Noelle Cockett resigning

rAggie · Post by **rAggie** » November 22nd, 2022, 10:35 am

https://www.usu.edu/today/story/usu-pre ... uly-1-2023

As first reported here by Jimbo

jimbo · Post by **jimbo** » November 22nd, 2022, 10:47 am

https://www.sltrib.com/news/education/2 ... president/

3rdGenAggie · Post by **3rdGenAggie** » November 22nd, 2022, 10:48 am

Would I be wrong in assuming this is more of a "heads have to roll and you're the boss, so yours is rolling" kind of situation? As opposed to anything Cockett really did wrong?

jimbo · Post by **jimbo** » November 22nd, 2022, 10:55 am

3rdGenAggie wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 10:48 am
Would I be wrong in assuming this is more of a "heads have to roll and you're the boss, so yours is rolling" kind of situation? As opposed to anything Cockett really did wrong?

Let's just say it's not significantly different than what happened to Ruth Watkins: https://www.sltrib.com/news/education/2 ... president/

Madmartigan · Post by **Madmartigan** » November 22nd, 2022, 10:59 am

3rdGenAggie wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 10:48 am
Would I be wrong in assuming this is more of a "heads have to roll and you're the boss, so yours is rolling" kind of situation? As opposed to anything Cockett really did wrong?

The buck ultimately stops with her. It's dangerous at the top. @jimbo already drew the comparison to the U of Us president that had to resign after the McCluskey fiasco.

Post by **AggiesForever** » November 22nd, 2022, 11:01 am

I think this means she is probably worn out and ready to do something else. The usual term for a university president, nationally, is about 7 years. Some go longer and some less. But I don't believe it is fruitful to try and "read into" why this has occurred, other than to say that she has probably achieved her goals and has had enough. I think she will be very happy to return to her lab and professorship full-time next July.

Congratulations to her on an excellent term as USU President.

YoungBloodAggie · Post by **YoungBloodAggie** » November 22nd, 2022, 11:05 am

AggiesForever wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 11:01 am
I think this means she is probably worn out and ready to do something else. The usual term for a university president, nationally, is about 7 years. Some go longer and some less. But I don't believe it is fruitful to try and "read into" why this has occurred, other than to say that she has probably achieved her goals and has had enough. I think she will be very happy to return to her lab and professorship full-time next July.

Congratulations to her on an excellent term as USU President.

Noelle? John? Certainly one of the Cocketts is running the AggiesForever account.

apo · Post by **apo** » November 22nd, 2022, 11:07 am

Is Jimbo, Jim Laub????

rAggie · Post by **rAggie** » November 22nd, 2022, 11:09 am

AggiesForever wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 11:01 am
I think this means she is probably worn out and ready to do something else. The usual term for a university president, nationally, is about 7 years. Some go longer and some less. But I don't believe it is fruitful to try and "read into" why this has occurred, other than to say that she has probably achieved her goals and has had enough. I think she will be very happy to return to her lab and professorship full-time next July.

Congratulations to her on an excellent term as USU President.

I'm with you Vic. Her accomplishments as president are extremely noteworthy and among the biggest in the history of USU. She found herself in some crossfire on extremely serious and sensitive issues that would have been mitigated with more proactivity and/or less naiveté but all in all her tenure has risen the profile of the university in numerous positive ways.

NowhereLandAggie · Post by **NowhereLandAggie** » November 22nd, 2022, 11:12 am

YoungBloodAggie wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 11:05 am

AggiesForever wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 11:01 am
I think this means she is probably worn out and ready to do something else. The usual term for a university president, nationally, is about 7 years. Some go longer and some less. But I don't believe it is fruitful to try and "read into" why this has occurred, other than to say that she has probably achieved her goals and has had enough. I think she will be very happy to return to her lab and professorship full-time next July.

Congratulations to her on an excellent term as USU President.
Noelle? John? Certainly one of the Cocketts is running the AggiesForever account.

Nope. I used to work directly for Noelle, and so did he. I will also vouch for her integrity as a person, even if I did get a letter from informing me of being laid off.

jimbo · Post by **jimbo** » November 22nd, 2022, 11:16 am

rAggie wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 11:09 am

AggiesForever wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 11:01 am
I think this means she is probably worn out and ready to do something else. The usual term for a university president, nationally, is about 7 years. Some go longer and some less. But I don't believe it is fruitful to try and "read into" why this has occurred, other than to say that she has probably achieved her goals and has had enough. I think she will be very happy to return to her lab and professorship full-time next July.

