Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Jen Cohen has got to go NOW
Comments
-
Couldn’t disagree moreTurdBomber said:
If UW was manufacturing widgets, I'd agree. They aren't, so I don't. Teq, you must be aware of "MBA Thinking" a short-hand description of extremely narrow group-think pathologies interjected into discussions where they don't belong. This is not a slam against people with an MBA, but typical of persons who know an MBA or two, and love to say shit like "We need to run this School District/Water Department or SDOT like a business." Bullshit. And a true MBA would recognize the massive differences and chasms immediately.Tequilla said:
With all due respect DJ, comments like this from you (and others) are ones where I just shake my head and sigh because this just isn’t how business is done.DerekJohnson said:
Making a hire that could crater an entire season = micromanagingTequilla said:
So you’re going to micro manage your employeesDerekJohnson said:
If I'm running a business, and I see an employee making a terrible decision, I intervene.Tequilla said:
It’s a simple questionDerekJohnson said:
Jesus Christ Teq.Tequilla said:
Intervene how?DerekJohnson said:
If an AD sees her staff member making a colossal mistake, you intervene. This is not difficult.Tequilla said:
So Jen’s supposed to be the expert on OC hires?HoustonHusky said:Jen had a no-brainer hire of Eric Musselman and instead hires a guy who couldn’t take over for a coach who pees himself. She hired Jimmy without having any knowledge/oversite in making him successful…the John Donovan hire should never have happened because any competent AD would have put a stop to it.
The idea of her hiring anyone should frighten everyone.
It was a questionable at best hire at the time and the disaster it turned out to be was a contributing factor in Jimmy getting rightfully fired
But having an AD overtly micro manage hiring decisions by her directs … that’s not how things work
I’m plenty critical of Jen but not in this regard … that’s 1000% on Jimmy
I’m asking you to clarify as to not jump to conclusions
If I’m jumping to conclusions I’d expect you to say that if you were the AD you would have blocked and not signed off on the hire
It’s an approach
Sure buddy
Mr Anus gave a really good reason why what you and others are suggesting doesn’t work
Whatever
When you don’t have structure, process, vision, goals, objectives, etc in place you get the UW AD with accountability to what? You get low bar results with minimal hurdles.
I’m not saying it needs to be the most complex organization … I’ve been part of very micro privately held businesses and far larger publicly traded companies. I despise bureaucracy… inefficient and slows people down
That said you have to have accountability and that’s where everything has fallen apart … make no mistake Jen doesn’t fire Jimmy unless her seat got really warm -
A basic leadership model says you delegate and are hands off in Petermen's case because he's an experienced winning coach with an established culture.
That same model says you make sure to be at least consultative with Jimmy because he's a first time head coach and will need the support as he figures out 10,000 other things for the first tim.
The trouble is, Jen is equally not experienced in her position and is incapable of giving that kind of feedback or support to Jimmy.
"Hey Jen, I'm thinking of hiring JonDon what do you think?"
"Sounds like a great idea Jimmy! I'm behind you 100%!"
Sorry @Tequilla but you are way off base on this one and I've been a part of a number of corporate overhauls as a consultant. I get your point about executive level hiring but there's a massive gulf between hiring an outside experienced executive with a proven culture versus promoting someone within an Org as a first tim exec. One needs a cheerleader while the other needs a mentor. This is basic corporate leadership stuff. -
And isn't that how you want it?Tequilla said:
Talk good … I encourage that.TurdBomber said:
Yeah, No. The point is not whether to usurp the HC, Teq. It's to question his choices and allow him to sell or defend them. Part of leadership is forcing your underlings to think long and hard about their choices and the consequences of them. It's not the Battle of the Bulge, nor is it a one-way street. People talk for a reason.Tequilla said:
I know way more than you thinkhaie said:
Shut up.Tequilla said:
So you’re going to micro manage your employeesDerekJohnson said:
If I'm running a business, and I see an employee making a terrible decision, I intervene.Tequilla said:
It’s a simple questionDerekJohnson said:
Jesus Christ Teq.Tequilla said:
Intervene how?DerekJohnson said:
If an AD sees her staff member making a colossal mistake, you intervene. This is not difficult.Tequilla said:
So Jen’s supposed to be the expert on OC hires?HoustonHusky said:Jen had a no-brainer hire of Eric Musselman and instead hires a guy who couldn’t take over for a coach who pees himself. She hired Jimmy without having any knowledge/oversite in making him successful…the John Donovan hire should never have happened because any competent AD would have put a stop to it.
