It would be a wonderful distraction from yesterday's loss if we got the predictable trial balloon of candidate names from JOC this coming week. Its got to be coming soon. Its time to get moving on this.
AD Search
- Thread starter MolivaManiac
- Start date
David has done a wonderful job but I've been told it's going to be an outside hire. I think a fresh perspective can be helpful.
Has anyone here met Hale and care to share anything? I have not met him but have heard good things.
Ok someone explain this to me. The new AD will be reporting to Hale who will be reporting to Crutcher, right? So is this just to insulate Crutcher from having to make tough decisions for athletics?
So say for instance the budget gets cut, performance deteriorates , the new AD takes a beating and is fired then Hale takes the beating, eventually is fired and Crutcher remains above the fray and in his job. It's just another layer of bureaucracy, right? What am I missing?
So say for instance the budget gets cut, performance deteriorates , the new AD takes a beating and is fired then Hale takes the beating, eventually is fired and Crutcher remains above the fray and in his job. It's just another layer of bureaucracy, right? What am I missing?
I think the article addresses it. Crutcher is going to focus more on alumni engagement and fundraising, particularly with a new capital campaign presumably coming. That's going to have him traveling a lot, so on a day-to-day basis, it seems to make sense to have another layer in there for more regular contact.
For many AD issues, Crutcher doesn't need to be involved. I'm sure he will be on big things though.
For many AD issues, Crutcher doesn't need to be involved. I'm sure he will be on big things though.
Seems that Crutcher was insulated from the stuff brewing between Gill and Rocco-lots of stuff until it was too late.Gill couldn’t manage up nor could he manage down.Crutcher effectively let him alone to operate on auto-pilot.Crutcher was/is at 35,000 feet.Hale comes across as a guy who can manage both up(Crutcher) and down(AD) well.This new AD will not be dopey,that’s for sure,like the predecessor.Hopefully,the new AD will manage everything inside RC correctly along with instituting a real external outreach to alumni and boosters for considerably loftier fund raising goals.Hopefully,the new AD changes the athletic organization along with new admin personnel and some coaches.Get rid of the Featherbedding.
Last edited:
It's likely, and I hope, you are correct, but it seem superfluous to me, and will it hurt the AD search (it's kind of like the new AD is really something like an 'assistant' AD) If you're taking away budget and expenditure responsibility from the AD, doesn't that diminish the job?
I didn't know what it meant..
Featherbedding is the practice of hiring more workers than are needed to perform a given job, or to adopt work procedures which appear pointless, complex and time-consuming merely to employ additional workers
+1
Seems to me the problem was Gill (i.e. the person in charge of athletics), not the structure. Most schools work with just an AD and he/she runs athletics w/ the President's limited involvement. This works for most and doesn't when you hire the wrong AD.
And I I agree that the revised structure actually undermines your ability to hire the best possible AD because at least some (and maybe many) candidates take themselves out of the running because it seems a lesser position if it doesn't report to the President etc. That offsets any benefits the structure might have because I think this is a meaningful problem in the search. Yes, there will be ample candidates and some good ones I am sure, but there will be good ones who won't consider the job. In my job, I wouldn't take another job (even with a same or similar title) that reports to a level lower than what the job reports to at most places etc. As someone noted, its sorta like an Assistant AD job then. To many possible candidates it might also signal that Athletics have a lesser importance to the School. Athletics aren't as important to UR as they are to school X because they don't even report to the President like they do at School X and if they were as important, they WOULD report to the President directly. Lastly, the AD hired by and reporting to the President knows he has that President's support which is a huge factor. The AD hired in our structure however, can't and won't count on having the Presidents active support day-to-day. He'll have his boss' support day-to-day but he/she will certainly note that that isn't as impactful as having the President's support (and remember, the stated reason for the structure is to keep the President AWAY from day to day support). Take this hypothetical scenario for example - - - AD approaches admissions in support of Sport X coach trying to get a borderline admission pushed through. Admissions reports to the President. Admissions is reluctant to move off whatever stance they have. AD says, "look . . . I know I have the President's support on opening up the admissions standards for athletes because we discussed it directly when I was hired and have been discussing it since I got here too. If we cant work this out, I am going to need to go talk to him because its contrary to what he/she and I have been talking about what our school needs to be successful in athletics." In this scenario, the AD is talking to a peer (both report to the President) and is representing a couple of things - - current active discussion with the Admissions Office's direct boss. Change the scenario to the AD reports to a Vice-President and the conversation is no longer between peers and the AD is now representing a current active discussion etc. with the Admissions Office's peer, not their boss. Admission may be more willing to stand up to a non-peer and to take a referral to a peer (and not their boss) and may also be more willing to stand there ground against a peer who can't as affirmatively claim their boss' support (and the President view is unknown because he /she is being shielded from the issue by design). And now you are clearly more likely to end up at a stand-off. It may work out, but it may not. An AD candidate may very well identify this differing level of administrative "support" and choose to wait for a better opportunity.
