Any word at all on potential AD yet?

[App91]

WV maybe?

[NewApp]

WV maybe?

Seems like he did have one gig there.

[tjpappy]

I had a short nightmare last night. I dreamed we focused on a politically correct hire.

You listen to the chancellor during the pre-game show? You might be closer to your dream than you think.

I just suspect that when the BOG selects a politically correct hiring experiment as Chancellor, that person also considers experimenting with one themselves. However, I think she realizes what the backlash would be if she tried and failed. Let's hope she makes a good decision, not a PC nor accommodating one. Nothing says she can't do both, but the odds are against it. The talent pool is too small.

If she starts thinking outside the box and makes the wrong choice, can you say "INCOMING?"

So ...
politically correct = female
and correct = male?

[1987mountaineer]

NewApp he is not at Wake but was at one point. He is a Mountaineer just at WVU!

http://www.wvusports.com/staffDirectory ... affID=2331

[spong]

I'm sure with an out-of-state Chancellor now this gentleman won't even get an interview:

Neil McGeachy at Lenoir Rhyne.
http://www.lr.edu/about-us/office-of-th ... l-mcgeachy

Former head coach of the Duke Blue Devils Basketball squad. He has experience at both big-time programs and AD experience at a small-time school. He has built LR to what might be the best DII athletic program in the nation. Even though the football team runs the triple option (the chance that our team will switch to the triple option will cause protests by some of the alumni and mean a slow rebuild for our football team) they have massively over-achieved the last few years making it to the national championship game last year and on track to win it this year. (I wouldn't want App to play them this year)

The basketball program is historically good as well. Plus Mr McGeachy has no set formula for hiring coaches. Some come from other DII schools, some top assistants at FBS schools (like their current football coach) and some from the junior college ranks.

What he is best known for is fundraising. He knows North Carolina particularly Hickory and Charlotte. He can come in day one and hit the ground running in regards to fundraising.

Their football attendance is probably the best in DII and this was the case before they became nationally relevant. The community of Hickory loves the job he's done. The alumni base loves the job he's done. I really think he could be a home run.

[EastHallApp]

I'll preface by saying that I haven't done a ton of study into what backgrounds successful ADs usually come from. With that said, I want someone who has experience at a fairly high-level athletics program - successful G5 or P5.

We definitely need someone with fundraising expertise, especially with corporate donors. But I also want someone who has a solid network with other ADs and has successful experience in coaching searches.

[NewApp]

I had a short nightmare last night. I dreamed we focused on a politically correct hire.

You listen to the chancellor during the pre-game show? You might be closer to your dream than you think.

I just suspect that when the BOG selects a politically correct hiring experiment as Chancellor, that person also considers experimenting with one themselves. However, I think she realizes what the backlash would be if she tried and failed. Let's hope she makes a good decision, not a PC nor accommodating one. Nothing says she can't do both, but the odds are against it. The talent pool is too small.

If she starts thinking outside the box and makes the wrong choice, can you say "INCOMING?"

So ...
politically correct = female
and correct = male?

Not necessarily but they could be part of the decisions. There are many women across the nation who would do a fantastic job, but why limit the pool just to appear politically correct? I wasn't thinking solely of gender, but any criteria we use that limits the pool in the name of political correctness. Besides, where did I mention gender in my original post? Just because the current chancellor is female doesn't necessarily mean she is going around the country looking for a female at the expense of passing over males.

Conversely, if she thinks outside the box and hits a home run....we should all be ecstatic, but at this point in time, she can't afford to make a mistake by limiting her choices Just too risky for our program as well as her career..

[HeffnerIV]

This is largely the problem with Affirmative Action. Whenever minorities and/or women are hired for jobs, qualified or not, they're judged by their race or sex rather than their merit and professional success.

Let's just find the best candidate.

[NewApp]

This is largely the problem with Affirmative Action. Whenever minorities and/or women are hired for jobs, qualified or not, they're judged by their race or sex rather than their merit and professional success.

Let's just find the best candidate.

Totally agree. That's what I was trying to say. Let's forget about PC and Affirmative Action and just find the best person, whether black, white, male, female, old, young, Hispanic, Anglo, Jewish, Christian, etc etc. Don't limit our choices or preferences in any way whatsoever.

[NoLongerLurking]

Quit trying to fire our AD. We are just young! Oh wait...

[huskie3]

Assistant AD at Virginia, he has the background experience. Have no idea what his salary is nor what his demands would be.

[wataugan03]

This is largely the problem with Affirmative Action. Whenever minorities and/or women are hired for jobs, qualified or not, they're judged by their race or sex rather than their merit and professional success.

Let's just find the best candidate.

Totally agree. That's what I was trying to say. Let's forget about PC and Affirmative Action and just find the best person, whether black, white, male, female, old, young, Hispanic, Anglo, Jewish, Christian, etc etc. Don't limit our choices or preferences in any way whatsoever.

You certainly seemed to be indicating our chancellor was chosen, at least in part, because she was a woman. And that because she was chosen due to her gender that she would have some inclination to hire others based on race, gender, etc. I don't think there is any reason to believe either of those statements are true. Also, I'm not buying the intent to wrap all this commentary up in a blanket of political neutrality (not buying it from either of you).

[wataugan03]

I'll preface by saying that I haven't done a ton of study into what backgrounds successful ADs usually come from. With that said, I want someone who has experience at a fairly high-level athletics program - successful G5 or P5.

We definitely need someone with fundraising expertise, especially with corporate donors. But I also want someone who has a solid network with other ADs and has successful experience in coaching searches.

