Hackett could be around longer than we thought...

Submitted by Wolverine Devotee on

FootballScoop.

http://footballscoop.com/news/update-michigan/

The plan was not for Hackett to be in this position long-term.

Well, that has changed folks. Per source, Michigan’s board of regents met recently and Hackett told the board that he has not found a person or persons that he would recommend the board consider for the permanent athletic director post. Accordingly, he advised the Regents that he would be the one making the decision on Hoke’s future following the season. The Regents per source, recognizing the potential issue this could present when trying to hire a new head coach, asked Hackett if this meant he was prepared to stay on “at least two years” in order to provide stability when, potentially, attempting to hire a new face of Michigan football. Hackett told the Regents he was prepared to do so.

steve sharik

November 23rd, 2014 at 1:24 PM ^

Here's moderator Chris Balas's post from The Wolverine's premium message board, "The Fort," dated Nov. 3:

 

We continue to pick up information on Michigan's search for a new athletic director. There's a solid list of five or six, and we can confirm former U-M player and current Boston College athletic director Brad Bates is on the list.

So for the author to say

Hackett told the board that he has not found a person or persons that he would recommend the board consider for the permanent athletic director post.

is complete bullshit, either on the author's, source's, or Hackett's part, as Bates, Manuel, etc. are definitely more than qualified for the job, and a thousand times more than Hackett.

blueblueblue

November 23rd, 2014 at 1:44 PM ^

I dont understand what you consider to be an incoherence between the two. All Hackett is saying is they have not found a candidate to recommend for the job. This implies that they have looked at some people in some fashion. Perhaps the folks they looked at, including the guy from BC, do not meet their criteria for one reason or another. For example, they might be looking at folks who are not tied to the university, and they might have loooked at folks who expressed that they do not want the job; who knows what the reasons might be? 

steve sharik

November 23rd, 2014 at 2:14 PM ^

...and look at his resume, then conclude "he's not worth even recommending," is simultaneously stupid and disturbing.

I get that it doesn't have to be a "Michigan Man," but to say he (or Manuel or Long) aren't good enough is ludicrous.

I will say that the latest "Inside the Fort," suggests that they're intent on hiring someone without Michigan ties.  If that's the case, it's just as misguided as those who want someone with Michigan ties.

blueblueblue

November 23rd, 2014 at 2:27 PM ^

I agree with your logic about their selection criteria (in that not hiring a Michigan man is just as reactionary as having to hire a Michigan Man). All I am saying is that there's no incoherence between not advancing a candidate and saying that there have been candidates. You may not agree with their criteria, but that's a different issue. 

SFBlue

November 23rd, 2014 at 1:29 PM ^

I have a bad feeling about this, and I hope I am wrong.  We just deposed a stooge.  Reading Hackett's commets today in the Freep, I am afraid that we are just playing stooge musical chairs. 

 

http://www.freep.com/story/sports/college/university-michigan/wolverine…

 

Hackett praises Hoke for, among other things, coaching through "difficulties."  Oh really?  Surely it must occur to him that Hoke is himself responsible for much of this difficulty?  To say the least, the bad news in this program goes beyond a certain toxic former AD.  This is like praising Hoke for sleeping through the stench after he shits his own bed. 

Maybe it's just me, but Hackett comes accross as a fucking piker.  A business executive of modest success, who should have probably either been a cop or a vice principal, who we are allowing to play fantasy AD camp.  

So Michigan lets this stoogie conduct a preliminary AD search, and he tells us he came back empty handed?  Sorry, but this smacks of their blantat incompetence, or insufferable self-interest.   

TheBoLineage--

November 23rd, 2014 at 2:50 PM ^

The Planning for The New Email Offensive needs to start now--  to be directed at Hackett.

 

I think Most Of Us recognized early-on that it was Likely To Come To This.

 

Submit your Operational Plans--    ASAP  . . .

