Dave take a pay cut to become AD?
landing spot. will be interesting to see how he does.
Dave take a pay cut to become AD?
Maybe. He's no longer CEO of Dominos but he is chairman of the board of directors. I'm sure still holds a fair amount of stock. Has one of the highest salaries listed in the public U of M salary record. There is also a thing around U of M called "defered compensation" which does not show up on the public reports. Basically a way to hide bonuses.
Its my understanding that Board members are not highly compensated as such. They get all expenses paid but do not necessarily get compensation. Its more of a prestige thing (though I'm not sure how prestigious it is to sit on Domino's board - LOL). He probably get a nice parting gift from Dominos but, nevertheless, there's no way he's making as much as AD compared to what he made as CEO of a major corporation. Either way, I'm sure he's doing fine.
Actually, Dominoes is doing quite well, thank you.
This guy would know. He's a fatbastard.
Seriously funny shit.
I think they get compensation that your average joe would consider to be great pay, but yes, he's almost certainly making less now that he was as CEO.
It is not uncommon for Board members on publicly traded corporations to make 6 figures a year.
The article above indicates that for S&P 500 companies, board member pay averages $251,000. Hardly a nominal sum. I would also direct you to pull forms 990 (available to the public) from some of your notable local not-for-profit organizations. You might be surprised how much board members on those organizations are getting paid, too. Pretty eye-opening.
This sounds about right. The charter for our company's board says that they meet "as often as necessary", but it usually seems to end up being about 4-6 times per year. Here anyway, they are compansated half in cash and half in equity, but the amount of total compensation puts it around $50,000 per meeting per person. Funnily enough, Dave Brandon is actually on our board of directors here.
That's pretty high relative to the people whose board memberships I know about, who seem to get $10k a day for 10 days of work a year.
I have an uncle who sits on a couple of Boards so I can tell you that members typically get some level of compensation, but it's nothing compared to what executives get. You're looking at anywhere from 75K to 200K a year. Of course, board members only have to work infrequently, so it's not bad pay for the hours. Besides, Board members are always ex-execuitves, so they've made their money and are just filling the days in their semi-retirement.
Nice work if you can find it.
Don't forget, though, that even though there is D&O insurance, you still, as a board member, are a fiduciary and therefore have personal iability. And with the advent of Sarbanes-Oxley you also have potential criminal liability.
There *is* responsibility and risk that goes along with the job.
note: just providing facts. not hating.
the board members do have fiduciary responsibility, and thus personal liability, in theory.
Of course, it's nearly impossible to successfully sue a board/directors, let alone criminally convict them. In terms of being sued, the board is protected by "the business judgment rule," which basically requires you deal in good faith, make reasonably prudent decisions, and make decisions you then-believe to have been in the company's best interest.
Not that easy, though. The board has what is essentially an extremely high level of deferrence from courts--the courts won't substitute their business judgments for the execs.
Also, to successfully bring a shareholder derivative suit, you need to first obtain permission, or "waiver" from the board. The premise of derivative suits is that conduct/a decision harmed the company, and the company is thus suing the directors. AND, to top it all off, this is only waived when you can show a self-interested transaction that would make it futile to attempt to ask. To sue. Themselves.
In short: technically, there's liability. But you need to try real hard to actually screw up hard enough for anything to happen.
/end law rant
with top notch facilities already built. I don't think we want to go back to the days of Goss who had us running deficits and who could not manage the department. I know the board bitches about some things like "wow", but the guy makes us money which is more important than ever in a college arms race. Pay for results.
I have to imagine so. Dominoes is one of the largest pizza companies in the world and being its CEO is not a low paying job, I'm sure. Plus, CEOs get paid large bonuses and have stock options, so yes, I'm almost 100% sure he took a pay cut to be the AD.
There are plenty of legitimate criticisms when it comes to Dave Brandon, but this is a bit disingenuous. Disagree with him about what's best for the AD all you want, and I'll probably support those disagreements to some degree, but accusing Brandon of deliberately ignoring the interests of the AD in favor of himself is classless.
Not only classless, but maniacial, stupid, and without any merit, of any type. It's a way to get hits on his website, and that's it.