I agree, I think. It's a long and tedious path Philly led us through but I get his point (at least I think I do)
Another note; if the AD is really going to run (budget, expended money, manage, etc) the Athletic Department then this go between guy simple becomes a communication conduit right? So is the problem we have a President that can't find the balance between athletics and academics and we need to pay someone to help him? I'm not saying we shouldn't consider this setup I just think it's possibly going to hurt our AD search.
Philly - agree. When there is another layer inserted between a person and the head person who has the final say that diminishes both the authority and influence of, in this case, the prospective AD. It says loud and clear let an underling deal with the matter at hand because it is not that important to me and I have better things to do with my time. Is the BOT onboard with this structure or has the BOT had input? I certainly don't know the answer to that but maybe some other poster has better insight on the subject?
I don't understand why people think moving Hale (who apparently is well respected by coaches and the athletic department alike) to oversee athletics as a negative thing. I actually view it as a positive thing.
Let's take a look at what has transpired over the past few months and see why things may have happened the way they did.
1. Gill "stepped down" as AD. It has been mentioned by many posters here and by JOC himself that many influential donors did not like the state of our athletics under Gill's leadership.
- So what are the implications of this? The fact that Gill "stepped down" means that athletics is something valued by alumni and something Crutcher, Hale, etc. have repeatedly valued a commitment to as well. Gill would still be our AD if we were complacent with how things are going and so the hiring of a new AD will hopefully bring in energy, vision, accountability of our coaches, a desire to compete nationally, fundraising, etc. all of which Gill lacked.
2. Crutcher decides to move responsibilities to Hale who has more direct oversights on financial aspects of the University. Hale - again - is also someone that the coaches and athletic department respect and thinks "gets it" when it comes to our athletics.
- What is the relevance of this? The relevance is that the president does a bunch of stuff on a daily basis that known of us can really comprehend. There are so many things that he has to look over, such as traveling to different events, getting alumni donations, and most notably helping to improve UR's academic reputation (which he has so far). These aspects, among other things, take up a lot of Crutcher's time. On top of that, Crutcher is not an individual who is more inclined on the athletic side. Again, this is NOT a bad thing and does NOT mean Crutcher doesn't care about athletics. It just means his strengths are in other areas and his focus as president is to improve on our endowment, renovating dorms, getting our academic reputation up, etc (all of which are very important and necessary for a school). It would be pretty dumb to hire a University president who doesn't want to do anything else except funding athletics. So given all of this, what makes sense? Have Crutcher shift the responsibilities to someone (Hale) who understands the logistics of athletics better, doesn't have a million other things to worry about, and a person the athletic department can directly communicate with for any funding/resource allocations. Also, this past JOC article talked about how other A10 schools have this model. So it is not unique just to us.
The whole point of what has transpired the past few months - as I see it - is the school having a cultural shift to be more inclined to athletics (which isn't to say we have not been in the past). As much as I care about our athletics, my opinion doesn't really matter because I don't have the doe to back it up. Thankfully we have influential donors who share the same vision of athletics as I and this forum has. The vision being
for us to not just be good (which we are overall) but great in our sports and basketball in particular. This requires change, which is what we're doing because as they say "the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result"
Let's take a look at what has transpired over the past few months and see why things may have happened the way they did.
1. Gill "stepped down" as AD. It has been mentioned by many posters here and by JOC himself that many influential donors did not like the state of our athletics under Gill's leadership.
- So what are the implications of this? The fact that Gill "stepped down" means that athletics is something valued by alumni and something Crutcher, Hale, etc. have repeatedly valued a commitment to as well. Gill would still be our AD if we were complacent with how things are going and so the hiring of a new AD will hopefully bring in energy, vision, accountability of our coaches, a desire to compete nationally, fundraising, etc. all of which Gill lacked.
2. Crutcher decides to move responsibilities to Hale who has more direct oversights on financial aspects of the University. Hale - again - is also someone that the coaches and athletic department respect and thinks "gets it" when it comes to our athletics.
- What is the relevance of this? The relevance is that the president does a bunch of stuff on a daily basis that known of us can really comprehend. There are so many things that he has to look over, such as traveling to different events, getting alumni donations, and most notably helping to improve UR's academic reputation (which he has so far). These aspects, among other things, take up a lot of Crutcher's time. On top of that, Crutcher is not an individual who is more inclined on the athletic side. Again, this is NOT a bad thing and does NOT mean Crutcher doesn't care about athletics. It just means his strengths are in other areas and his focus as president is to improve on our endowment, renovating dorms, getting our academic reputation up, etc (all of which are very important and necessary for a school). It would be pretty dumb to hire a University president who doesn't want to do anything else except funding athletics. So given all of this, what makes sense? Have Crutcher shift the responsibilities to someone (Hale) who understands the logistics of athletics better, doesn't have a million other things to worry about, and a person the athletic department can directly communicate with for any funding/resource allocations. Also, this past JOC article talked about how other A10 schools have this model. So it is not unique just to us.
