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

https://www.wbhm.org/News/2015/finisstjohn

This is not a drill. You are not being Rick Rolled. Mandatory listening for all.

Remember, he is a lawyer. The questions asked cut directly to the point, so kudos to WBHM.

Finis believes the self-appointed board works great. He believes the medical center is the crown jewel of the UA System (I agree with him there). He correlates a drop in NIH funding with an increase in subsidies for UAB athletics.

The kicker is that he DOES NOT answer the question about the connection between his letter to alumni & Watts' decision. In nearly the same breathe he says the BOT will communicate better with the UAB community... he & Witt are masters of talking out of both sides of their mouths.

Wow, just wow. He's obviously not changing his mind on anything. Also convenient that he carries on about the NIH ranking decline when Watts was the med school Dean that oversaw the decline.

My favorite part was when he bragged that the board approved every UAB item in the last 5 years "that was presented to the board." The lawyer-speak is all over this interview.

If we could just have an additional committee formed to help us understand that the BOT has our best interests in mind. Communication is the key. We need to make sure they hear us and listen to us this time.

I fart in his general direction.

He is clearly sitting on PBJ's other fist.

Throw **** on him Friday & bump him around severely.

BS and spin…

oh yeah, they must communicate better.

(02-04-2015 08:06 AM)BlazerFire Wrote:  BS and spin…

oh yeah, they must communicate better.

The problem is they tell so many different lies about so many different things that they can't keep them straight. As Judge Judy likes to say. "If you tell the truth, you don't need a good memory!"...

communicate better? I thought this was Watts' decision alone?

(02-04-2015 01:30 AM)UABslant Wrote:  He correlates a drop in NIH funding with an increase in subsidies for UAB athletics.

This is the most nonsensical thing I've ever heard.

Things wrong with this statement:
1) They promoted the guy in charge of the SOM during the time the NIH funding dropped the most and if you read and watch videos from that time all you'll hear is Dr. Watts and others on the board talking about what a great trajectory UAB was on at the time.
2) In fairness to Dr. Watts, though, that period was during the recession. That said, it was during the recession and sequestration and all the federal budget problems.
3) The NIH does not fund football programs, so the money that would've been coming in via grants but didn't wasn't going to the UAB football team. It was going to other universities or didn't exist (because the federal budget was reduced)

(02-04-2015 01:30 AM)UABslant Wrote:  He correlates a drop in NIH funding with an increase in subsidies for UAB athletics.

Someone needs to ask how funding for athletics directly impacts losing grant money from NIH. That's such a stupid correlation. They are mutually exclusive activities. And Ray's original plan didn't even reduce the subsidy.

Finis is from another planet. He will never get it.

The questions were good, except I wish a question regarding why so many BOT members have connections to Bryant Bank had been asked.

(02-04-2015 08:49 AM)KevMo4UAB Wrote:  Finis is from another planet. He will never get it.

The questions were good, except I wish a question regarding why so many BOT members have connections to Bryant Bank had been asked.

"except I wish a question regarding why so many BOT members have connections to Bryant Bank had been asked."

Amen to that.

Typical "Better than Thou" answers: It's the "I am better, I am smarter, I am privileged" speak that has persisted and is woven into the fabric of this state much more than in many, many others. A$$holes like sinjon et al honestly believe they are smarter and better informed than the rest of the bama universe, so questioning of their logic is dismissed outright. What's worse, is that much of what we make fun supports this reasoning. Just read the gump attacks on UAB and anything else "not bamar." They have such an amazing proclivity for circular logic and they are very,very disciplined in maintaining the low orbit.

At some point, they will leave the 1800s and enter into the 21st century, but it will be kicking and screaming, and then only likely by the legal process.

I think if nothing else one can tell that the BOT is feeling heat. Clearly not enough heat just yet though because none of them seem willing to change their ways. It's time UAB folks rise up and demand change. Over are the days of us waiting to be heard by the BOT or trying to improve communication between the interested parties. No conversation can be had when there is such a discrepancy of philosophy and morals. The BOT has shown their true colors over and over.

We have got to show up this week and continue to fight until there is change.

This interview was extremely rehearsed, much more than other interviews WBHM does. Listen to the speech pattern of Greg Bass. He's reading. I wonder if Finis only agreed to the interview if he could see the questions ahead of time.

(02-04-2015 08:43 AM)biglizard Wrote:  

(02-04-2015 01:30 AM)UABslant Wrote:  He correlates a drop in NIH funding with an increase in subsidies for UAB athletics.

Someone needs to ask how funding for athletics directly impacts losing grant money from NIH. That's such a stupid correlation. They are mutually exclusive activities. And Ray's original plan didn't even reduce the subsidy.

Here is their argument please do not kill the messenger
The funding for athletics subsidies and a lot of the new buildings comes from almost exclusively the indirect cost from grants. (This part is true). The SOM/east side believes that "their grant" money would be better spent as seed money for new researchers. these new researchers in turn will apply for new grants and generate more indirect grant monies. Their operating theory. Rather than in atletics subsidies which have grown from 8 million to 20 million in the last decade per FSJ numbers.

I do not agree with the east side arguments but we need to understand them to fight them. So no real direct correlation but a clear linkage in their minds

Except that Watts has said that these subsidies will remain with the athletic department and the financials/challenges of the UAB athletic department are no different from those faced by the other 127 college athletic departments. The BOT would have you compare UAB to UAT which is ridiculous...