I don't think DB puts himself above the good of the AD. And the "EEEEVIL Bain Capital" ranting is annoying.
I do think, however, that he has a hell of an ego and sometimes too easily equates "things that Dave Brandon likes" with "things that are good for the athletic department". I also think he gets too personally involved in the operation of the football team (sitting in film review, the very personal and frankly unprofessional "vote of confidence in Hoke and Mattisson" blog post.
I agree with you, to a point. I can't stand that we play music all game long. I don't think we need to "promote" Michigan Football as much as we do, since, like Bill Martin, I'm under the general impression that Michigan Football sells itself. That said, to equate a reasonable belief, and action on that by Brandon (and he's not making this decisions without committees and discussion and overview from Mary Sue) as somehow self serving is just plain stupid.
I actually agree with you. To me, DB's ego manifests itself when he sometimes acts like a fan (of the Ol' Blue persuasion) given the keys to the castle. I don't like this, but I don't think it affects his ability to manage the bottom line.
The article however is implying that DB is milking the AD for the sake of personal enrichment, which is a stupid argument.
helped with the clicks by posting it here.
But I am generally in favor of more info, and fewer banned things.
Still, as long as we are on the subjects of bans and/or boycotts; if I were Brian Cook, I think I'd tell the DSR that I would never ever again appear with or for them in any capacity. And I'd make a big deal about doing that, and exactly why.
This is garbage. Beneath garbage, is the assertion that Brandon is somehow converting fans' money to his own use ("his own bank account"); it seems to me close to libelous.
I'm all for intelligent criticism of the Michigan Athletic Department if it is deserving. I've engaged in some of that myself. And I don't mind a bit if someone has some intelligent criticism, or critical news, about Dave Brandon. But this story is such lowbrow trashtalk. Beneath contempt. Sub-Sharp.
Nothing new in this article. IIRC, most of the criticisms are pulled from Three and Out. It's no secret DB worked for Bain Capitol and the seat-cover debacle is stale.
Ben Franklin is THE DEVIL!
Foosball is the DEVIL!
No, Col. Sanders. You're wrong.
Sorry, but YOUR wrong!
LUDICROUS SPEED... GO!!!
THEY'VE GONE PLAID.
They've gone from suck...to blow!
Edit. next post down.
EVERYTHING IS THE DEVIL TO YOU MAMA!
AND ALLIGATORS ARE ORNERY BECAUSE OF THEIR MEDULLA OBLONGADA!
...just going to start yelling this at random strangers.
I have a mental image of Coach Beilein going around and yelling this at random strangers. It's quite lovely.
A Snickers ad. Get Robin Williams back on the phone.
They got all those teeth, and no toothbrush.
I'm at my doctors and I literally busted out laughing.
And not just your post. Team effort. My gosh.
I'm not sure how the association of Bain with DB is supposed to suddenly make DB a bad guy. Also, why is the promotion of DB from Bain to CEO of Domino's a bad thing? DB did a great job with Domino's...and none of this has anything to do with being an AD at Michigan.
With everything but the product. The one thing consumers really care about. That sounds familiar.
It's an attack article, which serves no real purpose except to try to smear DB from every possible angle. Hell, if Brandon sneezed once in 1995 the author might have listed it as "an affront to American atmospheric quality".
I know Brandon isn't the most popular guy now, but this article is ridiculous.
to be code for republican/Romney in many corners, and therefor evil. Some of that persuasion believe they can mention Bain w/out any context, and evil is assumed.
I believe ~60% of dislike for Brandon is politically motivated, but detractors don't have the gumption to admit that. And on this blog, you're not really allowed to. So it comes out as "BRANDON KILLS BABIES FOR NICKELS AND CHILDREN FOR DIMES!!"
Actually, considering that many posters seem to hope DB leaves the AD by way of winning political office, I think you're wrong (at least re: the Brandon hate).
FWIW I'm no Democrat and I dislike many of Brandon's actions.
even if true, and I wouldn't concede many or the majoritiy of detractors feel that way, it wouldn't necessarily refute my argument. Just as likely that they'd rather he go be that away from their university (i.e. better in public office than so close to home).
And re. your preferences, fair enough, but I did say 60% and not 100%.
