(02-20-2018 01:24 PM)TribeInTheBurg Wrote:  

(02-20-2018 01:01 PM)Tribal Wrote:  Not one person said she or any other woman is an inferior candidate.





Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

njalum Wrote:Background-wise, there were no applicants from schools that teach boys and girls? No applicants from the Power 5, the non-power 5, or the G-5? Nobody from Virginia? Nobody from the South?

That quote would indicate njalum thinks she's an inferior candidate. Also, nobody says "diversity hire" as a compliment.

It seems to me that most people here are willing to wait and see at worst, but what you said isn't correct.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using CSNbbs mobile app

Hmm, what do Huge and Rowe have in common that is of course entirely, completely unrelated to some on this board immediately trashing each of them as "diversity hires"...

From a strictly superficial outlook, she does not check off a few of the important boxes for me, no serious work at a co-educational university, similar to W&M, no work at a school with D1 athletics, but she was picked, unanimously, by a group of people much smarter than I, so I am willing to support her and see how she does.

I retain the right, however, to change my mind at a future date...

(02-20-2018 01:30 PM)billymac Wrote:  From a strictly superficial outlook, she does not check off a few of the important boxes for me, no serious work at a co-educational university, similar to W&M, no work at a school with D1 athletics, but she was picked, unanimously, by a group of people much smarter than I, so I am willing to support her and see how she does.

I retain the right, however, to change my mind at a future date...

As always, BillyMac is the voice of reason and I concur.

BUT....as someone who has served on a few Boards (and I assume others have) these type of choices are almost always publicly unanimous. Regardless of what the actual votes were behind closed doors.

A friend pointed out that this could have a very positive impact on athletics if Rowe allows Huge to steer that ship on her own. I'll be excited if that is the case.

(02-20-2018 01:34 PM)Tribe1693 Wrote:  

(02-20-2018 01:30 PM)billymac Wrote:  From a strictly superficial outlook, she does not check off a few of the important boxes for me, no serious work at a co-educational university, similar to W&M, no work at a school with D1 athletics, but she was picked, unanimously, by a group of people much smarter than I, so I am willing to support her and see how she does.

I retain the right, however, to change my mind at a future date...

As always, BillyMac is the voice of reason and I concur.

BUT....as someone who has served on a few Boards (and I assume others have) these type of choices are almost always publicly unanimous. Regardless of what the actual votes were behind closed doors.

I had two things to say in response to Billymac's post; however, Tribe1693 already made cogent comments about Board unanimity. The other thing is that I know Billymac only from this board and I don't know any BOV folks at all (at least, I don't think any of my friends are on the board) but I find it very hard to believe that the Board consists of a group of people much smarter than Billymac!!

(02-20-2018 01:24 PM)TribeInTheBurg Wrote:  

(02-20-2018 01:01 PM)Tribal Wrote:  Not one person said she or any other woman is an inferior candidate.





Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

njalum Wrote:Background-wise, there were no applicants from schools that teach boys and girls? No applicants from the Power 5, the non-power 5, or the G-5? Nobody from Virginia? Nobody from the South?

That quote would indicate njalum thinks she's an inferior candidate. Also, nobody says "diversity hire" as a compliment.

It seems to me that most people here are willing to wait and see at worst, but what you said isn't correct.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using CSNbbs mobile app

So, I think Dr. Rowe is an inferior candidate, and I'm uncomplimentary as to the hire?

Man, you really take the cake.

Thanks for smearing me.

Don't put words in my mouth, or derive meaning / thinking that isn't there.

I don't do it to you.

Diversity was all over the focus group / staff responses as a necessary criteria for the hire. The committee gave the focus groups what they wanted, and Dr. Rowe's biography seems to bear that out, but I can't say that because it's not a compliment? Was it a compliment when the focus groups / staff asked for it? Which is it?

Is it okay for you to say diversity, but not okay for me to say diversity? Where is that in the First Amendment?

Give me a break! This PC poop has got to stop.

And your reading comprehension failed you re: my quote that you posted. The committee reached into liberal New England, to a liberal small girls only liberal arts school, to a school that doesn't have a D-1 athletics program. That doesn't speak to whether a candidate is inferior or not. It speaks to something else. You figure it out.

“Be not afraid of greatness: some are born great, some achieve greatness, and some have greatness thrust upon them.” - Shakespeare

Since Rowe has no D1 athletic background, but likes to win, here’s hoping she accepts Huge’s guidance in creating athletic greatness.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(02-20-2018 01:30 PM)Tribe2011 Wrote:  Hmm, what do Huge and Rowe have in common that is of course entirely, completely unrelated to some on this board immediately trashing each of them as "diversity hires"...

