The CardBoard
59ers' coaching job a circus, apparently - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: 59ers' coaching job a circus, apparently (/thread-13610.html)

Pages: 1 2

59ers' coaching job a circus, apparently - washingtonismoney - 03-22-2017

Lost out on their top MBB choice because of internal dysfunction: https://twitter.com/MurrayRGJ/status/844594475032702976

Re: 59ers' coaching job a circus, apparently - BostonCard - 03-22-2017

Bears [are] a circus, apparently

{fixed it for you}

Re: 59ers' coaching job a circus, apparently - BobK - 03-22-2017

Rabb of cal goes pro today also

Re: 59ers' coaching job a circus, apparently - OutsiderFan - 03-22-2017

Please.  Agents are notorious for leaking heavily spun realities to reporters to gain leverage on contract extensions.  It wasn't even reported that Mussleman was offered the job.  He well could have been torpedoed by the new chancellor.

Cal does plenty of things to embarrass itself.  It's way too early to conclude "Cal internal dysfunction" made Mussleman withdraw.  Again, he wasn't offered the job.

Re: 59ers' coaching job a circus, apparently - 2006alum - 03-22-2017

(03-22-2017, 01:28 PM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:Please.  Agents are notorious for leaking heavily spun realities to reporters to gain leverage on contract extensions.  It wasn't even reported that Mussleman was offered the job.  He well could have been torpedoed by the new chancellor.

ןɐɔ does plenty of things to embarrass itself.  It's way too early to conclude "ןɐɔ internal dysfunction" made Mussleman withdraw.  Again, he wasn't offered the job.

I think a certain amount of skepticism is always warranted with these kinds of announcements, but having known several faculty members at UC Berkeley who have described the massive "cal internal dysfunction" involved in faculty hiring and tenure decisions, it doesn't surprise me at all. Everything is extraordinarily bureaucratic and often times the faculty of a department will vote unanimously for a faculty member to get tenure, or overwhelmingly vote to lateral-hire an outside faculty member, only for the higher-ups to stall the approval for literally years, at which point the faculty member leaves to go elsewhere or accepts an offer at another institution because they don't want to wait for years to get hired. If there's anything like that involved in AD coaching hires, I wouldn't be surprised if it turns some people off from even considering the place. 

It's kind of like how I assess a job offer: is the employer responsive and eager to answer questions, etc.? If they aren't when they're trying to win you over, how likely is it they will be once you're there and you have no leverage?

Re: 59ers' coaching job a circus, apparently - BobK - 03-22-2017

Musselman was offered.  Confirmed  :)

Re: 59ers' coaching job a circus, apparently - CTcard - 03-22-2017

(03-22-2017, 02:00 PM)2006alum link Wrote:I think a certain amount of skepticism is always warranted with these kinds of announcements, but having known several faculty members at UC Berkeley who have described the massive "ןɐɔ internal dysfunction" involved in faculty hiring and tenure decisions, it doesn't surprise me at all. Everything is extraordinarily bureaucratic and often times the faculty of a department will vote unanimously for a faculty member to get tenure, or overwhelmingly vote to lateral-hire an outside faculty member, only for the higher-ups to stall the approval for literally years, at which point the faculty member leaves to go elsewhere or accepts an offer at another institution because they don't want to wait for years to get hired.

I am a faculty member, and have several good friends at UC Across The Bay. Much of that story either doesn't ring true or sounds like standard practice at universities.

The tenure process is bureaucratic, as is much that goes on at large state universities. I have seen no evidence that particular aspect is worse at Berkeley than elsewhere.

It is quite common for the departmental tenure committee to vote for tenure but for it to be denied at higher levels; usually there is both a college and university-wide tenure committee as well. Deans and provosts tend to suspect that departments are too friendly with their own colleagues and thus not tough enough. And new deans/provosts often want to come in showing how tough the new regime will be.

Generally, higher ups cannot stall internal tenure decisions for years because the usual rule is that one cannot work beyond year seven without tenure (modulo various reasons your tenure clock might be temporarily stopped - a formal process that tends to involve things like child birth). There just aren't years available between the initial consideration and the time they have to fire you if not giving tenure.

Lateral hires are complicated. If you offer tenure upon hire, you have to make sure that you're not making a mistake which can be tricky if you haven't actually worked with the person. Such hires tend to be senior people and thus expensive, so one has to have the funds. Often departments love the idea, but not the people managing the budgets. I am trying to remember if I have seen more lateral hiring out of Berkeley or into Berkeley - can't quite remember but certainly some examples of each.

-----------------
None of the above should be taken as any indication that sports at Berkeley aren't a total circus.

Re: 59ers' coaching job a circus, apparently - 2006alum - 03-22-2017

These phenomena may be standard practice at other universities, but the faculty friends I have at other universities have no where near the contempt for their central campus administrations that the Berkeley faculty I know have for theirs, at least in the department with which I have pretty intimate familiarity. So either something is going wrong at Berkeley, there's a massive disconnect between this particular department and central campus, or other universities simply throw enough money at the problem for faculty to stay. But the department with which I have great familiarity has lost a number of faculty, and failed to laterally hire faculty, because of concerns about the bureaucracy of central campus and the effect it has on the quality of the faculty experience, both in terms of tenure decisions and lateral hiring, and also in terms of how much decisions around funding lines, department funding, etc. are controlled by the department vs. central campus.