I was not aware that the DNC had a plank regarding uniformz.
Maybe I am being naive, but I think most disagreements have to do with people disagreeing with their vision of what Michigan is supposed to be and what DB's vision is. More of a traditionalists vs progressives (i.e. band vs piped in music).
I thought Dave Brandon was a great hire. He came into a divided house and I felt he did a good job of reuniting the fan base. I still like his hire of Hoke (even though I was against it when I initially heard about it) and think he handled the press very well at the time.
I do disagree with some of the direction he is taking this department. I am not against modernizing, (love the new stadium upgrades and the Crisler updates), but still enjoy the old tradition. I would prefer that the band be more prominent, and death to uniformz, I don't see any of these things as political points.
but that political bias is being transferred to blog-appropriate memes is pretty clear, at least to my mind. The venom and fervor with which even mild decisions are met with outrage is very reminiscent of that arena.
It appears you have a few advocates and I detractors in this thread. Perhaps like you, they disagree with my argument. Perhaps they dislike being outed. Such is the nature of opinions.
what I do care about are his repeated efforts to squeeze every last dollar out of fans and his putting marketing flash over substance.
accurate, and he accuses DB of diverting funds? I'll rush right over there.
It's semantics, really, and what you call an accusation of diverting funds is just the author complaining about DB's growing salary and money-driven attitude. I trust everyone here to consider Acker's points with good reason, not as if it's gospel.
I suppose it is in the sense that any statement whatsoever can be given that label. I think more accurate descriptions would be libellous and ludicrous.
Generally speaking, most references to "Bain Capital" in arguments, the linked article included, can be safely replaced with "the bogeyman" without affecting the quality of reasoning.
Apologies for skirting the no politics rule - please read this exclusively as a lament on the current status of reasoned debate.
Everything is the Devil to you MAMA! Well I look school, and I like football! And I'm gonna keep doin them because they make me feel good!
Alligators are ornery because of their Medula Oblongata!
...And I like Vicki and she likes me back. And she showed me her boobies and I like them too!
The article is a pretty good read and a good take on how corporate greed is ruining college football and basketball. The overall theme of the article is that Brandon is turning his back on lifelong and loyal fans, particularly season ticket holders, in favor of making a quick buck. He makes a great point that anybody that faithfully attendned MBB games and kept their season tickets through the Elerbe and Amacker eras should not be forced out of the lower bowl because they cannot afford to pay the exorbarant fees for the "privilege" of continuing to pay for the seats that they earned. I also love the comparison to Jerry Jones! Well done, sir.
football. For example, Title IX requires equal opportunities and facilities. Nothing wrong with that at all, but it is expensive to provide that for sports that do not generate much if any revenue for the athletic department.
In life nothing is free. UM's AD wants to be top notch. That means top dollar for coaches and facilities.
It's only expensive if you're at the same time building palaces for your football and basketball programs.
Top recruits take into consideration the facilities they will be playing in and using. If you want to compete with the top programs you need top facilities. You can save on facility costs if your goal is to compete with Eastern Michigan. Yes the ticket prices will be lower, but so will the product on the field and the expectations of the program.
Gasoline for 50 years. At one point it cost me $0.25/gallon. $3.50 is unfair, 16 year olds should just pay $5.00 since they are new to the market.
Same goes for my frequent flyer status. I've been flying delta my entire life. My flight should be the same cost as they were in the early 90s due to my loyalty.
Sports is entertainment. As long as someone is willing to pay more for your seat, you'll have to do the same. You have the reciprocal right if you move or stop caring.
however, sports and fans are a little different. If Delta is not giving you good deals, and your loyalty program isn't great, no big deal to go over to United. In sports, the idea is that you want fans who love the team no matter what. You want the fans to support the team through lean or rebuilding years and not jump to a more reasonably priced better "product", like jumping to become a State fan this year.
It also complicates things when you throw in the non-profit college aspect of the sport. I think there is something to be said about fans who have been loyal to the program, over those like that the team is good now and have more money.
I had a longer response typed but I'm already tired of re hashing this conversation. I watch games from the couch anyway...
