Team UConn

[mrl2016]

Will you stop with sports are doing well overall?

Those people all pre-date her. That’s what is so stark about the athletic failures in everything she has touched.

Nobody has said she should be fired just because the basketball and football team are bad. Jimmy spelled out his non-sports reasons.

The school improved academically for 30 years because we spent billions. Pudge asked me to look at the campus - did some administrators congure up the build out or did we simple pay for it? That money train is about to go bone dry.

Next Generation Connecticut is just more expenditures that can’t be sustained. More state employees, more health care costs, more buildings that won’t have funding to be maintained.

At the same time the population of CT high school seniors is falling. Hope she is as good as y’all say. Winter is coming.

The population of CT high school seniors has been falling for over the past ten years yet every year we've seen a rise in the average UConn applicant. Is most of this due to level of investment made in the school? Absolutely... but for her to be able to secure that level of investment despite the financial pressures brought on by the states current fiscal landscape objectively makes her an effective school president.

Whether that is smart, safe, or responsible of our policymakers is a different story entirely, but she's just doing her job. If you want people to blame for spending- blame the ones giving her the money.

 

[whaler11]

View attachment 30130
The population of CT high school seniors has been falling for over the past ten years yet every year we've seen a rise in the average UConn applicant. Is most of this due to level of investment made in the school? Absolutely... but for her to be able to secure that level of investment despite the financial pressures brought on by the states current fiscal landscape objectively makes her an effective school president.

Whether that is smart, safe, or responsible of our policymakers is a different story entirely, but she's just doing her job. If you want people to blame for spending- blame the ones giving her the money.

I guess we can disagree that building unsustainable things is successful.

Unless they have a plan to support continued expansion with no state contribution it’s expansion for the sake of expansion.

There is an easy example in the hockey program. They upgraded... which is great and all except there is no longer term solution on where they play.

The XL center could be dark in 5 years. They didn’t even fund the repairs the best case is that a private company keeps it on life support without investments?

They never raised the money for the other stadiums - they are going to make a 40 million dollar hockey arena appear with ticket surcharges?

 

[mrl2016]

I guess we can disagree that building unsustainable things is successful.

Unless they have a plan to support continued expansion with no state contribution it’s expansion for the sake of expansion.

There is an easy example in the hockey program. They upgraded... which is great and all except there is no longer term solution on where they play.

The XL center could be dark in 5 years. They didn’t even fund the repairs the best case is that a private company keeps it on life support without investments?

They never raised the money for the other stadiums - they are going to make a 40 million dollar hockey arena appear with ticket surcharges?

I hear what you're saying, and the hockey team is a strong example for the point you're trying to make, but I still respectfully disagree. Susan has one job, to make the University into the best school it can be. Is the University in a better place than when she arrived in 2010? When you look at the statistics of the average accepted student the answer is clearly yes.

You think that's from "unsustainable" spending- I get that. Blame the Connecticut policy makers for giving her the money. Don't blame her for putting the University in a better place because she spent the money she was given... What did you expect her to do, save it so she could bail out the state? That's not her job. Her responsibility is to the University.

If you disagree with the states decision to invest so heavily in the University that's fair but it has no bearing on whether she is an effective President... if I had to pick between a President who spends the money & doesn't improve the quality of the University or one who spends the money and does improve the quality of the University I'm picking the latter (that's Susan).

If the "unsustainable" levels of investment go away chances it hurts the level of applicant UConn receives are slim to none in the short term. The seniors applying don't give a damn about what the school is spending in the future they just know what the campus looks like when they show up for their tour. The new STEM building isn't going to disappear & the Seniors aren't going to lose the perception of UConn as a more competitive school. It's this cyclical perception which has been driving better applicants, which in turn drives better employment recruiting, which makes better students apply.

TLDR: if you don't like spending blame CT lawmakers, not the President whose turned the school into a better University because of that spending

 

[whaler11]

I hear what you're saying, and the hockey team is a strong example for the point you're trying to make, but I still respectfully disagree. Susan has one job, to make the University into the best school it can be. Is the University in a better place than when she arrived in 2010? When you look at the statistics of the average accepted student the answer is clearly yes.

You think that's from "unsustainable" spending- I get that. Blame the Connecticut policy makers for giving her the money. Don't blame her for putting the University in a better place because she spent the money she was given... What did you expect her to do, save it so she could bail out the state? That's not her job. Her responsibility is to the University.

If you disagree with the states decision to invest so heavily in the University that's fair but it has no bearing on whether she is an effective President... if I had to pick between a President who spends the money & doesn't improve the quality of the University or one who spends the money and does improve the quality of the University I'm picking the latter (that's Susan).

If the "unsustainable" levels of investment go away chances it hurts the level of applicant UConn receives are slim to none in the short term. The seniors applying don't give a damn about what the school is spending in the future they just know what the campus looks like when they show up for their tour. The new STEM building isn't going to disappear & the Seniors aren't going to lose the perception of UConn as a more competitive school. It's this cyclical perception which has been driving better applicants, which in turn drives better employment recruiting, which makes better students apply.

TLDR: if you don't like spending blame CT lawmakers, not the President whose turned the school into a better University because of that spending

It ate a longer reply - but we can agree to disagree.

The president of the university has a fiduciary responsiblity to ensure the direction they lead it is sustainable. I don’t even see how anything else could be suggested.

UConn was a very good school before she got here, it would be a very good school if she never set foot on campus.

Time will tell how she does as the subsidy declines. Will she run off and leave the mess for someone or does she solve problems.

Someone should send her the state motto.

 

[Nostical]

Does she (Herbst) solve problems.

Is the Pope Argentinian? She’s the President who has done more for this University (and been more responsive to her constituents) than any of her predecessors—by a lot.