Hackett Staying Long Term?
[Eric Upchurch]
Bruce Feldman is reporting that interim AD Jim Hackett is close to dropping the interim title:
Hearing from multiple sources that expect #Michigan's interim AD Jim Hackett to remain on as the #Wolverines AD.
— Bruce Feldman (@BruceFeldmanCFB) November 26, 2014 Not saying Hackett decision with #Michigan to remain as AD is a done deal but word is that's the direction things seem to be heading
— Bruce Feldman (@BruceFeldmanCFB) November 26, 2014 That's along the lines of what we'd been hearing from Sam and others—that Hackett is going to be around for X number of months where X > amount of time it'll take to fire and hire a new coach.
The chances that the best available athletic director is a retired CEO who hasn't worked in an AD ever are about 1%, but This Is Michigan. They don't care what the sensible thing seems to be. That's fine as long as you are good at doing things. Michigan hasn't been, and given the way the chips have fallen if Hackett doesn't lock down Jim Harbaugh the fanbase is going to have a fit.
But he's not Dave Brandon.
November 26th, 2014 at 11:15 AM ^
Well, as long as the AD hires Harbaugh or Miles he could be a chainsaw wielding vivisectionist and I'd be fine with it.
November 26th, 2014 at 11:17 AM ^
as Brandon, this about Brandon and people like him staying in control, and calling the shots. Milk the public for all its worth, live high on the hog.
November 26th, 2014 at 11:21 AM ^
Other than being a corporate type, he's pretty much the exact opposite of Dave Brandon.
November 26th, 2014 at 10:40 PM ^
Anyone who keeps calling Michigan athletics "product" is not opposite of Dave Brandon enough for me. And I have an MBA.
December 3rd, 2014 at 12:37 PM ^
I doubt Hackett and Brandon have much in common besides the former title "CEO" and the new title "AD".
Brandon came to run domino's (a commodity company specializing in marketing, franchising, and a shitty product) after the hedge fund that he ran completed a hostile takeover.
Hackett was asked to transition Steelcase through a downsizing due to hugely increased outside competition (cheap steel from asia) that crushed most US steel manufacturing/furniture/whatever. Hackett sold to other businesses in such a way that relationships were crucial. Accounts are that he was very personable and someone that people liked working for.
There are good managers and bad managers. Just because they shared 5 letters don't assume that they are the same person. Schlissel just saw actual live protests due to Brandon's tenure. Think he wants to bring in a clone?
November 26th, 2014 at 11:24 AM ^
Do you believe that anyone who has ever been a CEO = Brandon? If so, I understand your complaint, if not you have no real basis for stating that this is just Brandon esque people staying in charge.
November 26th, 2014 at 11:58 AM ^
It's about him having precisely zero experience running or even being involved in an athletic department.
November 26th, 2014 at 12:05 PM ^
Than the previous poster should have made that their complaint, you are justified in being concerned about him having no athletic department experience. Instead the previous poster made some lame statement about how this was all about Brandon people staying in charge to milk more money out of the fan base and continue to fund their lavish lifestyles. That is not a conclusion that can be drawn simply because both men once held the title of CEO.
November 26th, 2014 at 12:31 PM ^
I don't think the fan experience stuff will be as much of an issue with him because, well how could it be? Brandon was so bad it almost appeared as thought he was trying to fail at times.
I think a lot of us aren't worried that he will become Brandon, just incredibly dissapointing that the university/Schlissel think he is the best man for the job when that is so incredibly unlikely.
November 26th, 2014 at 1:33 PM ^
Dissapointment is a sentiment I can get behind. I am holding out hope (maybe wrongly) that Hackett is simply a stop-gap in place. He is going to fire Hoke and hire his replacement due to the urgent need to get Brandon out of town but Schlissel will execute the AD search the way he wants and on his timeframe, finding the best man for the job, not just an AD at another university who happens to have U of M ties.
This could all go wrong quickly, and the vagueness of Hackett's tenure worries me, but I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and not judge him simply because the last former CEO as AD was so terrible at the job.
November 26th, 2014 at 11:35 AM ^
Are all those with a Maths PhD from UM terrorists?
