Welcome Coach Fickell

NigelUno wrote:

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:If there is anything i learn from this is do not trust jim comp. what a doofus

Comp probably should have understood there are a few layers to a job hire at MSU. I think a lot of people were excited that we were going to pull this off and let that excitement get ahead of them.

It's also entirely possible that Fickell changed his mind on Sunday night/Monday morning.

Turtleneck wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

Comp probably should have understood there are a few layers to a job hire at MSU. I think a lot of people were excited that we were going to pull this off and let that excitement get ahead of them.

It's also entirely possible that Fickell changed his mind on Sunday night/Monday morning.

Is Comp brand new at this? Serious question. I thought he had been doing this for awhile.

Dendrobates wrote:I don't see how I can justify renewing my football tickets

Heathens '87 wrote:

NigelUno wrote:For sure.  Nardog and Tucker look great to their fans.  They publicly turned us down.  The only thing better for them would be if their agents got them raises out of it.  Saleh not even wanting an interview was a little odd (unless he's just totally locked into the NFL)...why not just go through the interview process (unless he knew it was a waste of time because a BoT member tipped him off)?    

Saleh had his name floated because he had coached here under Bobby.  He's been a NFL guy for 15 years, DC for a Super Bowl team, and he knows his shot at a NFL head coaching job is soon.  The search consultant asks for permission, he declines and what is more interesting is that this comes out publicly through the 49ers.  I'd say he sent a message to the NFL regarding his intentions.  He could've done so quietly....it's worth noting that he didn't.....

Dendrobates wrote:I don't see how I can justify renewing my football tickets

NigelUno wrote:

Heathens '87 wrote:

Saleh had his name floated because he had coached here under Bobby.  He's been a NFL guy for 15 years, DC for a Super Bowl team, and he knows his shot at a NFL head coaching job is soon.  The search consultant asks for permission, he declines and what is more interesting is that this comes out publicly through the 49ers.  I'd say he sent a message to the NFL regarding his intentions.  He could've done so quietly....it's worth noting that he didn't.....

Mosallam is a big fan.

[tw]1224029833065304065[/tw]

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:

Dendrobates wrote:I don't see how I can justify renewing my football tickets

We already agreed to giving up our tickets before this shitahow started. Still tailgating though.

We'll pick up single game tix for the few we want to go to for muuuuuuch cheaper.

Rocinante wrote:

MattyFresh wrote:Alright here are some scenarios I see.

Scenario 1: Tressel blows past expectations and wins the CFP in year one. Sign him to lifetime contract. Hey Pepto Bismol!
Scenario 2: 6-7 As we skate by into mediocrity, the board accepts this. Removes interim, 3 yr. contract, we continue to float around .500, diarrhea poop all day.
Scenario 3: Tank for Tua, poop.
Scenario 4: Sub .500 year with Tressel at the helm, the year is full of strong evaluation of candidates that can come in guns blazing and will want the job, then we sign said guy we want, hope is restored and I never pooped my pants.
Scenario 5: Poop our pants
Scenario 6: Rush a hire, like Bielema and Butch Jones to save "face"? Complete culture shift into the unknown, most likely this will also result in tons of poop in our pants.
Scenario 7: "I'm sure that we can handle this situation maturely, just like the responsible adults we are. Isn't that right, Mr. Poopy Pants?"

I see pants pooping in our future.

steveschneider wrote:

Nordic wrote:In regards to Heathens post...

I'm going with all of the above. Complete leadership vacuum all around. And we had warning signs with the Blackwell case. This should of never seen the light of day. You either reach a settlement go on the attack and counter sue/smear his ass back. I know he surd Dants, and not MSU, but MSU could made this go away.

You think this happens in Ann Arbor? No chance.

Point fingers at Beekman, BoT or Stanely. They are all equally responsible for not getting on the same page BEFORE Dantonio retired. Even with the awkward timing, there was time to get the plan down and EVERYONE on board. Either allow Beekman full autonomy or set the ground rules  Hell, this was happening eventually. Either this year (signs back in August) or in a year or two. How the fuck were rules of engagement not set the second Beekman and Stanely were hired officially? You have too aging coaches at the end of their career. The time is not after Dantonio retired.

I seriously thought they had the plan on lockdown this morning. I was wrong.

Fickell saw what a mess our leadership is. Saw Dantonio getting sued, looked at our roster, looked at his, looked at his kids and said, "nah, I'm good". Hell, the fucker didn't even bother to leave his house for the interview. Smart man. Fickell comes if our house is in order. It is not.

Man, I really wanted to believe we were past this, but we are no.better than before Nassar in terms of leadership.

I'm somewhere between anger and bargaining.

Regarding the Blackwell thing, had a similar thought today. Probably time we open up the check book and settle. Don't know what else to say but the lawyers are out and it's creating uncertainty.

MSU addict wrote:

steveschneider wrote:

Regarding the Blackwell thing, had a similar thought today. Probably time we open up the check book and settle. Don't know what else to say but the lawyers are out and it's creating uncertainty.

Fuck that. It is time to go on the offensive.

