http://m.dnronline.com/article/commentary_9_12_13

Longhorn - what are your thoughts on the statement towards the end on the "vote of no confidence" threat against Alger if we make the move?

Makes some great arguments for moving up.

For those that are more rivals inclined:

http://jamesmadison.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1548788

Sheesh. Git R Dun.

He's right about the lack of natural rivals on this schedule. Our esteemed opponent this weekend has 2,500 students? Ugh - that's less than Bridgewater. I'm hoping we get a decent turnout Saturday.

Quotes?

The Rivals article shows the 4 points that Simmons is making. I'm not sure if there is more beyond that, but otherwise there isn't really anything new here. Simmons is saying the same thing as those of us that support a move up have been saying for awhile.

That's interesting since Simmons has had a "No to FBS" slant on his articles in the past. The tides are a turnin', my friends.

Is this article still slanted heavily hinting toward a C-USA invite like the last couple? Seems like the ODU beat-writer mentioned JMU to MAC once, but most hint toward C-USA. I can't read the article.

(09-13-2013 07:58 AM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  Is this article still slanted heavily hinting toward a C-USA invite like the last couple? Seems like the ODU beat-writer mentioned JMU to MAC once, but most hint toward C-USA. I can't read the article.

There is no new information in the article. If you have been following our boards on this topic, which you have, you know the reasons to move. No mention of any specific conference affiliation.

Doesn't hint a conference just that we are going in the author's opinion.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

Is he not excited about ST Francis week and central con weeks?

ODU was by far my favorite football week.


GMU, VCU, and ODU were by far my favorite home basketball games.

I still enjoy going to JMU games, but the excitement is certainly on the decline. All your long term rivals you felt you had a leg up on have moved past you. ODU's new schedule is ECU. Ours is elon and Albany.

Albany and elon - sure they are fine schools but they don't get folks excited which in turn has the same effect on me....

(09-13-2013 08:04 AM)JMU Wrote:  

(09-13-2013 07:58 AM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  Is this article still slanted heavily hinting toward a C-USA invite like the last couple? Seems like the ODU beat-writer mentioned JMU to MAC once, but most hint toward C-USA. I can't read the article.

There is no new information in the article. If you have been following our boards on this topic, which you have, you know the reasons to move. No mention of any specific conference affiliation.

Thanks, I just read the free part on Rivals.

Interesting there was so much emphasis on Stony Brook. The MAC has kept an eye on them as having potential and our new regional TV package extends into downtown NYC and western Long Island near SB.

Anyway...

All the concerns these "officials" told to the article author of why JMU must move, wouldn't they also apply to Delaware? Is UD that complacent that if JMU moves for these reasons, they are OK sitting where they are? I'd think they are concerned too.

(09-13-2013 08:14 AM)Dukester Wrote:  Is he not excited about ST Francis week and central con weeks?

ODU was by far my favorite football week.


GMU, VCU, and ODU were by far my favorite home basketball games.

I still enjoy going to JMU games, but the excitement is certainly on the decline. All your long term rivals you felt you had a leg up on have moved past you. ODU's new schedule is ECU. Ours is elon and Albany.

Albany and elon - sure they are fine schools but they don't get folks excited which in turn has the same effect on me....

Couldn't agree more. The only rivalry week for me now is UR football. W&M a little, but that has always been civil with no huge excitement. UD is kind of a rival, I guess.

Had you told me in 2005 that ODU/VCU/GMU would move on to better things BEFORE JMU, I would have laughed.

Lets get this move done, re-establish a good rivalry, and start new ones with Charlotte and the thundering turds.

A prof or anyone can disagreed with a 1A move but the profs threatening a vote of presidential no confidence, if this is even being discussed, is asinine. Even a communist, tenured, tax supported, American football hating, no shaving (anywhere) ancient pottery prof can't legitimately support a negative vote for changing athletic conferences.

Go Alger!

(09-13-2013 08:29 AM)Purplehazed Wrote:  A prof or anyone can disagreed with a 1A move but the profs threatening a vote of presidential no confidence, if this is even being discussed, is asinine. Even a communist, tenured, tax supported, American football hating, no shaving (anywhere) ancient pottery prof can't legitimately support a negative vote for changing athletic conferences.

Go Alger!

If you don't want to support (moderately) big-time athletics, then don't accept a teaching job at JMU. Simple enough.

(09-13-2013 06:10 AM)JMUBarry Wrote:  http://m.dnronline.com/article/commentary_9_12_13

Longhorn - what are your thoughts on the statement towards the end on the "vote of no confidence" threat against Alger if we make the move?

