The University of Wyoming is a two ring circus.

[YankPoke]

I would just like to say thanks LawPoke for expanding on your thoughts and giving us a little more info on the whole situation it is very helpful. It is very hard to get much information, and I appreciate any information so that we can make better judgement at what just happened at the university.

 

[LawPoke]

No problem, Yank. This sucks - no matter the reasons, especially considering that our beloved University doesn't look real great right now. But the reaction needs to be to circle the wagons, figure out a better process to pick the next President and go forward. Frankly, I think we need a lot fewer focus groups and selection committees. We need to look at what we want, evaluate what we need, find a person, and romance the hell out of them. Committee searches generally suck eggs - we need a more direct approach.

 

[Cheywypoke]

I think I need to head to the grocery store to stock up. We must have the second coming of the Blizzard of '49 on the way.

First, I've been a huge fan of Tracy's for a long time. However, his refusal to answer any questions or elaborate on any statement when asked is disheartening and disappointing. I could be wrong, but from what I've read today it appears you're firmly entrentched in the UW Good Ol Boy network and that's not good. I fear we will be mired in mediocrety for an awfully long time both as a university and as an athletic department. My high school daughter has always said she doesn't want anything to do with UW when it comes time to choose a university. I've been lamenting that fact. Now maybe I'm thinking she's making a wise decision -- hopefully I can afford it.

Secondly, today for the first time, I've agreed with Doc Holliday a full 100%.

Yep, that blizzard's gotta be coming.

 

[TracyRingolsby]

I think I need to head to the grocery store to stock up. We must have the second coming of the Blizzard of '49 on the way.

First, I've been a huge fan of Tracy's for a long time. However, his refusal to answer any questions or elaborate on any statement when asked is disheartening and disappointing. I could be wrong, but from what I've read today it appears you're firmly entrentched in the UW Good Ol Boy network and that's not good. I fear we will be mired in mediocrety for an awfully long time both as a university and as an athletic department. My high school daughter has always said she doesn't want anything to do with UW when it comes time to choose a university. I've been lamenting that fact. Now maybe I'm thinking she's making a wise decision -- hopefully I can afford it.

Secondly, today for the first time, I've agreed with Doc Holliday a full 100%.

Yep, that blizzard's gotta be coming.

Sorry you feel that way. I have provided some detail on the other site, and I merely came over to because of some accusations made earlier. I really don't feel anything is accomplished me by repeating what I've already said. As far as more details, I am not going to compromise the people who have told me specifics. If that makes be a bad person, I apologize, but I respect their requests.
As I have said in the past, I am usually defender. The only other hiring I can remember strongly questioning during my 62 years was Heath Schroyer, and I spoke out from Day 1 on. I don't think that was off base, as time proved. And a lot of my early feeling on him was his disrespect and rude treatment of Kenny Sailors and Jim Brandenburg, who I feel have earned at least a little respect from anyone associated with the University of Wyoming.
I am not at any time trying to defend the manner in which the president departure happened, but I defend the result. But then I did not defend the original hiring process and its secrecy and if the process had been more transparent I don't think we would have ended up where we are.
There are changes that need to be made and hopefully they come, but to make change you need to be able to sell the product so people embrace it. Quality leaders usually spend a little time learning where they are and what's going on so they have some of their own judgment to use in making changes, not relying on what someone else, possibly a BOT member or other third party.

 

[Austin Nichols]

But then I did not defend the original hiring process and its secrecy and if the process had been more transparent I don't think we would have ended up where we are.

What? The lack of secrecy with the hiring process is exactly what got UW to the point it is at now. You should have defended it, and Sternberg would have then never been hired. Tracy, did you know that the top candidates in this recent search dropped out after being told that their names were going public?

 

[Cheywypoke]

For HR:

(1) Little to no trust among the faculty and staff, which will lead to a loss of good faculty and an inability to recruit new, good faculty (sure, you can poke at the entrenched, mediocre types - I love to myself - but the outward impression is that the ship doesn't have a rudder and is ran by a shifty-eyed President, which = no good candidates for provost, deanships and professorships and the brightest and best students)
(2) Diminishing trust among legislators, especially key members in leadership, especially in a budget session and especially this budget session when you could be in line for some great one-time project and endowment match funding
(3) Loss of private fundraising opportunity (see #4)
(4) Loss of goodwill with key donors and UW supporters
(5) General sense of being the outsider with no friends to help him achieve his vision - even if it was great, he had high-centered himself with few friends around to help push him off the log
(6) Caviar taste
(7) Anger and resentment from local business leaders in and around Laramie

As I noted, I still think you will see change...and a lot of it...but now it has a snowball's chance to make it through the gauntlet without immediately being labeled as a conspiracy.

Thanks for your input LawPoke. I appreciate your providing some substantial reasons for what happened. The fact that "Law" is part of your handle concerns me a little, but I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt.

 

[Cheywypoke]

I think I need to head to the grocery store to stock up. We must have the second coming of the Blizzard of '49 on the way.

First, I've been a huge fan of Tracy's for a long time. However, his refusal to answer any questions or elaborate on any statement when asked is disheartening and disappointing. I could be wrong, but from what I've read today it appears you're firmly entrentched in the UW Good Ol Boy network and that's not good. I fear we will be mired in mediocrety for an awfully long time both as a university and as an athletic department. My high school daughter has always said she doesn't want anything to do with UW when it comes time to choose a university. I've been lamenting that fact. Now maybe I'm thinking she's making a wise decision -- hopefully I can afford it.

Secondly, today for the first time, I've agreed with Doc Holliday a full 100%.

Yep, that blizzard's gotta be coming.

