New University President Announcement Open Thread EDIT: It's Dr. Mark Schlissel, Provost at Brown
It's official, the University is holding a press conference now at 10am to announce the name of the new (and only 14th) President of the University of Michigan.
LINK:http://www.freep.com/article/20140124/NEWS06/301240048/U-M-to-name-new-president
LINK #2: http://www.michigandaily.com/blog/wire/regents-have-special-meeting-friday-morning
Supposedly the Michigan Daily may Liveblog it (not kidding). WIll post link if they do.I just wonder if they'll do the whole picking hats and putting the winner on their head thing.
EDIT: Better than a Liveblog, the University is posting a live broadcast of the news conference here: http://umich.edu/watch/
EDIT #2: Its Dr. Mark Schlissel, the current provost at Brown and former Dean of biochem at Cal-Berkeley. Here's the pic & bio: http://www.brown.edu/Administration/Provost/people/about_schlissel.html
EDIT #3 - NO YOU DO NOT REMEMBER HIM FROM HIS ROLE IN "THE HOBBIT"
January 24th, 2014 at 5:31 PM ^
Post-doc wages are negotiated - there isn't a set standard other than a limit of something like 70k
January 24th, 2014 at 10:16 AM ^
Humanities is in the past. Science is the future, mannn.
January 24th, 2014 at 10:39 AM ^
January 24th, 2014 at 10:54 AM ^
January 24th, 2014 at 11:14 AM ^
Obviously. Our circle jerks have robots.
January 24th, 2014 at 4:43 PM ^
Go to Ann Arbor coffee shops and see how many baristas have a humanities degree from U of M and how many have a STEM degree
January 24th, 2014 at 10:17 AM ^
With how important research is to Michigan, I'm happy with him. Grants are getting harder and harder to come by even for the big sciences and hopefully he'll make it a priority.
January 24th, 2014 at 11:22 AM ^
Isn't Science/research the golden goose of this University. Over 1 billion in research spending annually; most of that due to the sciences.
January 24th, 2014 at 10:12 AM ^
He's kind of a got an Evil Super-Villian Beard going
January 24th, 2014 at 10:13 AM ^
They just said he has worked to increase academic standards in his career. THANK GOD. and a guy with a science background isn't bad.
January 24th, 2014 at 10:16 AM ^
I'm pretty shocked. Dr. Schlissel is an ESTEEMED academic with both Ph.D. and M.D. and has a serious science background. Will be very useful in attracting faculty.
That said....
1) Never been a President/Chancellor. Provost is a #2 and its not uncommon to raise a Provost to a President but for Michigan, I'm surprised they wouldn't hire someone with sitting President experience or at least interim president experience.
2) NO ATHLETIC EXPERIENCE OR RELATIONSHIP ON AN NCAA FACULTY BOARD. If I'm David Brandon I'm watching my back CLOSELY.
3) Not that it really matters that much, no Michigan ties.
For our East Coast crew...he's a Brooklyn native
January 24th, 2014 at 10:18 AM ^
I think the general rule is:
- Dean from a better institution
- Provost from a peer institution
- President/Chancellor from a worse institution
so, this doesn't seem out of line.
January 24th, 2014 at 10:25 AM ^
I don't disgree. Great pedigree and if you're going to grab a provost, you take one from a better institution. Just listened to his speech. His Go Blue was a little weak. Needs to sneak in a little "This is Michigan Fergodsakes" but he'll learn over time.
January 24th, 2014 at 10:44 AM ^
I should have clarified. That's just the "minimum" qualification. Obviously you get the best candidate you can. The two elephants on campus are medicine and athletics. I'm curious if the new prez -- especially since he was at Berkeley -- favors putting a little financial distance between the medical enterprise and the rest of the U.
January 24th, 2014 at 10:22 AM ^
Undergrad at Princeton w/ honors. Johns Hopkins for med school. This dude is a brain.
January 24th, 2014 at 11:56 AM ^
The Princeton to Michigan path continues.
Fritz Crisler, me and the new Prez.
January 24th, 2014 at 10:26 AM ^
NO MICHIGAN TIES!!! Oh the humanity!!!!
I think our athletic department could use some of his influence... STAT! Or better yet, I think the search committe should start on their next task, finding us a new AD, ready..... go!
January 24th, 2014 at 12:16 PM ^
Easily correctable.
January 24th, 2014 at 10:26 AM ^
Dave Brandon is making money for the school. He has nothing to worry about as long as that continues.
January 24th, 2014 at 10:43 AM ^
Dave Brandon is making money for the Athletic Department. Folks in other places in the school aren't necessarily seeing any of it and many are bitter. I think that, at the very least, Schlissel will have some fence-mending to do.