Congratulations to her on an excellent term as USU President.
I'm with you Vic. Her accomplishments as president are extremely noteworthy and among the biggest in the history of USU. She found herself in some crossfire on extremely serious and sensitive issues that would have been mitigated with more proactivity and/or less naiveté but all in all her tenure has risen the profile of the university in numerous positive ways.

@rAggie You're dead on, and she still has 7 months left at the helm, so I expect Cockett will go into hyperdrive finishing up lingering projects and go all out in leaving USU in the best possible position before handing off to her successor.

ChicagoAggie · Post by **ChicagoAggie** » November 22nd, 2022, 11:18 am

rAggie wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 11:09 am

AggiesForever wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 11:01 am
I think this means she is probably worn out and ready to do something else. The usual term for a university president, nationally, is about 7 years. Some go longer and some less. But I don't believe it is fruitful to try and "read into" why this has occurred, other than to say that she has probably achieved her goals and has had enough. I think she will be very happy to return to her lab and professorship full-time next July.

Congratulations to her on an excellent term as USU President.
I'm with you Vic. Her accomplishments as president are extremely noteworthy and among the biggest in the history of USU. She found herself in some crossfire on extremely serious and sensitive issues that would have been mitigated with more proactivity and/or less naiveté but all in all her tenure has risen the profile of the university in numerous positive ways.

I second this. I am sorry to see her leave.

gomretat · Post by **gomretat** » November 22nd, 2022, 11:23 am

From the rumor mill - I was told last week by a guy who is quite well connected that she was going to follow soon after Hartwell and also that BA is in trouble. Not sure what is going on or what it means but it was certainly more than she was ready to do something else. Would love to know what is really going on. Seemed to me that she was doing a good job. I am just the messenger.

AggieGrad2021 · Post by **AggieGrad2021** » November 22nd, 2022, 11:26 am

gomretat wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 11:23 am
From the rumor mill - I was told last week by a guy who is quite well connected that she was going to follow soon after Hartwell and also that BA is in trouble. Not sure what is going on or what it means but it was certainly more than she was ready to do something else. Would love to know what is really going on. Seemed to me that she was doing a good job. I am just the messenger.

Yeah she didn’t step down because she wanted to. She was definitely, asked to step down. She did some great things here. Glad she brought the Vet School to Utah State. Well over do. As a student, loved her handling of COVID, basically forcing in person classes to be available. Other university president didn’t have the stones to pull that. Utah State statically was one of the best Universities to handle COVID, and kept on-campus/in person classes). Other than that, too many disaster fires she failed to extinguish. Mishandling if Sexual Assault, repeatedly. Random “resignations” from high profile USU positions weeks before the school year started, etc. it’s a Tough job. But Buck stops with her, someone had to go. I also heard BA’s job is in trouble, and that if Cockett had the buyout money for his deal he would be gone now too. Right or wrong, it’s an undeniable fact that Utah State has a bad reputation and it’s needing to change. If cleaning house does that, well it has to be done

ManitobaAggie · Post by **ManitobaAggie** » November 22nd, 2022, 11:29 am

There was a poster who said he won’t miss this football staff - I wouldn’t be surprised to find out BA is in trouble.

Doesn’t mean I agree with it.

There must be a bunch of stuff behind the scenes we don’t know about because this is getting ridiculous.

NowhereLandAggie · Post by **NowhereLandAggie** » November 22nd, 2022, 11:44 am

AggieGrad2021 wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 11:26 am

gomretat wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 11:23 am
From the rumor mill - I was told last week by a guy who is quite well connected that she was going to follow soon after Hartwell and also that BA is in trouble. Not sure what is going on or what it means but it was certainly more than she was ready to do something else. Would love to know what is really going on. Seemed to me that she was doing a good job. I am just the messenger.
Yeah she didn’t step down because she wanted to. She was definitely, asked to step down. She did some great things here. Glad she brought the Vet School to Utah State. Well over do. Other than that, too many disaster fires she dialed to extinguish. Tough job. But Buck stops with her, someone had to go. I also heard BA’s job is in trouble, and that if Cockett had the buyout money for his deal he would be gone now too. Right or wrong, it’s an undeniable fact that Utah State has a bad reputation and it’s needing to change.