November 26th, 2014 at 11:41 AM ^
Bill Martin was a "businessman" too. Despite the negativity around him he did a very good job as AD; managing the facilities upgrades for football and basketball, hiring two excellent coaches from WVU, not price gauging, and mostly keeping the meaningful traditions from the past around. Was he perfect? No. The big complaint against Martin is that the transition from Carr was bungled badly, but ultimately he did hire a very good football coach (even though it didn't work out.) He was a good steward for a decade and absolutely knocked the Beilein hire out of the park.
So spare me the Dave Brandon 2.0 BS. Give the guy a chance. Be concerned if you want, but judging now is idiotic.
People complaining about things are just there to complain. (sometimes, but other times not, just like...people in charge of things. Generalizations are great.)
November 26th, 2014 at 11:22 AM ^
and otherwise tried to minimize his profile with the fans, then the fans and students would almost surely have put up with the DB act. Sure, we would have grumbled about him, but if the football team was winning, it would have been an annoyance.
Michigan athletics is very ambitious when it comes to extracting revenue from its fanbase, but like a slacker when it comes to going outside of the good-ol-boys network to find a winning coach or administrator.
Hopefully, this time the slackers in charge know that the minimum they can get away with is a Harbaugh or a Miles.
November 26th, 2014 at 12:01 PM ^
Which is why he's gone, and it's why it's pretty reasonable to be worried that the person making one of the most important decisions in the history of the football program has no experience in those decisions whatsoever.
November 26th, 2014 at 11:19 AM ^
Is there a possibility they are dropping the interm tag simply because Harbaugh (or any other decent coach) does not want to get hired by an interm AD? The idea might be to keep Hackett on board until the football program is turned around and then hire a more permanent AD.
November 26th, 2014 at 11:27 AM ^
WHile a possiblity, feelers to real ADs such as Long, Bates, et al were sent out as early as 2nd week of October if you believe the rumblings via backchannels. I mean you'd have 60-75 days to evalute candidates such as that group and getting one hired by mid December shouldnt be that friggin difficult. These guys are experienced, know the business, you have to talk to them and get a feel for them personally and the ones who are not UM graduates (such as the Sooners AD) you have to see how they fit culturally but aside from that their track record is out there to evlaute for anyone.
If you put Hackett in a room with 50 ADs he'd not be one of the top 10 hires. That's the rub.
Same for Hoke with 25 other head coach candidtes in 2010-2011. If Hoke had been a DL coach at Oklahoma rather than Michigan he would never have been hired. Same for Hackett now - he has no qualification other than UM alum.
November 26th, 2014 at 10:53 PM ^
This hits the nail on the head. Hackett is another Hoke hire. Not the best guy for the job, but the guy who got the job by default, inertia, and nepotism.
It's fine if he's a true "interim" guy. Even if you define interim as a number of months. But now we're getting the feedback that it's not interim at all, and perhaps never was.
If this guy is the AD next year at this time, it needs to be because there was a true exhaustive AD search process, and he won it. But you know that won't be the case.
So we'll be stuck with another Hoke hire. We may get lucky and it may work out. But relying on luck given our track record is delusional.
November 26th, 2014 at 11:21 AM ^
until it became apparent that DB wasn't going to stay. Someone close to Michigan must have recommended Hackett to Schlissel.
If Hackett is to become permanent we can safely assume he has a powerful sponsor. It could also mean that Michigan is losing interest in the athletic department by not going after the best AD in the country. Instead they entrust the department to a retire old executive with no knowledge as to how to operate a successful AD department. This is not good news.
November 26th, 2014 at 11:20 AM ^
My only hope is that they've already laid the groundwork on the coach search and decided that some stability in the AD office is needed to attract the guy they want.
November 26th, 2014 at 11:00 PM ^
I hope this as well. And it could be true.
The problem with Michigan is that it could be equally true that they are about to bungle another important hire for no good reason at all.
Given our track record, you have no idea which one it is.
All you can do is cross your fingers and hope that the golfing buddy they picked from first-class realy knows how to fly the plane.
November 26th, 2014 at 11:21 AM ^
I'm not overly concerned who the AD is. As long as the next head coach hiring is not bungled and things get right on the field, it really doesn't matter.
November 26th, 2014 at 11:47 AM ^
A lot of people are making this point and it makes little sense to me.
First, even if all you care about is who's hired as Michigan's next head football coach, the AD will play a major role in that. The candidates will size him up as a potential boss, and he'll be involved in evaluating candidates.