A family member of mine worked with DB when he was at Valassis and despite his take-no-prisoners attitude and toughness, he was a very shrewd businessman. He got things done. He wasn't all about himself but did take care of his interests. The impression I was left with after a lengthy discussion is the same one we're left with and most on this Blog feel...DB makes money. Say what you will about his motivations or his methods, there's probably a lot of non-revenue sports that are thankful he's there.
What's wrong with working at Bain Capital?
PERSPECTIVE. GET SOME.
is a joke plain and simple... everyone on DSR has an axe to grind with someone...
I'm trying to figure if calling Brandon out for a Republican for no apparent reason, or suggesting that he's embezzling money from the department was the low point of this "article".
Brandon running in the Republican primary for governor before he took the AD job.
figurative sense that it is not a legitimate source of news.
Everyone here knows I be beefin' with DB.
But this is just over the top.
I don't particularly like DB, but I believe that I may look back at him - when he eventually moves on - as a guy who was more-or-less useful for Michigan. I trust that he will take relatively agressive steps for the sake of the Athletic Department. I have not agreed and presumably will not agree with all of those steps, but I appreciate the fact that he's not coasting along. It sure seems to me - again, from afar - that the pre-DB Michigan Athletic Department thought it could rest on its laurels for a long time while the OSU AD ate its lunch.
Working for an investment firm. asset management firm, or bank does not make a person evil. Nor does being a CEO as someone has to do the job. Dominos was a luckluster company until Brandon was hired, he helped turn that business around. Some of you may have bad experiences in your area but without a doubt the Dominos in my area had the best quality pizza and was always busy.
Since becoming athletic director our facilities have been upgraded and our profile increased. Some objected to the Michigan Stadium facility, I do not want those suites to become an obstruction to our ability to have the largest football stadium in the country. Some have objected to Brandon's use of corporate terminology using words such as brand. This does not make him a failure. The big question is can his decisions help turn around Michigan football. That is the true measure of every AD at Michigan. If Michigan football begins winning Big 10 and national titles then Dave Brandon's work will have been considered successful.
People that don't work for financial institutions have a very skewed perception of what goes on/what people's motives and agendas are inside them. They see that someone works for a bank and automatically assume "CORPORATE GREED!!!!," when in reality that is more often than not, not the case.
I rhink lots of people have skewed views of what go on in many organizations and that unfortunately they let the actions of a few taint their views of many.
It should be noted that Brandon has been successful with his degree from UM, completed as a student-athelete. He was not given anything to accomplish his success, perhaps through a windfall or inheritance. I like to be optimistic that a degree fromk UM helps with such success.
"Dominos was a luckluster company until Brandon was hired...."
I don't think "lackluster" is accurate. If you're literally saying they lacked luster at the time that he took over, sure, but I don't think they've had "luster" since the '80s, and Brandon didn't change that. It was thay way before him and has been since. If you're saying they were struggling financially and he helped make them healthy, fine. (Although I'm willing to bet Bain gave him some strict guidelines with financing and cost philosophy.)
The way you stated it makes it seem that Domino's was some relative unknown until Brandon showed up, when the reality is that Domino's in the 1980s revolutionized the food industry. It made home delivery a very popular thing, and it made take out (especially pizza) a very popular thing. Domino's almost destroyed Pizza Hut single-handedly. I'd also be willing to be that a lot higher proportion of the US and world population know who Tom Monaghan is than do Brandon.
"(T)he Dominos in my area had the best quality pizza..."
I weep for the pizza consumers in your area.
In the 1980's and prior, sit-down pizza restaurants were huge, and that was (and still is) Pizza Hut's main business. Those red-roofed buildings are all for dining in. Little Caesars had a similar concept with family fun centers in the 1980's and 1990's.
By taking pizza out of the restaurant, Domino's was able to sell a lot of pizza without a lot of unnecessary overhead costs.
Tom Monaghan or Dave Brandon
They sure as hell know of Dominos, though... I think it's the world's largest pizza chain (or neck and neck with Pizza Hut, anyway).
Negbang? Posbang? How do I choose? So much pressure with this new old voting system . . . One thing is for sure - self-posbang on this one!
You are a self-fellating whore-monger.
I imagine someone who could self-fellate would have little need for whores.
We can self pos-bang now?