Hey, I accept the committee's decision. I accept the hire. I support the hire.

If I didn't, and I wanted to throw a tantrum, I might ask for a special counsel to look into some Russian collusion.

Look forward to our new president arriving in June. She wasn't selected by a bunch of lightweights...I know two of them fairly well.... so there's no doubt in my mind that she has the outstanding qualities that will make her a success at W&M.

Time will tell how she will do and how Tribe athletics will do, but we all ought to offer her every chance
to succeed.

I didn't read anything into it. You listed criteria you wanted in a candidate that Rowe didn't have. Does that not imply that she's inferior to candidates with those qualities? Somebody referred to the move as a diversity hire and that was seconded. Tribal said there were no people here casting aspersions, and I posted to respond to that. No reading into anything, no deeper meaning.

Honest question though: did the committee go in search of candidates, or did candidates make themselves known to the committee? I don't know which way the search went.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using CSNbbs mobile app

(02-20-2018 11:59 AM)nj alum Wrote:  I'll be honest ... this diversity push has consumed higher education, IMO. It was in the recent athletics survey, for goodness sakes. We all knew that this was coming (I'll duck ... fire away).

Biographically, this has all of the appearances of being a diversity hire.

Our new President has spent the last twenty years at two all-girls colleges with a known liberal orientation. Seriously?

Background-wise, there were no applicants from schools that teach boys and girls? No applicants from the Power 5, the non-power 5, or the G-5? Nobody from Virginia? Nobody from the South?

Never thought I'd see the day that W&M would pull from Smith College.

My gut tells me that we are heading straight for the Patriot.

Having said that-

I watched Dr. Rowe's acceptance speech. I am rooting for her as I really like her background as an historian (not intended to be snide as I was a history major). I liked the speech (for the most part), and I like her public speaking style.

Dr. Rowe is undoubtedly an impressive person, and must have really impressed the committee. I will rely on their judgment, and support the hire.

I am now Samantha Huge's biggest fan ... she didn't become AD to lead W&M to the Patriot.

I am having a very hard time finding anything that you said above that is remotely objectionable. But then again, maybe some of my acquaintances think that I am remotely objectionable.

The use of the term "diversity hire", which I generally take to be pejorative, assumes that a candidate who is not white and male can only get a job because of some overweening, wrongheaded desire to put women and/or people of color who are demonstrably unqualified into positions of authority. So is this particular woman a diversity hire, or are all women diversity hires? If this woman only got the job because of her gender, were there other women who didn't get the job, but were in fact more qualified? Unless we have a list of candidates with their qualifications available to us, I think it would be best to operate from the assumption that the board chose her for reasons other than her gender or at the very least that gender was not the primary factor in the decision. Otherwise, ought we assume that Taylor Reveley was only hired because he was male? Clearly that wasn't the case.

I always find it of interest regarding influences in someone's life.

Her spouse, Bruce Jacobson, has a BS in EE from Penn, MS in Science, Technology and Policy from MIT, and held leadership positions in broadcast engineering at QVC and Comcast.

Her father, Richard R. Rowe, PhD in Clinical Psychology from Columbia, past Associate Dean of Graduate School of Education at Harvard, where he was Chair of the Harvard Center for Studies in Education and Development. Founded and heads Open Learning Exchange:
https://www.ole.org/

Education and technology is strong in the family. Let's hope the role of athletics, beyond her and her spouse's shared love of ultimate frisbee, does not get lost in the overall picture.

Sent from my SM-N910V using CSNbbs mobile app

(02-20-2018 02:37 PM)TribeInTheBurg Wrote:  I didn't read anything into it. You listed criteria you wanted in a candidate that Rowe didn't have. Does that not imply that she's inferior to candidates with those qualities? Somebody referred to the move as a diversity hire and that was seconded. Tribal said there were no people here casting aspersions, and I posted to respond to that. No reading into anything, no deeper meaning.

Honest question though: did the committee go in search of candidates, or did candidates make themselves known to the committee? I don't know which way the search went.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using CSNbbs mobile app

What I said: "Not one person said she or any other woman is an inferior candidate."

Truth.

