Apparently one of the points being made by pro-Shelby people is that if Shelby is removed, no one else would want the job (!).  Here are some reasons why I think this assumption is mistaken; I encourage others to add more reasons.

* Any QUALIFIED person who takes the job after Shelby leaves will be greeted as a potential redeemer.  That person will have the good will of the faculty and staff to an enormous degree; s/he will be given every benefit of the doubt.  People will be so glad that Shelby is gone that they will knock themselves out to help the new person succeed.

* If the new person has aspirations to move up the academic ladder, what would be a better situation: (1) becoming president of a university that is functioning very well and running the risk of disappointing people or (2) becoming president of a university that is so demoralized that practically anything you do will win you gratitude and loyalty?  The new president would earn a reputation as the savior of USM and could then eventually move on to an even better position if s/he so desired.

* An idealist (and surely there must be a few still out there) would welcome the chance to undo the damage done by Shelby to a school that, before Shelby's reign, had been winning a very fine name for itself. 

On the other hand, here is at least one reason why any talented administrator might be very reluctant to take the job:

* A history of interference with the university, and manipulation of the president's office, by members of the local business community.  Any sensible incoming president would want a guarantee that this kind of interference would end.