CSNbbs

(01-12-2015 11:58 PM)PTBlazer Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-12-2015 11:56 PM)HSV_BLAZER Wrote: [ -> ]

Quote:"The only thing I have is my credibility," [Wes Smith] said.

You know what? He's earned it.

Go to bed, Mrs. Smith.

(01-12-2015 11:55 PM)PTBlazer Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-12-2015 11:44 PM)Blazer85 Wrote: [ -> ]Shouldn't be a huge surprise if Wes said he was proud of Watts after the decision to review the numbers. Newsflash, Wes... We shouldn't be reviewing numbers. We shouldn't even have to be justifying something that an overwhelming majority of major stakeholders support.

You know what Blazer? I respect you, I really do. But I have no idea how someone who joined the NAS two days ago gets off talking about what "an overwhelming majority of major stakeholders support." I can assure you with great confidence that the "major stakeholders" in any way you want to define that are members of the NAS. And have been for a very long time.

Wes Smith has supported this University with his time, money, and energy for many years. He deserves the right and opportunity to have his voice heard, and I don't disagree that reviewing the numbers is something to be proud of. It's a start.

What more do you want, a lynch mob? The only way you get football, or board independence, or shared governance or anything else you believe is important is to get involved in the process in a manner which encourages intelligent conversation.

Is that you ray watts?

You do nothing but defend anyone who might be tied in with or support of ray watts

(01-12-2015 11:55 PM)PTBlazer Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-12-2015 11:44 PM)Blazer85 Wrote: [ -> ]Shouldn't be a huge surprise if Wes said he was proud of Watts after the decision to review the numbers. Newsflash, Wes... We shouldn't be reviewing numbers. We shouldn't even have to be justifying something that an overwhelming majority of major stakeholders support.

You know what Blazer? I respect you, I really do. But I have no idea how someone who joined the NAS two days ago gets off talking about what "an overwhelming majority of major stakeholders support." I can assure you with great confidence that the "major stakeholders" in any way you want to define that are members of the NAS. And have been for a very long time.

Wes Smith has supported this University with his time, money, and energy for many years. He deserves the right and opportunity to have his voice heard, and I don't disagree that reviewing the numbers is something to be proud of. It's a start.

What more do you want, a lynch mob? The only way you get football, or board independence, or shared governance or anything else you believe is important is to get involved in the process in a manner which encourages intelligent conversation.

So you are glad for the chance to review the numbers on such an ill-conceived study that was used to justify the wrongful ending of a program that means so much to so many? Sorry. I can not and will not support that as something to be proud of. We shouldn't be in the position we are in right now to begin with. Watts has already royally messed us up to put it lightly. Getting the football team back is not something to review or look in to. It is something you DEMAND.

And furthermore I don't know where you get that I joined the NAS just two days ago. You must be confusing me with someone else. No matter, it certainly is reminiscent of Watts "I've got 42 years." I don't care how long you've given to the NAS or how much. If you aren't outraged by Watts then I have nothing for you.

(01-12-2015 11:55 PM)PTBlazer Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-12-2015 11:44 PM)Blazer85 Wrote: [ -> ]Shouldn't be a huge surprise if Wes said he was proud of Watts after the decision to review the numbers. Newsflash, Wes... We shouldn't be reviewing numbers. We shouldn't even have to be justifying something that an overwhelming majority of major stakeholders support.

You know what Blazer? I respect you, I really do. But I have no idea how someone who joined the NAS two days ago gets off talking about what "an overwhelming majority of major stakeholders support." I can assure you with great confidence that the "major stakeholders" in any way you want to define that are members of the NAS. And have been for a very long time.

Wes Smith has supported this University with his time, money, and energy for many years. He deserves the right and opportunity to have his voice heard, and I don't disagree that reviewing the numbers is something to be proud of. It's a start.

What more do you want, a lynch mob? The only way you get football, or board independence, or shared governance or anything else you believe is important is to get involved in the process in a manner which encourages intelligent conversation.

So...i respect your right to defend the NAS if you want, and to also appropriately criticize those who are less involved but vocal.

But to be clear, therd has been an utter suspension of intelligent or honest conversation by this administration. The full body of communication is simply ludicrous, as was the method by which theese decisions were made. At best, the actions of this administration have been criminally neligent and worthy of civil lawsuits. There is nothing worthy of pride in reviewing the justification for premeditated murder of UAB football. Nothing. Its merely a scrap thrown to us dogs by the master, hoping that some of us will shut up while gnawing. This man is a sociopath, and i dont use that term lightly. He has zero ability to empathize, and apparently to understand the magnitude of what has happened here.

