"Those damn Catholics" and the rise and fall of President Gordon Gee

[Perfection]

Maybe he'll be back?

 

[downtown]

Apparently UCSC was one of the schools he bashed.

My first reaction:

OH MY GOD SOMEBODY KNOWS WE EXIST!

I think that was another B1G AD. I don't remember any references to UCSC in the remarks.

It is rumored that Craig James killed five hookers while at SMU. Does anyone know Gee's involvement?

Can't trust those damn Methodists.

It also speaks volumes that the president of a university is even publicly discussing college football in such a manner. One would think it was actually important compared to academics.

Football is a major source of alumni donations, which is most of the entire job of a major university president. Given that Gee was talking to donor-type individuals, he would be remiss of his duties if he *didn't* give the matter some sort of attention.

Plus, who do you think makes up the NCAA? It isn't Athletic Directors....

As for Gee coming back, he is planning to continue to fund raise for Ohio State and teach at the Law School, but at nearly 70 years old, I think the odds of him ever returning are really low, unless the new president completely flounders.

 

[Perfection]

so sounds like all the fun parts with limited responsibility.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Football is a major source of alumni donations, which is most of the entire job of a major university president. Given that Gee was talking to donor-type individuals, he would be remiss of his duties if he *didn't* give the matter some sort of attention.

There is a big difference between engaging in fund raising activities and playing a bigoted cheerleader. Paying it "some attention" is hardly what he has been doing and continues to do.

The primary job of higher education is not to be a minor league for professional sports.

 

[druidravi]

Imagine the outcry if he said those 'Damn Muslims' . Anyways I'm fine with this as long as this is a personal opinion and joke. However if it gets in public domain it's a different matter.

It's the same criteria used by employers in screening Facebook for employees .I'm personally all for jokes on religions , priests ,believers and non-believers. However it's not a good PR when head of your institute comes out with these jokes.

He's a person whom I can have a beer with but not tenable as a President.

 

[JollyRoger]

It's the same criteria used by employers in screening Facebook for employees

Good point. When a job recruiter sees offensive facebook posts, would that be enough to likely eliminate an otherwise qualified job candidate? What is your experience on that Downtown, since I think you once had such a job?

 

[downtown]

Good point. When a job recruiter sees offensive facebook posts, would that be enough to likely eliminate an otherwise qualified job candidate? What is your experience on that Downtown, since I think you once had such a job?

You're totally right, depending on the position and the organization, that could be enough (although I think a current employee should get more of the benefit of the doubt than an applicant). That's pretty much what happened here.

I do think it was an unfortunate decision, but I do understand the thought process that went into it.

 

[JollyRoger]

So are you saying that Gee should not be given as much benefit of the doubt if he applies to be President of A Ohio State University?

 

[Kyriakos]

So here is the question. Assuming that nobody disputes that this guy was actually great at his job, should he have to resign? Should the board have waited until it could be demonstrated that his jokes hurt fundraising? Have we gotten to the point where public officials will become too afraid to speak candidly or joke? Would you want this guy leading your university?

I think that, given that this is the US, probably a considerable amount of the people who are related to this school and athletic group are christians themselves. Some might even be catholics. So it is controversial for a figure associated with those entities to speak publicly on issues he is not regarded as being an authority on, and moreover be offensive while doing so.

Personally i think being "PC" (an idiotic term by itself, in my view) is quite easy to exploit, and overall it is an idea which causes more harm than it helps. By now it does seem somewhat probable that most of the groups who attack other groups are only branded as offensive if they attack groups which are traditionally seen as minorities or otherwise vulnerable. But that does not justify saying idiocies agaisnt other groups.