Yes, there was definitely pressure, but the fact that she will stay on until July means that it isn't "for cause."

Also, she will have been employed for 33 years, it isn't like retirement is a huge surprise after that many years. Considering her husband has a principal's retirement, plus a few years at USU, they are fine financially.

I doubt Scott Wyatt gets the job, USU has had rules in the past that department heads have PhDs, and his Juris Doctorate isn't going to put him at the top of the list. My guess is an outsider gets the job.

WasatchAggie · Post by **WasatchAggie** » November 22nd, 2022, 12:02 pm

As it pertains to who we should select for an interim president, if needed, I would simply point out that Wyatt would not be an unusual choice based upon his education and background.

In recent decades, lawyers have been tapped to run some of the country’s elite institutions. They include Yale University, Harvard University, Stanford University, Columbia University, Johns Hopkins University, Tufts University, Dartmouth College and Barnard College, as well as George Washington University, New York University and the universities of California, Chicago, Iowa, Virginia, Miami, Indiana and Florida.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/educatio ... education/

I’d note that you can add Utah and yBu to the list too. A JD requires 91 semester hours post BA/BS which falls within PhD programs which avg. between 60-120 hours.

YoungBloodAggie · Post by **YoungBloodAggie** » November 22nd, 2022, 12:06 pm

Did Noelle Cockett do a good job? In my opinion, yes.

Can you reasonably argue she is stepping down without pressure to do so? No way.

Hoot · Post by **Hoot** » November 22nd, 2022, 12:14 pm

ManitobaAggie wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 11:29 am
There was a poster who said he won’t miss this football staff - I wouldn’t be surprised to find out BA is in trouble.

Doesn’t mean I agree with it.

There must be a bunch of stuff behind the scenes we don’t know about because this is getting ridiculous.

I believe I said something along those lines. I have no inside knowledge into BA’s situation. I was just saying I won’t miss all the crap he and the staff pull.

As for Cockett, good riddance.

tipitup · Post by **tipitup** » November 22nd, 2022, 12:17 pm

Hoot wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 12:14 pm

ManitobaAggie wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 11:29 am
There was a poster who said he won’t miss this football staff - I wouldn’t be surprised to find out BA is in trouble.

Doesn’t mean I agree with it.

There must be a bunch of stuff behind the scenes we don’t know about because this is getting ridiculous.
I believe I said something along those lines. I have no inside knowledge into BA’s situation. I was just saying I won’t miss all the crap he and the staff pull.

As for Cockett, good riddance.

wow hoot, who do you like?

Hoot · Post by **Hoot** » November 22nd, 2022, 12:18 pm

tipitup wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 12:17 pm

Hoot wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 12:14 pm

ManitobaAggie wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 11:29 am
There was a poster who said he won’t miss this football staff - I wouldn’t be surprised to find out BA is in trouble.

Doesn’t mean I agree with it.

There must be a bunch of stuff behind the scenes we don’t know about because this is getting ridiculous.
I believe I said something along those lines. I have no inside knowledge into BA’s situation. I was just saying I won’t miss all the crap he and the staff pull.

As for Cockett, good riddance.
wow hoot, who do you like?

I like Chuckie… and you…

hickaggie · Post by **hickaggie** » November 22nd, 2022, 12:28 pm

AggieGrad2021 wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 11:26 am

gomretat wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 11:23 am
From the rumor mill - I was told last week by a guy who is quite well connected that she was going to follow soon after Hartwell and also that BA is in trouble. Not sure what is going on or what it means but it was certainly more than she was ready to do something else. Would love to know what is really going on. Seemed to me that she was doing a good job. I am just the messenger.
Yeah she didn’t step down because she wanted to. She was definitely, asked to step down. She did some great things here. Glad she brought the Vet School to Utah State. Well over do. As a student, loved her handling of COVID, basically forcing in person classes to be available. Other university president didn’t have the stones to pull that. Utah State statically was one of the best Universities to handle COVID, and kept on-campus/in person classes). Other than that, too many disaster fires she failed to extinguish. Mishandling if Sexual Assault, repeatedly. Random “resignations” from high profile USU positions weeks before the school year started, etc. it’s a Tough job. But Buck stops with her, someone had to go. I also heard BA’s job is in trouble, and that if Cockett had the buyout money for his deal he would be gone now too. Right or wrong, it’s an undeniable fact that Utah State has a bad reputation and it’s needing to change. If cleaning house does that, well it has to be done

I would like to know what "mishandling" means and why anyone considers this the University's job. Yeah I get the title 9 BS but this is law enforcement and county attorney issues period. Students may be young but they are adults and subject to the penal code.

