Orr to Return

[MacGuy]

Just read the stories below and you have your answer on why they are keeping Orrfor another year. Dr. Mazey is in her second year and would be crucified if she now fires Orr and his assistants and eats their salary after the tough choices she had to make with the faculty. That could total as much as $400k or more?

So maybe we are too hard on Christopher here and the edict is coming from the president? Unless we find a donor willing to step up and write that check for the athletic department.


http://www.toledoblade.com/Education/20 ... -fall.html


http://www.toledoblade.com/Education/20 ... -jobs.html

Unless it's Duke, pretty much every assistant has a one year contract. Same with football, unless it's a coordinator with a special contract. If Orr was let go, BG would not have to pay assistants anything. Their contracts usually run until July.

[Globetrotter]

When Rollo cited the news articles about the faculty cuts I think he was spot on. The faculty went into conniption fits when Clawson received his extension, threw tantrums when Mazey announced renovations of academic buildings, and started crying incessantly when raises were handed out last summer and the faculty hadn't been able to negotiate a new contract. If Orr were released and we agreed to pay out the remainder of his contract, the faculty union would start burning down campus. Mazey cannot put herself and her staff behind the 8-ball like that in contract negotiations. Is this the best choice for the basketball team? No. However, this is the correct choice politically when it comes to the University as a whole.

It seems like all of the other things could have waited and we should have done this first.

[Globetrotter]

The faculty are pretty smart people. They mostly have PHDs. I think that they could realize that a well run basketball program can actually provide revenue and not be a drain. This isn't women's lacrosse we are talking about.

[hammb]

The faculty are pretty smart people. They mostly have PHDs. I think that they could realize that a well run basketball program can actually provide revenue and not be a drain. This isn't women's lacrosse we are talking about.

I think if you did a straw poll of the faculty you'd find that a vast majority of them would want athletics abolished completely. I'd be pretty surprised if more than a third of them would want to see an increased financial commitment to athletics.

That being said, I don't agree with them. If you're going to have athletics you should commit to it.

[bgsufalcon24]

This whole deal has reminded me that BG has some very backward people when it comes to where athletics stand in the bigger framework of a university, as well as the concept of economics.

I agree 100% with hammb, if you're going to have an athletics program at the D-I and D-IA/FBS levels, you need to go full bore and do the things necessary to have good attendance and good fan and community relations, because that makes money. To keep bad coaches around just because you signed them for a certain number of years means that you will lose fan and community interest in the teams, which means lost revenue and lost potential to gain revenue over the prior season.

A number of people here have run the numbers, and though they are just estimates, it doesn't surprise me that keeping bad coaches ultimately hurts you financially in the long run. But of course, many of the townies, and especially the professors at BGSU, are wrapped up in their own self-interest and see HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS PAID TO BUY OUT A COACH!!! ZOMG!!! These folks are either incapable of seeing the bigger picture or simply don't want to see it. I bet you cold hard cash that the same people who are against Orr being bought out are the same people that were against building the Stroh Center. After all, that project was MILLIONS!@!

[hammb]

I bet you cold hard cash that the same people who are against Orr being bought out are the same people that were against building the Stroh Center. After all, that project was MILLIONS!@!

I'm trying to figure out why you'd commit millions to a brand new basketball facility and then fail to commit a few hundred thousand to field a competitive basketball program.

It's very annoying to see a 4500 seat arena sitting less than 1/3 full on most nights.

[Warthog]

I bet you cold hard cash that the same people who are against Orr being bought out are the same people that were against building the Stroh Center. After all, that project was MILLIONS!@!

I'm trying to figure out why you'd commit millions to a brand new basketball facility and then fail to commit a few hundred thousand to field a competitive basketball program.

It's very annoying to see a 4500 seat arena sitting less than 1/3 full on most nights.

Couldn't agree more. BGSU could have saved millions and just rented out the Community Center for games. Why invest in a state of the art facility but not a state of the art product?

[Globetrotter]

The faculty are pretty smart people. They mostly have PHDs. I think that they could realize that a well run basketball program can actually provide revenue and not be a drain. This isn't women's lacrosse we are talking about.

