GW Hoops

You are not logged in. Would you like to login or register?



8/19/2021 8:00 am  #1


Bona's New AD

St. Bonaventure is expected to hire the former Director of Athletic Development at Duke as their new AD. The hire came after a national search conducted by a well known search firm: https://buffalonews.com/sports/report-st-bonaventure-to-name-dukes-joe-manhertz-as-new-athletic-director/article_f5dfdf1c-ffc3-11eb-807c-4fdc6d368c3a.html

My reason for posting this is NOT to start another fire-and-brimstone rehash of the past. Hopefully avoiding the shoehorning of worn out arguments into yet another thread. (it is to laugh!) Instead to point out that old insults about what do Bona and Olean  NY and similar schools and places have to offer that GW doesn't are nonsense. More to  the point I think this is another indication of how thin the ice is around GW and GW Athletics.

 

8/19/2021 10:47 am  #2


Re: Bona's New AD

FredD, I would agree, and this would start with the simple fact that SBU conducted a national search and took 2 1/2 months before naming a new AD.  This alone demonstrates a commitment to sports.  Manhertz is from the Rochester area (about 80 miles or so from SBU) and of course becomes an AD which is certainly a promotion.  He also has a strong fundraising background as did his predecessor, Tim Kenney.

Speaking of Kenney, it's a bit curious that his contract was not renewed.  The basketball team reached the NCAA's twice within the six years that he was AD.  He also oversaw the introduction of a men's lacrosse team and spearheaded a number of athletic renovations and improvements through aggressive fundraising while at SBU.  There's been no word as to why his contract was not renewed.
 

 

8/19/2021 11:27 am  #3


Re: Bona's New AD

I am not certain that a "national search" has the weight or meaning you are ascribing to it. What candidates were considered? Who was interested in working at a small school in Olean? They ended up with a guy from Rochester - not very national.

Search firms make a ton of money but no one has ever demonstrated that they yield better results. Mainly their function is to make the search easier by putting someone in front. I've been involved in athletics searches with and without search firms. Can't say one is better than the other. It just depends on the position and what candidates you can attract otherwise. I would imagine it would be tough to attract many to Olean. Washington, DC not so much.

I also disagree that using a search firm "demonstrates a commitment to sports.". Many here believe GW doesn't have the requisite commitment to sports. Yet GW has used search firms before most notably in the hires of JC, ML and PN. GW did not use search firms in the hires of TV, MJ, KH or TP largely because search firms either weren't relevant or did not exist to the extent they do today.

Finally, as for a fundraiser as AD, it helps in some ways and can be a liability in other areas particularly day to day department leadership. I've seen great fundraisers become sub-par ADs and I won't mention any names but one some of you may know.

Last edited by GWRising (8/19/2021 11:29 am)

 

8/19/2021 12:01 pm  #4


Re: Bona's New AD

The hiring of Tanya was a disaster, regardless of whether or not a search firm was used. The moment her hiring was announced, many spoke up about their dismay and feelings. The last 4 years has proven us right.

St Bona is just another example of how schools at our level and below are attracting great talent in the coaching and athletic administrator ranks while GW continues to trod along with sub-par talent. 

We can only hope that a new school president will turn this thing around and realize a good athletic program raises the profile of a university and makes other things better (increased applications, etc). I keep believing that if the right president is hired the days of Tanya and coaches who aren't meeting the expectations and results are numbered.

 

8/19/2021 12:07 pm  #5


Re: Bona's New AD

GWRising, suffice it to say that my comments were in regard to our own situation, with TV being appointed as a replacement for PN.  I get the sense that the only real priority for LeBlanc was to get rid of the whole ML/PN mess.  Once a settlement with ML was reached, more attention was paid to PN.  Once these facts, complete with video, surfaced, PN was shown the door.  It would have been to name TV Acting AD through the end of the school year and then conduct a broader search.  If TV emerged as the best candidate after such a search was completed, great.  Instead, LeBlanc gave her the permanent job after TV served three months as the Acting AD, without considering any other alternatives.

While I don't believe that one should be made to pay for someone else's mistakes, one can theorize how much TV knew about PN's irreprehensible behavior and remained silent about.  Similar to the decision to hire MoJo (and certainly to extend him), one can feel like this department needed to be blown up and start fresh with a new regime.

You have no way of knowing that SBU's search wasn't national.  Just because they hired someone who is from their region does not mean they didn't speak to a number of candidates from throughout the country.  And, they end up hiring someone who enjoyed great success at a major program (Duke). 

