|
Post by 1611Luginbill on Apr 19, 2013 8:16:07 GMT -8
I am confused, is it a secret or not? It's not a secret to those who know and it's not for public disclosure.
|
|
|
Post by vision on Apr 19, 2013 8:41:09 GMT -8
Stirk's statement was not as glowing as BB deserved. That means that it is NOT simply a personal choice. IF this were truly a retirement there would have been more fan-fair, parade to celebrate a great career, players would have wished her well...etc. Something is awfully fishy
|
|
|
Post by azdick on Apr 19, 2013 8:44:02 GMT -8
Never said a word about filings. I was talking about the logic and necessity of coming clean on these matters because it affects the confidence of the investor. Ergo, HP SHOULD have come clean, and if the had, perhaps would not have lost have of their share price. What loss of share price? HP's stock did nothing but post new 52 week highs every month for the next 30 months and crush Dell after the severance. I think it's time for you to back away from the whole "shareholders" comparison. Maybe it's time for you to do some research. During Carly's rule of terror the stock price droped 2/3 from historic highs and profits declined 82%. Here's the link. Study it. politicalcorrection.org/factcheck/200908200003My point from the beginning, if you'd read it, is that the University is like a corporation and confidence is gained or lost based on the crediblity of information made public.
|
|
|
Post by azdick on Apr 19, 2013 8:48:47 GMT -8
In the end, we have all been left to twist in the wind and it is a sad way for Beth to end her tenure. She deserves some praise and some credit for what she's achieved and it's a darned shame that none of us can celebrate he career here with nothing but speculation twirling. I respect and reluctantly agree with Seagull's request and I will not post on this again unless there is new information made available by Beth or the school.
|
|
|
Post by FULL_MONTY on Apr 19, 2013 9:19:33 GMT -8
I am confused, is it a secret or not? It's not a secret to those who know and it's not for public disclosure. What? This a State University, so unless HIPPA or another statute trumps, they need to provide transparency to the community. It is not fun, but you should know this as a risk when you become a state employee. Ask Schemmel.
|
|
|
Post by jcljorgenson on Apr 19, 2013 9:28:11 GMT -8
Not a health problem. Not a recruiting violation. No players were mistreated. The actual reason is a private matter and not a secret. I ask you to stop inquiring into a private matter. It is not for public disclosure. End of discussion. I take it that you have been informed on what the actual reason was? If it is a personal matter, and she decided to leave, then I agree with you, things should be left private. However, without information pointing to that, there are lots of possible explanations that *should* be made public (or at least to the donors). For example, if Sterk cut her pay (or her staff's pay) to hire back Hutson, and that drove her to leave, then I think that the people who donate to SDSU are entitled to know about that. If we want successful programs, we'd (donors) need to pony up, or help recruit more donors... (Note: The above is pure speculation, and I have no idea why she left) Just as an FYI, since Burns just signed a 5-year contract, it seems SDSU would not be able to reduce her pay even if they wanted to.
|
|
|
Post by longtimesdsufan on Apr 19, 2013 10:07:29 GMT -8
No, the Dumba$$ is the person who does not understand that some things people do not want to share. You clearly do not respect the privacy of the coach and players. However I note that you want privacy. You don't know what I want, but you're sure willing to think so. The dumba$$ is someone who thinks the University can simply not say a word while those that support the University would like to have, and deserve, an explanation as to why we've just lost a great coach. If you think that the privacy of the University outweighs that concern, then we simply disagree. But please, don't pretend to know what's best, because you have already demonstrated that you have no clue. Noun 1. dumbass - a stupid persondumbass - a stupid person; these words are used to express a low opinion of someone's intelligence Would you be man enough to meet in person to discuss this?
|
|
|
Post by longtimesdsufan on Apr 19, 2013 10:18:19 GMT -8
Not a health problem. Not a recruiting violation. No players were mistreated. The actual reason is a private matter and not a secret. I ask you to stop inquiring into a private matter. It is not for public disclosure. End of discussion. I take it that you have been informed on what the actual reason was? If it is a personal matter, and she decided to leave, then I agree with you, things should be left private. However, without information pointing to that, there are lots of possible explanations that *should* be made public (or at least to the donors). For example, if Sterk cut her pay (or her staff's pay) to hire back Hutson, and that drove her to leave, then I think that the people who donate to SDSU are entitled to know about that. If we want successful programs, we'd (donors) need to pony up, or help recruit more donors... (Note: The above is pure speculation, and I have no idea why she left) Yes, we donors need to pony up, for lots of reasons. Seagull said it was a personal matter. Some people here don't understand privacy laws, and risk to SDSU and this board. This thread needs to end.
