Why did we get SFT? - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Apr 29, 2005

Why did we get SFT?

Date: Apr 29, 2005

quote:

Originally posted by: Just wondering
"especially at a school like USM with practically no endowment

And that's sure to change with the emphasis Shelby places on it and the respect Toy elicits...

I know, when someone told Shelby how important it was to raise development funds, what he heard was raise development fun!

Date: Apr 29, 2005

Why did we get SFT? Because we are all sinners and God is punishing us. This is our Job moment, and we'll all end up covered in sores and sitting atop a pile of sh*t.

Date: Apr 29, 2005

If I am recalling Job correctly, when Job stopped asking God why, and instead asked God to show him the way out, God stopped punishing Job and showed him the way out. Is there a lesson here some where? Perhaps.

Date: Apr 29, 2005

A coalition of business people and athletic boosters, many of whose petty egos and purse strings are firmly attached only to sports, grew increasingly disenchanted with Horace Fleming's effort to make athletics take its fair share of continuing state budget reductions. They were seeking every spare dollar for athletics, even when those dollars were generated elsewhere. Anyone who opposed their goals was fair game, and Fleming did not have the deep political roots to survive. Nicholson was never happy after his choice of a successor to Dr. Lucas was passed over, primarily because of overwhelming support of Fleming by USM faculty and staff, and played a key role in Fleming's eventual downfall. Thames went into office with a list of IOUs to those who put him into power, and wasted little time fulfilling what he believed was his mandate. Some of his early administrative appointments were nothing short of personal political paybacks. Thames's bullying, ham-fisted style was quite well known to the faculty and staff with whom he had been long associated; but at the presidential level, his damn-the-torpedoes approach has been devastating. Those with the power to change the downward slide continue to fiddle while Rome burns. I've never heard, however, that Dr. Lucas supported Thames's ascendency to the presidency. What is the "hard evidence" of which you write?

Date: Apr 29, 2005

From what various people have told me about Aubrey Lucas, he didn't support Thames' enthronement... but for some reason was afraid to oppose it.

No way do I have any deep insight into Lucas's motives. But it seems highly implausible that he would support anyone who behaved as badly as Thames usually did, or was as strongly opposed to Lucas's own ideals as Thames obviously was.

Robert Campbell

Date: May 1, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: disgusted student
"If I am recalling Job correctly, when Job stopped asking God why, and instead asked God to show him the way out, God stopped punishing Job and showed him the way out. Is there a lesson here some where? Perhaps."

For the record, God was not punishing Job, rather allowing Satan to fail in tempting Job to disavow God. Please re-read the book of Job. While those around Job believed he was being punished, Job knew he had done no wrong and never surrendered his faith in God.

Date: May 1, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Robert Campbell
"No way do I have any deep insight into Lucas's motives. But it seems highly implausible that he would support anyone who behaved as badly as Thames usually did, or was as strongly opposed to Lucas's own ideals as Thames obviously was."

This has puzzled us all. Why did Lucas not dismiss Shelby from the university for his misdeeds in the 1980s? A misguided sense of "propriety," perhaps? Or an equally misguided sense of "forgiveness?" And why did Lucas not only not mention SFT's misdeeds three years ago but went as far as to say that SFT would make a fine president for USM? Fear? Genuine ignorance? Yes, it all seems out of character for AKL.

On the Job front, I've always found that book to be disturbing, because it has God getting in a little betting game with Satan, just placing side bets & letting Satan off Job's whole family as part of the game. I think there are real parallels.

Date: May 1, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Bible Scholar
"For the record, God was not punishing Job, rather allowing Satan to fail in tempting Job to disavow God. Please re-read the book of Job. While those around Job believed he was being punished, Job knew he had done no wrong and never surrendered his faith in God."

I always loved how this book can be interpreted in so many ways. Funny that a supernatural being can’t communicate accurately. The above rationalization takes the meaning of "punish" to a new universe where words mean anything you want. We do not "punish" murders by executing them. We just prevent them from acting again. The judge doesn't "punish", he just lets the warden have his way with you. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck …

Even though Job knew he didn't do anything wrong, God could still be punishing him. Because "God acts in mysterious ways". In fact how could Job "know" he didn't do anything wrong. Remember, "we are all sinners".