I think if you did a straw poll of the faculty you'd find that a vast majority of them would want athletics abolished completely. I'd be pretty surprised if more than a third of them would want to see an increased financial commitment to athletics.

That being said, I don't agree with them. If you're going to have athletics you should commit to it.

The head of that group was one of my favorite professors in college and he posts right on these boards.

[falcfan]

I would be less embarrassed about my alma mater having no athletic department at all than having it run like this. And I feel bad for guys like Sebo, Frack, and the Strohs because they look like they've sunk their money into the worst investment since people bought Enron stock at $90 a share.

[BGWriter]

When Rollo cited the news articles about the faculty cuts I think he was spot on. The faculty went into conniption fits when Clawson received his extension, threw tantrums when Mazey announced renovations of academic buildings, and started crying incessantly when raises were handed out last summer and the faculty hadn't been able to negotiate a new contract. If Orr were released and we agreed to pay out the remainder of his contract, the faculty union would start burning down campus. Mazey cannot put herself and her staff behind the 8-ball like that in contract negotiations. Is this the best choice for the basketball team? No. However, this is the correct choice politically when it comes to the University as a whole.

What a bunch of BS.

So we're supposed to let the faculty and political correctness guide how we run the university now?

How about we run it like a business, instead?

I'd bet you cold, hard cash that running it as you've described is why there are tons of cash problems and contract issues with the faculty now. There have probably been concessions made that should never have been included in past contracts because they weren't affordable -- but were included because of factors that had nothing to do with higher education or making BGSU a better place for students.

I've worked in these types of environments and they are driven by selfish greed and not what's best for the organization as a whole.

If Mazey made this decision because of faculty pressures and because she's AFRAID of how it will make her look in negotiating something that is TOTALLY UNRELATED to the academic issues facing the university, then perhaps BGSU has selected the wrong person to lead it.

I'd prefer someone who has a stronger spine and understands the broader picture.

[Globetrotter]

When Rollo cited the news articles about the faculty cuts I think he was spot on. The faculty went into conniption fits when Clawson received his extension, threw tantrums when Mazey announced renovations of academic buildings, and started crying incessantly when raises were handed out last summer and the faculty hadn't been able to negotiate a new contract. If Orr were released and we agreed to pay out the remainder of his contract, the faculty union would start burning down campus. Mazey cannot put herself and her staff behind the 8-ball like that in contract negotiations. Is this the best choice for the basketball team? No. However, this is the correct choice politically when it comes to the University as a whole.

What a bunch of BS.

So we're supposed to let the faculty and political correctness guide how we run the university now?

How about we run it like a business, instead?

I'd bet you cold, hard cash that running it as you've described is why there are tons of cash problems and contract issues with the faculty now. There have probably been concessions made that should never have been included in past contracts because they weren't affordable -- but were included because of factors that had nothing to do with higher education or making BGSU a better place for students.

I've worked in these types of environments and they are driven by selfish greed and not what's best for the organization as a whole.

If Mazey made this decision because of faculty pressures and because she's AFRAID of how it will make her look in negotiating something that is TOTALLY UNRELATED to the academic issues facing the university, then perhaps BGSU has selected the wrong person to lead it.

I'd prefer someone who has a stronger spine and understands the broader picture.

I know nothing about Mazey or this situation. My only connection to BG is Basketball and Football at this point. But it does seem that they are not looking at the big picture here and "directionally" we are not thinking about this the right way.

Do you want a Basketball team that loses as little revenue as possible and may in fact make a buck but you will have to momentarily frustrate the teachers or do you want a program that is a leach to the University funds and professors that are still frustrated at you?

[Globetrotter]

Greg Fundraiser has overseen two debacles in the last two days.

[It's the Journey...]

Ummm, this is the FIRST contract with the faculty union and is hasn't even been finalized after 2 years!!

