FC: Barbour sees no culture problem, only positive Paterno legacy
- Thread starter LundyPSU
- Start date
This is the new M.O. Have the AD tell alumni groups/ fans what they want to hear in local meetings/ news outlets etc. It's the opposite stance at national media events or when Old Main would have to take a public stand in front of anything other than an alumni group.
Last edited:
Good, then she should have no problem with every team wearing a "409" patch or sticker....starting now!
<<<<----------------------- So was this INAPPROPRIATE or a tribute to a LEGACY, Ms. Barbour?
Ms. Barbour looks into "Manual of Protocol" and right there in Chapter 1 it says: understand the perspective of your audience, so therefore she is likely to respond "It depends? Are you from Michigan or Penn State?"
Ms. Barbour looks into "Manual of Protocol" and right there in Chapter 1 it says: understand the perspective of your audience, so therefore she is likely to respond "It depends? Are you from Michigan or Penn State?"
Lets give Sandy some credit. She unequivocally supported Joe and PSU culture. She was rightly criticized for the infamous 409 tweet to that woman from Michigan but she has learned from her mistake. This was the strongest pro-Paterno, pro-PSU culture statement we have seen from anyone in administration since this whole mess started. Can you imagine Joyner saying these things?
If she doesn't say what you want to hear, you rip her a new one. And if she does say what you want to hear, you still rip her a new one. And you wonder why she doesn't risk her job by going against the BOT narrative more often, with that kind of support?
I do see some positive aspects in her statements. Other than the alumni trustees, she is the only administrator of whom I am aware who publically rejects the football culture accusation and who goes so far to acknowledge Joe's and the rest of the Paterno family's contributions to the university. Erickson, Barron, and the old guard trustees refuse to say the same because they have painted themselves in a corner and won't admit to any mistakes in dealing with crisis.
She hasn't done squat except spend a ton of money, trash the 409 wins, leave the hockey coach and all other athletes spinning in the wind on the issue, etc., etc., but hey, she stated the obvious when no one was looking.
Yes, there is some truth to that but, have we had enough time to know who the real SB is? The misstep to which I refer was 4 months ago (nearly to the day I think). I know she regretted that twitter reply, but was it because of the reaction she got? As she sent that reply without perhaps giving it much thought, says something to me. The quick reply was to me serving an audience different than the Penn State audience. When the message is consistent, consistent, and consistent then I'll be convinced.
No one is ripping her personally. What they are ripping is the Penn State policy of double talk.
Now everyone here knows that any action is really controlled by the board. The issue people are ripping is in effect a Penn State 'bait and switch'. The athletic director will go to local Pennsylvania outlets with what they want to hear but you don't see Barron going on CNN or Fox saying the same thing with conviction nationally. Hell, when these issues were brought up with Barron by a Pennlive interview he said he didn't want to talk about it. The frustration comes from the BoT and Barron's double-talk- not Sandy.
You need to remember who the real enemy is.
And telling that to the Philadelphia Inquirer is not stating the obvious "when no one was looking."
Sheesh.
Do you honestly believe that the support she does or does not get on this board will make one iota of difference when it comes to retaining her job? frankly she can say whatever she wants as long as her actions bring in the cash. While it's too early to do a fair accounting, I haven't seen anything proposed that has the prospects of a payout.
Positive reinforcement, ladies and gentlemen. How else do you get people to do what you want? Those who are critical or worse, cynical 100% of the time, only help Barron prove the truth in his recent outburst. We are the problem.
“I have no doubt that at the right time as some of the legal issues have been sorted through, …Penn State will honor not only Joe Paterno’s legacy but the Paterno family’s legacy,” said Barbour, Penn State’s first female athletic director, who got her start in collegiate athletics more than 30 years ago as an assistant field hockey coach. “…We’ll know when it’s time.”
Read more at http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/campus_inq/PSU-athletic-director-.html#14DjUtIDiWFpTPyY.99
I'm glad to hear her say some of these things, but the PSU leadership team has talking points on the "honoring Joe in due time" theme. Also, simply honoring is not enough. And even if there was something to honor Joe, what would it look like and who would do the honoring such that it is sincere? I have trouble getting my head around honoring him in a way that is meaningful. I can't imagine I would enjoy certain people presiding. I welcome another perspective.
Read more at http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/campus_inq/PSU-athletic-director-.html#14DjUtIDiWFpTPyY.99
I'm glad to hear her say some of these things, but the PSU leadership team has talking points on the "honoring Joe in due time" theme. Also, simply honoring is not enough. And even if there was something to honor Joe, what would it look like and who would do the honoring such that it is sincere? I have trouble getting my head around honoring him in a way that is meaningful. I can't imagine I would enjoy certain people presiding. I welcome another perspective.
I never forget who the real problem is, but I have yet to see anything that points to her as part of any solution. On the contrary, in her limited opportunities she comes across as part of the problem.
It's the overall support she gets, whether on this board, in public, in terms of donations and tickets sales, etc. Also, how much backing she gets from the coaches, particularly Franklin.