MSU addict wrote:This, gentlemen (and lady) is the new public face of MSU football:







I wish I could tell you that I searched for a bad picture of Knake, but no, that is her official BOT photo (love the blue).

I submit that a majority of our current board would rather not even field a football team.  

This is our penance for Nassar.  We probably deserve it.

Turtleneck wrote:I'm sorry women are allowed to occupy positions of power.

DWags wrote:So, not joking, on my kids, as a donor, a graduate, a husband of a graduate a father of a graduate (and letter winner) and the father of a current student, I wrote a letter to the board tonight. Just to let them know my disappointment in the university as a whole. Not that we didn't get a specific coach, but, what looks, at first blush a completely unorganized administration and hobbled search for what, in my opinion was a big hire.

Yes, I emphasized donor grad father of grad husband of grad. Gave our names, our colleges and the year we graduated. I got the robotic response. I wasn't pissy, but I did ask three questions I hoped they could answer. You can now laugh at me. But I actually felt good writing that letter. I ended with my thought that it was my belief that the board was elected to set policy not try to insert themselves into the daily operations.

MSU addict wrote:

Turtleneck wrote:I'm sorry women are allowed to occupy positions of power.

I understand that my post will simply be viewed as misogyny.  

Refute the fact that our BOT of trustees is comprised of people who are more concerned with a political agenda than hiring a football coach who will win games.

As I said, this is our penance for Nassar.

Turtleneck wrote:

MSU addict wrote:
I understand that my post will simply be viewed as misogyny.  

Refute the fact that our BOT of trustees is comprised of people who are more concerned with a political agenda than hiring a football coach who will win games.

As I said, this is our penance for Nassar.

Yet you selected only the female members of the BoT and did not include the three males. So yeah, misogyny. Besides, nowhere in the mission of the university does it mention football. Get a grip, bro.

Turtleneck wrote:

MSU addict wrote:
I understand that my post will simply be viewed as misogyny.  

Refute the fact that our BOT of trustees is comprised of people who are more concerned with a political agenda than hiring a football coach who will win games.

As I said, this is our penance for Nassar.

Yet you selected only the female members of the BoT and did not include the three males. So yeah, misogyny. Besides, nowhere in the mission of the university does it mention football. Get a grip, bro.

NigelUno wrote:

Turtleneck wrote:

Yet you selected only the female members of the BoT and did not include the three males. So yeah, misogyny. Besides, nowhere in the mission of the university does it mention football. Get a grip, bro.

Then it probably doesn't mention messing up Coaching Searches either.

Turtleneck wrote:

MSU addict wrote:
I understand that my post will simply be viewed as misogyny.  

Refute the fact that our BOT of trustees is comprised of people who are more concerned with a political agenda than hiring a football coach who will win games.

As I said, this is our penance for Nassar.

Yet you selected only the female members of the BoT and did not include the three males. So yeah, misogyny. Besides, nowhere in the mission of the university does it mention football. Get a grip, bro.

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

Then it probably doesn't mention messing up Coaching Searches either.

Could you explain in detail how the BoT messed up this coaching search?

NigelUno wrote:

Turtleneck wrote:

Yet you selected only the female members of the BoT and did not include the three males. So yeah, misogyny.  Besides, nowhere in the mission of the university does it mention football. Get a grip, bro.

Then it probably doesn't mention messing up Coaching Searches either.  

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:

Could you explain in detail how the BoT messed up this coaching search?

Personally i think the attitude of MSU addict and others going after these BOT women is pretty representative of the culture that sources said fickell wanted to avoid.

MSU addict wrote:

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:

Personally i think the attitude of MSU addict and others going after these BOT women is pretty representative of the culture that sources said fickell wanted to avoid.

Obviously, I am the reason that Fickell is not our coach. I feel so powerful, I hope it does not go to my head.

MSU addict wrote:

Turtleneck wrote:

Yet you selected only the female members of the BoT and did not include the three males. So yeah, misogyny. Besides, nowhere in the mission of the university does it mention football. Get a grip, bro.

Fair enough, I should have included the whole board.

If the mission of the University is exclusive of football, should they assert themselves in a coaching search?

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:

Could you explain in detail how the BoT messed up this coaching search?

Personally i think the attitude of MSU addict and others going after these BOT women is pretty representative of the culture that sources said fickell wanted to avoid.

Turtleneck wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

Then it probably doesn't mention messing up Coaching Searches either.

Maybe it is bad precedent to let the athletic department do as they please in respect to hiring university employees and contracts, especially given that they BoT has a fiduciary duty.

Turtleneck wrote:

MSU addict wrote:Fair enough, I should have included the whole board.

If the mission of the University is exclusive of football, should they assert themselves in a coaching search?

The mission does not exclude the BoT from playing a role in this kind personnel decision, nor do the bylaws or policies of the BoT. However, my point is the mission of the university is not to field a championship football program coached by a person the fans will worship. Unfortunately, in the U.S., we have reduced the value of higher education at our major institutions to sportz.

Turtleneck wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

Then it probably doesn't mention messing up Coaching Searches either.  

Maybe it is bad precedent to let the athletic department do as they please in respect to hiring university employees and contracts, especially given that the BoT has a fiduciary duty.