A no-confidence vote in Alger by the Senate, or an effort by the Senate to solicit a no-confidence vote on the Pres by all full-time faculty on this issue, would be extremely bad. Yet, I don't think that's necessarily on the horizon. It all depends on how deftly any proposed move to FBS is handled by Alger as he triangulates that move with the issue of compensation. I like Alger, and I think the vast majority of the faculty want to believe in him.

Not that there is a quid pro quo swap to made here, but in a sense there is...faculty (and staff) need to be convinced that a move to FBS is not going to impact Alger's commitment to redressing the lingering salary and wage issue. The compensation task force appointed by Alger completed its work last Spring, yet now ANOTHER presidential committee has been appointed to study the recommendations of the original compensation task force, and make recommendations on what to do.

This isn't my first rodeo when it comes to this kind of thing...appointing a second, or a third committee (and so on ad infinitum) to study the recommendations of the previous committee is an old game used to delay, postpone and ultimately eliminate the passion behind an issue. As much as I admire and respect Uncle Ron, he was a master at this. Ron's protégé and UVA BOV lacky Rose didn't use this technique, he simply ignored the faculty. If Alger takes his cue from either of those predecessors and endlessly delays action on the recommendations of his own committees on compensation, all while proposing a costly new sports endeavor...well, then they'll be trouble in the friendly city.

The two weeks following the Oct. 4th meeting will be interesting, and should give us all an indication of what kind of leader Alger really is.

(09-13-2013 06:58 AM)Madison 91 Forever Wrote:  Sheesh. Git R Dun.

He's right about the lack of natural rivals on this schedule. Our esteemed opponent this weekend has 2,500 students? Ugh - that's less than Bridgewater. I'm hoping we get a decent turnout Saturday.

No. Bridgewater is ~1,750. 2,500 is still way to small for us to play against, but it's not quite Bridgewater small.

OT: Anyone read the Wash Post article yesterday about UVa mulling over the idea of becoming quasi private so UVa can jack up tuition via accepting more out of state students without VA getting in the way?

(09-13-2013 08:41 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(09-13-2013 06:10 AM)JMUBarry Wrote:  http://m.dnronline.com/article/commentary_9_12_13

Longhorn - what are your thoughts on the statement towards the end on the "vote of no confidence" threat against Alger if we make the move?

A no-confidence vote in Alger by the Senate, or an effort by the Senate to solicit a no-confidence vote on the Pres by all full-time faculty on this issue, would be extremely bad. Yet, I don't think that's necessarily on the horizon. It all depends on how deftly any proposed move to FBS is handled by Alger as he triangulates that move with the issue of compensation. I like Alger, and I think the vast majority of the faculty want to believe in him.

Not that there is a quid pro quo swap to made here, but in a sense there is...faculty (and staff) need to be convinced that a move to FBS is not going to impact Alger's commitment to redressing the lingering salary and wage issue. The compensation task force appointed by Alger completed its work last Spring, yet now ANOTHER presidential committee has been appointed to study the recommendations of the original compensation task force, and make recommendations on what to do.

This isn't my first rodeo when it comes to this kind of thing...appointing a second, or a third committee (and so on ad infinitum) to study the recommendations of the previous committee is an old game used to delay, postpone and ultimately eliminate the passion behind an issue. As much as I admire and respect Uncle Ron, he was a master at this. Ron's protégé and UVA BOV lacky Rose didn't use this technique, he simply ignored the faculty. If Alger takes his cue from either of those predecessors and endlessly delays action on the recommendations of his own committees on compensation, all while proposing a costly new sports endeavor...well, then they'll be trouble in the friendly city.

The two weeks following the Oct. 4th meeting will be interesting, and should give us all an indication of what kind of leader Alger really is.

For those of us not following the faculty pay issue, can you elaborate what the point of contention is?

(09-13-2013 08:54 AM)Purplehazed Wrote:  OT: Anyone read the Wash Post article yesterday about UVa mulling over the idea of becoming quasi private so UVa can jack up tuition via accepting more out of state students without VA getting in the way?

I'm not sure why is is making the news now. W&M and UVA have been working towards this for at least 10 years.

Given the gross reduction in state support to higher ed, the desire by well-endowed schools to cut the state strings of control can be understood...however, it would be a huge mistake in my opinion.

Still, the "privatization of public higher ed" has been happening for years...it is now just as hard to gain admission into the elite state schools as it is for many of the privates. Somehow, over the last 40 years, the entire reason for establishing state universities and colleges has been lost, as has the political will to fund our state schools so that their cost can remain far below that of a private school.