A Broader Picture

Censored by Laurie · October 21, 2015

*** REDACTED. APPARENTLY MY ATTEMPT AT HUMOR AND PERHAPS GUILTING A BUCK OR TWO OUT OF YOU FOR MY PREFERRED CHARITABLE CAUSE WAS TAKEN FAR TOO LITERALLY BY SOME AS BEING AN ACTUAL INDICTMENT OF THEIR OWN PHILANTHROPY AND PRIORITIES. THAT WAS NEVER MY INTENT...QUITE FRANKLY, I DON'T CARE IN THE LEAST HOW YOU CHOSE TO SPEND YOU MONEY. I REGRET IT DISTRACTING FROM THE OTHERWISE MEANINGFUL AND THOUGHT-OUT POST THAT REMAINS ***

how about we all try and take in a bit broader view of what the AD/University dynamic seems to be right now...and perhaps viewing it at least slightly dispassionately, determine whether or not its a bad thing on the whole.

to do so, we're assuming certain rumors/whispers are fact...I assume everything on here to be such, but if certain aspects of this have actual confirmation, feel free to correct me
   - RV has let's say a really generous baker's dozen of large donors who in some capacity want him to continue as AD...be it personal or professional.
   - RV has approximately 18 months remaining on his current contract and if terminated would be owed at least a 6 figure buy-out
   - a hiring committee and/or Prez Smatresk will be anywhere from intimately involved in to largely responsible for hiring the next football coach

again, if this is all true...the way this all reads to me is that Smatresk has heard the complaints and/or adequately reviewed the RV's success rate on and records of the past money-sport hires and simply does not trust RV to make an adequate hire and he feels that either acting his own capacity or that of an outside committee can do a better job. I think you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone here who disagrees with that assessment.

most, however, would also find the above grounds enough for RV's termination. Smatresk apparently disagrees...perhaps not on principle, if only pragmatically and fiscally. the approach he seems to be taking is to let RV see out his current deal, but ostensibly as little more than a figurehead and fundraiser, even if it means just glad-handing a select few (3+ million in novelty checks really is not anything for UNT to sneeze at).

My guess is, if I do have the RV contract timeline right, that in the next six months or so you'll see a new hire with some new and important-sounding title announced in the AD...Director of Athletic Center Ops, or some-such...this hire will likely have crossed career paths with Smatresk at some point and will either be RV's heir-apparent or a baby-sitter for the position until RV's deal expires and Smatresk makes a permanent hire.

RV wasn't Smatresk hire so he likely feels neither loyalty or culpability to his being here...however he has also likely received the RV-sell-spiel and/or can see the strides and improvements he has made over his tenure...new stadium, new facilities, small-sport success...to Prez, it's certainly not enough to merit a new contract, but perhaps it is enough to let RV walk out with dignity at the end of his deal.

essentially...Prez tactfully works to fix the mess in the athletic department...RV steps aside more or less on his terms...new AD's first deed is to name some new building or soccer field after RV. everyone's pride and face are saved.

so...now tell me why this is disastrous...***REDACTED AS WELL. SINCE ALL HUMOR IS DEAD***

Edited October 21, 2015 by Censored by Laurie

Tyler Maryak · October 21, 2015

It seems like this post is intended to bait people into an argument. Why?

Eagle-96 · October 21, 2015

I simply don't want RV to have ANY input into this coaching hire. None zero zilch.

Army of Dad · October 21, 2015

It seems like this post is intended to bait people into an argument. Why?

CBL doing CBL type things.

GreenTexan13 · October 21, 2015

It seems like this post is intended to bait people into an argument. Why?

That's because he is trying to start an argument.

Green P1 · October 21, 2015

I hope you drown.

Green92 · October 21, 2015

It's one of a handful of posts on this board that weren't full of hate and/or whining. Well said. Carry on, CBL.

Quoner · October 21, 2015

STFU. It's drama queen time and no one is going to be happy until everyone gets to feel more special and angrier than everyone else. I hope those sick kids rise up against you and beat you to death with your own limbs.

Censored by Laurie · October 21, 2015

CBL doing CBL type things.