I know, I know. Title 9 and woke BS but I keep hearing this mishandling allegation. Absent criminal obstruction what is there? Not saying there isn't something wrong but nothing in what has been disclosed publicly suggests such.

Post by **aggies22** » November 22nd, 2022, 12:37 pm

Hoot wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 12:18 pm

tipitup wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 12:17 pm

Hoot wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 12:14 pm

ManitobaAggie wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 11:29 am
There was a poster who said he won’t miss this football staff - I wouldn’t be surprised to find out BA is in trouble.

Doesn’t mean I agree with it.

There must be a bunch of stuff behind the scenes we don’t know about because this is getting ridiculous.
I believe I said something along those lines. I have no inside knowledge into BA’s situation. I was just saying I won’t miss all the crap he and the staff pull.

As for Cockett, good riddance.
wow hoot, who do you like?
I like Chuckie… and you…

Chuckie isn't ready yet but he will be.

cbingham · Post by **cbingham** » November 22nd, 2022, 3:40 pm

hickaggie wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 12:28 pm

AggieGrad2021 wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 11:26 am

gomretat wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 11:23 am
From the rumor mill - I was told last week by a guy who is quite well connected that she was going to follow soon after Hartwell and also that BA is in trouble. Not sure what is going on or what it means but it was certainly more than she was ready to do something else. Would love to know what is really going on. Seemed to me that she was doing a good job. I am just the messenger.
Yeah she didn’t step down because she wanted to. She was definitely, asked to step down. She did some great things here. Glad she brought the Vet School to Utah State. Well over do. As a student, loved her handling of COVID, basically forcing in person classes to be available. Other university president didn’t have the stones to pull that. Utah State statically was one of the best Universities to handle COVID, and kept on-campus/in person classes). Other than that, too many disaster fires she failed to extinguish. Mishandling if Sexual Assault, repeatedly. Random “resignations” from high profile USU positions weeks before the school year started, etc. it’s a Tough job. But Buck stops with her, someone had to go. I also heard BA’s job is in trouble, and that if Cockett had the buyout money for his deal he would be gone now too. Right or wrong, it’s an undeniable fact that Utah State has a bad reputation and it’s needing to change. If cleaning house does that, well it has to be done
I would like to know what "mishandling" means and why anyone considers this the University's job. Yeah I get the title 9 BS but this is law enforcement and county attorney issues period. Students may be young but they are adults and subject to the penal code.

I know, I know. Title 9 and woke BS but I keep hearing this mishandling allegation. Absent criminal obstruction what is there? Not saying there isn't something wrong but nothing in what has been disclosed publicly suggests such.

Title 9 existed long before any "woke BS" was ever invented. Your narrative seems highly informed by uninformed social media posts. The basis for liability and the purpose of title 9 is that entities have responsibility, whether it be a company keeping employees safe when in company owned buildings or school leaders with students / employees on their campuses. Liability drops significantly if students are harmed outside of the campus or associated off-campus housing.

Bummer that your take seems to dismiss the value of protecting women in general. I assume it just reads that way and was not the intent?

Intermeddler · Post by **Intermeddler** » November 22nd, 2022, 3:51 pm

gomretat wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 11:23 am
From the rumor mill - I was told last week by a guy who is quite well connected that she was going to follow soon after Hartwell and also that BA is in trouble. Not sure what is going on or what it means but it was certainly more than she was ready to do something else. Would love to know what is really going on. Seemed to me that she was doing a good job. I am just the messenger.

Heard the same a couple weeks ago. Surprised she was pushed out so quickly. I’ve heard part of why Wyatt’s name is floated is they anticipate more lawsuits coming their way and his mix of experience as SUU president and lawyer might be valuable while they deal with those. If she stays until July it makes an interim appointment less likely.

She wanted BA gone from what I was told so maybe he’s safe now but I think that he’s potentially on thin ice depending on what else comes out about the program

Coloraggie · Post by **Coloraggie** » November 22nd, 2022, 4:49 pm

aggies22 wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 12:37 pm

Hoot wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 12:18 pm

tipitup wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 12:17 pm

Hoot wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 12:14 pm

ManitobaAggie wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 11:29 am
There was a poster who said he won’t miss this football staff - I wouldn’t be surprised to find out BA is in trouble.