 

MWolverine7

November 23rd, 2014 at 2:50 PM ^

Hackett fIres Hoke - delay....Announce AD hire (already identified) and advise that he will be responsible for hiring new coach - further delay. Coaching search begins and AD advises search will be deliberate to set expectation for extended search. Hire Harbaugh once his season is over.



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

LSAClassOf2000

November 23rd, 2014 at 3:05 PM ^

I sort of had a feeling from the beginning that Hackett was probably the person that was bound to determine the future of Hoke, something which probably makes it much easier for a potential permanent hire if they get to avoid this problem of conducting this search. Other than that, this article takes a little and turns it into a lot, which doesn't sit well with me personally. If Roussel wanted to stir a pot again, he definitely succeeded, it seems. 

DFW_Michigan_Man

November 23rd, 2014 at 3:17 PM ^

Sooner rather than later....we shall soon know if Hackett is legitimately contemplating staying on the job an extended amount of time, or if he is just giving the next AD a blank canvas and is simply the hatchet man!

Boom Goes the …

November 23rd, 2014 at 3:23 PM ^

that is a bad sign if we can't get a permanent AD in place.  What coach is going to come here without a longterm answer?

And I don't think Hackett should be the longterm guy fwiw

cobra14

November 23rd, 2014 at 3:39 PM ^

There is so much negative towards this? Most wanted Brandon out and he is out. Now you get this possibility. The issue is no one took time to consider what might happen next. And no Hacket has no basis or experience to hire a good football coach outside your obvious slam dunk hires. So if they pass some of you feel confident he will be able to find a great coach at a lower tier school?? Of course this is the same place that told us leadership and chemistry on a team aren't important. Buckle up people.

cutter

November 23rd, 2014 at 4:08 PM ^

Another possibility to consider is that Hackett has formally or informally contacted the potential AD replacements on the list and has been told "thanks, but no thanks".

Brandon resigned on 31 October and Hackett was given the interim AD position almost immediately thereafter.  That means he's had three weeks to contact likely candidates--people like Jeff Long (Arkansas), Brad Bates (Boston College), Joe Castiglione (Oklahoma) or Jim Philips (Northwestern).  If he's getting negative responses from people like that about taking the job in Ann Arbor and Hoke's replacement needs to be hired within a fairly limited timeframe, then maybe the only choice Hackett has is to take the position himself for two years.  

FWIW, also consider the possibiity that Hoke is fired an an interim HC is named (perhaps Nussmeier) for at least one year.  This is what happened at Arkansas and Ohio State, although those coaches were forced out not because of win-loss records, but for personal (Bobby Petrino) and professional (Jim Tressel) reasons.

Why would a potential AD look at the Michigan position and say "thanks, but not thanks"?  It's not hard to figure out where the problems lie.

First off, the university president has demonstrated that he doesn't have a great understanding for how athletics works at institutions like Michigan.  I'm sure President Schlissel will be great in many way at U-M, but he's had one football-related p.r. disaster already and judging by his comments about athletics being a "time sink", he may not have great interest in it.  Any potential AD would also have to ask himself how much Schlissel would have his back seeing that he caved into a social media driven protest (including the publication of the AD's emails on this blog) that forced Brandon out of the AD position.

Second, the new AD would have to come in right away and conduct a coaching search that literally has to be a home run hire.  If that new coach doesn't work out and meeting fan expectations, would he get a second chance to hire his replacement?  Brandon didn't get that chance, assuming Hoke is fired shortly after the Ohio State game (which is think is 95% likely at this point).  Who would want to take on that responsibility given the relatively short time frames involved?

Third, any potential AD would being taking look at the "fan frenzy" (to use the term in a Wall Street Journal article) surrounding Brandon and the statements of the Regents and wonder what sort of environment exists in Ann Arbor right now.  Say something wrong at an alumni get together and it gets reported on a blog.  Don't get rid of the rawk music or the alternative uniforms and a half dozen of your emails get edited and published on social media (with a FOIA request added in).  Have something happen on the field you have no direct control about happen on the football field and a student protest gets organized in front of the President's House.  Get paid the 11th highest AD salary in the country or appear in front of the press too many times and get called an overpriced media whore.

