bucfan81
Heisman
Posts: 7,301
Joined: Nov 2006
Reputation: 14
I Root For: ETSU
Location: Johnson City
|
RE: Will ETSU Grab SoCon Opening?
(11-04-2011 08:36 AM)slappywhite Wrote: (11-03-2011 12:37 PM)posterformerlyknownasthedoctor Wrote: (11-03-2011 11:57 AM)slappywhite Wrote: (11-03-2011 11:13 AM)posterformerlyknownasthedoctor Wrote: (11-03-2011 10:07 AM)slappywhite Wrote: This was known to have been coming down the pike for at least two years. Timing was not the issue, nor were the students moving out. Where were the faculty? They drive the university, they could have had a vote of no confidence in the president and stopped it. Who tried to organize the faculty?
On this you are wrong. There were hints two years prior that it was a possibility, but as MommaBear pointed out repeatedly, all that was at least "smoothed over" for a period. The dropping of football, when and how it happened, was a total shock to 99.9% of the campus, including students, faculty, and other administrators. And that 99.9% is not an exaggeration. As I've mentioned before, again and again and again, there was no warning that anything of the sort was imminent. I have multiple degrees from ETSU. I was NEVER contacted about trying to save football, and I'm on all the alumni lists, mailouts, etc. To my knowledge, NOT ONE SINGLE football player, either present or past, was contacted about trying to raise money for the program. And I've talked to many of them, and others on this board have said exactly the same thing. There was NO realistic, "real" effort to raise the money needed to make it work. My contacts within the university community are vast and extensive, and I can assure you that not a single contact had any knowledge of it, nor any warning of it. JoAnn Paty herself didn't know of it, or if she did, she covered it up, because (again as I've posted repeatedly), she was quoted in the JC Press immediately after the ceremony opening the golf facility, to the effect that "ok, now we have to get working on the baseball stadium" (paraphrased, but very close to verbatim). Not a hint that there was anything worrisome about the football program.
As to the faculty, you have a point, but:
1) The faculty do not drive the university;
2) They were apparently (from all the evidence I've heard and seen) sold a bill of goods about how dire the financial situation was if football was kept. They were not informed that student activity fees were coming regardless. Some of the more outspoken faculty members, more academically-oriented, drowned out any opposing voices. Moreso, however, stanton presented it as a "done deal", with no room to argue.
That being said, however, if more faculty had taken it upon themselves to become educated about all the pros and cons, then perhaps there would have been more of an outcry. Sadly, no one tried to organize the faculty, but.........well, see point 1 above.
Et tu, doctor? With all do respect, (and i read your posts and agree with mostly everything you say) were gonna disagree here on a couple things.
1. "there were hints two years prior about the possibility" What do you need...a sledgehammer over the head? Even with the assurance(whatever that is worth), did football attendence spike? Did financial contributions spike? Did the community even wimper? Students?
2. why is any "real" effort(or lack there of) to save football tied to etsu. Why couldnt some of the ardent supporters on this board put forth a "real" effort and contact the folks you listed? why?
3. name another constiuency within the university that can have a president thrown out with a simple vote...see Ron Beller? The faculty have an ability to drive the university. They have a trump card that no one else does.
4. there was NO response from faculty because either 1)their head was in the sand with regards to the ramifications or 2) they just didnt care. Either way, it does not show much solidarity towards the football program. As for the student fees, this is a state university and things happen. thats how it is with public institutions. if they want more upfront dealings, i suggest a private institution (see also the current presidential search).
Well, thank you for the respect. I try to be balanced (no, not like that other entity) and accurate, to the best of my ability. I don't have time for a lengthy response, and I don't know how much of the history of this board, and historical comments you're aware of. So.....here are brief responses to your enumerated points:
1. Human nature being what it is, warnings must be somewhat dire, and have a bit of "it's now or never" about them. [See Tulane football salvation, global warming, hurricane warnings, "you need to see a doctor about that" comments, etc., etc., for proof of that phenomenon.] There was NO imminent warnings; not even an *hint* of the ax. And we both know attendance wasn't going to save it. Yes, the community and students did indeed whimper - and more.
2. Well, primarily because it's an ETSU institution (or *was*). There *was* an ardent movement put forth at the time, but was denied even the courtesy of meetings with stanton; denied the courtesy of a "what if" establishment of an account at a bank across the street. I'm not sure from whence your lack of knowledge or remembrance stems here. This point is completely invalid.
3. and 4. Well, obviously Beller had "cause" as they say, to go. They have the ability to make a big noise, which sometimes can have an effect, but historically, ETSU's faculty have been mice, overall. Buccaneerlover's point about job security is also not moot, although I think the bark was worse than the bite might have been, we'll never know. Moreover, as I said, this is a good point - the faculty haven't been overly supportive of football - but neither have they been overly supportive of ROTC, DeRosier, Beller, and numerous other things we could mention. To be honest, I don't think the faculty have educated themselves about this issue at all - with a few exceptions.
In summary(?), football shouldn't really be *much* of a faculty issue (financial considerations notwithstanding, of course), nor should any individual program in and of itself. Football is really more an issue of the quality and extent of student life, especially in the South, and especially at a regional university like ETSU. Students don't really know how much they're getting from a college experience (with exceptions, of course) until maybe towards the end of their junior year, if then. It's up to the university to provide them with an atmosphere of extra-classroom activities [see Mary B. Martin School of Art for a recent positive], not to mention it's up to the university to try and attract a diverse student body, not to mention it's up to the university to try to attract (and hold) more quality students [see Appalachian St., among others] - and, as has been shown in older threads, football is a significant tool for this aim. [This summary is shorter and less nuanced than I would like. Forgive my lack of details.]
OK doctor, lets simplify things. i personally enjoy the intelligence you bring to the board, but all these words are just muddling things up.
Lets try this and end it because its really not that important. I just want simple YES or NO answers...not historical observations or reasoning to contrary.
1)were there warnings prior to football being dropped that it was a possibility?
2)did alumi, fans, faculty, students, heed these warnings and increase support through attendance, financial giving or by any othr means neccesary to show overwelming support to save our football program during these difficult times?
3)can any one person start a foundation to solicite funds to be contributed to a cause of their own desire?
4)do faculty of a university have the power to use "a vote of no confidence" to affect a change in leadership?
and most importantly...
5)in this era of "shared governance", will faculty support for the re-estblishment of football at etsu be absolutely necessary for a new president to move forward on it?
simple yes or no please...
Answer to 1) NO!!!
|
|