Doesn’t mean I agree with it.

There must be a bunch of stuff behind the scenes we don’t know about because this is getting ridiculous.
I believe I said something along those lines. I have no inside knowledge into BA’s situation. I was just saying I won’t miss all the crap he and the staff pull.

As for Cockett, good riddance.
wow hoot, who do you like?
I like Chuckie… and you…
Chuckie isn't ready yet but he will be.

And many said Jeff Saturday wasn't ready for the Colts job either, but he's there and after two weeks doing a decent job. Chuckie has more direct experience and it isn't as high profile as NFL coaching. On the other hand you could argue that an NFL head coach just needs to guide the direction of the team and doesn't do much "coaching." But I do agree with you that Chuckie won't be our next head coach unless Blake is here for 10 years.

Post by **aggies22** » November 22nd, 2022, 5:25 pm

Coloraggie wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 4:49 pm

aggies22 wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 12:37 pm

Hoot wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 12:18 pm

tipitup wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 12:17 pm

Hoot wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 12:14 pm

ManitobaAggie wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 11:29 am
There was a poster who said he won’t miss this football staff - I wouldn’t be surprised to find out BA is in trouble.

Doesn’t mean I agree with it.

There must be a bunch of stuff behind the scenes we don’t know about because this is getting ridiculous.
I believe I said something along those lines. I have no inside knowledge into BA’s situation. I was just saying I won’t miss all the crap he and the staff pull.

As for Cockett, good riddance.
wow hoot, who do you like?
I like Chuckie… and you…
Chuckie isn't ready yet but he will be.
And many said Jeff Saturday wasn't ready for the Colts job either, but he's there and after two weeks doing a decent job. Chuckie has more direct experience and it isn't as high profile as NFL coaching. On the other hand you could argue that an NFL head coach just needs to guide the direction of the team and doesn't do much "coaching." But I do agree with you that Chuckie won't be our next head coach unless Blake is here for 10 years.

I think Chuckie would be ready in 5.

bwcrc · Post by **bwcrc** » November 22nd, 2022, 5:34 pm

aggies22 wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 5:25 pm

Coloraggie wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 4:49 pm

aggies22 wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 12:37 pm

Hoot wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 12:18 pm

tipitup wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 12:17 pm

Hoot wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 12:14 pm

ManitobaAggie wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 11:29 am
There was a poster who said he won’t miss this football staff - I wouldn’t be surprised to find out BA is in trouble.

Doesn’t mean I agree with it.

There must be a bunch of stuff behind the scenes we don’t know about because this is getting ridiculous.
I believe I said something along those lines. I have no inside knowledge into BA’s situation. I was just saying I won’t miss all the crap he and the staff pull.

As for Cockett, good riddance.
wow hoot, who do you like?
I like Chuckie… and you…
Chuckie isn't ready yet but he will be.
And many said Jeff Saturday wasn't ready for the Colts job either, but he's there and after two weeks doing a decent job. Chuckie has more direct experience and it isn't as high profile as NFL coaching. On the other hand you could argue that an NFL head coach just needs to guide the direction of the team and doesn't do much "coaching." But I do agree with you that Chuckie won't be our next head coach unless Blake is here for 10 years.
I think Chuckie would be ready in 5.

If that is the case, I would maybe kind of like for him to go elsewhere for about 3 of those years to gain different experience and to help enlarge his circle. With a program like USU, having solid coordinators and position coaches is so critical. My only concern with Chuckie in 5 years is whether he would have a large enough circle to have a fill out a quality staff if he stays at USU.

utaggies · Post by **utaggies** » November 22nd, 2022, 5:40 pm

WasatchAggie wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 12:02 pm
As it pertains to who we should select for an interim president, if needed, I would simply point out that Wyatt would not be an unusual choice based upon his education and background.

In recent decades, lawyers have been tapped to run some of the country’s elite institutions. They include Yale University, Harvard University, Stanford University, Columbia University, Johns Hopkins University, Tufts University, Dartmouth College and Barnard College, as well as George Washington University, New York University and the universities of California, Chicago, Iowa, Virginia, Miami, Indiana and Florida.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/educatio ... education/

I’d note that you can add Utah and yBu to the list too. A JD requires 91 semester hours post BA/BS which falls within PhD programs which avg. between 60-120 hours.

