is this a standoff?

Matt/Clay/Dudley

I read Wally’s column this morning and I read it to mean the BOT forced the chancellor to fire Long and that he did not want to do this. Is this a coup by the board and some boosters to take over the athletic department? I would think the elevation of JCP would be carrying Long and his practices onward would it not? I would think that would displease the BOT as they want someone that they can control. Derrick Gragg being the only AD with experience we are considering when there are several others out there is very disconcerting to me. I would like to think this is not a power play by a certain booster faction. Is this what is happening?

I have never been able to get a good feel for what exactly went down at that board meeting last month, so I’m going to steer clear of that. I will say that I have heard from someone I trust that Steinmetz was tough on Long at times prior to him being fired.

I don’t know who all Arkansas is considering for AD. Among the names I’ve heard, Gragg is the only one with No. 1 AD experience, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t others who are being considered.

If there is a power struggle between the two sides, the only thing they are doing is hurting our program

Bingo.

I have no idea if Steinmetz was forced to fire Long. If he was, that adds to my displeasure with the BOT. I have no problem with the Chancellor being tough on the AD. He’s supposed to be if he sees problems. We know Long could be too money-grubbing even if we also know the dept needs a lot of money. I’m sure he made some other mistakes we don’t know about. However, that’s not uncommon for human beings. (Posters on this board excepted.)

I have no problem with the BOT controlling the AD or the Chancellor to some extent. That’s their job. But micromanagement by a committee doesn’t work well–especially if factions of the committee are too influenced by a few egotistic big donors.