The whole point of what has transpired the past few months - as I see it - is the school having a cultural shift to be more inclined to athletics (which isn't to say we have not been in the past). As much as I care about our athletics, my opinion doesn't really matter because I don't have the doe to back it up. Thankfully we have influential donors who share the same vision of athletics as I and this forum has. The vision being
for us to not just be good (which we are overall) but great in our sports and basketball in particular. This requires change, which is what we're doing because as they say "the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result"
Last edited:
"Have Crutcher shift the responsibilities to someone (Hale) who understands the logistics of athletics better, doesn't have a million other things to worry about, and a person the athletic department can directly communicate with for any funding/resource allocations."
but isn't that what an AD is supposed to do?
but isn't that what an AD is supposed to do?
Ever thought that when Hale and the new AD take something to the President, it's like two against one? Just a thought; I think having Hale as a colleague to the AD is great. Of course, I would. Right.
The AD at any school has to report to someone. It would be very unusual for an AD to have unlimited ability to do what ever he or she wanted with the athletics department.
The AD's job is to have the most knowledge about the school's athletic department, understand all the logistics of it, be the voice for coaches, have a plan on things the athletic department needs, raise funds for athletic campaigns, keep the alumni abreast about current happenings in the athletic world, etc. However, the AD can't just take University money and write themselves a check for 10 million dollars to achieve all of that. He/she would have to report to someone(s) who will listen to what the AD had to say and then have the capacity to provide the AD with the resources, funding, etc. that the athletic department needs.
In this case, rather than having the AD report to president Crutcher who has a myriad of other responsibilities and things to worry about (I talk about that extensively above), the AD is reporting to Hale who understands the logistics of athletics better, doesn't have as many responsibilities as the president does, and has the capacity to give the athletic department the funding it needs (basically his job description). This also frees up Crutcher to focus on other incredibly important aspects of this University.
Last edited:
Hale joined the University of Richmond as vice president for business and finance and treasurer beginning April,2013
Hale was vice president for finance and administration and treasurer at Colgate University, where he had served between 1993 and 2013 .At UR,he provides leadership for a division of more than 500 individuals and have oversight of the university’s approximately $235 million annual operating budget and financial operations, as well as other key areas including facilities, human resources, dining services, sustainability and campus police.Add to his responsibilities-the AD reports and all relevant personnel inside RC.
Hale holds a bachelor’s degree from Colgate University and a master’s degree in accounting from Stern Graduate School of Business Administration, New York University.
Don’t be surprised if the new AD is a seasoned Patriot League school vet.
Tom Gutenberger:
Hale was vice president for finance and administration and treasurer at Colgate University, where he had served between 1993 and 2013 .At UR,he provides leadership for a division of more than 500 individuals and have oversight of the university’s approximately $235 million annual operating budget and financial operations, as well as other key areas including facilities, human resources, dining services, sustainability and campus police.Add to his responsibilities-the AD reports and all relevant personnel inside RC.
Hale holds a bachelor’s degree from Colgate University and a master’s degree in accounting from Stern Graduate School of Business Administration, New York University.
Don’t be surprised if the new AD is a seasoned Patriot League school vet.
Tom Gutenberger:
Last edited:
It's pretty clear from your board activity over the last few days that you are mad about lots of things going on with Richmond athletics.
How's the rest of your life going?
Just cut your annual contribution in half-from $20 to $10.That will show ‘em.
Fine thanks for asking. Would you be ok with a Patriot league AD?
in fact i'm a whole lot 'finer' with Huesman than most of the post here.
I just want a solid choice for AD, don't care if it is male/female, Patriot League or elsewhere
The realistic options are:
*Get an experienced AD from a smaller conference
*Get an assistant AD from a larger conference
*Get someone with little or no AD experience
That's it. We're not going to hire a sitting AD from a larger conference, so if you don't like the idea of someone from the Patriot League, I presume you would rather have someone who hasn't been an AD before?
*Get an experienced AD from a smaller conference
*Get an assistant AD from a larger conference
*Get someone with little or no AD experience
That's it. We're not going to hire a sitting AD from a larger conference, so if you don't like the idea of someone from the Patriot League, I presume you would rather have someone who hasn't been an AD before?
Pretty solid resume, has done a lot to upgrade everything at Bucknell. Played on a Rose Bowl winner at Iowa, assistant AD at Michigan Stare. Has experience on the FCS committee, also a solid lacrosse background, and he's a good fundraiser.
