Occasionally, as in the recent University of Virginia trustees rebellion, you get a glimpse of what matters most to some of the people entrusted with the integrity of an intellectual institution.
For the chair of the University of South Florida trustees, the win/loss record of the football team is paramount. Minutes after the team’s latest loss, he fired off an email to the president’s chief of staff.
Imagine the roiling emotions that set going the email now heard ’round the world. Imagine the Boone Pickens-like intensity of this man’s desire. Imagine what he’ll write to Judy Genshaft when the team finally wins one.
Oh Judy Judy Judy! I can hardly catch my breath! We’ll be topping the Shanghai Ranking this year!
October 15th, 2012 at 4:58PM
You have to like this paragraph.
“Ramil said he likes Holtz as a coach, was ‘totally impressed’ with him in his personal interactions, and he fully supports Woolard’s decision in June to give Holtz an extension through the 2017 season despite a 1-6 record in the Big East in 2011, citing interest from other top programs in hiring the coach away.”
1-6 last year, and they gave him an extension. God forbid that some other school should hire away our losing coach!
October 16th, 2012 at 12:28PM
Does this man understand that, when you participate in win/loss endeavors such as sports (as opposed to say, research, or teaching, or even service, where any number of people can succeed at the same time, regardless of how well others are doing), there’s going to be a loser at least 50% of the time? Sure, one can throw money at trying to be a winner, and that will sometimes work, but is it really a good investment?
October 16th, 2012 at 12:31PM
Actually, correction — there will be *a* loser almost 100% of the time (unless there’s a tie, in which case there’s no winner, either). I wonder if they thought of themselves as trying to avoid losing rather than as trying to win it would adjust their perspective?