Trev to A&M

Mavric said:
If this is true, a lot of what he said for a long time but a bunch of hooey.
Click to expand...


He's not going to make it public knowledge, as we know through the FB coaching search, he keeps things very close the vest, what you see in the public or in the office is VERY different than what he was feeling. He's not going to burn any bridges by making his frustrations public. He will go public when decisions are finalized, whether the public likes the decision or wants to know where he's at in the process doesn't matter. He went through the proper channels, expressed his concerns; not saying those comments went on deaf ears, but disfunction was unable to do anything to even address his concerns. He wants to be happy and aligned with where he works. He started looking privately, has been looking for long time, hoping that things would get resolved here. Things have only gotten worse over time and he accepted an offer where he feels comfortable and sees cohesion.

 
Douglas said:
For those of us in Omaha, people still complain about his actions at UNO. I had a conversation about this a couple of weeks ago.  Local wrestling is still pissed. 

I cut part of your post because it wasn't important to the conversation. 

Context has meaning. 
Click to expand...
I’m sure local wrestling is still pissed. Probably also some other Omaha locals (possibly some people you know or also talk to) pissed about a few things he did or didn’t do. Doesn’t change my point that those grievances don’t add up to squat relative to the UNL football, volleyball and basketball programs. Most of us don’t give a FF what Trev did at UNO.

 
Wistrom Disciple said:
I agreed with you up until this part. "Loyalty and what it means to be a Husker" could mean any number of things (characteristics) to anyone. You can bash him and blame him for whatever you would like. However, as we've learned in the past 24 hours, the problems within our system extend beyond the AD position and don't appear to have a firm solution on the horizon.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree that there are issues that extend beyond the AD position. Clearly, there are. 

I just think that it's pretty chickens#!t to run away from them instead of trying to be part of the solution. 

 
The Maudfather said:
I don't disagree that there are issues that extend beyond the AD position. Clearly, there are. 

I just think that it's pretty chickens#!t to run away from them instead of trying to be part of the solution. 
Click to expand...
Yeah, he just seems to bail in his career when presented with obstacles.   It is disappointing to see him do it at his Alma Mater that gave him his first chance at being a Power 5 AD.  If this were a year into a new president's tenure and he just couldn't find a way to get along with that person, it might be more understandable. 

 
Loebarth said:
Hopefully and in due time, Trev will address openly his decision. Speculating on it only creates confrontation. However, I don't believe anyone can deny that 206 days and still nowhere near having an announced replacement for Carter is acceptable. I also think the Pillen apologists might rethink their side. The old clique of "s_it rolls down hill" is true but so too is the truth that ownership of a problem starts at the top. 

Trev's gone, the university has to move forward and the university and board of regents can't drag their feet any longer. Pillen is accountable and if it is learned that he's the biggest issue then address it in the next election but for now, the university needs to act proactively and with urgency while also doing their due diligence in finding the best person for the positions, politics aside and excluded in the decision process. Flippin politics!! Hate it!!
Click to expand...


Not sure he's the "biggest" issue. There's been a power struggle between the university and the governor's office since before Pillen. Current governor has hinted at harsher arm twisting than his predecessor, who opted to try and get his people into power positions at the university to get his way instead of brute force of do it my way or get a lot less money. Not to go too far into the political realms, over the last 15-20 years there's been a growing shift to avoid collaboration and moving towards 'one of us must win and one of us must lose' mentality. The struggle between the university system and local government is how progressive state schools should be and if those ideas/goals don't mesh with the controlling party, why should they get the funding they want? The focus is on winning instead of focusing on what's best for everyone. Pillen is no different with that philosophy, he just has a different tactic to get those results. And frankly, a lot of people believe in what he wants overall without thinking of the consequences of those decisions. The 'brain drain', Trev, Carter et al are just the cost of the power struggle between the two, until the state start moving back to a more collaborative effort, the struggle will continue.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I have a feeling that Trev is highly motivated to climb high on the career ladder.  He may be looking at being a head of NCAA or whatever entity controls college football once the current system implodes.  He's young enough and already has B1G AD experience, and soon to add SEC AD to his CV.  I don't think aTm is his final destination.  Just another step towards his ultimate goal, whatever that may be.

 
The Maudfather said:
I don't disagree that there are issues that extend beyond the AD position. Clearly, there are. 

