- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Is F King next on the chopping block?
Posted on 4/22/19 at 9:05 am to johnfredlsu
Posted on 4/22/19 at 9:05 am to johnfredlsu
The stats are easily obtainable here (and other places): LINK
"Casual Bystander" will not be adding to the spin, and will be much more heavily engaged in reading than posting. I have no stake other than being a resident of a state that needs a nationally competitive flagship university. When you compare LSU to its self-selected peer group, it has immense opportunity to improve. Part of that means having a student body comparable in preparation and accomplishment to that peer group. Otherwise, the resources that could be invested in driving success in research and graduate studies must be diverted to support systems for students who may be better served at other universities whose missions are more access-oriented. I realize that may sound elitist, but I believe it is realistic. LSU cannot be all things to all people.
Again, I will wait and see the evidence on holistic admissions, but the purposeful rhetorical misdirection is not promising, even if a few of the data points are. The only "nefarious" purposes I suspect are an intentional abandonment of the Flagship Agenda in pursuit of another mission.
"Casual Bystander" will not be adding to the spin, and will be much more heavily engaged in reading than posting. I have no stake other than being a resident of a state that needs a nationally competitive flagship university. When you compare LSU to its self-selected peer group, it has immense opportunity to improve. Part of that means having a student body comparable in preparation and accomplishment to that peer group. Otherwise, the resources that could be invested in driving success in research and graduate studies must be diverted to support systems for students who may be better served at other universities whose missions are more access-oriented. I realize that may sound elitist, but I believe it is realistic. LSU cannot be all things to all people.
Again, I will wait and see the evidence on holistic admissions, but the purposeful rhetorical misdirection is not promising, even if a few of the data points are. The only "nefarious" purposes I suspect are an intentional abandonment of the Flagship Agenda in pursuit of another mission.
2
Posted on 4/22/19 at 9:14 am to CasualBystander
Thanks for the stats link. I could find it. But this doesn't seem toooooo casual, still. You had to do some more digging to come up with those numbers from that site. I'm not interested in ad hominem attacks here. But you've positioned yourself (intentionally) in a particular way to support your claims. So, understanding your particular agenda is important...
And here's where you're giving yourself away:
This is what I was asking about. What is this other mission to which you're referring? Please be more concrete and direct. I'm not convinced LSU is "abandoning" the Flagship Agenda. But if you think so, I need a little more clarity from you about what the new agenda is.
And here's where you're giving yourself away:
quote:
intentional abandonment of the Flagship Agenda in pursuit of another mission.
This is what I was asking about. What is this other mission to which you're referring? Please be more concrete and direct. I'm not convinced LSU is "abandoning" the Flagship Agenda. But if you think so, I need a little more clarity from you about what the new agenda is.
This post was edited on 4/22/19 at 10:26 am
Posted on 4/22/19 at 9:16 am to Moremiles
quote:
Is F King next on the chopping block?
he damn well needs to be!!
Posted on 4/22/19 at 9:44 am to johnfredlsu
Simply looked at the data points in the press release you shared. Took 5-10 minutes.
Now, I just googled "LSU Flagship Agenda" and came across this from the 2003 plan: LINK
The messaging and activities today seem far less oriented toward excellence and quality, and more oriented toward access (nothing wrong with access; it is simply a different mission) and quantity. Even the sound bites/headlines in recent press releases suggest LSU is focused on competing with other state institutions rather than Texas A&M, North Carolina State, Georgia, etc., except in athletics. "#1 in state" should be banned from the style guide at a nationally competitive flagship. LSU SHOULD be #1 in state by any measure. When it is #1 in its national peer group though, we all should brag as we benefit from the results.
LINK
LINK /
LINK
Truly not trying to be negative. Will now return to reading...
Now, I just googled "LSU Flagship Agenda" and came across this from the 2003 plan: LINK
The messaging and activities today seem far less oriented toward excellence and quality, and more oriented toward access (nothing wrong with access; it is simply a different mission) and quantity. Even the sound bites/headlines in recent press releases suggest LSU is focused on competing with other state institutions rather than Texas A&M, North Carolina State, Georgia, etc., except in athletics. "#1 in state" should be banned from the style guide at a nationally competitive flagship. LSU SHOULD be #1 in state by any measure. When it is #1 in its national peer group though, we all should brag as we benefit from the results.
LINK
LINK /
LINK
Truly not trying to be negative. Will now return to reading...
Posted on 4/22/19 at 10:09 am to CasualBystander
So, your position is that (1) messaging has shifted from excellence to access and, I may be putting words in your mouth so please do push back, (2) access is incommensurate with excellence? I'm not convinced access and excellence are inherently at odds. Further, is access nefarious? Please do elaborate. I feel like there's more under the surface to your argument against access.
Honestly, LSU can't release headlines for competing at the national level (except for a few programs, which have historically been strengths of the university). That wasn't the case at the time of the release of the Flagship Agenda (created during my time at LSU as a student and at a time when LSU was finally being named a Tier 1 institution by US News, in part because the cut off line moved, I think). And it hasn't been the case with O'Keefe or Martin or Alexander since. The University isn't undoing the Flagship Agenda from the inside.