Yes, it is too early, at least we agree on that.
Everyone acts like if Curley was still running the place we'd be in the black, even with the Sandusky mess. I'm not going to rehash all the reasons from past posts why our expenses have gone up (and would have gone up regardless when Joe left), but without the fine, we'd be still making money. There's the old saying, you have to spend money to make money. Right now, we have to spend for the long term health of the department. It's an investment. We coasted in many places because we had a legend at the top of the money making program, and we could get away with it. Unfortunately it comes at a time when revenue has taken a hit. But if we don't, we would be left in further in the dust.
Spend money to make money? Let me know when the next great marketing campaign takes effect. Overhead is not exactly value added, and not all spending is equal.
Right....so let's setup patsy schedules, not invest in facility upgrades, not hire anyone outside of the family, and not market at all......just like Tim Curley did.
So, the part where she told the largest newspaper in the state that we had no culture problem in the athletic department, that Joe's influence is everywhere and it's positive, that's part of the problem? Got it.
Look, she's made a couple of mistakes, but for all we know, in the 409 stickers screwup, she could have been told after the fact to come out against them, and take the fall for it -- e.g. she couldn't say that she was ordered to come out against it. I wouldn't put it past some of those in charge. That's as plausible as she's just tone deaf or incompetent.
For the record, what exactly would you like to see her do to make you feel like she's part of the solution?
No. People are just sick of the lying and double speak. Like when Barron says he's going to review Freeh and then spends months doing nothing. Worse than that- he tries to limit access to Freeh materials and wants complete anonymity so no one can know who said what, determine it's validity, etc. . When questioned he says there's no time line and not to expect it soon. In other words- when hell freezes over, move on.
Or when they say something good about Paterno, then when asked when they are going to honor him (as repeatedly promised for about 1-2 years now) you get the all too familiar PSU answer- ummmm.......well........yeah, umm.......about that........sometime in the future.....don't know exactly when.... I don't really want to speak about that. Next question please.
Bottom line- glad Sandy said what she did and it should be treated with some gravitas considering she's an "outsider" who has spent time at Cal, ND, Tulane, UMass etc. However, there's a point where actions need to follow words. You know- actually mean what you say. That's where Barron and the BoT keep falling short over and over and over.
Last edited:
Exactly. LOL If there had been no Sandusky scandal, Curley was still going to have to do things differently to some degree once Joe stepped down. It was inevitable. The transition would have been easier, for sure, but salaries were going to go up for coaches, football staffing was going to be expanded and facilities improved (if we wanted to hire a top coach to replace Joe). The realities of running a modern athletic department would have caught up to him eventually, and he would have had to do some restructuring, and gasp, probably added staff. Just look at the technological changes in the last 15 years. Adding hockey added significantly to the workload, I'm sure. Two more teams and coaches, but in a high profile sport with its own arena and areas open to the public. This wasn't adding synchronized swimming. Joe leaving would have meant some degree of marketing the program. There were fans of Joe that we were going to lose anyway.
So, we're going to criticize Barbour because we're upset with the BOT and Barron?
As far as stumbling over honoring Joe, in terms of timing, she did answer the question, essentially. Once the legal issues are cleared up. There is no way the BOT is going to allow it to happen until they feel there isn't something that could come out to make them take away the statue again (or however they honor him). I'm not sure how many of you are in PA versus out of state, but those of you in PA (and participating in threads like this) are in a bubble. Unfortunately the narrative hasn't changed much for most people, who probably have learned very much more than what they heard from the GJP, Freeh Report, and walking back some sanctions (because of good behavior, not because they shouldn't have been issued in the first place). So, IMHO they want some cover in terms of the courts. Even though Joe isn't on trial, if the others are acquitted, that's enough. Or, also, IMHO if Curley is acquitted and they can shift the blame to administrators and not the athletic department. Until then, they're taking no chances.
Right... Because hiring a bunch of expensive financing overhead accomplishes what you want. Do you remember what Sandy's big selling point was when she was hired? Finance. What has she hired to do that job? More finance. Do you think a higher cost structure makes your complaints more or less likely to occur? If you've ever done budgeting you'd know the answer. Let me know when she actually spends money on the things you think are needed to 'make money.'
When she starts saying these things to the national media, I'll take notice. When her deeds start matching her words, I'll take notice. Until then, I'll never understand this hero worship some have for her. You'd think some on this board were suffering from Stockholm syndrome.
I think you missed my comments on Barbour. No problem with the bulk of what she said. However the response of PSU is not adequate to alumni/ fans after 3 years now (and they really don't care what people in Nebraska or Iowa or Arkansas think).
The only issue I see for Barbour where she needs to be more careful to protect herself (compared to the BoT using her) is when they put her out there to pacify alumni and then she gives the standard BoT response on honoring Paterno. You know that question is coming. She's going to take heat for repeating the mantra as she becomes the PR face of Old Main. Frankly, she should just say that's a decision above her and put the attention where it belongs. Alumni would respect that honesty- a very rare thing the past 3 years.