The idea of her hiring anyone should frighten everyone.
It was a questionable at best hire at the time and the disaster it turned out to be was a contributing factor in Jimmy getting rightfully fired
But having an AD overtly micro manage hiring decisions by her directs … that’s not how things work
I’m plenty critical of Jen but not in this regard … that’s 1000% on Jimmy
I’m asking you to clarify as to not jump to conclusions
If I’m jumping to conclusions I’d expect you to say that if you were the AD you would have blocked and not signed off on the hire
It’s an approach
You don't know shit on the subject so piss off.
If you’re having to do what DJ is thinking should have done … it’s a bad strategy long term
What that is saying is that you hired the wrong person to start with
The JonDon hire isn’t about JonDon … it was about Jimmy
The JonDon hire, the firings of your recruiting/support staff, pushing out K … all of that shows that Jimmy was clueless at the job of being a head coach
If you’re going to be Jimmy’s boss and tell him he can’t make a hire … you might as well fire him right then and there
That’s the point
Nowhere did I suggest that an AD shouldn’t have those conversations … they absolutely should
There’s also accountability for actions … if you go to bat for a hire that fails spectacularly you’re going to go down with that ship
Math Teachers make you show your work. Any decent AD - at a minimum - has to require the same when they're putting the HC's pick on the payroll. -
There's no official one-true-template for the process. The point I'm making is that many organizations talk the MBA talk, but don't walk the walk when the time comes for it. The accountability needs to be real and tailored to the specific program needs. Obviously it was skipped in UW's case.Tequilla said:
Couldn’t disagree moreTurdBomber said:
If UW was manufacturing widgets, I'd agree. They aren't, so I don't. Teq, you must be aware of "MBA Thinking" a short-hand description of extremely narrow group-think pathologies interjected into discussions where they don't belong. This is not a slam against people with an MBA, but typical of persons who know an MBA or two, and love to say shit like "We need to run this School District/Water Department or SDOT like a business." Bullshit. And a true MBA would recognize the massive differences and chasms immediately.Tequilla said:
With all due respect DJ, comments like this from you (and others) are ones where I just shake my head and sigh because this just isn’t how business is done.DerekJohnson said:
Making a hire that could crater an entire season = micromanagingTequilla said:
So you’re going to micro manage your employeesDerekJohnson said:
If I'm running a business, and I see an employee making a terrible decision, I intervene.Tequilla said:
It’s a simple questionDerekJohnson said:
Jesus Christ Teq.Tequilla said:
Intervene how?DerekJohnson said:
If an AD sees her staff member making a colossal mistake, you intervene. This is not difficult.Tequilla said:
So Jen’s supposed to be the expert on OC hires?HoustonHusky said:Jen had a no-brainer hire of Eric Musselman and instead hires a guy who couldn’t take over for a coach who pees himself. She hired Jimmy without having any knowledge/oversite in making him successful…the John Donovan hire should never have happened because any competent AD would have put a stop to it.
The idea of her hiring anyone should frighten everyone.
It was a questionable at best hire at the time and the disaster it turned out to be was a contributing factor in Jimmy getting rightfully fired
But having an AD overtly micro manage hiring decisions by her directs … that’s not how things work
I’m plenty critical of Jen but not in this regard … that’s 1000% on Jimmy
I’m asking you to clarify as to not jump to conclusions
If I’m jumping to conclusions I’d expect you to say that if you were the AD you would have blocked and not signed off on the hire
It’s an approach
Sure buddy
Mr Anus gave a really good reason why what you and others are suggesting doesn’t work
Whatever
When you don’t have structure, process, vision, goals, objectives, etc in place you get the UW AD with accountability to what? You get low bar results with minimal hurdles.
I’m not saying it needs to be the most complex organization … I’ve been part of very micro privately held businesses and far larger publicly traded companies. I despise bureaucracy… inefficient and slows people down
That said you have to have accountability and that’s where everything has fallen apart … make no mistake Jen doesn’t fire Jimmy unless her seat got really warm -
I think my perspective is far more aligned with yours than you think … my comments have been twisted a bit here and I’ve probably been a little too focused on certain aspectsUW_Doog_Bot said:A basic leadership model says you delegate and are hands off in Petermen's case because he's an experienced winning coach with an established culture.
That same model says you make sure to be at least consultative with Jimmy because he's a first time head coach and will need the support as he figures out 10,000 other things for the first tim.