There are obviously no guarantees of hiring successfully no matter the process.  However, what's important is to put your best foot forward and enhance your chances for making a successful hire.  Whether or not a search firm should have been utilized is secondary to the importance of interviewing or considering a wide range of candidates. 

Finally, I would contend that having an AD without a significant fundraising background is less of a mistake at schools with major athletic programs because these schools have large enough support staffs that you can make this up by bringing in several skilled fundraisers.  At schools like SBU and GW, fundraising is critical.  AD's at these schools ought to be leading the charges when it comes to fundraising, IMO.        

 

8/19/2021 12:27 pm  #6


Re: Bona's New AD

Joel Joseph wrote:

The hiring of Tanya was a disaster, regardless of whether or not a search firm was used. The moment her hiring was announced, many spoke up about their dismay and feelings. The last 4 years has proven us right.

St Bona is just another example of how schools at our level and below are attracting great talent in the coaching and athletic administrator ranks while GW continues to trod along with sub-par talent. 

We can only hope that a new school president will turn this thing around and realize a good athletic program raises the profile of a university and makes other things better (increased applications, etc). I keep believing that if the right president is hired the days of Tanya and coaches who aren't meeting the expectations and results are numbered.

Joel. not sure how long you have been around GW but if the sole metric of the AD is performance of men's and women's basketball then I think you have the wrong school. GW will NEVER be a consistent national power in men's basketball in this era. You can hope for it to be so but the reality is it will never be. Can we win the A-10 every so often? Sure. Can we play a 1-3 games in the NCAAs every so often? Sure. But don't think TV is going to have much to do with that. In GW's history only two ADs have seen the Sweet 16 or a A-10 Championship in Men's Basketball.

Any thought about donations (increasing)? Performance of other sports (good)? I would argue with TV you are looking solely at the tip of the iceberg. TV inherited a mess not of her making. You have a few Board Members who right now want to de-emphasize athletics. She didn't fire ML, she didn't hire Mojo. Instead she used a national search firm (since you all apparently think that's the best) and ended up with JC. He's really coached one full season. Last year was a complete disaster for many reasons outside of everyone's control. Under your metric, we should have fired ML and PN after year two based on the performance of the men's basketball team. Thankfully, we didn't. at least in the case of ML or we would have missed a NCAA bid and a NIT Championship.

What you and others don't realize is how restricted the AD is at GW. You could take the NACDA AD of the Year and put them at GW and you would get largely the same result. The problem is the Board and lack of top executive leadership. You want to fix something  ... fix that first and see what TV can do. Otherwise you would simply be re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic. 

 

8/19/2021 12:43 pm  #7


Re: Bona's New AD

Gwmayhem wrote:

GWRising, suffice it to say that my comments were in regard to our own situation, with TV being appointed as a replacement for PN.  I get the sense that the only real priority for LeBlanc was to get rid of the whole ML/PN mess.  Once a settlement with ML was reached, more attention was paid to PN.  Once these facts, complete with video, surfaced, PN was shown the door.  It would have been to name TV Acting AD through the end of the school year and then conduct a broader search.  If TV emerged as the best candidate after such a search was completed, great.  Instead, LeBlanc gave her the permanent job after TV served three months as the Acting AD, without considering any other alternatives.

While I don't believe that one should be made to pay for someone else's mistakes, one can theorize how much TV knew about PN's irreprehensible behavior and remained silent about.  Similar to the decision to hire MoJo (and certainly to extend him), one can feel like this department needed to be blown up and start fresh with a new regime.

You have no way of knowing that SBU's search wasn't national.  Just because they hired someone who is from their region does not mean they didn't speak to a number of candidates from throughout the country.  And, they end up hiring someone who enjoyed great success at a major program (Duke). 

There are obviously no guarantees of hiring successfully no matter the process.  However, what's important is to put your best foot forward and enhance your chances for making a successful hire.  Whether or not a search firm should have been utilized is secondary to the importance of interviewing or considering a wide range of candidates. 

Finally, I would contend that having an AD without a significant fundraising background is less of a mistake at schools with major athletic programs because these schools have large enough support staffs that you can make this up by bringing in several skilled fundraisers.  At schools like SBU and GW, fundraising is critical.  AD's at these schools ought to be leading the charges when it comes to fundraising, IMO.        

1. Fundraising has increased under TV not decreased.
2. Not true that LeBlanc considered no other alternatives and handed the job to TV. Just because they didn't make that public doesn't mean it didn't happen. LeBlanc considered others in different athletic departments from around the country. I can't tell you his exact decision-making process but he must have decided TV was the best candidate among the options.
3. When I speak of SBU's search, I am not saying it wasn't national. I am saying people use "national" as a broad term that can mean all sorts of things. It can truly mean "national" as in we affirmatively searched the land for the best qualified candidates. It can also mean we opened it up and advertised it "nationally" and then took what applied and determined the best candidate. All "national" searches are not the same and the cost of the search firm depends on how it is organized.