The majority, if not all, of the universities you listed have prominent law schools. USU does not. I know nothing about Wyatt but I highly doubt that a research university would tab a non-research attorney to lead it. And the converse is also true. Harvard will not be looking at a PhD in Animal Science (or similar degree) to lead its school.

browntown · Post by **browntown** » November 22nd, 2022, 5:50 pm

aggies22 wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 5:25 pm

Coloraggie wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 4:49 pm

aggies22 wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 12:37 pm

Hoot wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 12:18 pm

tipitup wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 12:17 pm

Hoot wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 12:14 pm

ManitobaAggie wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 11:29 am
There was a poster who said he won’t miss this football staff - I wouldn’t be surprised to find out BA is in trouble.

Doesn’t mean I agree with it.

There must be a bunch of stuff behind the scenes we don’t know about because this is getting ridiculous.
I believe I said something along those lines. I have no inside knowledge into BA’s situation. I was just saying I won’t miss all the crap he and the staff pull.

As for Cockett, good riddance.
wow hoot, who do you like?
I like Chuckie… and you…
Chuckie isn't ready yet but he will be.
And many said Jeff Saturday wasn't ready for the Colts job either, but he's there and after two weeks doing a decent job. Chuckie has more direct experience and it isn't as high profile as NFL coaching. On the other hand you could argue that an NFL head coach just needs to guide the direction of the team and doesn't do much "coaching." But I do agree with you that Chuckie won't be our next head coach unless Blake is here for 10 years.
I think Chuckie would be ready in 5.

Now this intrigues me, in your opinion should he move to coach other position groups before presumably being an OC, which would lead to a head coaching gig?

rAggie · Post by **rAggie** » November 22nd, 2022, 6:31 pm

utaggies wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 5:40 pm

WasatchAggie wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 12:02 pm
As it pertains to who we should select for an interim president, if needed, I would simply point out that Wyatt would not be an unusual choice based upon his education and background.

In recent decades, lawyers have been tapped to run some of the country’s elite institutions. They include Yale University, Harvard University, Stanford University, Columbia University, Johns Hopkins University, Tufts University, Dartmouth College and Barnard College, as well as George Washington University, New York University and the universities of California, Chicago, Iowa, Virginia, Miami, Indiana and Florida.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/educatio ... education/

I’d note that you can add Utah and yBu to the list too. A JD requires 91 semester hours post BA/BS which falls within PhD programs which avg. between 60-120 hours.
The majority, if not all, of the universities you listed have prominent law schools. USU does not. I know nothing about Wyatt but I highly doubt that a research university would tab a non-research attorney to lead it. And the converse is also true. Harvard will not be looking at a PhD in Animal Science (or similar degree) to lead its school.

Jeepers, this is super interesting to me, so I am looking into the list to see what backgrounds these presidents have.

Yale: PhD, Social Psychology
Harvard: PhD, JD, previous president of Tufts, long time professor
Stanford: PhD, neuroscience
Columbia: JD (no PhD), previous Michigan president, long time law professor
Johns Hopkins: JD, LLM, former lobbyist
Tufts: PhD, neurobiology
Dartmouth: PhD, math, compsci
GW: PhD, inorganic photochemistry
NYU: PhD, chemistry
Iowa: PhD, communications
Virginia: JD, professor
Miami: PhD, public health
Florida: PhD, electrical engineering

The Washington Post article intrigued me, but whether it is because it is a couple years old or because it phrased it as "over the last few decades these schools have hired..." there are just a few that currently have JDs without PhDs as presidents, and in every case, those JDs taught law, in all but one case, for multiple decades.

WasatchAggie · Post by **WasatchAggie** » November 22nd, 2022, 9:21 pm

^^^^^^^

Valid points for sure. My point was that to say that if USU will only hire a PhD for president, it seems short-sighted. Would we turn down a highly qualified MD who was the provost at, for example, the University of Texas or The Ohio State University just because we don’t have a medical school? I also think that a large university is similar to a large corporation. I wouldn’t turn down the CEO of a large successful corporation or non-profit who only had a MBA or CPA if he/she had the skills to keep USU moving forward

In addition, a lot of corporations and non PhDs employees do research in their field and are very well versed in it even if they don’t publish. What if the VP for engineering at Tesla applied? He “only” has two BS degrees in engineering. Yet, I’m fairly certain he knows more about engineering issues facing a global company than any engineering professor at USU. Can you imagine the wealth of experience he’d bring to USU in manufacturing, research and development, EV batteries, environmental issues and budgets? He may be unqualified for many reasons but certainly he is an expert in his field, which research professors are supposed to be. And without a question, he would not be sitting at the back of the room just because he doesn’t have a PhD.

