AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
Mark Kennedy new, but soon to be old CU President - Official CU president Thread
- Thread starter buff4bcs1985
- Start date
For Christ’s sake DBT, he has “UND” in his ****ing avatar.
Do me a favor. I don’t call you names, have the same respect for me.
@FLounder may be totally right about the guy. I have no problem with that. At least he’s the one guy here who claims to know him and to have seen him in action. If the guy sucks then I hope he doesn’t get hired.
But if they interviewed 6 people out of, I’d imagine, a multitude of applicants and he came out on top, if he’s as awful as all of you believe, then maybe the question should be “why are there not better applicants?”
But if they interviewed 6 people out of, I’d imagine, a multitude of applicants and he came out on top, if he’s as awful as all of you believe, then maybe the question should be “why are there not better applicants?”
That’s a question a lot of us have been asking. What we don’t know is who the other applicants were and what the criteria was for eliminating them. I may be reading way too much into this, but I suspect that our dysfunctional system and BoR is scaring potential candidates away. Qualified candidates look at the dumpster fire that is our BoR and dont want anything to do with it. I hope that’s not the case, but suspect it’s a contributing factor.
I have a hard time believing that. CU’s Presidency is a primo gig.
My wife interviewed four candidates for a job that pays less than 50k. Wtf are you so happy about the fact six anonymous people interviewed? If this guy had been a dem back bencher you'd not come up with these inane excuses. Can you ever stop with party over everything? **** man I've happily voted for Republican candidates for regent. At some point you have to draw a line
Great question DBT. The BoR is filled with morons. You have imbeciles like Jack Kroll on the board, and folks trying to score political points for a run at the Governor's mansion like Heidi Ganahl. In between you have regents trying to serve narrow constituent communities in Boulder or Castle Rock or wherever instead of trying to serve the University.
The system is absolutely ****
I can’t argue with you on that.
Sorry. You lost me.
I’m pretty sure a candidate would not want their name disclosed, among other reasons not to let the other names out.
This is hilarious.
@FLounder knows and works with Kennedy. He levels the same criticism of Kennedy that members of allbuffs have been stating for weeks. Imagine that: you don’t have to know someone in order to gauge their professional qualifications. Several members give a litany of reasons why the Regents are awful.
Yet, we get the dig in...the Regents just selected the best application! It can’t be that the Regents suck at picking people and Kennedy is an extension of their suck. It can’t be that Kennedy is simply a hack and people are upset that we don’t have a stud candidate as the sole finalist for the University system’s Presidency. Nope. The Regents still know what they’re doing.
Bliff Cranch
Well-Known Member
My philosophy: you work for people, not places. That’s the most important factor in pursuing, and ultimately staying in, any role. I have no way of proving it, but I’d venture a guess that other, more qualified candidates stayed away after conducting some research on just how dysfunctional over time the Regents have been here.
Okay. From now on I’ll put my trust in a bunch of internet geniuses. Given the personality of this board these days, I’m having a hard time believing politics isn’t driving opinions. In the very least political bias.
Last edited:
You choose not to evaluate arguments based on evidence. Many people throughout this thread have levied valid criticism of Kennedy. Your best reply has been that we don’t personally know the man. Then, someone who does know the man posts a near verbatim skewering of Kennedy. You continue to ignore the critiques since the person in question is in your tribe.
Maybe this is asking too much, but we “internet geniuses” are hoping that you will try to understand what we are actually saying instead of imposing a skewed vision of what you want to think we are saying.
Good point.
The part that confuses me is that they say he is a great salesman but then his fundraising doesn't seem to reflect that. Also, everyone here hates being micromanaged so I get what he is saying there but still doesn't seem to have a vision for what he wants to do.
That article is full boulder at points though and made me laugh.
That article is full boulder at points though and made me laugh.
I have no issue with legitimate criticism. The guy has zero experience administering a flagship University. UND is a tenth the size of CU. His fundraising record at UND isn’t stellar. Those are legitimate concerns.
I think the criticism started out along political lines, and then evolved into a little more substantive criticism of his actual qualifications. Politics is emotional, and it gets people motivated to look deeper. I think if there was more meat on the bone, so to speak, his politics would have already been forgotten.