If I remember correctly Job didn't need "faith" in God. He "knew" God existed from evidence that is no longer supplied in these modern times.

Sorry for the Sunday sermon.

Date: May 1, 2005

It has been reported from a very reliable source that AKL was asked directly by the board if there was any reason NOT to appointment SFT as pres. Lucas did not give one.

Date: May 1, 2005

You hear a lot about God these days: God the beneficient; God, the all-great; God the Almighty; God the most powerful; God the giver of life; God the creator of death. I mean, we're hearing about God all the time, so we better learn how to deal with it. But if we know anything about God, God is arbitrary. So people better be able to deal with that, too.

-- Bob Dylan
September 25, 2001

Date: May 2, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Just wondering
"Answer #1: money. Folks like Warren Paving, Carl Nicolson, the car dealers all had a financial stake. Hey, they were his financial stakeholders. Answer #2: money. Contributed to the athletic fund. Answer #3: money. Here is the speculation. Why did people like Lucas support him (and there is hard evidence that he did by the way)? Did folks like that see the horrible financial mess of Mississippi higher education, especially at a school like USM with practically no endowmentwhat, and think that SFT might be the answer? At least he knew the terain? And he had been a business success himself? Obviously, a word from AKL (and folks like him--Chain, etc.) could have stopped this cold before it happened. Just wondering."

I see no "hard evidence" to date to support the contention that AKL backed Thames's rise to the presidency, and such support would seem to contradict everything Dr. Lucas stood for during his more than 20 years in the office. It is the comprehensive university AKL worked for so long to build that SFT has taken so little time to dismantle.

Date: May 2, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Truth or consequences
"It has been reported from a very reliable source that AKL was asked directly by the board if there was any reason NOT to appointment SFT as pres. Lucas did not give one. "

Date: May 2, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Roscoe Thorndyke
" I see no "hard evidence" to date to support the contention that AKL backed Thames's rise to the presidency, and such support would seem to contradict everything Dr. Lucas stood for during his more than 20 years in the office."

Well, Roscoe, you just need to ask "oldtimers" for the information, since "institutional memory" is one of the casualties of the Thames administration. Some of us "gray-hairs" remember when SFT was removed from "Executive Vice-President" to "Distinguished Professor of Polymer Science" for inappropriate activities that were not in keeping with such a high-visibility position. Since Aubrey K. was the person who made SFT step down, then he was the person who should have passed this information on to the IHL during the search process. Reading (here on this board) that he was specifically asked about this topic by IHL members has made me lose respect for AKL. If you're not part of the solution, then you're part of the problem.

Date: May 4, 2005

Lucas had no backbone. There were lots of things Fleming got punished for, mainly for standing up to the inequities in funding for USM. We were last among the schools per capita. When he did a study showing that and that we were the fastest growing, the powers that be would not allow that. Then when athletics DEMANDED another $1.5 million when we were taking all those reductions and doing away with unfilled positions and trying to save everybody on board Fleming said no. That sealed it for him. He may not have had the political roots to survive, but he had guts. Lucas had the roots, but no guts and no courage. He would never speak up. he is a go-along, get along guy interested in making no waves. Some pay the price for others' weaknesses. We let Fleming down. We should have stood with him. He stood pretty much along, but he was right. he did the right thing, I think. Different style from Lucas.

Date: May 4, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: hamlet's ghost
"Lucas had no backbone. There were lots of things Fleming got punished for, mainly for standing up to the inequities in funding for USM. We were last among the schools per capita. When he did a study showing that and that we were the fastest growing, the powers that be would not allow that. Then when athletics DEMANDED another $1.5 million when we were taking all those reductions and doing away with unfilled positions and trying to save everybody on board Fleming said no. That sealed it for him. He may not have had the political roots to survive, but he had guts. Lucas had the roots, but no guts and no courage. He would never speak up. he is a go-along, get along guy interested in making no waves. Some pay the price for others' weaknesses. We let Fleming down. We should have stood with him. He stood pretty much along, but he was right. he did the right thing, I think. Different style from Lucas."

hamlets ghost, You are very perceptive. USM lost its opportunity when it allowed Horace Fleming to be forced out. Things have gone nowhere but downhill after his departure. So he put substantial resources into our primitive technology system which was light years behind when he arrived. That was such a petty thing for people to complain about.