The trouble is, Jen is equally not experienced in her position and is incapable of giving that kind of feedback or support to Jimmy.
"Hey Jen, I'm thinking of hiring JonDon what do you think?"
"Sounds like a great idea Jimmy! I'm behind you 100%!"
Sorry @Tequilla but you are way off base on this one and I've been a part of a number of corporate overhauls as a consultant. I get your point about executive level hiring but there's a massive gulf between hiring an outside experienced executive with a proven culture versus promoting someone within an Org as a first tim exec. One needs a cheerleader while the other needs a mentor. This is basic corporate leadership stuff.
I’ve been vocal about the idea that Jen torpedoing the hire after it hit her desk … I think you’d agree that the frequency of that occurring at that level is very very low
You’re exactly right in that Jimmy could have used mentorship from Jen and good management is working through that on the front end and being a resource throughout the process … it’s what any responsible leader does and something that I 1000% endorse. It’s why you have regular meetings discussing all aspects of the organization … nothing should be a surprise
That said, and I will reiterate this, it is rare from my perspective to see an executive bring a hire to their boss and have it rejected. The implications for Jen doing that effectively undercuts her job. From an outside standpoint, I don’t think any of us want Jen (or any AD) making staffing hires for football … besides the fact they are often far from SMEs but it’s also an indication that you clearly have the wrong person in place
We can talk about all the errors that Jen has made as an AD and they are numerous … we can hypothesize the errors she made in shepherding Jimmy through the hiring process as a mentor … all of that is fair criticism. Once the hire gets to her desk though she’s fucked for sure politically if she blocks it … at least if it goes through she has a chance of it working out.
It’s also why these discussions are hard to have on a message board because the true back/forth nature required in this type of conversation really is hard to convey and things spiral
Jen’s a horrendous AD … we should all agree on that
Jen likely could have managed the JonDon hiring process better … can’t imagine too many disagree
The crux is should Jen have torpedoed there JonDon hire … maybe there are different opinions there … to me it’s bad business for her to do that and if she did that she should be torpedoing Jimmy right afterwards … the root cause of all of this isn’t JonDon -
The AD isn’t a SME in the nuances for football … which is part of the problemTurdBomber said:
And isn't that how you want it?Tequilla said:
Talk good … I encourage that.TurdBomber said:
Yeah, No. The point is not whether to usurp the HC, Teq. It's to question his choices and allow him to sell or defend them. Part of leadership is forcing your underlings to think long and hard about their choices and the consequences of them. It's not the Battle of the Bulge, nor is it a one-way street. People talk for a reason.Tequilla said:
I know way more than you thinkhaie said:
Shut up.Tequilla said:
So you’re going to micro manage your employeesDerekJohnson said:
If I'm running a business, and I see an employee making a terrible decision, I intervene.Tequilla said:
It’s a simple questionDerekJohnson said:
Jesus Christ Teq.Tequilla said:
Intervene how?DerekJohnson said:
If an AD sees her staff member making a colossal mistake, you intervene. This is not difficult.Tequilla said:
So Jen’s supposed to be the expert on OC hires?HoustonHusky said:Jen had a no-brainer hire of Eric Musselman and instead hires a guy who couldn’t take over for a coach who pees himself. She hired Jimmy without having any knowledge/oversite in making him successful…the John Donovan hire should never have happened because any competent AD would have put a stop to it.
The idea of her hiring anyone should frighten everyone.
It was a questionable at best hire at the time and the disaster it turned out to be was a contributing factor in Jimmy getting rightfully fired
But having an AD overtly micro manage hiring decisions by her directs … that’s not how things work
I’m plenty critical of Jen but not in this regard … that’s 1000% on Jimmy
I’m asking you to clarify as to not jump to conclusions
If I’m jumping to conclusions I’d expect you to say that if you were the AD you would have blocked and not signed off on the hire
It’s an approach
You don't know shit on the subject so piss off.
If you’re having to do what DJ is thinking should have done … it’s a bad strategy long term
What that is saying is that you hired the wrong person to start with
The JonDon hire isn’t about JonDon … it was about Jimmy
The JonDon hire, the firings of your recruiting/support staff, pushing out K … all of that shows that Jimmy was clueless at the job of being a head coach
If you’re going to be Jimmy’s boss and tell him he can’t make a hire … you might as well fire him right then and there
That’s the point
Nowhere did I suggest that an AD shouldn’t have those conversations … they absolutely should
There’s also accountability for actions … if you go to bat for a hire that fails spectacularly you’re going to go down with that ship
Math Teachers make you show your work. Any decent AD - at a minimum - has to require the same when they're putting the HC's pick on the payroll.