(and an addendum: without knowing whether your peers are in a research-grant-predominant department or not, I suspect the experience at Berkeley varies a lot on this basis, because outside money can provide a department with more autonomy. The department I'm familiar with is comparatively less able to rely on outside grants, and so funding decisions are inextricably tied to central campus's prerogatives.)

Re: 59ers' coaching job a circus, apparently - CTcard - 03-22-2017

(03-22-2017, 05:51 PM)2006alum link Wrote:(and an addendum: without knowing whether your peers are in a research-grant-predominant department or not, I suspect the experience at Berkeley varies a lot on this basis, because outside money can provide a department with more autonomy. The department I'm familiar with is comparatively less able to rely on outside grants, and so funding decisions are inextricably tied to central campus's prerogatives.)

I mostly know physics, chemistry, materials science, and electrical engineering.

These departments bring in outside research funding. That money doesn't bring a department autonomy in any direct sense, but it probably helps in broad and indirect ways in the constant, ongoing battle for resources.

As a rule, all faculty have contempt for central campus administration. The degree generally depends upon how much they've lost out in the latest round of budget cuts. I understand times have been rather tough there lately.

Re: 59ers' coaching job a circus, apparently - OutsiderFan - 03-23-2017

(03-22-2017, 03:29 PM)BobK link Wrote:Musselman was offered.  Confirmed  :)

By who?  All the Cal reporters have been unanimous in their reporting that Musselman was never offered the job.  He had two interviews, but no offer was made.  Moreover, the reporting was Mussleman removed himself from consideration "because of Cal dysfunction," not that he turned down a Cal offer.  These are two different things.

Re: 59ers' coaching job a circus, apparently - BobK - 03-23-2017

All the cal reporters?  Nope fake news outsider.  A long post from a cal reporter on Musselman. Yes behind a pay wall but still a cal reporter.

Re: 59ers' coaching job a circus, apparently - OutsiderFan - 03-23-2017

Nobody on the Cal Rivals site says Mussleman was offered the job.  That includes donors and reporters on there.

I am curious what your source is.

Re: 59ers' coaching job a circus, apparently - OutsiderFan - 03-23-2017

I'm gonna break a rule to prove a point:  A post from the Cal Rivals board, from an extremely reliable source:

I don't know why [Mussleman] wasn't offered the gig. I just know he wasn't.

If I were to venture a guess, I'd say Cal was certainly interested but wasn't willing to give Musselman the gig without talking to all the candidates first. He got pissy about that and walked, then used some reporter in Reno as a mouthpiece to trash the search process because his pride and butt were hurting. Not the first time such a thing has happened.

This is what makes the most sense and is the most logical explanation of the situation.  Dykes made Cal fans became experts in recognizing how agents use reporters to spin coaching searches.

Re: 59ers' coaching job a circus, apparently - StanfordMatt - 03-23-2017

https://twitter.com/slamdunk406/status/844386978548203520

Ben Parker covers Cal for Rivals. In order for a deal to be "all but complete," it stands to reason that at the very least Cal made an initial offer to Musselman.

Re: 59ers' coaching job a circus, apparently - Phogge - 03-24-2017

It doesn't really matter how far any infatuation got with Musselman. Cal had little chance to grab the Big Enchilada in Moraga. Bennett knows how good he has it and practically owns the continent of Australia. The Christian Brothers are great people to work with, Moraga is a few miles from Berkeley but worlds apart in that little peaceful valley. I hope he stays there forever.

Re: 59ers' coaching job a circus, apparently - BostonCard - 03-24-2017

If at first you don't succeed, hire Wyking Jones.

https://twitter.com/calmensbball/status/845380739830972416

http://www.sfgate.com/collegesports/article/Cal-promotes-Wyking-Jones-to-head-men-s-11025962.php

Quote:“We conducted a thorough search, looking near and far and talking to people all around the country,” Cal athletics director Mike Williams said in a statement. “We consulted with several Cal basketball alumni, as well as multiple NBA and college coaches, some of the most experienced basketball minds in the game.
“Ultimately, we came back to where we started and found what we wanted right here in Berkeley.”

Translation, "we couldn't get anyone else to come coach this dumpster fire".


Re: 59ers' coaching job a circus, apparently - jacketree - 03-24-2017

Huh?  Has it even been a week?

He could be the next Pete Newell; you never know.

Re: 59ers' coaching job a circus, apparently - JJJ - 03-24-2017

#WyNotKingJones?

:P

Re: 59ers' coaching job a circus, apparently - winflop - 03-24-2017

(03-24-2017, 04:40 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:If at first you don't succeed, hire Wyking Jones.

I hear he named new assistants: Ragnar Lothbrok, Leif Eriksson, and Erik the Red  :P :P :P :P

Re: 59ers' coaching job a circus, apparently - wallendar - 03-24-2017

Regardless of which school athletes and coaches represent, racially insensitive posts should not be permitted....