I really wasn't trying to play provocateur...save for a few bits that I've since redacted.

I think I have a pretty valid view of what is currently taking place in the AD hierarchy...and I'm honestly wondering if it's not a terrible thing.

Army of Dad · October 21, 2015

I really wasn't trying to play provocateur...save for a few bits that I've since redacted.
I think I have a pretty valid view of what is currently taking place in the AD hierarchy...and I'm honestly wondering if it's not a terrible thing.

Oh I figured it was partly an honest question and and attempt to stir the pot.

Censored by Laurie · October 21, 2015

I hope those sick kids rise up against you and beat you to death with your own limbs.

We got this one kid, Mongo... He's got a forehead like a drive-in movie theatre, but he's a good ship. So we don't bust his chops too much. So, one day Mongo gets out of his cage...

I simply don't want RV to have ANY input into this coaching hire. None zero zilch.

and if he doesn't, yet keeps milking the "17" (gotta come up with a better name)...how does it negatively impact the athletic department to have him see out his contract?

MeanGreenHoops · October 21, 2015

@Censored by Laurie It would appear for a few minutes while composing your post you forgot how the internet works. Your post sounds plausible. which is why is it clearly wroNG!!!!

Ron Paul 2012!

Eagle-96 · October 21, 2015

and if he doesn't, yet keeps milking the "17" (gotta come up with a better name)...how does it negatively impact the athletic department to have him see out his contract?

My issue is that if he is in the department he will have a say in the hiring. This hire is too important to let that be the case.

UNT90 · October 21, 2015

My issue is that if he is in the department he will have a say in the hiring. This hire is too important to let that be the case.

this.

Army of Dad · October 21, 2015

and if he doesn't, yet keeps milking the "17" (gotta come up with a better name)...how does it negatively impact the athletic department to have him see out his contract?

The main problem with that strategy is that it would have to be secret. Publicly stating that's the plan would make us look even more silly/small time/stupid than the current way RV runs the department. Keeping it secret it only feeds the toxic environment that has developed.

Making what should be fairly easy changes (like fixing the ticket office and lighting a fire under whoever is in charge of the MGC) would also be tough since the heads of those groups will still see RV at the top and figure business as usual is ok.

I see little benefit and more harm in your scenario. That's like my opinion man.

Censored by Laurie · October 21, 2015

My issue is that if he is in the department he will have a say in the hiring. This hire is too important to let that be the case.

ok...let's run on the assumption this was Smatresk ultimatum..."Rick, you have two choices...I can relieve you of your duties, pay you the buy out I'm contractually obligated to and effort to make certain your name is in no way associated with the work you've done here over 15 years...or, you can cede your responsibilities in this and future coaching searches as you direct your attention to fundraising efforts over your last 18 months...at which point you go out on your own terms, pride in tact, and we recognize your body of work somehow in the future."

hell, maybe even the significance of that naming honor is determined by how much he raises over 18 months...$10M and you get "The Rick Villareal Baseball Complex"...twenty bucks and you get "Rick Villareal Port-O-John Row"

FirefightnRick · October 21, 2015

My issue is that if he is in the department he will have a say in the hiring.......

...among everything else.

Or...maybe people enjoy standing outside the Super Pit, missing the first half of the LSU game while staff members slowly print more tickets...or maybe folks enjoy standing in line at Will Call at SMU for their tickets that never got sent to them...or.......?

Rick

Edited October 21, 2015 by FirefightnRick

Eagle-96 · October 21, 2015

ok...let's run on the assumption this was Smatresk ultimatum..."Rick, you have two choices...I can relieve you of your duties, pay you the buy out I'm contractually obligated to and effort to make certain your name is in no way associated with the work you've done here over 15 years...or, you can cede your responsibilities in this and future coaching searches as you direct your attention to fundraising efforts over your last 18 months...at which point you go out on your own terms, pride in tact, and we recognize your body of work somehow in the future."
hell, maybe even the significance of that naming honor is determined by how much he raises over 18 months...$10M and you get "The Rick Villareal Baseball Complex"...twenty bucks and you get "Rick Villareal Port-O-John Row"

I want to be clear. RV absolutely deserves credit for certain things that were accomplished during his tenure(athletic center, athletic village, Title 9 compliance). He ALSO deserves blame for things that didn't go so well(coaching hires, MGC enrollment, too many instances of the average fan being $hit on in interactions with RV and his staff for me to count). I am not out for blood and an erasing of RV's athletic department existence. I am out for kaizen. I am out for accountability from the administration. I am out for the powers that be to stop throwing good money after bad. I am out for not being the butt of jokes on national sports outlets.

