Crutcher Update on AD Search and Leadership Reorganization
- Thread starter SFspidur
- Start date
I don't know if my position is true or not but it certainly is as valid as the position he isn't trying to insulate himself from under the scrutiny . If the President isn't accountable for athletics, how can you he is accountable for the institution, which includes athletics.
The president is accountable for everything that goes on at the university. The fact that a high ranking official under his supervision has been named by him, to report to him directly on athletics can only be a good thing. Clearly this will help get the alignment we are looking for with our athletics programs. Congratulations to Dr. Crutcher for doing this.
It seems like those who do not like Crutcher see this as a negative, those that do like him see this as a positive, and those that don't care don't care. Time will tell if this realignment is good for the athletic department and good for the university, but right now I don't see much besides projection.
I don't know. It seems to me if you want to be moving forward you need to get the leader in place to move you forward and let him/her lead. "Keeping things running" is what Walsh is tasked with and he'll certainly be able to handle that, but it's certainly not the overall goal. So, are we voluntarily delaying pursuit of the goal?
That doesn't mean you have to hire a new person the very next week as it's definitely more important to get it done right than to get it done quickly. But, just start the process and take whatever time you need to feel really good about the decision. It strikes me that for some (unknown) reason we deferred the start of the process and that I just don't get.
One thing that struck me as I was writing this is that is that we delayed the start pending the announcement on the revised reporting structure for athletics. This is actually relevant to the search process and you wouldn't have wanted to start under any false pretenses etc. But waiting an addition 2 months still seems strange.
The reporting change it strikes me isn't a good development when it comes to WHO we might be able to hire. Certainly to an outsider, the job reports in one level below where many comparable jobs report in. This is potentially problematic for some candidates who might conclude that (1) they won't really be running the athletics shop and/or (2) that they won't have the same level of high level support and investment from the top guy etc. In fact, Crutcher realizes many might read these kinds of things into it when he makes it a point to say the change "in no way reflects a diminishment of Athletics’ stature at Richmond". But outsiders thinking of taking the AD job may decide it does signal that or at least there is a risk it means that and that fact diminishes their ability to do things the way they would want to etc. or diminishes the likelihood of being successful. Those kinds of thoughts could cost us chances with good people. I know my job in many companies reports to the CEO, but in some to the COO and some to the CFO. Having experienced both personally and observed how it has seemed to work at other places, it's an absolute requirement for me to report to the CEO. I am not willing to take the risk that comes with the alternatives!
Fair points. My perspective is that KG is technically in place until 6/30 as far as I know. It's probably a little awkward to fire up the engines fully while he's still there.
I also suspect there's quite a bit more going on that's not public than is public. I imagine that it's not as devoid of movement as you think.
Regarding the last point, it's possible that prospective ADs might be reluctant not to report to the top man. That said, I think as a practical reality, our AD will get further faster if they have Hale as their advocate than if it's Dr. C. I think Dr. C has to balance where his time is spent, whereas Hale is apparently a supporter of athletics and seems likely to make it a priority.
As fan2011 noted, this is all a bunch of speculation for now, but it's safe to say the prior model wasn't working.
I never said he isn't accountable for athletics, what I said is no one is going to come after his head if we perform at a mediocre level, something that happens regularly in the GM/coach analogy.
Overall, that's now how UR operates, and frankly, that's not how most universities operate. Even at a P5 school where athletics exerts an inordinate influence on the institution, presidents rarely get terminated because football/basketball isn't doing well. They are academic institutions with interests far reaching beyond sports.
Maybe I'm missing your point, hence my assertion that analogies tend to fail.
think Tbone nailed it, the process started a long time ago and probably a lot has taken place but they are not going to run a public deal and they should not. they may have already been given some candidates, a few who would need to do some work to be available when we are ready to actually hire, thus a long process rather than quick. think it is more important that the administration and board get everyone on the same page than to make a quicker hire.
Faculty is not on campus. They're back in 2 months. They're not doing anything with this unless the faculty are on board.
Perhaps it would be harder to hire an AD reporting to a president who may retire again in a couple of years. This structure avoids that until the next president changes it of course. I see it as a good move as the position reports to business administration not academics.
The most curious note in here is O'Connor's naked assertion that Gill's departure was due to donor dissatisfaction, not his partner's health concerns. Not surprising to most spider faithful but interesting that JOC isn't sticking to the PR narrative.
We need to get this next hire right and find an AD who can align the entire university and elevate our athletics programs. With football being top 10 nationally every year and lacrosse being ranked and getting better every year, there is no reason why we aren't capable to compete for national championships. Also, basketball competes in a great conference, we have one of the best arenas in the A10, and are an attractive school with academics, campus beauty, and location. There is no reason why we can't become a Butler, VCU (as much as I hate to say it) or Gonzaga. We need vision, funding for facilities or things like bringing all the football players on campus for the summer, and leadership.
On a side note, JOC mentioned that the school will be looking to input from alumni who support Spider Athletics. I guess that means the alumni who donate the most to the program?
On a side note, JOC mentioned that the school will be looking to input from alumni who support Spider Athletics. I guess that means the alumni who donate the most to the program?
Robins will have a disproportionate large level of input on decision.To a lesser extent,Queally.
Last edited:
Donors that are putting "their money where their mouth is", have earned every right to have input.
Does it really matter? Walsh seems to be doing a good job, and I don't see that there's much value to rushing a process like this.
HUH? We hired a better coach? we may have, we may not have. I hope you are correct but unless you are omnipotent 'we' have no idea. I don't trust Crutcher's as far as I can throw him,(my guess is he's a typical academic elitist), but I'm willing to wait and see.
What has Walsh done so far to show he's doing a good job? Not trying to argue, I hope he is, I've just been out of the loop and unaware.
Well, for starters, he's communicating with the Spider community which is something Keith Gill didn't do in his five year tenure. Additionally, the university apparently committed to ponying up to cover the summer costs to keep football players around school. I don't know that the latter was a Walsh initiative but It happened under his watch.
Just a couple of examples.
Summer costs meaning a stipend? I didn't realize they didn't cover summer school for them in the past.
Apparently not. This was one of Rocco's chief complaints and I'm gathering has been rectified.
The job’s been posted.
http://ncaamarket.ncaa.org/jobs/10230368/director-of-athletics-university-of-richmond
http://ncaamarket.ncaa.org/jobs/10230368/director-of-athletics-university-of-richmond
Is anyone from the board applying? We have a lot of experts around here.
VT - I know you've mentioned your desire to be our FB coach. Now's your shot to apply to be the top dog in the department!
fan1,05,Mo,iSpider,Spinner(out of retirement) best options.
Re:VT as top dog.I think it says that you need a bachelor's degree from a reputable college.That would obviously disqualify him on both fronts.
Why would they post such a job? Isn't the selection of someone in such a high position selected by those who the committee approaches? Would anyone qualified for such a position read our jobs site? Doesn't the search group we have hired take responsibility for locating all available candidates, advising them of our requirements, etc., and thereafter set up the appropriate interviews?
