at the outset. Noland is as close to an "insider" as ended up on the list and he was not a common name before the finals. The one inside candidate who actually was on the list was eliminated quickly and Wilsie Bishop, who many thought was the heir apparent, didn't apply. Neither did Wayne Andrews who at the beginning some on campus though would be interested. At this point the process has been open and fair.
No one predicted? I think slappywhite, among several others, have been pointing at Noland since before he even applied. Also, Frank stood out immediately among those paying attention. If you're referring to Manahan as the "one inside candidate", it was clear very early on he wasn't even going to come close, and to those who
really were acquainted with him, knew that even before the process got under way. (Which is why in earlier posts I've pointed out that local legislators have looked silly in writing that letter trying to 'anoint' Manahan.)
But as to the original question, I do think the protocol is going as planned. That being said, the protocol will still come down to Haslam, and/or the TBR as a whole.