Tweet
CB is in meltdown mode this morning with a "byu insider" posting about the brethren's take on BYU football and its fans.
The post that started the CB meltdown:
http://www.cougarboard.com/noframes/...tml?id=5682915
Example of how bad this post hurts:
http://www.cougarboard.com/noframes/...tml?id=5683303
The main points and my analysis.
1. Brethren's take on BYU fans
He comes across self righteous and sounds a lot like an ALUF here and that's one reason why wondering if the guys is a Ute troll is reasonable. But we do know the brethren have been unhappy about a number of issues relating to BYU athletics: the gang bangs and the booing are two that came out publicly. There were rumors the brethren were considering dumping BYU athletics or seriously taking the air out of the balloon after the gang bang II and it's widely understood that Bronco was not a football hire but a "clean up the image" hire. We're just lucky Bronco also turned out to be a good football coach in addition to being the right guy to clean up the image.
2. Brethren's take on BYU in general
None of this is unreasonable. It's pretty much what we all understand BYU to be through the eyes of the brethren. The different stance I would take is that it would be impossible for the church to shut down BYU. There's such a large capital investment. It's such an important brand name to the church. There could be things the church could do to tweak BYU, a) cut growth in student body b) raise tuition so it's not so subsidized c) downplay significance of the athletic teams, etc. But the church is not going to shut BYU down.
3. Authority for the AD, BCS entry.
Some of the language might be a little strong here, but I and many other BYU fans already believe most of this. Recalling Rondo's frustrations with wanting to make BYU bigger than the brethren wanted them to be, I've wondered if it would be possible that BYU would end up rejecting a Big 12 offer. It wouldn't shock me. Holmoe and even Samuelson go work to get it done, and then when it comes down to it, the offer comes with a few strings that make it clear BYU is not going to be able to push its weight around in the conference like it always has, and ultimately the brethren say no we like it better in the MWC.
4. Athletic and other donations--one big pot
The gist of this is pretty obvious to me. It's silly when BYU fans or critics point out that tithing does not fund BYU athletics. It's like saying a holding company for a corporation isn't tied to the rest of the business, and it's true the accountants can prove it to the auditors, but then if the holding company is bleeding money and needs some cash flow or is a cash cow and wants to give money back to the corporation, of course it happens.
I disagree with the original take that the brethren see it as taking away from the kingdom. The brethren have finance people explaining to them how the revenue streams work. And I highly disagree that it's a drain.
The post might have be a BYU insider, if so he provides a picture of how most of us understand things already to be and shows some anti-sports bias that may or may not be reflected by the brethren as a whole. If he's a Ute troll, he still provides some accurate analysis of the picture.
The bottom line here is that BYU is not run like most institutions. It's unpredictable how the BOT is going to handle different issues, and they won't always make decisions that are best for football. That's the truth that should be understood from this post, whether it's an ALUF troll or a self-righteous BYU insider.
The post that started the CB meltdown:
http://www.cougarboard.com/noframes/...tml?id=5682915
Example of how bad this post hurts:
http://www.cougarboard.com/noframes/...tml?id=5683303
The main points and my analysis.
1. Brethren's take on BYU fans
Let me just say that BYU and Church leaders are not oblivious to you: your comments and behaviors as fans in general have been a subject of discussion in recent years (this board is just a small piece of this issue). There's a great disappointment how too many BYU fans (not all) have taken the Utah news poorly. Unfortunately, this adds to a long string of incidents where what you do and say in no way builds the Kingdom and in no way acts as a missionary tool. I know this is a generalization. Many of you are wonderful examples and say what you should and act how you. The problem is that there are too many exceptions to those of you who are behaving as you should. Those exceptions hurt the Kingdom more than you understand.