He seems to have gone against everything the members of his organization have been in support of. How can you defend that?

(01-13-2015 12:02 AM)FNblazer Wrote: [ -> ]Ugh. Let's hope this isn't foreshadowing for the Thursday vote. I fear many Faculty Senators feel as if they can use Friday as a way out.

I know there is a lot of time between now and the vote but one of the FS members have suggested that the vote will pass.

Here is a link to the video:
School of Business FS comments 1/12/2015

We have not seen the actual statement yet.

The will of the membership was crystal clear. If that will has been defied, then the leadership must be replaced, no matter how much they may love puppies.

From Mr Smith's facebook page

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=...=3&theater

(01-12-2015 11:24 PM)dblaze Wrote: [ -> ]Kyle Whitmire @WarOnDumb
OK, this is confusing. Board says as of Jan. 9, no confidence in Watts, will work with new committee. #FreeUAB

Anyone have any idea what this means?

It means that the NAS board is comprised of cowards and traitors.

I believe , except for one person, all the speakers called for immediate restoration of the athletic programs.

(01-13-2015 12:13 AM)uabblazer2012 Wrote: [ -> ]From Mr Smith's facebook page

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=...=3&theater

Figures.

Here's the statement:

http://www.myfoxal.com/story/27829982/ua...ntil-jan-9

UAB NAS rating on facebook page dropping fast...

This may be rapid typing on the reporter's part, but the statement mostly reads like gibberish:

"Up until January 9th the National Alumni Society board has has no confidence in the leadership of president Ray Watts and university of Alabama system board of trustees. In an effort to restore the football rifle and bowling programs we will move forward with the athletic strategic plan review committee and expected to receive positive reviews from recently created university task force," the board said in a statement.

They are trying to give him a out! I personally want him out as well!

(01-13-2015 12:25 AM)kdblazer Wrote: [ -> ]They are trying to give him a out! I personally want him out as well!

Maybe. It's so badly written, it's hard to say what they're trying to do. They may be trying to say "the review-the-report committee is the only thing Ray Watts has touched that hasn't turned to $%^#" which is probably too generous but not an endorsement.

It doesn't express confidence in Watts. It's doesn't express a lack of confidence. It reads like the stuff my sister-in-law posts on facebook when she's dead drunk at 3 a.m.

(01-13-2015 12:32 AM)58-56 Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-13-2015 12:25 AM)kdblazer Wrote: [ -> ]They are trying to give him a out! I personally want him out as well!

Maybe. It's so badly written, it's hard to say what they're trying to do. They may be trying to say "the review-the-report committee is the only thing Ray Watts has touched that hasn't turned to $%^#" which is probably too generous but not an endorsement.

It doesn't express confidence in Watts. It's doesn't express a lack of confidence. It reads like the stuff my sister-in-law posts on facebook when she's dead drunk at 3 a.m.

It's just fence riding.

(01-13-2015 12:32 AM)58-56 Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-13-2015 12:25 AM)kdblazer Wrote: [ -> ]They are trying to give him a out! I personally want him out as well!

Maybe. It's so badly written, it's hard to say what they're trying to do. They may be trying to say "the review-the-report committee is the only thing Ray Watts has touched that hasn't turned to $%^#" which is probably too generous but not an endorsement.

It doesn't express confidence in Watts. It's doesn't express a lack of confidence. It reads like the stuff my sister-in-law posts on facebook when she's dead drunk at 3 a.m.

I think they should have voted up or down on the items instead of compromising. Either way at this point I expect football to be back regardless of the new commissioned study of the study that wasn't a study.

(01-13-2015 12:25 AM)kdblazer Wrote: [ -> ]They are trying to give him a out! I personally want him out as well!

I agree, but the guy has already been given an out. The faculty senate gave him ample time to address the issue of shared governance and re-think the decision.

forming a committee to select a firm that will be responsible for re-evaluating bad numbers is not the way to fix the issues. If he had wanted to take the out on 1/9 he should said that they would have the committee re-evaluate numbers and decision.

Because of Wes Smiths comments, it is possible that some sort of deal has been made behind closed doors that we don't know about, but this has not helped by Watts intimidation and other slimy behavior. I think its more likely that he realizes that the BOT, who directed him to cancel football may have to cut him loose if they start getting some of the flack he has been experiencing.

Will someone please tell me whether or not I'm supposed to be pissed at the NAS?

Their statement doesn't make any sense. "We have no confidence in Ray Watts, but we might later"?

Really?