Um...OK....I gotta go and check some older threads now to make sure I made my point clear to the reader.
Be right back.
I don't have much of an opinion on Jordan Acker, but Jeff Moss, the "frontman" of the DSR, seems to be a complete blowhard. The mission of the site and his sports commentary seems to be to feel bigger and better than the local sports media.
Admittedly, the local sports media doesn't always get the scoop or ask the hardest hitting questions in press conferences, but the amount of vitriol he spews on Twitter and his website makes me disregard most things posted on the DSR.
does is troll terry foster and 97.1... in the very few times i've been on DSR the majority of the articles have something to do with terry foster or someone at 97.1... after reading the posted article i went to the DSR home page and saw that someone created (i'm going to assume a DSR person) a fake POF profile page for Scott "The Gator" Anderson... now thats pathetic...
I can't tell if he's arguing for or against Brandon in this article.
I would not miss Brandon. A decade of failed AD's has left plenty of fans with a bad taste in their mouths.
failed AD's being the Roberson/Weidenbach/Goss era, I agree with you. I don't think of Martin and Brandon as being total failures. Not at all. Martin got the program in the black again, which was a big accomplishment. He also got the huge stadium upgrade project done, as well as some other much needed facility improvements. Yes, he hired Amaker and RR. But, he was damned close to getting Pitino as coach, and didn't because of things beyond his control. And he DID bring in Beilein. With Brandon, the book is still out.
Uh... One of the things for which Martin is pretty much universally revered is the fact that he did in fact get the department in the black, which if memory serves, happened in 2003 or 4. Before the BTN launched.
Give credit where credit is due.
Getting the Department in the black again had at least as much, if not more, to do with Jason Winters, a turnaround guy from AlixPartners who joined the Department as CFO a few months before Martin did in 2000. The first budget surplus was in 2001-2.
Personally, I have always thought that thre first proccess was much worse than the second and that if Martin were even half competent there would be lots less bitching about the recent history of the football team. I wonder how much Carr really wanted to coach in 2007 and whether a better AD would have brought in a good new head coach in 2007.
I think that Brandon is a far superior AD, understanding that his job is both to make money and to field winning teams,
Charging fans six bucks for a water and 100 bucks for their Appalachian State tickets next year helps hire million-dollar coaches and make hundred-million dollar renovations to Crisler, which are are the most important drivers of program health (at least right now) and likely outweigh the risk of alienating the fans who want to pay for Michigan football at below-market rates like they did in 1980.
I certainly understand that desire--I'd like everything I buy to be cheaper, and I'd probably have season tickets if they were cheaper. But cloaking what is at its core a "dammit I want this product to be cheaper" argument in the "Dave Brandon killed my childhood" gloss seems pretty disingenuous. Cheap seats are not "the fabric of Michigan football"; cheap seats are what Don Canham did to fill the stadium before we started kicking the ever loving shit out of the Big Ten--a ritual that is, in fact, the actual fabric of Michigan football. And if there's a criticism of Dave Brandon, it's that we're not currently kicking the ever loving shit out of the Big Ten. If we were, I'm 100% positive that this guy wouldn't be writing blog posts about how Dave Brandon "doesn't get it."
It is not just alienating old coots who complain because tickets prices have increased. It is more about damaging the long term interests of the "brand" of Michigan football. Currently, I make more myself than both my parents combined currently make (and therefore more than they made at any time while I was growing up). I am not unwise with my money (I am a CPA), nor am I excessively cheap. Nonetheless, when I try to devise a realistic budget to take my family to AA and take my son to a game (as I recently tried to do for the OSU game), I end up having to scrap that plan. $190.00 for the tickets themselves already makes it a pretty expensive outing (and, in a teatament to the quality of the team, I was unable to entice any of my dude friends to go with me either). Yet my dad, who was travelling from further away, is excessively cheap, and significantly less than me, managed to take me to a handful of games growing up (which cemented my M fandom).
Unless I start making even more money (and the play of the team improves), I don't foresee ever being able to look at the comprehensive cost of taking my family to AA for a game (much less ever buying my own season tickets) and seeing an attractive value proposition. For fuck sake, I could take them to the Great Wolf Lodge in Traverse City, buy us all nice dinners, watch the game in a bar drinking premium beers and still come out ahead all told.