Sorry you feel that way. I have provided some detail on the other site, and I merely came over to because of some accusations made earlier. I really don't feel anything is accomplished me by repeating what I've already said. As far as more details, I am not going to compromise the people who have told me specifics. If that makes be a bad person, I apologize, but I respect their requests.
As I have said in the past, I am usually defender. The only other hiring I can remember strongly questioning during my 62 years was Heath Schroyer, and I spoke out from Day 1 on. I don't think that was off base, as time proved. And a lot of my early feeling on him was his disrespect and rude treatment of Kenny Sailors and Jim Brandenburg, who I feel have earned at least a little respect from anyone associated with the University of Wyoming.
I am not at any time trying to defend the manner in which the president departure happened, but I defend the result. But then I did not defend the original hiring process and its secrecy and if the process had been more transparent I don't think we would have ended up where we are.
There are changes that need to be made and hopefully they come, but to make change you need to be able to sell the product so people embrace it. Quality leaders usually spend a little time learning where they are and what's going on so they have some of their own judgment to use in making changes, not relying on what someone else, possibly a BOT member or other third party.

Thanks for the response Tracy. Maybe when the rest of the story comes out I will feel differently.

 

[TracyRingolsby]

But then I did not defend the original hiring process and its secrecy and if the process had been more transparent I don't think we would have ended up where we are.

What? The lack of secrecy with the hiring process is exactly what got UW to the point it is at now. You should have defended it, and Sternberg would have then never been hired. Tracy, did you know that the top candidates in this recent search dropped out after being told that their names were going public?

I think that was the previous search.
I may be wrong (or I may have been out of town when things changed) but everything I read and heard was secrecy, and the newspapers even fought to force it to be public, but the secrecy was defended by government officials so the board did not have public involvement.

 

[DocHolliday]

I'm simply out back, a nice fire is crackling in the pit whilst I smoke a fine cigar.

I also took my boots off.

I also plan to go get a six pack of: http://odellbrewing.com/beer/cutthroat-porter/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[kdwrightuwyo]

Maybe, instead of all of us getting pissy and arguing with each other, this is a time for UW fans and alumna band together for a cause. Maybe it's time for us to communicate with the BOT and UW. Tell them what we want and expect from them and the university. Pulling your money and support and bitching on a message board does nothing for the school, and may even hurt it worse.

Just a thought.

 

[TracyRingolsby]

But then I did not defend the original hiring process and its secrecy and if the process had been more transparent I don't think we would have ended up where we are.

What? The lack of secrecy with the hiring process is exactly what got UW to the point it is at now. You should have defended it, and Sternberg would have then never been hired. Tracy, did you know that the top candidates in this recent search dropped out after being told that their names were going public?

Confirmed tonight the presidential search that resulted in hiring of Sternberg was done in secrecy to the point that the only interview the BOT even had with him was 1 hour in a meeting room at DIA so nobody in Wyoming would see him. They didn't even have dinner. One hour face time and that was it.

 

[McPeachy]

But then I did not defend the original hiring process and its secrecy and if the process had been more transparent I don't think we would have ended up where we are.

What? The lack of secrecy with the hiring process is exactly what got UW to the point it is at now. You should have defended it, and Sternberg would have then never been hired. Tracy, did you know that the top candidates in this recent search dropped out after being told that their names were going public?

Confirmed tonight the presidential search that resulted in hiring of Sternberg was done in secrecy to the point that the only interview the BOT even had with him was 1 hour in a meeting room at DIA so nobody in Wyoming would see him. They didn't even have dinner. One hour face time and that was it.

Interesting stuff. I think whomever you spoke with is correct, the meeting at DIA in a conference room there happened, and that is what he was hired from. How embarrassing - no visit to UW, no off BOT interviews or reviews with others, this was a horribly flawed process, and BOT heads need to roll. The one thing the person you spoke with missed, that I heard as well, is that UW lost several top candidates (for the second time - in the presidential search process) because of the media request and threatening lawsuits. If the person you know has a leg to stand on, they will know that as well.

 

[TracyRingolsby]

But then I did not defend the original hiring process and its secrecy and if the process had been more transparent I don't think we would have ended up where we are.

What? The lack of secrecy with the hiring process is exactly what got UW to the point it is at now. You should have defended it, and Sternberg would have then never been hired. Tracy, did you know that the top candidates in this recent search dropped out after being told that their names were going public?

Confirmed tonight the presidential search that resulted in hiring of Sternberg was done in secrecy to the point that the only interview the BOT even had with him was 1 hour in a meeting room at DIA so nobody in Wyoming would see him. They didn't even have dinner. One hour face time and that was it.

Interesting stuff. I think whomever you spoke with is correct, the meeting at DIA in a conference room there happened, and that is what he was hired from. How embarrassing - no visit to UW, no off BOT interviews or reviews with others, this was a horribly flawed process, and BOT heads need to roll. The one thing the person you spoke with missed, that I heard as well, is that UW lost several top candidates (for the second time - in the presidential search process) because of the media request and threatening lawsuits. If the person you know has a leg to stand on, they will know that as well.

The person I spoke to has more than a leg to stand on. I don't make a living spreading rumors, despite what HR and some of the others on this board may think. He also said they had a couple drop out but he wouldn't say they were higher on list than BS.
Personally, I'd rather have transpency. Maybe you lose a candidate or two but you also do a better job of vetting. Maybe you don't do it until you have the guy you want to hire but want to make sure there aren't skeletons in the closest like BS. Don't buy the idea that being identified can hurt a candidate. His employer already knows he is interviewing. What's to hide? In most cases it would be a chance for a promotion.