In Jen’s case, sure she can ask Jimmy to show his work … but how does she know it is right or wrong? -
"my comments have been twisted a bit here"
You're right, you're not wrong, it's everyone else who is wrong -
Don’t you have something better to do during the work day than write thesis papers on hardcore husky about leadership within an organization/AD?Tequilla said:
I think my perspective is far more aligned with yours than you think … my comments have been twisted a bit here and I’ve probably been a little too focused on certain aspectsUW_Doog_Bot said:A basic leadership model says you delegate and are hands off in Petermen's case because he's an experienced winning coach with an established culture.
That same model says you make sure to be at least consultative with Jimmy because he's a first time head coach and will need the support as he figures out 10,000 other things for the first tim.
The trouble is, Jen is equally not experienced in her position and is incapable of giving that kind of feedback or support to Jimmy.
"Hey Jen, I'm thinking of hiring JonDon what do you think?"
"Sounds like a great idea Jimmy! I'm behind you 100%!"
Sorry @Tequilla but you are way off base on this one and I've been a part of a number of corporate overhauls as a consultant. I get your point about executive level hiring but there's a massive gulf between hiring an outside experienced executive with a proven culture versus promoting someone within an Org as a first tim exec. One needs a cheerleader while the other needs a mentor. This is basic corporate leadership stuff.
I’ve been vocal about the idea that Jen torpedoing the hire after it hit her desk … I think you’d agree that the frequency of that occurring at that level is very very low
You’re exactly right in that Jimmy could have used mentorship from Jen and good management is working through that on the front end and being a resource throughout the process … it’s what any responsible leader does and something that I 1000% endorse. It’s why you have regular meetings discussing all aspects of the organization … nothing should be a surprise
That said, and I will reiterate this, it is rare from my perspective to see an executive bring a hire to their boss and have it rejected. The implications for Jen doing that effectively undercuts her job. From an outside standpoint, I don’t think any of us want Jen (or any AD) making staffing hires for football … besides the fact they are often far from SMEs but it’s also an indication that you clearly have the wrong person in place
We can talk about all the errors that Jen has made as an AD and they are numerous … we can hypothesize the errors she made in shepherding Jimmy through the hiring process as a mentor … all of that is fair criticism. Once the hire gets to her desk though she’s fucked for sure politically if she blocks it … at least if it goes through she has a chance of it working out.
It’s also why these discussions are hard to have on a message board because the true back/forth nature required in this type of conversation really is hard to convey and things spiral
Jen’s a horrendous AD … we should all agree on that
Jen likely could have managed the JonDon hiring process better … can’t imagine too many disagree
The crux is should Jen have torpedoed there JonDon hire … maybe there are different opinions there … to me it’s bad business for her to do that and if she did that she should be torpedoing Jimmy right afterwards … the root cause of all of this isn’t JonDon -
Couldn’t agree moreTurdBomber said:
There's no official one-true-template for the process. The point I'm making is that many organizations talk the MBA talk, but don't walk the walk when the time comes for it. The accountability needs to be real and tailored to the specific program needs. Obviously it was skipped in UW's case.Tequilla said:
Couldn’t disagree moreTurdBomber said:
If UW was manufacturing widgets, I'd agree. They aren't, so I don't. Teq, you must be aware of "MBA Thinking" a short-hand description of extremely narrow group-think pathologies interjected into discussions where they don't belong. This is not a slam against people with an MBA, but typical of persons who know an MBA or two, and love to say shit like "We need to run this School District/Water Department or SDOT like a business." Bullshit. And a true MBA would recognize the massive differences and chasms immediately.Tequilla said:
With all due respect DJ, comments like this from you (and others) are ones where I just shake my head and sigh because this just isn’t how business is done.DerekJohnson said:
Making a hire that could crater an entire season = micromanagingTequilla said:
So you’re going to micro manage your employeesDerekJohnson said:
If I'm running a business, and I see an employee making a terrible decision, I intervene.Tequilla said:
It’s a simple questionDerekJohnson said:
Jesus Christ Teq.Tequilla said:
Intervene how?DerekJohnson said:
If an AD sees her staff member making a colossal mistake, you intervene. This is not difficult.Tequilla said:
So Jen’s supposed to be the expert on OC hires?HoustonHusky said:Jen had a no-brainer hire of Eric Musselman and instead hires a guy who couldn’t take over for a coach who pees himself. She hired Jimmy without having any knowledge/oversite in making him successful…the John Donovan hire should never have happened because any competent AD would have put a stop to it.
