Got to amend this -

I would also include Col. (ret.) Raylawni Branch who also has SIGNIFICANT personal USM connection and professional adminstrative experience, for say, director of HR, and bring back Anthony Harris as director of Media Relations.  Who else am I forgetting?

What about Jim Williams for interim president?  Is he still in the state?  He's a very decent person and well respected.

Doug,

Thanks for a very reasoned analysis.  I agree completely.

Let's not sacrifice salvation in the quest for perfection.

I would like to be president for about 15 minutes. Can we arrange this?

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Doug Chambers
"NB: I sent this on a string - but perhaps it should be its own?   I could see a dream-team of Don Cotten (who appears to be available now), Jim Hollandsworth, Mary Ann Stringer (former dean of the former College of The Arts), and others, with either Dr. Lucas as Interim President (given his president emeritus status), or, yes, Tim Hudson.   Everyone would agree to be a caretaker administration, in order to conduct national searches for: President, University Provost (just 1 for all of USM, as is normal practice), V-P/Research, re-created V-P/Gulf Coast; all definitely must come from outside, and be seasoned and experienced and sound administrators - selling point would obviously be, come here and help us recover, rebuild, as we have so much potential (which is/was being squandered). As importantly, to also oversee/conduct a thorough review of the bloated administrative structure of USM under Thames with an eye to immediate reductions, in order to put the REAL SAVINGS to classroom instruction, hiring/retaining faculty, and investment in the Library to achieve ASERL membership. Lastly, it appears that there must an immediate accounting of the estimated $9 million recently written off (apparently) by the USM Foundation due to accounting irregularities (whatever the hay that means).  Some time ago, the word was that Lee Gore had said something along the lines of, if the Faculty really knew what was going on "they would riot."  No rioting is necessary - just a full audit, perhaps through the AG/Miss. office? In the end, I think that Tim Hudson could serve honorably as an interim president; clearly by any measure he would be a reasonable alternative to Thames (indeed, almost anyone would).  Let's be realistic."

---

Former dean Jane Boudreaux would be a wonderful addition to the dream team.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: truth4usm/AH
"Anselm (Andy) Griffith (Griffin?) would be great, too...don't know if he'd come back, but if we're dreaming..."

---

Either of the two Mississippi College graduates whose names have been frequently mentioned on this site -- Dr. Anselm Griffin or Dr. Noel Polk -- would be just fine for any upper-level administrative post at your university.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Racer X
" Yes, let's be realistic.  If Hudson is given the interim presidency, he'll leverage it into the permanent (well, four years minimum) position.  Remember how SFT was once on the president search committee, then suddenly he became a candidate?  Hudson as interim will be reminisent of that, but even worse.   Hudson may "agree" to make it a "caretaker" administration, as you say.  But will he see this promise through?  I don't understand how anyone can place faith (even in the INTERIM) in a guy who (1) didn't follow through on his promise to respond to public attacks on the faculty, (2) is said to be the one who altered the mid-year raise lists to favor his cronies, (3) reportedly has no sympathy whatsoever for the plight of nursing, (4) is the father of the shabby (but oh so profitable!) online graduate programs in econ development, and (5) is willing to sacrifice College of Business accreditation to keep spitting out online degrees like a Mississippi version of U of Phoenix.  Betcha I'm leaving stuff out, too. If you're really just looking for an interim caretaker, and you really believe (or insist) that it's absolutely necessary for a Provost to do it, then why not Grimes?  Sure, he may not be perfect, but he's not nearly as sneaky, underhanded and utterly loathsome as Hudson.   No Thames.  No Hudson.  No Quarter.  "

---

Racer X -- no one is arguing FOR Hudson. I've heard lots of good alternatives.

The academic argument of the moment is: if the only choice were Thames or Hudson, which? That is partly an exercise in game play -- but also a very serious one interms of how to develop a strategy if that happens.

The contention of some is that Hudson is so flawed and has made so many enemies on the faculty (and probably elsewhere) that he could not retain a viable position.  

Others content that Hudson is the worst of the two alternatives.

My personal view is that we cannot have worse than Shelby. Hudson in his worst dreams couldn't be this bad. Secondly, Hudson doesn't have Shelby's power base in the state -- not by a long shot. Third, he doesn't have the stature to be permanent president of the university. Finally, when the chnage comes and Shelby goes, the faculty and staff and students here need to force the issue of how the search will be condicted and what kind of President we will look for on the basis of the Board's own flawed choices x 2 (since they count Horace as a bad choice). If we get a stronger voice in the process, Hudson won't make it.