January 24th, 2014 at 10:53 AM ^
Why would people be bitter over the athletic department making money?
I understand some departments feeling underfunded, but it's not like the AD is taking money away from them. The AD making money and other people not having enough are two separate issues. If anything, the fact that the AD is self-sustaining should make other departments feel happy that the University doesn't have to help support them.
January 24th, 2014 at 11:10 AM ^
Well, there is some lingering sentiment that Brandon's aggressive strategy to shake down donors for more money brings funds those same people would otherwise have given to the academic side of the university to Athletics instead. Particularly when the fact of the matter is the AD is self-sustaining itself to a gigantic budgetary surplus that keeps growing while the academic departments are fighting off the Shared Services Consolidation in order to keep their office staff in their actual offices.
The fundamental question here is how self-sustaining should Athletics actually be at a world-class research university?
January 24th, 2014 at 11:24 AM ^
Oh, I hadn't heard that Brandon was trying to get donors to forgo academic donations for athletic ones. Yeah, that's not really an appropriate way to go.
But aside from diverting donations away from academic departments (clearly wrong), this sentiment "how self-sustaining should Athletics actually be at a world-class research university?" still strikes me as strange. Provided the AD is generating funds off of athletics, as opposed to diverting academic donations, why should other people within the university be upset that the AD has money, other than simply being upset that they don't have it?
January 24th, 2014 at 11:32 AM ^
That's the crux of it, though. When academic departments at a university are scrambling for every dollar they can beg for in order to conduct their academic mission while the athletic department is practically printing their own money, it's bound to raise questions of appropriateness.
January 24th, 2014 at 1:01 PM ^
Even further, there are studies that show that athletic success (at least in revenue sports) bring more applications into the university (which includes a better chance at landing high acheivers and a willing pool of canidates who can pay the ungodly expensive tuition to fund the rest of the U). That said, I don't have any problem with cross-selling if that is what he is implying. What makes Michigan great and distinguishes it from some of its peers is that we excel to be the best at everything, be it liberal arts, sciences, art, music, dance, or athletics and thats what creates such an awesome deeply enriching community. I think the opportunity for a future partner at a big law firm, nobel prize winning scientist and NFL linebacker to enjoy a game of beer pong together in their formative years leaves them all better off.
January 24th, 2014 at 1:47 PM ^
January 24th, 2014 at 11:12 AM ^
Many different people have reported that Brandon actively solicits donations from people who usually give to other academic units. So in that sense, yes, the AD is taking money away from other departments.
Also, if you've ever worked in any large organization where one department clearly holds favored status from those on high, you'll see that bitterness and anger often rear their heads.
January 24th, 2014 at 11:28 AM ^
Right, I used to work at UM, then at the University of Texas, and now work for the New York city government. I'm familiar with large organizations with huge budgets. It just seems silly (though, not at all surprising from my experiences in academia) that people in other parts of the university are upset simple because someone else has money.
But Brandon targeting academic donors, which is an issue I hadn't heard about, is a really bad practice that hopefully a new president can put a stop to.
January 24th, 2014 at 11:34 AM ^
It's not that someone else has money. It's that someone else--who is not an academic department--has money. Ultimately, it is a university not a professional sports franchise.
I love college sports, but it does require me to engage in some willful cognitive dissonance.
January 24th, 2014 at 11:45 AM ^
But this was my original point: if the AD has more money than some academic departments simply because they bring in more money, why should that academic department be upset?
Now, it sounds like Brandon has been sniping donations away from academic donors, which is totally inappropriate and a practice that should absolutely stop. But this idea that somehow the athletic department should not have more money than some academic departments, even if athletics are bringing their money in on their own is strange. Money doesn't enter the university via some big undifferentiated pot that is then distributed out to departments. That was my whole point about it being self-sustaining.
If they, the athletic department, raise the money, why shouldn't they have it?
January 24th, 2014 at 11:38 AM ^
My original comment wasn't intended to judge the correctness of people's feelings but simply to point out that bridges have been burned. MSC hired Brandon and therefore can't approach the situation as a totally neutral party. Schlissel will need to address this because if the university remains divided against itself the entire institution will suffer. He won't have the luxury of deeming one side's arguments right or wrong.
January 24th, 2014 at 11:59 AM ^
I had left Michigan a few years ahead of Brandon's hiring, so I don't have a good grasp of what the internal temperature has been around him. Sounds like it's not been too good.