So no, I wouldn't be surprised that Hackett takes the job because the really good candidates are deterred from taking the Michigan position for all the reasons I outlined above.  Let's just hope that he can convince Jim Harbaugh or Dan Mullen to take the HC job, because we all know his lack of athletic department credentials are going to be held against him from Day One.  Not hiring a top flight head football coach would be Strike Two.  Given the way things are in Ann Arbor and among the mainstream/social media covering UM football, finding that third strike isn't going to be too difficult.    

cutter

November 24th, 2014 at 7:11 AM ^

The comments I put forth aren't just my opinion.  It's something of a compilation of friends, etc., I've talked to who are college football fans of programs other than Michigan. i.e., people outside the bubble.

Simply put, there are things surrounding the Michigan AD job that could prove to be a deterrent to a large number of candidates President Schlissel and Jim Hackett are looking to hire for the position.  Setting aside anything that was said in mainstream or social media, you do have to question Schissel's actions to date on this issue, including his statements on the football team/academics.  Simply put, that was a major p.r. issue for which he had to issue a statement of clarification and an apology.  His "time sink" quote also might shed some light on his perspective about athletics.

The second point is something we're all aware of--the new AD would likely have to hire the new head football coach in  a very short time frame.  The only way around that is Hoke is retained for one more year (highly unlikely), an interim coach is put in place (probably Nussmeier) for one season or Hackett makes that hire either because he's the permanent AD or while he's the interim pending the hiring of a new person.

I hope we see another Canham/Schembechler partnership that lasts for the next two decades with these next two hires, but I don't see that very likely.  If Hackett does take the job on a permanent or semi-permanent basis (two years), I'd be very concerned about how he'll do given the statements from his most recent press conference.

 

 

 

Franz Schubert

November 23rd, 2014 at 4:56 PM ^

Let me get this straight, Hackett has no experience as an athletic director and has determined that there are no qualified candidates to this point? How would he know what a qualified AD would look like considering he has NO experience himself? Furthermore, wouldn't it be common practice for the President to be evaluating AD candidates and hiring them, rather than the interim AD? This is laughable.

StraightDave

November 23rd, 2014 at 6:24 PM ^

UM replaced an AD who was too businesslike with an AD who is too businesslike.  I guess Brian can deploy WD to dig up some dirt on this guy so UM can get rid of him.  

azian6er

November 23rd, 2014 at 6:38 PM ^

Unfortunately for everyone - If Hackett were to go after a one Jimmy Harbaugh, I sincerely doubt any information on that decision would be leaked as it would compromise the entire process - a la Kirk Herbsteit 2007.

As painfully silent as it may be, the lack of public/leaked information and the lengthening of the process certainly bodes well for our aspirations of hiring Jimmy Harbaugh.

I'm like everyone else with ants in my pants to fire hoke, however, if our ultimate goal is snagging Jimmy H., then perhaps waiting it out will be the best for us.

Sucks, but good things come to those who wait. God knows we have waited long enough.

Nitro

November 23rd, 2014 at 7:35 PM ^

George W. Bush enlisted Dick Cheney to head his vice-presidential search committee in 2000.  After extensively researching potential candidates, Cheney came to the only logical conclusion he could for the role: himself!

We all saw how well that worked out.

Nitro

November 23rd, 2014 at 7:50 PM ^

Nevermind, poor analogy.  Just read the earlier comments on page 2 and agree with the majority of those about the article's author taking things out of context to create a story that doesn't really exist.

Also, I agree with Hackett being the guy to fire Hoke.  The AD job will sound a lot more attractive to candidates if Task #1 isn't "go fire somebody, he loves his job and you'll have to negotiate a buyout."