I respect those folks who fear Hudson the Manchiavellian. But to tell you the truth, in this case I'd rather deal with the devil I don't know -- I have seen enough of the Thames gang to last me through my first thousand years of immortality . . .

Those of you who think Tim Hudson would be a reasonable alternative to Shelby Thames have never dealt personally with Tim Hudson.  He has no respect for the faculty and has refused to defend the faculty, as requested by the Faculty Senate, when the faculty were attacked in the press.  His flaming E-mails are notorious.  If Hudson does not go as well as Thames there will be little furture for USM.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Moving On
"Those of you who think Tim Hudson would be a reasonable alternative to Shelby Thames have never dealt personally with Tim Hudson.  He has no respect for the faculty and has refused to defend the faculty, as requested by the Faculty Senate, when the faculty were attacked in the press.  His flaming E-mails are notorious.  If Hudson does not go as well as Thames there will be little furture for USM."

---

I have dealt with Tim -- though perhaps not as much as you. I was at the Senate retreat when the Senate extracted that promise from him. But unlike Thames he does have an intellectual understanding of what a proper university should look like -- that will tend to circumscribe his ability to act in a way that Shelby simply does not have . . .

Hudson will go -- sooner or later. But once again, if the argument is Thames vs. Hudson . . . .

I haven't heard a single reason why when stacked together we should continue to live with Shelby and the cabal vs Hudson and some sort of different administrative arrangement . . . . on an INTERIM  . . . basis. Most arguments seemto hinge on the inevitability of Hudson's ascension to power, which I simply do not accept.

The fact is that unless we plan to work actively on the Board to give us a stronger hand in the next Presdiential search, we might end up with another Board selected disaster.

You can count on Tim Hudson to do what is in his own self interest. If he were to become interim president, it would be in his interest to make nice with the faculty, staff, and students. The cabal would soon be gone, and he would make a show of cooperating with the faculty and staff. Insincere or not, that would be a great leap forward right now.

Someone mentioned Jim Williams's name earlier; any thoughts on him?  Would he be acceptable?

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Tired
"Don Cotten would be wonderful!  He could unify this campus.   "

---

Everyone on this board seems to have great things to say about DC.  Would he be acceptable to the IHL?

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Eagle in Cairo, Egypt
"With the budget cuts in Mississippi, the state may not be able to pay Dr. Polk the amount necessary for his 15 minutes."

---

This could be a terrific way to raise money! Instead of paying the president a quarter of a million bucks every year, let faculty & staff purchase 15-minute presidencies for $32.55. Admit that it isn't a 24/7 job & convert the big house into a bed & breakfast for the alumni (can't leave them out of this deal).

After saving $250K by not paying the salary & raising $250K through 15-minute presidencies, the University would be $500K ahead without resorting to Mader Math. And I'm not even factoring benefits or the B&B into this!

I'd pay for a 15 minute presidency too, though if Noel got there first, I might not have much to do . . .

I agree with Flash Gordon that Tim Hudson's motives are predictable (even "reasonable," in the sense that his motives are rational--unlike our present president's), and I think he would see it as in his interests to "make nice." But this should only be a temporary measure, in my view, and I doubt that the Board would install this particular person as an interim choice.

I would love to see the "Dream Team" come back. But alas , the Board has already rejected these folks in various ways, and clearly doesn't share their philosophy of higher education (at least not as a body, though individual members may). Again I think they wouldn't go for even an interim administration with these people--though I suppose it wouldn't hurt to float the idea, those of you who have a line inside.

I'm afraid we're going to have to go back to the beginning.

And I think the PROCESS of selecting a U. prez in this state has to be addressed. There have been too many failed administrations lately. The problem is in the process, not just in the selection.

Well, I'm rambling. Sorry. The difficulty is so complex that I have trouble formulating any useful analysis.

Doug's original idea is right in its form, even though maybe not acceptable to the Board in its content: we need an interim administration run by people acceptable to U. consituencies, already trusted by them if possible, and also acceptable to the Board as a temporary solution. Then we can undertake new searches, and urge a new process for these searches.

Ok, I'm going to shut up now. Let's keep thinking.

NO QUARTER.
Anne Wallace