Rowe's not having some of what I (and maybe NJAlum's) had hoped for in our new president doesn't mean she is inferior. That was never even implied. I wanted a president, like Rev, who placed some emphasis on our athletic department and spoke to that during his or her introduction. I wanted someone with a strong history of raising cash, at a school similar to or bigger than W&M, excellent academics, and some history with Virginia or at least the region. Since everyone loves metaphors, I want a maxed out Toyota Sequoia but I drive an Avalon hybrid. My car isn't inferior. It's fine for me. Her sex means nothing to me and I don't think it's fair to accuse others of taking a massagonist stance without hard evidence to support it.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Did I just hear right on the baseball broadcast that she's at the game? Or did they just mention her as the new hire?

(02-20-2018 04:07 PM)zablenoise Wrote:  Did I just hear right on the baseball broadcast that she's at the game? Or did they just mention her as the new hire?

Think Jay was just welcoming her as the new hire.

Sent from my SM-N910V using CSNbbs mobile app

(02-20-2018 03:49 PM)Tribal Wrote:  

(02-20-2018 02:37 PM)TribeInTheBurg Wrote:  I didn't read anything into it. You listed criteria you wanted in a candidate that Rowe didn't have. Does that not imply that she's inferior to candidates with those qualities? Somebody referred to the move as a diversity hire and that was seconded. Tribal said there were no people here casting aspersions, and I posted to respond to that. No reading into anything, no deeper meaning.

Honest question though: did the committee go in search of candidates, or did candidates make themselves known to the committee? I don't know which way the search went.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using CSNbbs mobile app

What I said: "Not one person said she or any other woman is an inferior candidate."

Truth.

Rowe's not having some of what I (and maybe NJAlum's) had hoped for in our new president doesn't mean she is inferior. That was never even implied. I wanted a president, like Rev, who placed some emphasis on our athletic department and spoke to that during his or her introduction. I wanted someone with a strong history of raising cash, at a school similar to or bigger than W&M, excellent academics, and some history with Virginia or at least the region. Since everyone loves metaphors, I want a maxed out Toyota Sequoia but I drive an Avalon hybrid. My car isn't inferior. It's fine for me. Her sex means nothing to me and I don't think it's fair to accuse others of taking a massagonist stance without hard evidence to support it.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Too bad we could not get Condoleezza Rice. She is smart, is associated with a great school, and LOVES ATHLETICS!! She probably would have joined our boards.

(02-20-2018 04:08 PM)Tribeheart Wrote:  

(02-20-2018 04:07 PM)zablenoise Wrote:  Did I just hear right on the baseball broadcast that she's at the game? Or did they just mention her as the new hire?

Think Jay was just welcoming her as the new hire.

Sent from my SM-N910V using CSNbbs mobile app

Ah. Mea culpa

Most candidates are derived from a search firm with direction for the BOV. So, her attributes were likely a result of criteria from within the schools search committee. UNCW was looking for an outside the box candidate a few years ago. We ended up with a Navy Admiral, a provost and a Dean of Business for WVU that had 30 years experience running Johnson and Johnson. We took the J and J guy. Withing 3 years he's directed a 25% increase in student enrollment and we have over $100 million in construction to handle the growth. He's exactly what we wanted and expected...and more. We'll ben at 20,000 students in the next few years. Oh, and he never misses a basketball game.

(02-20-2018 04:08 PM)WMTRIBE75 Wrote:  

(02-20-2018 03:49 PM)Tribal Wrote:  

(02-20-2018 02:37 PM)TribeInTheBurg Wrote:  I didn't read anything into it. You listed criteria you wanted in a candidate that Rowe didn't have. Does that not imply that she's inferior to candidates with those qualities? Somebody referred to the move as a diversity hire and that was seconded. Tribal said there were no people here casting aspersions, and I posted to respond to that. No reading into anything, no deeper meaning.

Honest question though: did the committee go in search of candidates, or did candidates make themselves known to the committee? I don't know which way the search went.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using CSNbbs mobile app

What I said: "Not one person said she or any other woman is an inferior candidate."

Truth.

Rowe's not having some of what I (and maybe NJAlum's) had hoped for in our new president doesn't mean she is inferior. That was never even implied. I wanted a president, like Rev, who placed some emphasis on our athletic department and spoke to that during his or her introduction. I wanted someone with a strong history of raising cash, at a school similar to or bigger than W&M, excellent academics, and some history with Virginia or at least the region. Since everyone loves metaphors, I want a maxed out Toyota Sequoia but I drive an Avalon hybrid. My car isn't inferior. It's fine for me. Her sex means nothing to me and I don't think it's fair to accuse others of taking a massagonist stance without hard evidence to support it.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Too bad we could not get Condoleezza Rice. She is smart, is associated with a great school, and LOVES ATHLETICS!! She probably would have joined our boards.

+1

And from a school that embraces athletics as an important part of the university.