There are stealth candidates that have never yet been identified in the press or on these all knowing forums. Anyone that assumes they know of every vetted candidate and/or those actually interviewed is simply mistaken.
The Illinois AD Search
- Status
There are stealth candidates that have never yet been identified in the press or on these all knowing forums. Anyone that assumes they know of every vetted candidate and/or those actually interviewed is simply mistaken.
I like Tupper but he doesn't seem to have a very good pulse on this. I don't know if there are any reporters who do. Most of the thoughts and ideas seem to be speculation and educated guesses. Once we figure out who the hire is then we can more accurately piece together how disfunctional this has all been. Until then thought they're doing a pretty good job of keeping people out if the know. (Maybe they themselves do t have a clue what's going on)
Im with you. Most likely, the real truth has not been made public. I believe that they know what they are doing and being as thorough as possible to get the best candidate. I believe that the non truths being put out there are causing all the negative opinions on here - as if the people in charge care one bit about anyone heres opinion.-
I'm surprised to see so many here give the administration the benefit of the doubt. They haven't done much of anything to merit such trust, IMO. If anything, their actions would make me expect the opposite.
That being said, the list of things we can be confident in is rather short:
My personal take on the situation is that the lack of decisiveness after the George saga implies dysfunction. Seemingly everybody was reporting that he was the top candidate, but after that fell through we seem to have no direction at all. Expecting something to be done immediately after that domino fell is probably a bit much. However, right now we have nothing except a "probably by the end of the month maybe." Was there really no set back up plan after George predictably fell through? Or, maybe they've finally tightened up the flow of information after leaking like a sieve that they were interested in George? Past experience lends me to believe the former, but, hey, you never know.
That being said, the list of things we can be confident in is rather short:
- Rick George was far and away the top candidate
- No other candidates were going to receive any serious consideration until George declined the job (for real this time)
- The hope of George ended over a week ago
My personal take on the situation is that the lack of decisiveness after the George saga implies dysfunction. Seemingly everybody was reporting that he was the top candidate, but after that fell through we seem to have no direction at all. Expecting something to be done immediately after that domino fell is probably a bit much. However, right now we have nothing except a "probably by the end of the month maybe." Was there really no set back up plan after George predictably fell through? Or, maybe they've finally tightened up the flow of information after leaking like a sieve that they were interested in George? Past experience lends me to believe the former, but, hey, you never know.
...Take this for whatever it's worth....
Last edited by a moderator:
Hopefully, this is true. I like a Whitman hire, and it's seemed like he was the guy who was most likely to be selected all along. Now, we will see if it actually happens, or if something else delays the process (One last run at George! No stone unturned!).
I'm honestly not thrilled with either candidate. I know Whitman is an Illinois guy, but looking at resumes, is this the best we could bring to the table? If so, good luck hiring coaches that are a big step up from what we currently have.
Just to clarify - someone else said all signs point to Whitman. Tupper just said he's hearing Whitman and Chun - he didn't narrow down beyond that. Tupp did say he heard Tiley's out.
https://twitter.com/MarkTupper/with_replies
If it's not George or Tiley, and it sounds like both are out, then I'm all for taking a chance on Whitman, who could be the next George or Tiley (or Jim Phillips). The latter three are all alums whose careers have just rocketed to a point where they are unattainable for us. Let's not let Whitman pass us by either.
*disclaimer - there's no guarantee that Whitman will be great, heck he could end up a total dud, but we're in the position now that we have to take calculated risks and this is one.
You're right, my mistake.
dgcrow
- Kelso, WA
Well, our last AD's record before he came here was great and look at who he hired?
I am all in on Whitman if the powers that be name him.
FYI:
http://www.studlife.com/news/2016/02/15/athletic-director-whitman-up-for-illinois-position/
I may have missed this but the article mentioned Tiley and George are out because of "revision of the job description". What was the change?
Shane Walsh
aka "Captain Oblivious"
- Cynthiana, Kentucky
From the article...
"The field of Illinois candidates had recently narrowed after Tennis Australia CEO Craig Tiley, Colorado University athletic director Rick George, University of Maryland deputy athletic director Kelly Mehrtens and University of Central Michigan athletic director Dave Heeke all dropped out following a revision of the job description."
Also, did this happen after the job was posted?
Last edited:
dgcrow
- Kelso, WA
Good question.
+1 Amen - just hire Whitman already. Bronze Tablet. Former lawyer for the NFL. Illini football alum. 6 years of AD experience. If we wait too long on Whitman, Purdue may get him.
I can about garuntee that if we offered Heeke or Mehrtens they would take the job in a second. No revision of anything. They were out because they were not good choices. George most Likely didn't get all his demands met, same with Tiley. This is just a nice way to cover the tracks for some of them.
Don't like the sound of that. The high powered people dropped out after that, so I would guess that they diminished the power and authority of the job.
This whole process is turning into a joke. The image of the university has taken so many hits recently and now this. It's like watching a train wreck in slow motion.
Maybe we should all quit assuming the worst. For all we know Illinois offered Tiley and George all the money and guarantees they needed. Sometimes it just doesn't work out. We tried and that's all we can ask. Now if they screwed up it somehow, then it a different story. For all we know the process was smooth as can be, it just took way longer becuase we had to wait to make pitches to George and Tiley.
I have learned that my greatest sucesses in life was when I acted with efficient determination. I find it that our university has been quick to fire without a good plan going forward and a reluctance to be decisive following a fire.
How would a student newspaper at Wash U know the job description had been revised? Let's not jump to conclusions that is true.
However, I do find it interesting neither Whitman nor his head of communications was available for comment - seems like an implicit admission he is in the running.
Whitman gives a good interview, I like that. (Beckman gave possibly the worst interviews associated with our university's history, Mike Thomas was decent but by no means great.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ocmPsa5zY8
Googling Josh Whitman also just led me to a youtube vid of a touchdown pass to him from Kittner that put us up at Ohio State by the score of 42-14! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9I1dqMtgXGQ
Bring it back Josh!
Bring it back Josh!
That article says Tom Michael and Sean Frazier are still in the running as well and both of those things have been negated in other articles.
Let's try not to jump to conclusions as a lot of these folks don't know all the facts and are conflicting with other articles. "A change in job description" might have been a rumor this student heard and had no other legitimate reason for the other guys dropping out so they ran with it.
Or they made it up, we all know there is very little accountability in journalism nowadays and if you are vague enough you can get away with anything. "A change in job description" could be anything and is quite vague.
Let's try not to jump to conclusions as a lot of these folks don't know all the facts and are conflicting with other articles. "A change in job description" might have been a rumor this student heard and had no other legitimate reason for the other guys dropping out so they ran with it.
Or they made it up, we all know there is very little accountability in journalism nowadays and if you are vague enough you can get away with anything. "A change in job description" could be anything and is quite vague.
- Status