Liam decomitting

[Home Jersey 6,583]

8 minutes ago, Class of '66 Old Fart said:

Go for it but I'm going to tell you right now you'll be sorely disappointed.  Don't you think corporate minutes are written as obtusely as possible?  They're going to be written in language designed to be very bland and withstand court subpoena's should that ever arise in a civil lawsuit.

The issue is not getting access to IU's BOT votes/minutes or how they're split/what they say. The issue is ... somebody's ... very bold claim that consensus decision making has NEVER led to unilateral authority at IU. The votes would just be a way for her to support her claims, which were stated as fact rather than opinion. 

Given the preferences of our mods, who do a great job, this will be my last comment on this line of conversation. 

[Golfman25 5,002]

12 minutes ago, Home Jersey said:

The issue is not getting access to IU's BOT votes/minutes or how they're split/what they say. The issue is ... somebody's ... very bold claim that consensus decision making has NEVER led to unilateral authority at IU. The votes would just be a way for her to support her claims, which were stated as fact rather than opinion. 

Given the preferences of our mods, who do a great job, this will be my last comment on this line of conversation. 

Exactly.  And as far as language goes, if they didn't indicate a 6-4 type of breakdown, they would say "unanimous" or "majority" vote.  

[RaceToTheTop 24,922]

41 minutes ago, Class of '66 Old Fart said:

Go for it but I'm going to tell you right now you'll be sorely disappointed.  Don't you think corporate minutes are written as obtusely as possible?  They're going to be written in language designed to be very bland and withstand court subpoena's should that ever arise in a civil lawsuit.

Indiana University isn't a corporation.  You do realize that that IU board meetings, by law, are open to the public?  Anyone that wishes to can attend them.

EDIT:  FWIW, I found board meetings are also available through video and I would also believe through video stream.  This is also likely in accordance to public access laws.  So the spin you are talking about in the minutes by lawyers doesn't really hold water to the question at hand. 

[RoncalliHoosier 409]

1 hour ago, KathywithaC said:

They do, at least in a general sense. They’re all fans for sure and want us to do well. Some are much deeper into it than others, but they all want us to be good.

So, in your opinion, is 18-13 (10-10) "good"? I see it as merely adequate.

[BleedCubbieBlue 1,395]

Holy Sh!t, I have figured out who @KathywithaC is. Click the link below to find out. All will be revealed when I get 101 laughs. Giving me 101 laughs will also make your penis larger and probably a billionaire.

 

[BleedCubbieBlue 1,395]

1 hour ago, Class of '66 Old Fart said:

Go for it but I'm going to tell you right now you'll be sorely disappointed.  Don't you think corporate minutes are written as obtusely as possible?  They're going to be written in language designed to be very bland and withstand court subpoena's should that ever arise in a civil lawsuit.

And the minutes will never go into the details of discussions that were held on any particular issue.  They might reference some generalities of the discussions but rarely will minutes go into the juicy details many of you want.  "After lengthy discussion and upon a motion ......" that's mostly what you'll find in corporate minutes.  These things are being written and/or reviewed by lawyers before they're officially accepted.  That should tell you all you need to know - sorry btb lawyers.

That is if they even bother to follow the state laws, which they don’t.

https://www.heraldtimesonline.com/story/news/2022/02/15/iu-indiana-university-trustees-violated-open-door-law-michael-mcrobbie-deal-bloomington/6702680001/

[ib4iu 350]

5 hours ago, Chris007 said:

So do they think he deserves an extension? He only has a couple of years left on his contract and recruits are going to want to know if he's going to be here for their 4 years before committing.

Wrong here Chris. Mike Woodson doesn’t recruit 4 year players. 

[Chris007 43,565]

1 minute ago, ib4iu said:

Wrong here Chris. Mike Woodson doesn’t recruit 4 year players. 

Good point. I just wanted to make sure the athletic department was on the same page.

[Schreckbagger 620]

Indiana University isn't a corporation.  You do realize that that IU board meetings, by law, are open to the public?  Anyone that wishes to can attend them.
EDIT:  FWIW, I found board meetings are also available through video and I would also believe through video stream.  This is also likely in accordance to public access laws.  So the spin you are talking about in the minutes by lawyers doesn't really hold water to the question at hand. 

Maybe you should have told Brand that.....

Sent from my SM-S906U using BtownBanners mobile app

[IUFAN1976 2,775]

6 hours ago, Golfman25 said:

It's coming.  Some sort of collective bargaining agreement, with contracts so coaches know who's coming and who's going.  Probably salary cap type structure as well.  Don't know if it will be the NCAA or some new organization that does it though.  

It can’t come soon enough 

[J34 1,472]

2 hours ago, Class of '66 Old Fart said:

Go for it but I'm going to tell you right now you'll be sorely disappointed.  Don't you think corporate minutes are written as obtusely as possible?  They're going to be written in language designed to be very bland and withstand court subpoena's should that ever arise in a civil lawsuit.

And the minutes will never go into the details of discussions that were held on any particular issue.  They might reference some generalities of the discussions but rarely will minutes go into the juicy details many of you want.  "After lengthy discussion and upon a motion ......" that's mostly what you'll find in corporate minutes.  These things are being written and/or reviewed by lawyers before they're officially accepted.  That should tell you all you need to know - sorry btb lawyers.