Second, Michigan AD is a really big job. Our next AD, if he's around for a few years, will probably have to:
- hire at least one football coach
- hire at least one basketball coach
- navigate Schlissel's "balance" demands and fans' impatience for wins
- keep the department in strong financial health despite waning football ticket demand
- figure out which traditions to preserve/bring back and where to allow modernization
- keep U-M clean at a time when even schools like UNC and ND are dealing with academic scandals
- competently manage any crises that do arise (with increased scrutiny on issues like player safety and campus sexual assault)
- handle a new apparel contract (right?)
- appease / put up with the many groups at U-M that will weigh in on this coaching search
- do a bunch of other stuff
It matters that we get this right.
November 26th, 2014 at 12:24 PM ^
Your list of potential duties for the AD make it sound like ONLY a CEO will do. Who else is qualified to make so many important decisions across so many areas? Who else knows how to properly delgate duties and hire the right executives to run a company? Have you ever noticed that successful CEOs tend to move around REGARDLESS of the type of business they are running? It doesn't matter if you make cars or make computers, the person in charge needs to be someone who can handle the tough decisions and listen to the right people when it comes to hiring his/her executives.
November 26th, 2014 at 12:33 PM ^
Maybe someone who has run or even been involved in an athletic department before?
November 26th, 2014 at 12:44 PM ^
Because that person will "know sports"? Do you really think there is something terribly complicated about sports that Hackett or anyone else doesn't know? What if the athletic director only knew a lot about olympic sports, would that qualify them to make football decisions?
Knowing sports and knowing Michigan are two of the easiest parts of the job. Hackett knows those things. The question is whether he will make good decisions when it comes to running the department at a macro level.... so isn't having experience running things as the ultimate executive the most important criteria?
November 27th, 2014 at 11:33 PM ^
.....but this is spoken like someone who has never managed people before. It's not important that this person "know sports," but it's VERY important that this person knows the people that work in sports.
Managing private sector employees vs. managing govt people vs. managing military are all VERY different. It's not like "he can manage people well so get him on this totally different situation with different people" is going to work out.
Even if the job is exactly the same, sometimes the culture is so different that a very talented person will fail at exactly the same job. My best argument? RichRod.
So no, "experience running things as the ultimate executive" is NOT the most important criteria.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 26th, 2014 at 12:56 PM ^
Based on those responsiblilities, it seemsl plausible that a former CEO would be very apt at fulfilling the needs of an Athletic Department.
Obviously a former AD will be familiar with the responsibilities and make a good candidate as well, but the uproar over a former CEO taking this position is what is puzzling to me, when the resonsiblities of an AD and a business are not that different.
November 26th, 2014 at 11:22 AM ^
November 26th, 2014 at 11:58 AM ^
"This sucks if true and would be very disappointing. Although I don't know anything at all about him other than he was a CEO, He isn't what the athletic department needs. I've assumed that since one CEO failed at this job, another will as well. I enjoy making blanket assumptions based on a sample size of one."
November 26th, 2014 at 11:59 AM ^
Keep thinking this is mostly about him being a CEO though, it helps drown out the common sense that screams how fucking stupid this is
November 26th, 2014 at 12:45 PM ^
December 1st, 2014 at 3:17 PM ^
It's amazing how comments would even argue this point. This is one of the most influential leadership positions at one of the most prestigious universities AND athletic programs, yet some people will seriously argue that a person with no background or experience in this capacity at any level is the best candidate that the university can obtain on a longer time scale?
Because...wait for it...he ran a company that makes office furniture and played a little football? Those who argue these merits learned nothing from the Dave Brandon tenure. You don't need to risk this and shouldn't because the stakes are too high and there is no upside.
It is completely irrelevant whether or not he might potentially do an OK job as anything more than an interim AD. It would be reckless to roll the dice when you can have many experienced and well qualified candidates who don't have to try to adapt to or learn the dyamics of the role.
Neg away, idiots.
November 26th, 2014 at 11:22 AM ^
November 26th, 2014 at 11:27 AM ^
You are right, fans are complaining and too worried about this potential change in title, but your implication that upset fans on a Michigan-centric blog somehow effect the performance on the field is ridiculous. Fans respond to performance on the field and not vice versa.