2. Brethren's take on BYU in general
BYU's primary purpose is SPIRITUAL: it's to build the Kingdom and to prepare for His return. PERIOD. Should this spiritual experiment to create a Zion university fail, the Board won't hesitate to shut BYU down. Academics as defined by this world are absolutely secondary to this spiritual mission. No compromise is allowed in this regard. A preference is given to courses of study that can edify and prepare students for prominent professional positions and further graduate opportunities in respectable fields. To this end, there is no interest by the Board to make BYU into a research powerhouse or to gain academic respect in the eyes of the world. They understand the need for accreditation and reasonable levels of acceptance of BYU's academic quality, but just so that BYU students are not denied basic opportunities of employment and graduate school.
3. Authority for the AD, BCS entry.
In fact, it was this kind of bold thinking / crossing the line that got Rhondo Fhelberg pushed out. I really liked and respected the man and still do, but he went way overboard in trying to make BYU athletics something it wasn't, trying to generate more funds for athletics, etc. To this end, you need to understand that Tom is required to essentially be the anti-Rhondo. More importantly, Tom has no real authority or power. So, he is really the anti-Chris Hill, if anything.
This lack of power for the AD position first started under President Bateman and was greatly cemented in by President Samuelson. The feeling by the Board is that it was highly inappropriate for the BYU AD to report directly to the President of BYU, who is also a general authority. Accordingly, they created a layer that essentially acted as the semi-authority over BYU athletics to whom the AD's had to report. And this layer, then reported directly to the President. (This "layer" used to be Fred Skousen; do some footwork and you can easily find out who the current layer is). If BYU fans better understand this basic fact, they'd get off Tom's case and realize that all they have been doing is criticizing the Board with half of their misdirected and/or inane comments. Tom has no meaningful decision-making or budget-making authority. Budgets are given through this layer. Tom can't hire a secretary without it running all the way through the chain of command. Tom can't hire a coach without it going all the way to Board for their review and approval. He has no authority to go out and negotiate anything--especially entrance into a BCS conference. You just don't understand how preposterous that would be.
This lack of power for the AD position first started under President Bateman and was greatly cemented in by President Samuelson. The feeling by the Board is that it was highly inappropriate for the BYU AD to report directly to the President of BYU, who is also a general authority. Accordingly, they created a layer that essentially acted as the semi-authority over BYU athletics to whom the AD's had to report. And this layer, then reported directly to the President. (This "layer" used to be Fred Skousen; do some footwork and you can easily find out who the current layer is). If BYU fans better understand this basic fact, they'd get off Tom's case and realize that all they have been doing is criticizing the Board with half of their misdirected and/or inane comments. Tom has no meaningful decision-making or budget-making authority. Budgets are given through this layer. Tom can't hire a secretary without it running all the way through the chain of command. Tom can't hire a coach without it going all the way to Board for their review and approval. He has no authority to go out and negotiate anything--especially entrance into a BCS conference. You just don't understand how preposterous that would be.
4. Athletic and other donations--one big pot
To those of you who argue about BYU athletics being self-sustaining, you still don't understand another critical part about BYU and the Church: All funds, no matter how received, are considered sacred and as blessings from the Lord himself to be used for His purposes and timing. Its considered ONE financial pot, regardless of the source. Every dime that comes into BYU athletics (including gate receipts and concessions) is seen as coming from that pot, and thus, it is not considered self-sustaining at all. The view is that athletics takes away from other things that can be done with the same money--including many worthy causes outside of BYU such as the perpetual education fund.
I disagree with the original take that the brethren see it as taking away from the kingdom. The brethren have finance people explaining to them how the revenue streams work. And I highly disagree that it's a drain.
The post might have be a BYU insider, if so he provides a picture of how most of us understand things already to be and shows some anti-sports bias that may or may not be reflected by the brethren as a whole. If he's a Ute troll, he still provides some accurate analysis of the picture.
The bottom line here is that BYU is not run like most institutions. It's unpredictable how the BOT is going to handle different issues, and they won't always make decisions that are best for football. That's the truth that should be understood from this post, whether it's an ALUF troll or a self-righteous BYU insider.
Comment