DBT isn't wrong that there is political bias at play, but it is just as prevalent from folks like DBT who give him a pass because of his political leanings as it is from the liberals who are upset at his voting record.
Outside of politics, you have to question his experience since he has never managed a system remotely this large, his record at UND and relationship with the ND legislature and the fact that he has at least had a few complaints levied against him (Title IX complaint at UND, discrimination complaint against him at Georgetown by a gay employee).
He has seemed willing to pad the pockets of his political supporters using his position (approved his Chief of Staff at UND to a $180k salary AND allowed that person to expense the University $25k/year to commute from Texas. When criticized, he claimed everyone was being racist and no one would do the job for less).
You have to question his ability to raise money when the biggest donors to UND refused to donate money while he was there.
You have to question why he was only at UND for two years, and within that timeframe he already tried to get hired at UCF.... and you have to wonder why UCF ultimately rejected him.
You have to wonder why many, many at UND are happy as can be to see him leave
You have to wonder about his judgement when he sends out a letter more or less quitting at UND before he was even officially offered the position at CU and killed the ability for the school to properly announce him.
You have wonder why hardcore conservative like Flounder hates this guys guts after seeing him in action at UND.
But let's say you're fine with all that - what has he done since his announcement
- Bungled a number of interviews
- Inability to answer basic questions about higher education, such as not knowing what the Pomona Letter is, or whether UND has any DACA students
- Complains about how unfair it is that people question is voting record in Congress, but then references that same voting record when it suits him
- Seems to have zero grasp of CU. Much of what he says he would do already exists on campus
- Complete inability to paint any sort of vision for the University. Commentary basically devolves into 'schools can do what they want, and I won't get in their way, but I also won't advocate or fight for the University values and culture'
My final comment is this. If it was a Democrat being put forth for this position, and that person had a direct and recent history of slashing athletics like Kennedy has done, then this forum would be burning down in rage.
Outside of politics, you have to question his experience since he has never managed a system remotely this large, his record at UND and relationship with the ND legislature and the fact that he has at least had a few complaints levied against him (Title IX complaint at UND, discrimination complaint against him at Georgetown by a gay employee).
He has seemed willing to pad the pockets of his political supporters using his position (approved his Chief of Staff at UND to a $180k salary AND allowed that person to expense the University $25k/year to commute from Texas. When criticized, he claimed everyone was being racist and no one would do the job for less).
You have to question his ability to raise money when the biggest donors to UND refused to donate money while he was there.
You have to question why he was only at UND for two years, and within that timeframe he already tried to get hired at UCF.... and you have to wonder why UCF ultimately rejected him.
You have to wonder why many, many at UND are happy as can be to see him leave
You have to wonder about his judgement when he sends out a letter more or less quitting at UND before he was even officially offered the position at CU and killed the ability for the school to properly announce him.
You have wonder why hardcore conservative like Flounder hates this guys guts after seeing him in action at UND.
But let's say you're fine with all that - what has he done since his announcement
- Bungled a number of interviews
- Inability to answer basic questions about higher education, such as not knowing what the Pomona Letter is, or whether UND has any DACA students
- Complains about how unfair it is that people question is voting record in Congress, but then references that same voting record when it suits him
- Seems to have zero grasp of CU. Much of what he says he would do already exists on campus
- Complete inability to paint any sort of vision for the University. Commentary basically devolves into 'schools can do what they want, and I won't get in their way, but I also won't advocate or fight for the University values and culture'
My final comment is this. If it was a Democrat being put forth for this position, and that person had a direct and recent history of slashing athletics like Kennedy has done, then this forum would be burning down in rage.
You’ve got it the wrong way. The criticism has always been that he’s a small timer. That he has political baggage is extra reasoning for people to view him negatively.
You and I have a different opinion on how we got to this point. I had a long and arduous discussion on why his politics weren’t relevant, and was told in no uncertain terms that they were. Eventually, that discussion abated and we began to really look at the guys actual qualifications. But how we got to this point doesn’t really matter. We are here now.