|
|
|
Post by laaztec on Apr 19, 2013 10:22:30 GMT -8
The reason will eventually come out.
|
|
|
Post by onelittleindian on Apr 19, 2013 10:27:54 GMT -8
Some people here don't understand privacy laws, and risk to SDSU and this board. This thread needs to end. Where I disagree with this statement is that if I were a guest in your home and you "put an end" to something, I'd respect that and either stop discussing said matter, or leave your house. This is a opinion board and, for better or worse, all opinions are welcome and, sadly, all get the same real estate to express those views. As long as nothing libelous is being posted, people have the right to speculate anything from athletics to alien abductions and those who try and play the moral conscious of the board just have to deal with it or ignore it.
|
|
|
Post by MontezumaPhil on Apr 19, 2013 10:57:04 GMT -8
I'm afraid we do need to know. Not because I want to see Beth's privacy violated, which I absolutely don't, but because if there is a structural problem either in the department or in the women's basketball program specifically that led to this, and if it may cost us other good personnel in the future, then we as financiers of the department should have a say in fixing it.
By the same token, if the truth is something that might lead conscientious boosters to withhold their support in protest, such as the women's coaches being forced to take the hit for Hutson's deal, we should have the right to know that, too.
|
|
|
Post by AlwaysAnAztec on Apr 19, 2013 13:15:17 GMT -8
I cannot believe that some on this board think that they would take money from the coaches of the women's team to give it to a coach on the men's team. Not only would it violate title 9 and cal-now but Fisher would never agree to it. I also doubt that Hutson would either.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2013 13:28:42 GMT -8
I think it's cute that, given the information as to what aren't the reasons we're all just sort of dancing around what should be by now, the obvious.
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Apr 19, 2013 13:40:59 GMT -8
Can we just give this a rest? Beth Burns served us well!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2013 13:56:32 GMT -8
I think it's cute that, given the information as to what aren't the reasons we're all just sort of dancing around what should be by now, the obvious. say it or not then.
|
|
|
Post by MarshallU on Apr 19, 2013 14:09:30 GMT -8
Can we just give this a rest? Beth Burns served us well! on this board? with some of these people? in a word.... no.
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Apr 19, 2013 14:14:34 GMT -8
I cannot believe that some on this board think that they would take money from the coaches of the women's team to give it to a coach on the men's team. Not only would it violate title 9 and cal-now but Fisher would never agree to it. I also doubt that Hutson would either. Title 9 and Cal-Now say nothing about coaches salaries. Don't tempt them. That will be their next target.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2013 14:40:43 GMT -8
I cannot believe that some on this board think that they would take money from the coaches of the women's team to give it to a coach on the men's team. Not only would it violate title 9 and cal-now but Fisher would never agree to it. I also doubt that Hutson would either. Pro-Tip: If you don't know about something, don't talk about it.
|
|
|
Post by azdick on Apr 19, 2013 14:42:07 GMT -8
You don't know what I want, but you're sure willing to think so. The dumba$$ is someone who thinks the University can simply not say a word while those that support the University would like to have, and deserve, an explanation as to why we've just lost a great coach. If you think that the privacy of the University outweighs that concern, then we simply disagree. But please, don't pretend to know what's best, because you have already demonstrated that you have no clue. Noun 1. dumbass - a stupid persondumbass - a stupid person; these words are used to express a low opinion of someone's intelligence Would you be man enough to meet in person to discuss this? Is this an implied threat? If so, you need to talk to the mods.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2013 14:45:33 GMT -8
I take it that you have been informed on what the actual reason was? If it is a personal matter, and she decided to leave, then I agree with you, things should be left private. However, without information pointing to that, there are lots of possible explanations that *should* be made public (or at least to the donors). For example, if Sterk cut her pay (or her staff's pay) to hire back Hutson, and that drove her to leave, then I think that the people who donate to SDSU are entitled to know about that. If we want successful programs, we'd (donors) need to pony up, or help recruit more donors... (Note: The above is pure speculation, and I have no idea why she left) Yes, we donors need to pony up, for lots of reasons. Seagull said it was a personal matter. Some people here don't understand privacy laws, and risk to SDSU and this board. This thread needs to end. Seagull be wrong unless you consider NCAA violations a "personal matter".
|
|