What has changed in this time? State funding for LSU under Jindal. That has been a cataclysmic shift that affects both excellence and access. This is what we should ALL be railing against.
At the end of the day, admitting a few students at the lower end of the standardized test score scale who have shown in other ways that they can be successful at LSU isn't undermining excellence. If the retention and graduation numbers hold up, then we should be celebrating this as the right move.
Honestly, LSU can't release headlines for competing at the national level (except for a few programs, which have historically been strengths of the university). That wasn't the case at the time of the release of the Flagship Agenda (created during my time at LSU as a student and at a time when LSU was finally being named a Tier 1 institution by US News, in part because the cut off line moved, I think). And it hasn't been the case with O'Keefe or Martin or Alexander since. The University isn't undoing the Flagship Agenda from the inside.
What has changed in this time? State funding for LSU under Jindal. That has been a cataclysmic shift that affects both excellence and access. This is what we should ALL be railing against.
At the end of the day, admitting a few students at the lower end of the standardized test score scale who have shown in other ways that they can be successful at LSU isn't undermining excellence. If the retention and graduation numbers hold up, then we should be celebrating this as the right move.
This post was edited on 4/22/19 at 2:17 pm
Posted on 4/22/19 at 10:28 am to johnfredlsu
quote:
The true test of LSU’s admissions system is whether students are persisting and graduating.
I'd like to believe this, but LSU's professors are being pressured to pass students that should not be passing. All that's currently happening is that the degree is being watered down.
Posted on 4/22/19 at 10:31 am to johnfredlsu
I agree with most of this post, and certainly the sentiment.
The access mission, properly executed, requires resources to build needed support structures. I believe those resources would be better spent on research and graduate study. Louisiana has a graduated tier of admissions reflective of the prevalence of the access component in each institution's mission. In a resource-constrained environment, it is easy to lose focus. The Jindal-era disinvestment certainly contributed to what I consider to be mission creep. The Flagship Agenda was the right mission; we just never stepped up as a state and funded it.
If the students who are at the lower end of the quantifiable measures of preparedness but truly demonstrate preparedness in other ways succeed, that is something to celebrate. The metric should not be maintaining retention and graduation numbers, though. The metric should be retention and graduation numbers on par with aspirational peers.
The access mission, properly executed, requires resources to build needed support structures. I believe those resources would be better spent on research and graduate study. Louisiana has a graduated tier of admissions reflective of the prevalence of the access component in each institution's mission. In a resource-constrained environment, it is easy to lose focus. The Jindal-era disinvestment certainly contributed to what I consider to be mission creep. The Flagship Agenda was the right mission; we just never stepped up as a state and funded it.
If the students who are at the lower end of the quantifiable measures of preparedness but truly demonstrate preparedness in other ways succeed, that is something to celebrate. The metric should not be maintaining retention and graduation numbers, though. The metric should be retention and graduation numbers on par with aspirational peers.
Posted on 4/22/19 at 10:36 am to Moremiles
quote:
Is F King next on the chopping block?
Only if there is a just and merciful God.
I'm pretty sure that if one of the GOP candidates for governor (Rispone and Abraham) win, that his arse is grarse.
Posted on 4/22/19 at 10:36 am to Moremiles
Bring back Mike Martin!
Posted on 4/22/19 at 10:39 am to johnfredlsu
Jindal truly hurt LSU.
But it hasn't stopped. A significant contingent of state legislators, especially in the House have continued the Jindal Jihad against higher education in this state, long after his departure.
They, too, need to go.
But it hasn't stopped. A significant contingent of state legislators, especially in the House have continued the Jindal Jihad against higher education in this state, long after his departure.
They, too, need to go.
Posted on 4/22/19 at 11:38 am to mdomingue
quote:
I don't, in terms of athletics, but that is not a popular opinion. I don't recall him being a factor prior to the Les Miles situation in 2015. Not even during the Trent Johnson, Johnny Jones transition. The Miles debacle, with the leaks and deafening silence from Alleva as AD almost dictated he do something and Alleva has been making PR nightmares from that time forward. I suspect F King would like nothing better than to fade into the background in terms of athletics PR. Woodwards lets him do that.
Agreed. F King got involved in 2015 because Alleva just gave Miles a contract extension and a huge buyout. He was probably wondering WTF Alleva was doing.
With a competent AD, F King will be comfortable leaving athletics alone, at least that's my hope.
Posted on 4/22/19 at 1:29 pm to nitwit
(no message)
This post was edited on 9/30/20 at 11:10 pm
Posted on 4/22/19 at 1:31 pm to Moremiles
quote:
F King next on the chopping block
yes sir
Posted on 4/22/19 at 1:35 pm to Chimlim
quote:
Agreed. F King got involved in 2015 because Alleva just gave Miles a contract extension and a huge buyout. He was probably wondering WTF Alleva was doing.