I tend to disagree on coaching searches. I think they are a crapshoot. As long as I see hires that make sense on paper, and nothing that looks reckless (like Capel) I'm happy. Over time it seems like all AD's have a mixed bag of hires, especially if you consider all sports. I'm more interested in fundraising, leadership, and administration. If we can be ethical and professional while generating money then we can weather the bad coaching hires and capitalize on the good ones. We will also be able to attract better coaches and keep them (and their assistants).

[HeffnerIV]

This is largely the problem with Affirmative Action. Whenever minorities and/or women are hired for jobs, qualified or not, they're judged by their race or sex rather than their merit and professional success.

Let's just find the best candidate.

Totally agree. That's what I was trying to say. Let's forget about PC and Affirmative Action and just find the best person, whether black, white, male, female, old, young, Hispanic, Anglo, Jewish, Christian, etc etc. Don't limit our choices or preferences in any way whatsoever.

You certainly seemed to be indicating our chancellor was chosen, at least in part, because she was a woman. And that because she was chosen due to her gender that she would have some inclination to hire others based on race, gender, etc. I don't think there is any reason to believe either of those statements are true. Also, I'm not buying the intent to wrap all this commentary up in a blanket of political neutrality (not buying it from either of you).

I'm not indicating that at all. I'm simply responding to the comments of others who've opined that our Chancellor was chosen (in part) based on a set of gender criteria out of Chapel Hill (I have no idea if that's true). Further, my comments had no intent of neutrality. These are my feelings about AA. If you're choosing candidates based on gender or race, you're doing nothing different than the people who were discriminating against others based on gender and race- Discriminating based on gender and race. The result is that AA selections are judged unfairly from the start.

[MAD Doctor]

Personally, I would not mind that...maybe we could get their OC too. Wonder if we could swing getting him.

Forget the OC; Hire him if we could get their kicker.

[NewApp]

This is largely the problem with Affirmative Action. Whenever minorities and/or women are hired for jobs, qualified or not, they're judged by their race or sex rather than their merit and professional success.

Let's just find the best candidate.

Totally agree. That's what I was trying to say. Let's forget about PC and Affirmative Action and just find the best person, whether black, white, male, female, old, young, Hispanic, Anglo, Jewish, Christian, etc etc. Don't limit our choices or preferences in any way whatsoever.

You certainly seemed to be indicating our chancellor was chosen, at least in part, because she was a woman. And that because she was chosen due to her gender that she would have some inclination to hire others based on race, gender, etc. I don't think there is any reason to believe either of those statements are true. Also, I'm not buying the intent to wrap all this commentary up in a blanket of political neutrality (not buying it from either of you).

"You certainly seemed to be indicating our chancellor was chosen, at least in part, because she was a woman" NOPE. Not at all. It's just that when the PC ball gets rolling, it's hard to stop. So you may have been right on the second part.
I think she may have been chosen partly because she has roots in what used to be our primary mission...that of turning out good educators. Too, she just may have been the best candidate overall.

PS. You can buy or not buy anything you choose. Won't bother me a bit.

[EastHallApp]

I'll preface by saying that I haven't done a ton of study into what backgrounds successful ADs usually come from. With that said, I want someone who has experience at a fairly high-level athletics program - successful G5 or P5.

We definitely need someone with fundraising expertise, especially with corporate donors. But I also want someone who has a solid network with other ADs and has successful experience in coaching searches.

I tend to disagree on coaching searches. I think they are a crapshoot. As long as I see hires that make sense on paper, and nothing that looks reckless (like Capel) I'm happy. Over time it seems like all AD's have a mixed bag of hires, especially if you consider all sports. I'm more interested in fundraising, leadership, and administration. If we can be ethical and professional while generating money then we can weather the bad coaching hires and capitalize on the good ones. We will also be able to attract better coaches and keep them (and their assistants).

That's kind of what I was getting at with coaching searches - you're right, you can't guarantee a successful hire. I just want an AD who will aggressively pursue the top assistants and/or previously successful head coaches who might be out of work and looking for a new job. As opposed to just going with the guy we already know (and that is NOT a dig against Satt, who I thought was the right hire).

Basically, I'm saying my biggest worry is getting someone who's in over his/her head.

[wataugan03]

"You certainly seemed to be indicating our chancellor was chosen, at least in part, because she was a woman" NOPE. Not at all. It's just that when the PC ball gets rolling, it's hard to stop. So you may have been right on the second part.
I think she may have been chosen partly because she has roots in what used to be our primary mission...that of turning out good educators. Too, she just may have been the best candidate overall.

PS. You can buy or not buy anything you choose. Won't bother me a bit.

Your telling me that when you wrote this [the blue portion below] you weren't trying to indicate that you think our Chancellor was hired, at least in part, because she was a woman? Then who exactly were you referencing?

"I just suspect that when the BOG selects a politically correct hiring experiment as Chancellor, that person also considers experimenting with one themselves. However, I think she realizes what the backlash would be if she tried and failed."

[NewApp]

Woops. Fruedian slip. I think her being a woman in today's world gave her an extra half a point that she may just have not needed anyway. Regardless, they, at this point in time, got it right. We'll see after this hire.

[AppSt94]

This is my opinion and is in no way directed at anyone else that has posted on this subject. I hate political correctness. In my opinion, being PC is a direct contradiction to the 1st amendment. I also feel that the best person should be hired for the position. If that person happens to be of a certain gender or race then so be it. In the end whoever the hiring manager or body is should be able to stand up in front of whoever wants to listen and say, we hired this person because they are the best fit for the position. End of story. To imply that there were other factors at play in the hiring is not respectful to the person's abilities.