I've been out of pocket for the better part of six hours. I know some questions have been asked of me and I may have seen some of those, and others I may not. I know there still seems to be some confusion on other things.
So, here are a few things I wanted to follow up on:
1. I'll start with some good news: I think the BOT meeting was a formality. So whatever was proposed last week was likely approved. I shared some details on what I know about that last week.
2. To that: There are differences in capital and operating budgets. The operating budgets are what's been cut. That's not abnormal at Vanderbilt under these circumstances. It happens across the board.
3. So my problem isn't, per se, that they're reigning in spending. My problem is that it was allowed to go on for so long when there are precisely checks and balances within Vanderbilt for this. And why in the world did that happen?
4. Fingers keep getting pointed at the Board of Trust. I feel like I keep saying this isn't a BOT problem in terms of athletics being held back by the BOT, and I feel like people keep missing that. I still don't have any evidence that the BOT is running any sort of interference with athletics. I have said this for months, I think there is actually more BOT support than people realize. And not just from John Ingram. So I don't think that yelling at the BOT is the answer.
What I have been saying is that I think the BOT should start taking a closer look at things. I don't think Vanderbilt is as healthy as is perceived from the outside, and certainly not from a leadership standpoint. If this case doesn't prove it, I don't know what does. And if this case doesn't demand a review to find out what the heck went on, I also don't know what does.
5. I think where the school gets hung up is at the highest executive level. I'm asking some questions about that and will probably write some on that, hopefully, during next week's MMM.
If something's still unclear, feel free to ask. I may not be able to answer but I am happy to try to clear things up.
So, here are a few things I wanted to follow up on:
1. I'll start with some good news: I think the BOT meeting was a formality. So whatever was proposed last week was likely approved. I shared some details on what I know about that last week.
2. To that: There are differences in capital and operating budgets. The operating budgets are what's been cut. That's not abnormal at Vanderbilt under these circumstances. It happens across the board.
3. So my problem isn't, per se, that they're reigning in spending. My problem is that it was allowed to go on for so long when there are precisely checks and balances within Vanderbilt for this. And why in the world did that happen?
4. Fingers keep getting pointed at the Board of Trust. I feel like I keep saying this isn't a BOT problem in terms of athletics being held back by the BOT, and I feel like people keep missing that. I still don't have any evidence that the BOT is running any sort of interference with athletics. I have said this for months, I think there is actually more BOT support than people realize. And not just from John Ingram. So I don't think that yelling at the BOT is the answer.
What I have been saying is that I think the BOT should start taking a closer look at things. I don't think Vanderbilt is as healthy as is perceived from the outside, and certainly not from a leadership standpoint. If this case doesn't prove it, I don't know what does. And if this case doesn't demand a review to find out what the heck went on, I also don't know what does.
5. I think where the school gets hung up is at the highest executive level. I'm asking some questions about that and will probably write some on that, hopefully, during next week's MMM.
If something's still unclear, feel free to ask. I may not be able to answer but I am happy to try to clear things up.