Last edited by GWRising (8/19/2021 12:43 pm)

 

8/19/2021 12:46 pm  #8


Re: Bona's New AD

Had a nice conversation with Chris Monroe.  Not a long one, but it is nice that GW reached out.  See, some good things have happened recently at GW.   He said Amir seems to be about 80-85%.  Said nice things about the team.  Chris seems like a real nice guy.  Too bad I'm too broke to contribute much and so faaar away.

 

8/19/2021 2:13 pm  #9


Re: Bona's New AD

Rising, I've been around this program possibly before you were born - since the early 80's.

I'm not judging TV on just men and womens basketball but on the athletic program as a whole. I disagree with you that fundraising has increased on her watch - and I mean that athletic fundraising has NOT increased every year for the last 4 years - in fact, we (like many schools) had to CUT our athletic budget and cut out entire sports programs. Most (if not all) of our A-10 partners did not have to do the same.

I also disagree that our athletic program performances has increased. Not sure what programs you are referring to but our program as a whole has not improved from where we were before 2017 when she took over. 

She was unqualified for the job back in 2017 and she has proven why. Her future (and that of JC) will come to light after this season. No more excuses.

ML and PN weren't fired after 2 seasons. Neither were JC or TV. Big difference between the 2 groups were ML improved each season and we put a quality product on the court every game, despite injuries, transfers, etc. JC hasn't done the same so lets see what he can do in year 3?

 

8/19/2021 3:58 pm  #10


Re: Bona's New AD

It's not at all my intent to offer a referendum on how TV is doing or to indicate that she, JC or anyone should be removed from their positions after this season.

My comments are strictly about the process.  TV was appointed Acting AD in 1/18 and received the permanent nod three months later.  Realistically, I would be hard pressed to believe that LeBlanc was interviewing candidates or even talking about this position over the course of these three months.  It's clear that he liked TV, thought she was doing fine, and decided not to see if there was anyone out there more qualified or capable.

TV is a great story, a former GW athlete (in the school's HoF) who now runs the department.  My feelings have nothing to do with TV personally.  I just look at what SBU just did and am left to wonder why GW did not at least look into seeing who else might be interested (and perhaps more experienced or qualified) a bit further.  It's a pretty big job and suffice it to say, a critically important one.  Like I previously said, if the proper due diligence had been conducted and TV ended up being the best choice, fantastic!
 

 

8/19/2021 4:02 pm  #11


Re: Bona's New AD

First off, bully for St Bona on getting an AD with "major conference" pedigree. Given SUNY-Buffalo´s attempt to become a figure in big time sports, Olean faces a real challenge (aside from the ones it already faced).
Second, St Bona´s hire has nothing to with the way GW hired Vogel or the metrics by which either AD will be evaluated. At GW, winning is nice but I would argue that the key indicators are academic standings of the student-athletes, meeting budget mandates and contribution to community and student engagement across the entire University (and yes, I am cynical enough to grant you that item two might be the most important one to Rice Hall).
Given the disruptions caused by the Pandemic, it seems to me Vogel has done an admirable job on points one and three. Sure, no one has been able to attend an event, but the sports teams have done a better job than many academic departments in ensuring the GW brand is presented to the public (including an NCAA appearance by the softball team).
Both baskeball coaches are Vogel hires who have yet to fully get their "plan" in motion, but we have to assume the working environment is positive (then again, we did not know about the bad blood between Nero and ML until the final days of that adventure, so who are we to say?) and that the job standards set by the University are being met. In fact, I would argue that her desire to win was a driving factor in firing a well-know and highly-respected women´s basketball coach who delivered modest results here. 
Are the facilities falling apart? Are the athletes flunking out? Is the school laying off professors to pay for coaches and to fend off legal claims? All those things are going on at other schools. Perspective people. The 2021-22 basketball team is indeed winless as of today, but then again so is St Bona´s.

Last edited by GW Alum Abroad (8/19/2021 4:04 pm)

 

8/19/2021 5:53 pm  #12


Re: Bona's New AD

She absolutely knew about nero and if that video hadn't leaked she would've swept it under the rug

 

8/19/2021 7:16 pm  #13


Re: Bona's New AD

I like Tanya.  This is no easy job, as the Legal function at GWU runs the show.  I think given the circumstances, she has done and continues to do a good job.  Just one person's opinion.