The idea of her hiring anyone should frighten everyone.
It was a questionable at best hire at the time and the disaster it turned out to be was a contributing factor in Jimmy getting rightfully fired
But having an AD overtly micro manage hiring decisions by her directs … that’s not how things work
I’m plenty critical of Jen but not in this regard … that’s 1000% on Jimmy
I’m asking you to clarify as to not jump to conclusions
If I’m jumping to conclusions I’d expect you to say that if you were the AD you would have blocked and not signed off on the hire
It’s an approach
Sure buddy
Mr Anus gave a really good reason why what you and others are suggesting doesn’t work
Whatever
When you don’t have structure, process, vision, goals, objectives, etc in place you get the UW AD with accountability to what? You get low bar results with minimal hurdles.
I’m not saying it needs to be the most complex organization … I’ve been part of very micro privately held businesses and far larger publicly traded companies. I despise bureaucracy… inefficient and slows people down
That said you have to have accountability and that’s where everything has fallen apart … make no mistake Jen doesn’t fire Jimmy unless her seat got really warm
The thing about MBAs and really most degrees is that they don’t give you an answer key to your professional career … they give you skills and knowledge that you can leverage to adapt to the ever changing circumstances around you
The case studies that are given are great in that they give you a chance to apply learnings to a situation and see how you’d address the issues … but there’s no risk because those issues are done and resolved. The real test comes when you’re operating in real time trying to solve a massive problem and spit balling any and all possible solutions, making gut calls on imperfect data, and owning the decisions/outcomes associated with it
You learn way more in the real world than you do reading a book -
I’ve been on calls all day from 7 to 2:30backthepack said:
Don’t you have something better to do during the work day than write thesis papers on hardcore husky about leadership within an organization/AD?Tequilla said:
I think my perspective is far more aligned with yours than you think … my comments have been twisted a bit here and I’ve probably been a little too focused on certain aspectsUW_Doog_Bot said:A basic leadership model says you delegate and are hands off in Petermen's case because he's an experienced winning coach with an established culture.
That same model says you make sure to be at least consultative with Jimmy because he's a first time head coach and will need the support as he figures out 10,000 other things for the first tim.
The trouble is, Jen is equally not experienced in her position and is incapable of giving that kind of feedback or support to Jimmy.
"Hey Jen, I'm thinking of hiring JonDon what do you think?"
"Sounds like a great idea Jimmy! I'm behind you 100%!"
Sorry @Tequilla but you are way off base on this one and I've been a part of a number of corporate overhauls as a consultant. I get your point about executive level hiring but there's a massive gulf between hiring an outside experienced executive with a proven culture versus promoting someone within an Org as a first tim exec. One needs a cheerleader while the other needs a mentor. This is basic corporate leadership stuff.
I’ve been vocal about the idea that Jen torpedoing the hire after it hit her desk … I think you’d agree that the frequency of that occurring at that level is very very low
You’re exactly right in that Jimmy could have used mentorship from Jen and good management is working through that on the front end and being a resource throughout the process … it’s what any responsible leader does and something that I 1000% endorse. It’s why you have regular meetings discussing all aspects of the organization … nothing should be a surprise
That said, and I will reiterate this, it is rare from my perspective to see an executive bring a hire to their boss and have it rejected. The implications for Jen doing that effectively undercuts her job. From an outside standpoint, I don’t think any of us want Jen (or any AD) making staffing hires for football … besides the fact they are often far from SMEs but it’s also an indication that you clearly have the wrong person in place
We can talk about all the errors that Jen has made as an AD and they are numerous … we can hypothesize the errors she made in shepherding Jimmy through the hiring process as a mentor … all of that is fair criticism. Once the hire gets to her desk though she’s fucked for sure politically if she blocks it … at least if it goes through she has a chance of it working out.
It’s also why these discussions are hard to have on a message board because the true back/forth nature required in this type of conversation really is hard to convey and things spiral
Jen’s a horrendous AD … we should all agree on that
Jen likely could have managed the JonDon hiring process better … can’t imagine too many disagree
The crux is should Jen have torpedoed there JonDon hire … maybe there are different opinions there … to me it’s bad business for her to do that and if she did that she should be torpedoing Jimmy right afterwards … the root cause of all of this isn’t JonDon
Took a few minutes to respond …
Not that big of a deal