UNT90 · October 21, 2015

ok...let's run on the assumption this was Smatresk ultimatum..."Rick, you have two choices...I can relieve you of your duties, pay you the buy out I'm contractually obligated to and effort to make certain your name is in no way associated with the work you've done here over 15 years...or, you can cede your responsibilities in this and future coaching searches as you direct your attention to fundraising efforts over your last 18 months...at which point you go out on your own terms, pride in tact, and we recognize your body of work somehow in the future."
hell, maybe even the significance of that naming honor is determined by how much he raises over 18 months...$10M and you get "The Rick Villareal Baseball Complex"...twenty bucks and you get "Rick Villareal Port-O-John Row"

And then you have a new AD who didn't hire the coach he wanted.

Lunacy.

Fire RV now. Search quick, hard, and fast for a new AD by season's end, then let him make the hire.

A committee has no accountability. The new AD has no accountability if a committee does the hiring.

I'm sick of no one ever being accountable for anything when it comes to this AD, and particularly coaching hires.?

Censored by Laurie · October 21, 2015

And then you have a new AD who didn't hire the coach he wanted.
Lunacy.
Fire RV now. Search quick, hard, and fast for a new AD by season's end, then let him make the hire.
A committee has no accountability. The new AD has no accountability if a committee does the hiring.
I'm sick of no one ever being accountable for anything when it comes to this AD, and particularly coaching hires.?

is that a question. or a statement?

and won't the new AD already be inheriting about a dozen coaches he didn't hire?

and you see no potential problems from a quick, hard and fast search?

TheColonyEagle · October 21, 2015

So in CBL's scenario, I guess the question the Prez would have to ask (as it solely relates to fund raising):

Does the current money he believes being raised by RV and any future money he thinks RV can raise outweigh any potential money a new AD could raise? Are we leaving money on the table with RV running this department? If he left would the 17 leave? Would 8 of them leave and 9 stay? Could we replace those 17 with 34? Or replace those 17 with 1 that could make up for the 17?

It's a little bit of the devil you know vs don't know.

untjim1995 · October 21, 2015

I will say this...knowing this place, we will hire someone who will make RV look like Deloss Dodds if he got fired here.

But I'd take the chance...

Eagle-96 · October 21, 2015

So in CBL's scenario, I guess the question the Prez would have to ask (as it solely relates to fund raising):
Does the current money he believes being raised by RV and any future money he thinks RV can raise outweigh any potential money a new AD could raise? Are we leaving money on the table with RV running this department? If he left would the 17 leave? Would 8 of them leave and 9 stay? Could we replace those 17 with 34? Or replace those 17 with 1 that could make up for the 17?
It's a little bit of the devil you know vs don't know.

It needs to be a clean break. If the administration thinks that whatever future AD candidate cannot outraise RV then we probably shouldn't consider him. We also can't have the administration let 10, 15, 17, whatever hold the department hostage. If all 17 say they are leaving if RV leaves and Neal caves then we are doomed. We will be forever beholden to the 17.

forevereagle · October 21, 2015

is that a question. or a statement?

I see what you did there.

and you see no potential problems from a quick, hard and fast search?

Isn't that how we like our searches?

UNT90 · October 21, 2015

is that a question. or a statement?
and won't the new AD already be inheriting about a dozen coaches he didn't hire?
and you see no potential problems from a quick, hard and fast search?

AD is much different than head coach. No waiting for the coach to complete a season. I think this could get done first week of Dec. If you are still awaiting a thorough background check, give the guy input in the decision pending final hire status.

RV should have been gone the day after DMac, but as usual this university can't get things right with athletics.