The truth is that the "corporate mentality" or whatever you might call it is indeed harming college sports. Increasing revenue in order to create greater facilities or a better gameday experience or whatever you might call it is really just an attempt to build something from which even more revenue can be generated. This makes some sense in business, in that the greater and greater profits can be distributed to ever more shareholders, or invested in myriad other projects. It makes less sense in college athletics, unless the entire goal of the system is to provide $10,000,000 salaries for Nick Saban type individuals. Unfortunately, constantly increasing prices tends to weed out working class individuals first, and to increase the proportion of the dreaded "wine and cheese" stereotyped affluent M fans. While these types of fans are necessary for the donations and other types of funding they can help facilitate, excessively catering to their desires will, in my opinion, most likely tend to somewhat diminish the broader base of M football fans, the kids like me who grew up cherishing our M football memories when my dad could bring me to the Big House and with $10 or $15 in his pocket buy us some pops and hot dogs and a program. The value is not there anymore.
But what are you suggesting? That Brandon price the seats lower than people are willing to pay ? Look, when prices were lower, the "wine and cheese" folks still filled the stadium, because they were the ones willing to buy my student tickets for $200 a pop. Brandon isn't setting the prices--the market is.
I agree that corporate culture, coaching salaries, and other issues are gravely impacting the college fan experience. I hate that shit to death. But Brandon isn't responsible for that system; he's just living in it. Hating him for it, calling him names, or expecting him to do anything differently strikes me as misguided, mean, and naive, respectively.
You complain about the price of tickets, then pick a game that you should know will have especially high prices. I dare say that in previous years you would have had no shot of buying a block of single game tickets for OSU.
...no one gave a shit about this crap when we won.
And when someone did, there were 99 people yelling "SHUT UP!" at Mr. 100.
Rich people are rich, plenty of people get paid far more than they should...this is motherfucking America...what else is new? And I say that with the utmost respect.
The threads following the wins over Akron and uconn would disagree with you. Though you're mostly right.
to upgrade the success of all U-M sports - not just the revenue producing ones. The huge investments in new facilities and better coaches to make those sports more competitive costs money. That's a simple fact. In order to do this, he's tried many different revenue models and programs. Some of them have definitely rubbed me the wrong way, as they have others on this blog. The worst to me was definitely banning bringing water bottles into the stadium THEN gouging his new captive market by charging an obscene $4.50. But, getting back to the building of a competitive sports program, it can only be accomplished by someone who is very good at building revenue streams and fundraising. So, like it or not, it probably means David Brandon is the best one for the job.
the athletic department to a better place! He's totally completely evil for making money at some point in his life. I bet he didn't even fill up the cups at his lemonade stand all the way when he was a kid.
I don't think Dave Brandon is trying to make a quick buck. I believe that he is doing what he can to bring Michigan to a competitive level, across the board. It was well known that the infrastructure for Football and Basketball was substandard. Michigan got by on the cachet and reputation it had of success, but that only lasts so long. I remember the wars about the Football stadium, and the luxury boxes. I also remember how dingy Crisler was, and that was more than 25 years ago. Changes for those venues just had to happen, as much as there were complaints about it.
This also goes for the cost of coaching. If Michigan wants to compete with Alabama and USC and Ohio and all the rest of the Big Boys, they need to pay competitive salaries. Mattison doesn't come to Michigan for chump change.
The reality is that if you want a cheap ticket, you can go to an EMU game, or a high school game. I myself actually went to a bunch of local high school games this Fall, which was cheap, entertaining, and a way to keep my eye on my 12 year old twins.
You know, DB is going to strike out some of the time. I am probably least enamored with some of the changes at Yost. Having said that, he strikes out partially because he is swinging for the fences.
As for the nickel and diming complaints, DB isn't alone. I hate the world we live in, but I can't think of too many venues anymore where you can bring in your own food and beverages. And you know what? I bring in an emptied water bottle and fill it; I bring in some peanuts and sandwiches in coat pockets, and I'm never stopped. If you really want to be cheap, it still is possible.