I can think of many highly qualified professors who taught when I was at USU who would never be great administrators. I really feel that the days when you must be a PhD, with research credentials, is long gone for a major university. If needed, have the provost come from the academic side to advise the president. But first and foremost, we need someone who can lead, raise funds, represent well to the state legislature, recruit and make sure the university is running smoothly.

All that being said, I am also not saying PhDs are not qualified anymore either. I just think we should broaden our search and think outside the box. And in doing that, like it or not, the successful candidate needs to be committed to the success of our athletic department. It may be annoying to many, but the success of a D1 football program is considered a corollary to the quality of the education you get except for a few elite schools like Stanford and the Ivy League.

BeNo · Post by **BeNo** » November 22nd, 2022, 9:50 pm

after finally coming up to speed on recent lawsuits tonight - whatever it takes to have an admin to lay down the hammer on sexual assault is what is needed - phd or no phd.

utaggies · Post by **utaggies** » November 22nd, 2022, 11:06 pm

WasatchAggie wrote: ↑
November 22nd, 2022, 9:21 pm
^^^^^^^

Valid points for sure. My point was that to say that if USU will only hire a PhD for president, it seems short-sighted. Would we turn down a highly qualified MD who was the provost at, for example, the University of Texas or The Ohio State University just because we don’t have a medical school? I also think that a large university is similar to a large corporation. I wouldn’t turn down the CEO of a large successful corporation or non-profit who only had a MBA or CPA if he/she had the skills to keep USU moving forward

In addition, a lot of corporations and non PhDs employees do research in their field and are very well versed in it even if they don’t publish. What if the VP for engineering at Tesla applied? He “only” has two BS degrees in engineering. Yet, I’m fairly certain he knows more about engineering issues facing a global company than any engineering professor at USU. Can you imagine the wealth of experience he’d bring to USU in manufacturing, research and development, EV batteries, environmental issues and budgets? He may be unqualified for many reasons but certainly he is an expert in his field, which research professors are supposed to be. And without a question, he would not be sitting at the back of the room just because he doesn’t have a PhD.

I can think of many highly qualified professors who taught when I was at USU who would never be great administrators. I really feel that the days when you must be a PhD, with research credentials, is long gone for a major university. If needed, have the provost come from the academic side to advise the president. But first and foremost, we need someone who can lead, raise funds, represent well to the state legislature, recruit and make sure the university is running smoothly.

All that being said, I am also not saying PhDs are not qualified anymore either. I just think we should broaden our search and think outside the box. And in doing that, like it or not, the successful candidate needs to be committed to the success of our athletic department. It may be annoying to many, but the success of a D1 football program is considered a corollary to the quality of the education you get except for a few elite schools like Stanford and the Ivy League.

There is no question that there are scores of non-PhDs who have been successful in business or politics and who would have the skill set to lead a university. But such instances of it actually occuring will be in the vast minority. We’re talking about institutions that are steeped and entrenched in tradition, robes, elitism, snobbery and cliquishness. It just will not happen. I would liken it to a major college football program hiring a tremendously successful high school coach to lead their program. Yeah, there will be an outlier or two who gets hired (ask Notre Dame how its Gerry Faust experiment went) but the risk/reward is generally just too great.

LarryTheAggie · Post by **LarryTheAggie** » November 23rd, 2022, 4:04 am

In my experience, most administrators are not good researchers anyway. Good researchers keep researching and stay away from administration. Though that is not always the case, but it is often the perception.

So hiring someone with a PhD so that they are respected as a researcher by the faculty members doesn't make sense. Though hiring someone without a PhD would be viewed as an outsider.

If someone is a great administrator, you hire them. You done hire someone because they are really good at something that is not part of the job description. With the condition that they understand that this is a research university, and and also the condition that they have. Very good provost.

Upcoming Events

Event Results