At the risk of sounding repetitive and uncivil, she's a dumbshit.
Honestly, I don't think I'd go that far but I agree she's been a little slow on the uptake here as AD. I have a feeling she came in completely unaware on the real situation. Because of that I was willing to cut her some slack on some early missteps. However, she's been around long enough now and talked to enough alumni to get the real picture.
I'm sure at Cal (with all respect to our Cal fans here) there's pretty much apathy with regard to sports and the AD there could make a statement and no one would know. At PSU (especially on hot button topics) it hits the websites and Twitter within seconds and the calls to the AD office start 5 minutes later.
. Honestly, she needs to 'protect' herself in the eyes of alumni more and not just repeat the BoT mantra that gets people riled up. As AD she needs good alumni relations to do her job well. I think she just needs a little more political savvy here. The real problem is Old Main and the BoT and she needs to make sure she doesn't become their 'fall guy'.
I will never be able to forget that she got into a Twitter discussion with an anonymous Michigan person and apologized for the 409 hockey helmet stickers. That is quite possibly the stupidest thing anyone could have ever done. It was mind-bogglingly dumb, not to mention insensitive, and I cannot imagine another AD in the country acting that way. Not one. For me, that one irrefutably brain-numbingly stupid act will always define her.
I know but I think that came from a Cal mindset of political correctness (apologize to anyone who says they are offended) and thinking it would pretty much be a private conversation between them. Yes- I know Twitter isn't private but I think as Cal AD it wouldn't have made a blip on the radar. As PSU AD it made a firestorm.
To be honest- I'm not sure she's the sharpest tool in the shed but she has to be careful about being used by the BoT as their 'go to person' thinking the push back will be less. She needs to blaze her own path. She's not going to defy the BoT but she needs to walk a better line with alumni IMO- if for no other reason than to be able to do her job well.
Just because a head coach happens to be great at a certain position, does that mean he doesn't hire the best assistant he can to coach that position? Of course not. The head coach had a lot of responsibilities, as does an AD. Having that expertise makes it easier to manage the assistant, and teach them what you know, and step in and assist as needed. But that doesn't mean he/she has to do it him/herself just because they're good at it.
And as much as it apparently pains you to admit it, yes adding staff sometimes is necessary and helps you make money. If your current staff is overextended and can't do their jobs properly, it will cost you money in the long run. Maybe not right away, but over time it will. Maybe Sandy needs to devote more time to fundraising and going after donors than Curley did. After all, Joe can't pick up the phone anymore, and Franklin doesn't have 61 years of relationships to lean on. Maybe she needs to spend more time on marketing than Curley did, because tickets don't automatically sellout like they used to (for a variety of reasons). So maybe in order to do those things, which are directly related to her mission of improving finances, she needs good assistants to do some of the other work.
No hero worship. I just think she's done a good job, from what I can see, thus far. Has she made mistakes? Yes. Has Franklin made mistakes his first year? He'd be the first to admit that, I think. But no one is calling him names and talking about how incompetent he is. We're paying him millions of dollars to go 7-5 and win a bowl game that normally we'd be embarrassed to admit we went to. Oh, but there are extenuating circumstances, you say. Well guess what? Barbour is working under a set of extenuating circumstances too.
When the Sandusky situation broke, the athletic department had a bomb dropped on it, just like the football program and the rest of the university. Curley wasn't the only AD "casualty" either, if you'll recall. The sanctions made the job one of the more difficult ones in a Power 5 conference. Then we had the "reign of terror" that was Joyner. Today we're still working under severe financial sanctions and raising money to upgrade facilities, keep coaches like Shoop, etc. and trying to give men's basketball the support it needs to get some more momentum going to make that program more successful, and more profitable. Oh, and we're not allowed to cut money or eliminate any sports either. On top of that, the alumni (who she's trying to get pumped up to donate) are pissed at the BOT and administration, with tremendous in-fighting going on. If she says or does what the alumni want, she risks pissing off her bosses. If she says or does everything her bosses want, she pisses off the alumni she needs to buy tickets and donate. Anyone who can't see the position she's in just doesn't care to look. It's a tremendous juggling act, and I have no doubt she needs the extra help. Given our financial position, I seriously doubt overhead was added, unless they felt it was an investment that would pay off in the long run.
Last edited:
There's a corollary to spending money to make money that some people just don't seem to grasp, you have to spend money to waste money.
There's also this notion out there that the only way to balance a budget is by cutting spending and overhead. There are certainly times that reducing spending is appropriate. But I have seen time and time again that reducing spending just makes things worse.
Let's say I'm a retail store. Sales are down, so I decide to cut my new employee training program to save money. Can't be wasteful, right? Now I'm putting cashiers, sales people, etc. who don't know the stores, the stockrooms, the products, the computer system, etc on the sales floor. This affects the customer experience, people stop coming in as frequently, and stop buying as much. The solution: SPEND MONEY on training.
Similar threads