This just strikes me as a hatchet job on DB, and some will eat it up, and others see the reality of the situation.
Earle Bruce, Jim Tresel
Most of Bama's coaches between Bear and Saban
Every USC hire since the 1920's has played at or coached at USC previously, Paul Hackett in particular had a horrible resume.
How does the university president evaluate DB's job performance? Is it soley based on revenue generated?
Brian has previously referred to Acker as "the dumbest semi-literate person in the Western Hemisphere," which is probably not too far from the truth.
I had no idea he had so much notoriety at MGoBlog, assuming it's the same kid. /cool story bro
I tend to think DB is trying for mostly the right reasons but doesn't get it. I hope the increased revenue can help M football win a championship in the next 3-5 years, I won't feel bad paying more if it does.
I can skim through threads again and just scan for obvious positive and obviously negative ideas to get the gist of a thread. I very much enjoy the old voting system. I am still posbanging people
Is DSR aware that Brandon WAS a regent? And by all accounts a quite good one? And that when he lost his bid for re-election, he threw himself into fundraising for the UM health system?
There are a number of AD decisions I'm not thrilled with, but I think it's misguided to paint DB as some kind of selfish, egomaniacal leader.
Yeah I (like many here) think Dave Brandon has a big ego and can come off as smug and so I don't particularly like him. However, I do believe that most DB complaining is way over the top and that Brandon is honestly trying to do what he believes is best for Michigan athletics (however misguided some efforts may be).
Glassdoor's most-recent survey of employees found that Bain & Company's consulting firm is the best large company to work for. Interesting results. Twitter, LinkedIn and Facebook were chosen as the top three tech companies to work for. The Motley Fool was chosen as the best medum-sized company.
That's true, but Bain Capital != Bain & Co.
Just trying to give some props to the better-liked Bain for those who work at Bain & Company who might be saddled with a negative view that's associated with Bain Capital where directors are considered to be more like The Dark Knight's Bane, blowing up smaller firms.
I wonder if DSR realizes their website has been hacked and is covertly selling cialis links. Maybe yhey should clean up their own house before they try shitting in someone elses. Proceed with caution of visitng DSR.
Don't hate the player; hate the game.
I don't think a major college AD can compete in today's collegiate athletic landscape unless it acts like a business first, function of the university second. Pandora's box was opened a long time ago and there's no way to close it, just blow it up and start over (if one wants it back the "way things were"). Once the power structure changed from the AD reporting to a faculty board to reporting to the University President (money, money, money), it was over.
In other words, if it wasn't Brandon doing it, someone else would. If not, Michigan would be struggling to win or even field competitive programs, especially in sports not named "football" or "men's basketball."
Can anyone find an example of an athletic department of a power conference who hasn't bowed to the business model, and who is successful in all sports across their department?
Does Stanford fit? I honestly don't know enough about all other athletic departments to tell you.
TV money is there, seats in the stadium are >everywhere else, and you have a very large group of loyal alumni. You do not need to squeeze the nickles out as they come back as quarters when you've gained more people with attachments to the school and program. He's not doing that. He's tried to make the most money off ticket sales, uniformz and cheap advertising. With the home environment and TV production values so high that is myopic.
Spending $40+ million on a rowing facility and telling everyone in attendance at an overpriced tomato can opponent probably isn't a way to make friends.
According to this, Brandon is below a lot of other AD salaries at top schools for athletics.
I don't agree with all of his policies but to imply that he's raiding the departments resources is grossly inaccurate based on salary.
Surprisingly, the highest salary I saw scanning through the list is for David Williams at Vanderbilt. My guess is that his salary may include his duties as Vice Chancellor for University Affairs and Athletics as well as Professor of Law.
I suppose you could make the case for many devils, but only one Satan? Anyway, i thought it was Urbz.?
I like the piece. I think that David Brandon is damaging the only brand that matters: the one with "Michigan" on it.
If he continues to micromanage the playcalling and turns a team that scored 41 points against Ohio with an overmatched OL back into one that scored six against Sparty and 13 against Nebraska, it will mean that Borges becomes the first coach sacrificed at the altar of the Brandon brand, with Brady Hoke to follow the year after.