No need for the lecture,  I was just throwing something out there to the people who are wondering what's going on in the "bored" room. I personally don't give a darn. But, every meeting has a scribe assigned.

Not a lawyer, just a guy that hates public firms, politicians,etc, hiding/withholding information from the tax paying public. And the way you explained it, confirms the distrust. 

[rcbowla 7,020]

4 hours ago, KathywithaC said:

I’m expressing opinions based on information gleaned from people directly involved, past and present, and that includes trustees. They don’t take formal votes on basketball hires, something a few here can’t seem to accept.

So then this falls on Dolson (retention) unless of course he knows he'd be stonewalled when it came to compensation. Then to make it even more difficult for him he has to account for the $takeholder$ that are in favor of retaining CMW and how their allocation of funds would change. That the basic gist here?

[rcbowla 7,020]

4 hours ago, KathywithaC said:

I get that. These people haven’t traditionally been wallflowers, though. Many have been huge fans of the program but they’ve always kept a respectful distance. Look to the SEC and B12 for examples of a more engaged BOT, and it’s rarely been a good thing.

The 2 best basketball conferences and the best football conference? Sign me up for more engagement I guess???

[rcbowla 7,020]

1 hour ago, BleedCubbieBlue said:

Holy Sh!t, I have figured out who @KathywithaC is. Click the link below to find out. All will be revealed when I get 101 laughs. Giving me 101 laughs will also make your penis larger and probably a billionaire.

 

I don't need my penis to be a billionaire. He and I already have enough issues that I don't need him holding that over my head as well.

[Golfman25 5,002]

9 minutes ago, rcbowla said:

So then this falls on Dolson (retention) unless of course he knows he'd be stonewalled when it came to compensation. Then to make it even more difficult for him he has to account for the $takeholder$ that are in favor of retaining CMW and how their allocation of funds would change. That the basic gist here?

The way I read it Dolson has the “power” as long as he does what they say.  If he was to independently fire Woodson he’d lose his job.  It’s very authoritarian.  

[RaceToTheTop 24,922]

1 hour ago, BleedCubbieBlue said:

That is if they even bother to follow the state laws, which they don’t.

https://www.heraldtimesonline.com/story/news/2022/02/15/iu-indiana-university-trustees-violated-open-door-law-michael-mcrobbie-deal-bloomington/6702680001/

Yep -- in which case there is even more reason to believe the point I made, which is that they are acting in a manner that consistently makes sure there is no one on the board is held accountable for their own position.  

I have looked at board meeting minutes for both Purdue and IU.  Purdue's are MUCH more clear and easier to access. 

[RaceToTheTop 24,922]

12 minutes ago, Schreckbagger said:

Maybe you should have told Brand that.....

Sent from my SM-S906U using BtownBanners mobile app
 

But both cases support my initial point and that the board is not taking individual accountability and hide behind 'consensus building' according to a certain poster.  Either they are giving a public display of votes in which case it shouldn't be hard to find cases where there was a fractured vote or they cast their votes in private (which I believe is against public law as they are a public institution) and therefore make sure that no individual is held accountable for their stance.

 

[IUFAN1976 2,775]

5 minutes ago, Golfman25 said:

The way I read it Dolson has the “power” as long as he does what they say.  If he was to independently fire Woodson he’d lose his job.  It’s very authoritarian.  

It appears that the BOT’s will not allow this basketball program to ever be successful again.  They will and can dictate who they want as the coach and it most likely won’t be Bruce Pearl.  It seems they have way too much control over sports programs in general 

[RoncalliHoosier 409]

53 minutes ago, rcbowla said:

So then this falls on Dolson (retention) unless of course he knows he'd be stonewalled when it came to compensation. Then to make it even more difficult for him he has to account for the $takeholder$ that are in favor of retaining CMW and how their allocation of funds would change. That the basic gist here?

My thought here is for Dolson to just let it burn to the ground. He is in charge of the athletic department, but he can't make hiring/firing decisions. He can't worry about the Cooks and the Simons, and he can't worry about the funds - if they dry up, Scott, stand back and let it burn. Tell Buckner that "you stepped in and screwed the pooch, so this is on you". I know that's a simplistic view of how the world (or the IU athletic department) works, but it's also the reality of the situation. Buckner and his buds have either created or perpetuated this sh*t show.

I've seen this in my work place - people who have no business involving themselves in a situation do so anyway, and the sh*t flies. When that happens, my team and I have to pick up the pieces and try to make everything work. It's frustrating beyond words, and if the people would just stay in their lanes, everything would work out. Our CEO once said in a town hall "the day will come when you just have to trust the person in the next cubicle to do the job that they were hired to do". Either the university has an athletic director or they don't. And that extends to allowing Scott Dolson to do what he was hired to do. If he screws it up, so be it and deal with it. But don't tie his hands, and then when it goes south hang him out to dry.

Edited March 14 by RoncalliHoosier

[Ryno6284 2,560]

Where the hell is Scotty R?