 

8/19/2021 7:25 pm  #14


Re: Bona's New AD

Skittles wrote:

She absolutely knew about nero and if that video hadn't leaked she would've swept it under the rug

I'm not following your logic here. How could TV sweep anything under the rug? She wasn't AD until AFTER PN "resigned". A lot of people knew about PN as reflected in the Deadspin article. I'm not sure what your point is. The problem was nobody who mattered (e.g. Maltzman and Knapp) seemed to care enough to do anything about it. Not sure how that is on TV. Recall that TV left GW to work at NAU for three years (until 2015). Thus, she was really only there for one year during this contentious time. Not sure what she was supposed to do as a relatively new employee if the powers that be weren't inclined to do anything. If you think there weren't GW employees with severe misgivings about what went down with ML and about PN you are very wrong. The problem was none of them were in a position to do anything.

Again, this goes to my larger point above. The beef with all these issues isn't with the athletic department or TV. It's with those at the top. They allowed this entire situation to occur. 

 

8/19/2021 7:37 pm  #15


Re: Bona's New AD

Joel Joseph wrote:

Rising, I've been around this program possibly before you were born - since the early 80's.

I'm not judging TV on just men and womens basketball but on the athletic program as a whole. I disagree with you that fundraising has increased on her watch - and I mean that athletic fundraising has NOT increased every year for the last 4 years - in fact, we (like many schools) had to CUT our athletic budget and cut out entire sports programs. Most (if not all) of our A-10 partners did not have to do the same.

I also disagree that our athletic program performances has increased. Not sure what programs you are referring to but our program as a whole has not improved from where we were before 2017 when she took over. 

She was unqualified for the job back in 2017 and she has proven why. Her future (and that of JC) will come to light after this season. No more excuses.

ML and PN weren't fired after 2 seasons. Neither were JC or TV. Big difference between the 2 groups were ML improved each season and we put a quality product on the court every game, despite injuries, transfers, etc. JC hasn't done the same so lets see what he can do in year 3?

Joel, I appreciate the fact that you think I'm 20 years younger than I am lol.

Of course, during the height of the pandemic (at least I hope we aren't about to reach new heights) donations went down. I am talking the 2 years pre-pandemic and so far this year.

You said TV was unqualified. Let's see, She was a college athlete. Check. A Division I coach, Check. A Senior Women's Administrator at two different Division I schools. Check. And a GW graduate to boot. Check. Not sure what makes you think she was unqualified. Perhaps you think there were others who were more qualified (your entitled to your opinion) but to say TV was unqualified is simply not true.

Again, how has she proven to be unqualified? Has there been a scandal? Has GW's overall athletic program declined in performance? Are we not recruiting student-athletes befitting GW? Has she not taken action to try to rectify the two basketball coaching positions? Please give us the specifics as to why she has "proven" to be unqualified.

 

8/19/2021 9:40 pm  #16


Re: Bona's New AD

GWRising wrote:

Skittles wrote:

She absolutely knew about nero and if that video hadn't leaked she would've swept it under the rug

I'm not following your logic here. How could TV sweep anything under the rug? She wasn't AD until AFTER PN "resigned". A lot of people knew about PN as reflected in the Deadspin article. I'm not sure what your point is. The problem was nobody who mattered (e.g. Maltzman and Knapp) seemed to care enough to do anything about it. Not sure how that is on TV. Recall that TV left GW to work at NAU for three years (until 2015). Thus, she was really only there for one year during this contentious time. Not sure what she was supposed to do as a relatively new employee if the powers that be weren't inclined to do anything. If you think there weren't GW employees with severe misgivings about what went down with ML and about PN you are very wrong. The problem was none of them were in a position to do anything.

Again, this goes to my larger point above. The beef with all these issues isn't with the athletic department or TV. It's with those at the top. They allowed this entire situation to occur. 

A lot happened between 2015 and 16 that she knew about and did nothing and never spoke up about it. She didn't have the power but she certainly had a voice during that time. Problem also was a lot of those with misgivings were pushed out or left before ML was fired. Knapp was on his way out and didn't want to deal with it

 

8/19/2021 10:45 pm  #17


Re: Bona's New AD

keithgreene wrote:

I like Tanya.  This is no easy job, as the Legal function at GWU runs the show.  I think given the circumstances, she has done and continues to do a good job.  Just one person's opinion.

base upon?

 

8/20/2021 7:31 am  #18


Re: Bona's New AD

Thanks to those who have pointed out the degree to which structural choices GW has made could impact athletics. I wish I had a better understanding of what the impediments are. Leadership at the top is key. It does amaze me how GW doesn't seem to have learned from previous problems/scandals. They always seem to want to manage it, instead of acting more openly and decisively.