Let's look at running BGSU like a business. If that's done, say goodbye to athletics completely. It is a drain on the University budget each and every year. This is true of MOST DIVISION I PROGRAMS. More than 50% of the general fee goes to keep it floating and they want more while advertising "FREE ADMISSION" to students. IT ISN'T FREE!! If athletics needs to take a knock every now and then to do what is in the best interests of the University as whole, then so be it. BGSU exists to educate students, not to play sports. Now the two CAN and SHOULD exist together and when they do everyone benefits in terms of enrollment gains, finances, and things like that. But when finances are tough I expect athletics to take their fair share of cuts in order to balance the budget. There are only two ways to change that reality. First, raise enough money to endow the entire department. Then it does not make a difference how bad a season is, the funding is there. And second, make sure the department is self sufficient through fundraising and ticket prices. Either way, open your wallet.

I don't like the thought of having Louis Orr here another season but I dislike the thought of having a donor or donors write a buy out check even more. That is a slippery slope to head down. You are saying alumni who want a coach gone, and have the means to pay for it, can dictate HR decisions within the department. Allow donations to the program, facility, or department but do not allow donations to buy out coaches. I want the AD in charge of who is and is not coaching, not donors.

[BleedOrange]

When Rollo cited the news articles about the faculty cuts I think he was spot on. The faculty went into conniption fits when Clawson received his extension, threw tantrums when Mazey announced renovations of academic buildings, and started crying incessantly when raises were handed out last summer and the faculty hadn't been able to negotiate a new contract. If Orr were released and we agreed to pay out the remainder of his contract, the faculty union would start burning down campus. Mazey cannot put herself and her staff behind the 8-ball like that in contract negotiations. Is this the best choice for the basketball team? No. However, this is the correct choice politically when it comes to the University as a whole.

This is the only explanation for Orr's return that makes sense. I'm not close to the facts of the faculty situation, but if those ARE the facts, Orr's return is a little more easy to swallow. It is sad for the entire university.

[BGWriter]

Ummm, this is the FIRST contract with the faculty union and is hasn't even been finalized after 2 years!!

Let's look at running BGSU like a business. If that's done, say goodbye to athletics completely. It is a drain on the University budget each and every year. This is true of MOST DIVISION I PROGRAMS. More than 50% of the general fee goes to keep it floating and they want more while advertising "FREE ADMISSION" to students. IT ISN'T FREE!! If athletics needs to take a knock every now and then to do what is in the best interests of the University as whole, then so be it. BGSU exists to educate students, not to play sports. Now the two CAN and SHOULD exist together and when they do everyone benefits in terms of enrollment gains, finances, and things like that. But when finances are tough I expect athletics to take their fair share of cuts in order to balance the budget. There are only two ways to change that reality. First, raise enough money to endow the entire department. Then it does not make a difference how bad a season is, the funding is there. And second, make sure the department is self sufficient through fundraising and ticket prices. Either way, open your wallet.

I don't like the thought of having Louis Orr here another season but I dislike the thought of having a donor or donors write a buy out check even more. That is a slippery slope to head down. You are saying alumni who want a coach gone, and have the means to pay for it, can dictate HR decisions within the department. Allow donations to the program, facility, or department but do not allow donations to buy out coaches. I want the AD in charge of who is and is not coaching, not donors.

Just because it's the first official contract doesn't meant the entire system isn't out of whack. Look at the cost of higher education overall and how much debt students must now go into for a basic public education. The system is broken and has been for a long time -- and that is because it has NOT been run like a business on the academic side of things for decades.

You can run all aspects of the university like a business without simply cutting areas that aren't profitable. There's a way to strike a balance that doesn't have to include making a very poor personnel decision that, in the end, will likely cost more than it appears.

And why are you so paranoid about allowing flush alums to write big checks if they're needed to correct obvious mistakes in the athletics department? You aren't giving those folks the keys to the university; they understand that they do so without having more power than those who are making the day to day decisions.

Don't let your paranoia hurt the university's prospects. BG didn't turn down the bigger endowments it's gotten to fund sports programs and academics for fear those people would demand more power -- it's now different here.

BG has a need and an alum is stepping up to help out. We should be thanking them, not pushing them away and vilifying them.