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:

MSU addict wrote:Obviously, I am the reason that Fickell is not our coach.  I feel so powerful, I hope it does not go to my head.  

Look up representative in the dictionary and then strawman

MSU addict wrote:

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:

Personally i think the attitude of MSU addict and others going after these BOT women is pretty representative of the culture that sources said fickell wanted to avoid.

Obviously, I am the reason that Fickell is not our coach. I feel so powerful, I hope it does not go to my head.

NigelUno wrote:

Turtleneck wrote:

Maybe it is bad precedent to let the athletic department do as they please in respect to hiring university employees and contracts, especially given that the BoT has a fiduciary duty.

Are Coaches paid by the school or the Athletic Department? (Honestly asking.)

MSU addict wrote:

Turtleneck wrote:

Maybe it is bad precedent to let the athletic department do as they please in respect to hiring university employees and contracts, especially given that they BoT has a fiduciary duty.

That is a valid point. Except the whole "fiduciary duty" thing. Maybe the AD did over step his authority in a coaching search.

Here is what I know. Fickell will not be the next football coach at MSU. Somehow we fucked that up. I am angry about that.

Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges wrote:
Under state statutory and common law, officers and board members of corporations (including nonprofit corporations and public bodies that operate colleges and universities) are fiduciaries and must act in accordance with the f iduciary duties of care, loyalty, and obedience. What is a fiduciary? Legally, a fiduciary relationship is one of trust or confidence between parties. A fiduciary is someone who has special responsibilities in connection with the administration, investment, monitoring, and distribution of property—in this case, the charitable or public assets of the institution. These assets include not just the buildings and grounds and endowment, but also intangibles, such as the reputation of the institution and its role in the ILLUSTRATIVE QUESTIONS FOR GOVERNING BOARDS TO CONSIDER 1. Does the board understand the elements of the duty of care, the duty of loyalty, and the duty of obedience? How is our board educated on these principles? 2. Do board members understand how their f iduciary duties relate to their particular responsibilities in overseeing the college or university? How does our board discuss these matters? 3. Do board members understand the ways in which they could be exposed to personal liability for breaching their f iduciary duties? What areas of liability exposure are of greatest concern to our board members? community. A college or university board member or officer has duties to the institution under the law that a faculty member, a student, or an administrator does not.

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:

MSU addict wrote:Obviously, I am the reason that Fickell is not our coach.  I feel so powerful, I hope it does not go to my head.  

NigelUno wrote:

Turtleneck wrote:

Maybe it is bad precedent to let the athletic department do as they please in respect to hiring university employees and contracts, especially given that the BoT has a fiduciary duty.

Are Coaches paid by the school or the Athletic Department? (Honestly asking.)

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

Then it probably doesn't mention messing up Coaching Searches either.

Could you explain in detail how the BoT messed up this coaching search?

Turtleneck wrote:

MSU addict wrote:That is a valid point. Except the whole "fiduciary duty" thing. Maybe the AD did over step his authority in a coaching search.

Here is what I know. Fickell will not be the next football coach at MSU. Somehow we fucked that up. I am angry about that.

They have a fiduciary duty. They must act in, or protect, the public interest. This duty suggests the possibility of their involvement before a recommendation is made for their approval.

Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges wrote:
Under state statutory and common law, officers and board members of corporations (including nonprofit corporations and public bodies that operate colleges and universities) are fiduciaries and must act in accordance with the f iduciary duties of care, loyalty, and obedience. What is a fiduciary? Legally, a fiduciary relationship is one of trust or confidence between parties. A fiduciary is someone who has special responsibilities in connection with the administration, investment, monitoring, and distribution of property—in this case, the charitable or public assets of the institution. These assets include not just the buildings and grounds and endowment, but also intangibles, such as the reputation of the institution and its role in the ILLUSTRATIVE QUESTIONS FOR GOVERNING BOARDS TO CONSIDER 1. Does the board understand the elements of the duty of care, the duty of loyalty, and the duty of obedience? How is our board educated on these principles? 2. Do board members understand how their f iduciary duties relate to their particular responsibilities in overseeing the college or university? How does our board discuss these matters? 3. Do board members understand the ways in which they could be exposed to personal liability for breaching their f iduciary duties? What areas of liability exposure are of greatest concern to our board members? community. A college or university board member or officer has duties to the institution under the law that a faculty member, a student, or an administrator does not.

Honestly, I just don't think blame can be assigned to the BoT by itself. I honestly do not care all that much, but if I did, I would say there is plenty of blame to share.

MSU addict wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

Are Coaches paid by the school or the Athletic Department? (Honestly asking.)

Football coaches (coaches who make a lot of money) have very complicated contracts. Generally their pay checks are complex and includes money form many outside sources (like shoe companies).

MSU BoT Bylaws wrote:Outside Employment. A full-time member of the faculty or staff may not be employed for remuneration by agencies other than the University except under the established rules of the Board and with the approval of the appropriate University authorities. In all cases there shall be no conflict of interest between the activity of the faculty or staff member and the University function. Any proceeds realized from such activity may be proportioned between the University and the faculty member where institutional time and/or facilities are involved.