     Thread Starter
 

8/20/2021 7:54 am  #19


Re: Bona's New AD

GWRising wrote:

Skittles wrote:

She absolutely knew about nero and if that video hadn't leaked she would've swept it under the rug

Not sure what she was supposed to do as a relatively new employee if the powers that be weren't inclined to do anything. If you think there weren't GW employees with severe misgivings about what went down with ML and about PN you are very wrong. The problem was none of them were in a position to do anything.

Again, this goes to my larger point above. The beef with all these issues isn't with the athletic department or TV. It's with those at the top. They allowed this entire situation to occur. 

She obviously was supposed to call a press conference to personally apologize to ML, call PN a predator, demand the school rehire ML, and then resign /sarc

Anyway, you hit the nail on the head that all this angst about whether our AD is doing enough is a big waste of time if there's no buy-in from the powers that be at the top.  It's like getting mad at the GM of the Orioles for not doing enough to win.  If you're an up-and-coming assistant AD who wants to win more than anything, why would you go to a school where the administration's goals are not that? 

Conversely, if you're the administration, why pour more money into an athletics program where students barely show up and alumni engagement is anemic?  The school badly squandered the student enthusiasm of the 05-06 season by capitulating to the Post after Omar-gate.  We actually had students lined up outside for hours before game-time and you pretty much had to be a dues-paying member of the Colonial Army to get a chance of getting a good seat.  Those are the alumni, who like me are in our mid 30s, who should be sustaining the program with season tickets and donations, yet everything completely collapsed by the time we graduated in 2009. Even during the BEST stretch of the ML years I never saw a situation where students were turned away at the gate.

Right now we're basically operating like a newspaper where the only thing that can save us at this point is getting a benefactor (either the new president or booster) who dumps money into athletics without regard for the underlying fundamentals.

 

8/20/2021 10:02 am  #20


Re: Bona's New AD

Three items to discuss here.

First, the notion that a would-be whistleblower would have gone unheard or ignored is reprehensible.  If I'm understanding this correctly, the notion that TV (or anybody in the department) could have approached Knapp or Maltzman and indicated that PN was privately inviting players to his home for dinners, committing NCAA violations by paying a player each time the player knocked on PN's door,  caught on video performing unbelievably inappropriate acts on students and/or recent graduates, etc., only to either not be taken seriously or essentially be ignored is just implausible.  Whistleblower protection should be afforded to all employees when it comes to reporting violations as blatant as these.  If it wasn't, then that is on the school but if it was, then it's on those who sat on their hands and remained silent.

Second, while GWRising is correct that GW will never be able to pull off the sustained level of excellence, year in and year out, as some other programs, I would turn this around and ask whether as fans of this program, have we ever seen a four year stretch that has gone as abysmally as these past four years?  One could even say "past five years" if we count MoJo's first season which had 2 NBA players and far more talent than is commensurate with a first round CBI loser.  No need to rehash why and certainly, TV was not the AD for all of it.  But it should be mentioned and understood that the program has looked like a rudderless ship for years now.  When MoJo was first hired, a common sentiment expressed at that time was that this (scandal) was going to put this program back five years.  The hope at that time was that forecasting to today, the program would be in a much better place than it actually is right now.  This is why this season is so critical....not to go to the dance or to the NIT, but to show real signs of improvement.

Finally, and this is not a commentary on TV because I don't know what she has done and not done, nor do I know what she has wanted to do but has been denied doing, but from the sounds of things, it's time for this program to stop being "half-pregnant."  Either we are going to act like a D1 member school within a top 10 D1 conference by doing what it takes to gain fan support and properly invest in the flagship program or we should just acknowledge that athletics is of little consequence  or interest and drop to D3 or a lesser D1 conference.  It's hard enough competing against certain schools in our conference like Dayton, SLU and VCU.  It's another story when other member schools are surpassing ours in fundraising, facilities, and of course, on-court success.  Yes, this is largely men's basketball-centric for it's this one sport which pays the bills for many others to exist.  

President LeBlanc arrived here from Miami, a school with a big-time athletic program.  Who knows how the next president will feel about athletics but it's sounding more and more like it's some of the Board Members who are the ones stymieing real progress.  Again, if this is the case, it should change.  Let's commit or exit.  Otherwise, we can stay where we are, and continue to reminisce about MJ, KH and ML teams that brought us great memories, while wondering how we will ever get near this point again. 
  

 

 

Board footera

 

Powered by Boardhost. Create a Free Forum