November 26th, 2014 at 12:28 PM ^
and he was. Do you think that might have had an effect on the field? "Fans" marched across campus demanding the resignation / firing of Dave Brandon, fans have been calling for the firing of Brady Hoke for almost two years now. Gardner relates about all the racist commentary he receives from "fans". You don't think that has an effect on the field? Good gawd, listen to what they say. They talk about not letting those things distract them, which is to say the fans are distracting them. You don't think that has an effect on the field?
Of course it all has an effect to one degree or another. You're either in full denial or being intentionally obtuse if you think otherwise.
November 26th, 2014 at 1:13 PM ^
November 26th, 2014 at 11:27 AM ^
If you think a "negative fanbase" is at all a cause and not an effect of the current mess, you haven't been paying any attention.
And it's not talking shit. It's being concerned because this doesn't make a lot of sense and has the potential to be really bad. After the last 10 years, I'd say Michigan fans have a right to be gunshy about transition decisions.
November 26th, 2014 at 11:10 PM ^
Give the guy a chance before talking shit
Why in the world are we leaving it up to chance? Especially when we can find qualified candidates that have actually, you know, done this before.
"I need brain surgery"
"We're going to have Jim from hospital administration do the operation."
"Is he a qualified brain surgeon?"
"No he's from finance. But he's really smart and he's good at building things with his hands. You have to be really smart and good with your hands to be a brain surgeon, so we think he'll be a great fit."
"No fucking way."
"Give the guy a chance before talking shit."
November 26th, 2014 at 11:22 AM ^
It was specifically stated in the press release during the Brandon firing he was an interim and had no intentions of full time job.
But this is Michigan fergodsakes.
Lame. No offense to Hackett but you have zero experience in this realm. Zero. I find this extremely selfish on his part.
November 26th, 2014 at 11:31 AM ^
I think its a bit unfair for you to call Hackett selfish based on a few tweets from a national college football writer. He is almost certainly not the best guy for the job, but we have no idea what is happening behind the scenes.
If he is making a power play and trying to take control from Schlissel that is bad, but we don't know what is going on. Maybe Schlissel came to him with this idea and asked if Hackett was OK being a non-interim AD in title only until they can find the new candidate in 18+ months.
Lets relax with the accusations until we know a bit more about what is going on.
November 26th, 2014 at 11:34 AM ^
Ok let me rephrase - if he takes the job he is selfish when there are a bevy of qualified national candidates he could be hiring.
Would he hire someone with no experience to have run Steelcase? That's what he would be doing by taking this job.
November 26th, 2014 at 11:43 AM ^
I am just under the impression he is not the one actually making the hiring decision. I could be way off base in my thinking but I always thought Schlissel is the one taking his time and Hackett is the temporary or non-temporary AD because Schlissel asked him to do it while they searched for a permanent AD.
If Hackett somehow undermines the search in an effort to stay in power, that is bad and Michigan could be doomed. But if Schlissel asks him to stay on as the true permanent AD I don't really feel its selfishness if Hackett accepts the job because he thinks he can do it well.
November 26th, 2014 at 11:49 AM ^
"But if Schlissel asks him to stay on as the true permanent AD I don't really feel its selfishness if Hackett accepts the job because he thinks he can do it well."
Well I will disagree with you here on this point. If you are thinking of the greater good, you tell Schlissel you are honored for the offer but you see a landscape of 10-12 highly qualified, experienced AD canddiates who in this specific job bring more to the table and you don't take the job yourself. You continue to work to hire one of those 10-12 guys.
Just because a job is offered you dont take it "because I think I can do well". Almost every CEO type thinks he can do everything well. Thats part of what it takes to be a CEO culturally in a big business - a lot of self confidence.
November 26th, 2014 at 12:00 PM ^
We just have to agree to disagree on this one. I don't know many people who would turn down a job they are offered because they think there might be people out there who can do it better. If my job offers me a promotion earlier than I was expecting I am not going to turn it down because I think there is someone in the office who might be better qualified than I am. I am going to take the new position and work dang hard to make sure I succeed at it.
It is Schlissel's job to hire the AD and Hackett's job to run the department until he does. If Schlissel offers him the job and Hackett takes it and fails that is on Schlissel not on Hackett. Do you think Brady Hoke should have turned down the football coaching job at Michigan because there were other candidates with better resumes than him?
Thanks for the reasonable responses and discussion, I just believe we are coming from different sides on this.
November 26th, 2014 at 12:20 PM ^
November 26th, 2014 at 1:25 PM ^
November 26th, 2014 at 11:59 AM ^
Comments