The University of Michgan deserves better than David Brandon. Hopefully, he doesn't do much more damage before he gets bored and leaves.
How do you know he's micromanaging the play calling?
I dislike much of what Brandon has done. A lot. But this seems absurd. I don't like him being in coaches' meetings. But if he is suggesting the direction of the play calling, I would hope that Hoke would punch him in the mouth.
I am with you brother. DB cannot leave soon enough. He is poison in the long term.
Am I alone in not thinking Dave Brandon is a horrible human being? He seems to be genuine in his love for the University and especially the football team. All he's trying to do is build a brand, much like he would do as a CEO of a corp. Thats my tought on it though. /NEG
The University of Michigan is not a corporation to most of the people that care the most about it. "Building a brand" is not something he appears to be very good at, and it continues to be at odds with the university part. He's alienating current students (horribly implemented general admission), loyal supporters (increasing PSDs, dynamic pricing, selling home games to Jerry Jones, etc.), and making himiself too much of a public figure, IME.
I don't like what he does or what he says, and I wish there were someone else as AD of my university.
There's no doubt that Brandon loves Michigan. But that doesn't make him anything other than what the rest of us are - Michigan fans, alums, etc. If loving the school, being an alum, and doing what one thinks is best for Michigan qualifies a person to be the AD, then most of us would be reasonably solid candidates.
The point is, these are only a small part of the necessary qualifications.
The problem I have with Brandon, aside from his personality, is that his taste leans toward cheesy PT Barnum hucksterism, only we are the "suckers born every minute."
The Athletic Department should exist, first and foremost, for the students. And by that I don't mean only for the student-athletes. I mean for the student body.
Brandon treats the students is as if they didn't matter. To him, they're just a bunch of kids in maize shirts who show up too late for the stadium to look good on TV. Michigan students aren't good marketing. So he punishes them.
His treatment of the alumni fan base is barely acceptable, and his expressed opinions and actions regarding Michigan tradition are (in my opinion) shameful.
How many people did he add to a marketing staff that didn't need to be there in the first place? How many times will we have to listen to piped in crap at the stadium, see guys in jetpacks like some kind of circus, and be embarrassed by his marketing genius as shown by such stunts as skywriting over MSU's stadium?
No wonder they wanted to, and did, kick our asses.
The fact is that Dave Brandon is the Devil because he is an embarrassment. I don't care about him being a Republican, that's his business. I don't care about Bain or Domino's Pizza. That's his past.
But he has not done right by us, his fellow alumni (I was at Michigan when he was). He is an arrogant SOB who does not, and should not, run Michigan's athletic department.
Running a major college athletic department has changed a lot even in the last ten years. I don't pretend to know how to keep the Michigan Athletic Department in the black. I think what many people, myself included, want to know exactly what happens when DB is meeting with the coaches. What is the conversation like? Is DB the driving force behind "Manball" or is that Hoke? This is the main issue I have with Brandon.
I wonder the same things. I have been comparing Dave Brandon to Jerry Jones for a while. And I feel that it is not important if DB is actually getting in the way of the coaches. It is important that is APPEARS that DB is getting in the way of the coaches. I do not like the FACT that the face of Michigan Football is Dave Brandon....not the head coach.
Can't DB both want what he thinks is best for the university AND be saddled with a world view that sees making a quick buck as the way to do things? Personally I dislike many of his decisions around marketing and building a brand, (especaially b/c I see the "brand" he's building as damaging to the authentic/traditional brand that really is Michigan) but I do believe he thinks it's best. And that's what bothers me more than if he was cynically trying to increase his own wealth.
David Brandon can SOX my troll bells...
and...apparently gorgeous B CAN call plays if liberated from M man, man ball.....
RichRod will win NC within 5yrs. Could'a been us.
Please remember...he ,DB, only gave you want you wanted (like the Mafia does...)
Someone gets it.
I realize that some facts may be messed up. I hope they are not. There aren't many facts here. As an opinion piece this is remarkably accurate and truthful. Some things are almost direct quotes from myself over the past three years. My friends and I actually repeat this mantra over and over for years: "Dave Brandon is the Devil". Thank you for sharing. I am not alone. Learn this. It is impoortant if you are a fan of Michigan Athletics.