I can confirm this as Fact and was present the night it all went down at halftime-
The whole Jimbo Debacle was on ALeva and Aleva alone. JA was simply not a negotiator and certainly no match for Sexton
Posted on 4/22/19 at 2:09 pm to CasualBystander
quote:
The metric should not be maintaining retention and graduation numbers, though. The metric should be retention and graduation numbers on par with aspirational peers.
I hear you on this, too. My sense is that there has been some improvement over time in terms of retention and graduation rates. A long way to go, for sure. That the new admissions policy hasn't caused a noticeable drop, though, does suggest that there's some opportunity to make this work.
At the end of the day, the state's largest land grant and most-loved university is always going to deal with some seemingly competing but not irreconcilable goals, two of which I believe we have identified in this thread: (1) generating new knowledge through high quality research that goes hand-in-hand with research dollars and graduate education and (2) providing access to a high-quality undergraduate education for the state's residents. I think we can champion those two goals in ways that invite investment from the state, from donors, and from grant makers. The current discourse around the admissions policies totally misses any of these important points.
Even the tip-top tiered Power 5 institutions are emphasizing access (e.g., Michigan, Northwestern). Or maybe these institutions needed to be exclusive first, raise a ton of money, and then try to open things back up. That seems to be a route you're advocating for (even though it's almost impossible to replicate a Michigan or Northwestern trajectory)? Am I understanding you correctly? Or have I misrepresented your vision for how to improve LSU's standings?
I imagine there are some schools ( ASU, maybe?)that are trying to do more for access while not sacrificing other aspects of their missions. Looking at the ASU, UM, and NU materials, though, it seems like the structures and systems put in place for access outpace any of the details provided by LSU.
As I reflect on our back and forth, I do recognize that there seems to be very little leadership focused on hiring solid and superstar faculty to revive much of what the Jindal years snuffed out. And the poorly named capital campaign lacks quite a bit of detail about investment needs. I've only looked through the website and watched a couple of the campaign videos...but there's zero detail or case being made about what specific investments are needed. The campaign pillars themes that the individual pillar pages on the site don't explore more fully. The goals laid out on the site aren't granular enough; the pages don't provide a roadmap or an argument for what success/growth would look like. Compare the LSU campaign site to Penn's.
Finally, to sum up some of my sentiments that may not have been clear in my other posts...I'm certainly not convinced that FKA has the vision and leadership skills to put LSU on a trajectory that achieves any of the goals we've laid out in our posts.
This post was edited on 4/22/19 at 2:23 pm
Posted on 4/22/19 at 2:41 pm to johnfredlsu
I agree completely. Just a couple of clarifications:
1. Exclusivity: providing access to high-quality undergraduate education for the state's residents should absolutely be core to the LSU mission; however, we lose far too many of our most accomplished students to out-of-state institutions because of questions about academic quality. Admittedly, that assumption is based more in anecdote than evidence, but those anecdotes are plentiful enough that I am confident the evidence would support.
2. The Jindal years were disastrous, but some institutions fared better by more successfully adapting their business models to the new reality. In addition, the doomsday rhetoric and hyperbole from some in higher ed amplified the effects of the budget reductions.
I greatly appreciate your comments and constructive probing of mine.
1. Exclusivity: providing access to high-quality undergraduate education for the state's residents should absolutely be core to the LSU mission; however, we lose far too many of our most accomplished students to out-of-state institutions because of questions about academic quality. Admittedly, that assumption is based more in anecdote than evidence, but those anecdotes are plentiful enough that I am confident the evidence would support.
2. The Jindal years were disastrous, but some institutions fared better by more successfully adapting their business models to the new reality. In addition, the doomsday rhetoric and hyperbole from some in higher ed amplified the effects of the budget reductions.
I greatly appreciate your comments and constructive probing of mine.
Posted on 4/22/19 at 2:47 pm to CasualBystander
It's been a pleasant exchange, for sure, Mr. Lipse- I mean, Mr. Casual Bystander. 
This post was edited on 4/22/19 at 10:22 pm
Posted on 4/22/19 at 2:56 pm to Moremiles
quote:
F King next on the chopping block!
We coming!
Posted on 4/22/19 at 4:21 pm to bencoleman
quote:
I have serious hatred for FKing. Even more than I hate Alleva.
This.
Although Alleva was hired by Lombardi (a weasel in his own right) and F**King by Jindal, these two clowns have interwoven a tapestry of destruction at LSU.
King does not comprehend the marketing value afforded to his university by having nationally recognized and relevant sports programs. LSU is becoming a diploma mill. Enroll more students, earn more funding (who cares if TOPS is drained by under-performers), smile for the cameras. Meanwhile, your institution is rampant with waste and fraud because you are too afraid to be a leader.
Alleva has no spine and has never demonstrated an ability to support someone. His career is littered with knee jerk reactions (mis)guided by the media cycle.
Posted on 4/22/19 at 4:29 pm to FistFest
quote:
FistFest
Page 3 of 5
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News