I just think that it's pretty chickens#!t to run away from them instead of trying to be part of the solution. 
Click to expand...
I agree, though if his "interim" boss already was conflicting with his vision and that interim tag was considered being removed, I can partially empathize with Trev's decision even though I don't like it. Can't be easy to stay at a job out of loyalty when your direct boss does not support your vision/goals.

Most relatable example I can point out is between Pelini and Eichorst. Bo got along well with Osborne and shared his vision of how to run a program. Osborne protected Bo from having to deal with Perlman. Perlman's ego couldn't stand Osborne or Pelini so in walks Eichorst who had a different vision of how an athletic department should run. We all know how that played out and have been suffering the consequences ever since. 

 
Madcows said:
From people I know close-ish to the situation, the regents have had 3-4 people they wanted to offer the President position to, Pillen felt those candidates were too liberal ("too woke" was the quote used) and mentioned funding would be more challenging if they went that route. They are now having difficulty agreeing on a qualified candidate conservative enough for Pillen to ensure funding doesn't become an issue. So, with no permanent President in place, behind the scenes above Trev has been, from the way it was described to me "a complete and utter ish-show with no end in sight".  Issues started before Trev was in place, but people above him shielded him from the chaos. That shield is gone and as of yesterday's conversations, has no replacements in sight. Trev has been unhappy for a long time with what has been going on from a university leadership standpoint and has wanted out for more than a year, not a lot of options on where he was willing to go, but he was going to take the first offer he could.  He had been actively looking for options since around Jan. 2023, and expressed his concerns, through appropriate channels on several occasions. He made sure everything he did publicly was positive. The only way he would have stayed is if the regents and governor agreed to a person that was going to be forward thinking, and that's not happening anytime soon. Position may be filled soon-ish, but not by a forward thinking candidate.
Click to expand...


This.

 
Madcows said:
Not sure he's the "biggest" issue. There's been a power struggle between the university and the governor's office since before Pillen. Current governor has hinted at harsher arm twisting than his predecessor, who opted to try and get his people into power positions at the university to get his way instead of brute force of do it my way or get a lot less money. Not to go too far into the political realms, over the last 15-20 years there's been a growing shift to avoid collaboration and moving towards 'one of us must win and one of us must lose' mentality. The struggle between the university system and local government is how progressive state schools should be and if those ideas/goals don't mesh with the controlling party, why should they get the funding they want? The focus is on winning instead of focusing on what's best for everyone. Pillen is no different with that philosophy, he just has a different tactic to get those results. And frankly, a lot of people believe in what he wants overall without thinking of the consequences of those decisions. The 'brain drain', Trev, Carter et al are just the cost of the power struggle between the two, until the state start moving back to a more collaborative effort, the struggle will continue.
Click to expand...


I know it might not matter to some folks, but this kind of thinking will drive good professors and researchers away from the University at a huge cost to the institution and the state. 

There's a movement out there to make America stupider and angrier, and it's going to backfire on everybody. 

 
Guy Chamberlin said:
I know it might not matter to some folks, but this kind of thinking will drive good professors and researchers away from the University at a huge cost to the institution and the state. 

There's a movement out there to make America stupider and angrier, and it's going to backfire on everybody. 
Click to expand...
True, I just picked the names people here would recognize. A lot of unintended consequences to this power struggle that general public doesn't see and don't realize. Loss of professors, inability to recruit good professors, the brain drain is real and will be devastating. The current desire to squash this 'woke' movement in academia is major problem in the not too distant future and is already having some very unsavory side effects. A lot of leopards will be full on faces.

 
Madcows said:
True, I just picked the names people here would recognize. A lot of unintended consequences to this power struggle that general public doesn't see and don't realize. Loss of professors, inability to recruit good professors, the brain drain is real and will be devastating. The current desire to squash this 'woke' movement in academia is major problem in the not too distant future and is already having some very unsavory side effects. A lot of leopards will be full on faces.
Click to expand...


This is why politics has no place in academia. Teach the facts about governments and strengths and weaknesses of all types from authoritarian to democratic republics but keep the personal opinions and beliefs out of the subject matter. Somehow the ultra left and extreme right can't get this through their thick heads and they both push their agenda's and indoctrinations. Enforce curriculum while also enforcing institutional indoctrination. I mean seriously, did the world learn nothing from the mistakes leading up to the 2nd great war?? Indoctrination of any type is purely disgusting be it political, religious, biological, or any other.. Just stop with indoctrination principles and a lot of the differences suddenly becomes indifference to/with one another and real change/advances occur.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top