I have mixed feelings about him. It wasn't that long ago that the AD ran in the red every year, so I really appreciate having a director that can keep the books straight. I'm not a huge fan of all of his decisions, but I'm far from a mgoboard-certified Brandon-hater.
Either way, these are decisions and relationships well above my non-donor paygrade. Interesting to see it sort itself out in the coming months/years.
January 24th, 2014 at 11:15 AM ^
Because we're not winning as many football games as they'd like.
January 24th, 2014 at 11:21 AM ^
Under Brandon the Athletic Dept took their development staff from 6 to over 25 and counting and, instead of just hitting up an Al Glick when they need a building, they are now going after the nickels and dimes and everything else. Further, there are rules on campus about only being able to speak to your donors. IF you're an Enginieering grad/donor, no one else is allowed to make contact with you without Engineering's permission. Athletics threw those rules out and has deemed pretty much everyone as theirs. There are many people on campus who have intimated that Ross' entire $200 million gift was supposed to be for the B-School but Brandon snagged half of it at the last second. There have also been several other large donors around campus who traditionally give to academic units who are now being approached by Athletics.
I guess big picture, Athletics is ROLLING in money. The Football PSD's put them permanently in the black and adding the hoops and hockey ones just grew the pot. Brandon targeting academic campus donors is straight bullshit. Somehow he's forgotten that the athletic department though financially separate from the University, is certainly not the competition and supposed to be its partner.
January 24th, 2014 at 7:05 PM ^
I doubt David Brandon is kidnapping the children of traditional academic donors and threatening to kill the little tykes unless said donors pony up to the athletic department.
In other words, if somebody who has traditionally given money to academic donors is approached by DB, they are perfectly capable of telling him "Nope."
I can understand that the AD hitting up donors outside of his bailiwick is really bad form within the university, but I'm not sure he should be blamed for the people giving him money when he asks for it. Academic types need to get a backbone sometimes.
January 24th, 2014 at 12:12 PM ^
A lot of people are leary of the athletic department being run like a cutthroat corporation when it is a not-for-profit model that, by the way, is tax-sheltered. It's a sleazy look.
January 24th, 2014 at 10:58 AM ^
Actually our athletic department effectively gives the university two annual subsidies: it pays out-of-state tuition for all athletes, regardless of home address, and also donates to the general fund.
January 24th, 2014 at 6:33 PM ^
But how can that be? I thought Dave Brandon was evil incarnate and should be run out of town on a rail.
January 24th, 2014 at 10:49 AM ^
While the rankings of the graduate programs at Michigan remain stellar, the university's USNWR undergraduate ranking, not the only benchmark, of course, has dropped considerably since MSC came on board.
The University Hospital has also dropped considerably in its ranking,
http://www.michigandaily.com/news/12hospitals-2013-rankings11
Then there is the North Campus Research Complex and the debate about how effectively utilization of the complex is being realized.
Remember, the athletic budge, while large, is not the only big ticket item at Michigan. Our research budget alone is ten times the athletic budget.
So yeah, there is some work to be done. As much as most of us who frequent Mgoblog are sports junkies, seeing a new president with this guy's background in science and medicine may serve us well. There is no reason to think that athletics would get chopped or compromised.
January 24th, 2014 at 11:06 AM ^
What concerns me is that tuition at this school skyrocketed during MSC's tenure, basically doubling in that time, and applications soared, yet we see our undergraduate ranking having dropped. I know a major justification for the tuition hike was that state appropriations were reduced, but going forward (knowing that state appropriations are probably never going to be what they were), is it possible to keep tuition rates more stable and still remain a top-notch institution? The cost of attending U-M has become a concern for a lot of people.
On another note, our record against Ohio in football absolutely sucked in MSC's tenure. Maybe she was the problem.
January 24th, 2014 at 11:14 AM ^
But we're undefeated since Nussed God was hired.
January 24th, 2014 at 11:31 AM ^
That's kind of encouraging. Hopefully, he'll lead the movement to eliminate the big business/scholarship athlete model of our athletic department and get Michigan to join the Ivy League.
January 24th, 2014 at 11:41 AM ^
There's nary a fleck of maize or blue in this tie:
January 24th, 2014 at 12:47 PM ^
A friend of mine said It's been killing him trying to figure out why his face looks familiar. Then he remembered:
January 24th, 2014 at 10:21 AM ^
His frumpy academic suit game is on point.
January 24th, 2014 at 10:23 AM ^
Super awkward they're not putting him behind the podium for this speech.
January 24th, 2014 at 10:25 AM ^
Film department shoud really benefit!
January 24th, 2014 at 10:34 AM ^
January 24th, 2014 at 10:43 AM ^
the microphone feedback at the Big House.