New AD wanted

[normalbird]

I am not sure how things would normally work, but I’m wondering if the VP-Finance, VP-Development, and General Counsel might get involved in vetting a $3MM gift from a first-time donor???

Maybe next time.

 

[Reggie Redbird]

Okay, still his first shot at being an AD, he had other opportunities but backed out. I don't count that myself but if you do...okay.

His first time in seat, yes. Not his first opportunity. For whatever reason, he passed on it after accepting the job. Potential red flag there that should have been investigated by the search firm. Considering it appears the search firm did not identify several red flags, I hope they will not be used again

I wasn’t saying he backed out of the Montana State job to be a jerk. I truly hadn’t heard that before but easily found with a Google search..

 

[fourthandshort]

I am not sure how things would normally work, but I’m wondering if the VP-Finance, VP-Development, and General Counsel might get involved in vetting a $3MM gift from a first-time donor???

Maybe next time.

exactly, though maybe there was nothing or maybe Brennan was overbearing about just "getting er dun" so he could get the IPF going.

Which, as a fan, or if i'm a coach, or player, or a donor ... I don't mind. Particularly since, we aren't exactly hurting financially as an institution, and the funds will come from somewhere. Not the best way to do business, but ..... we've got an IPF coming !!!!!

 

[DougSutton]

exactly, though maybe there was nothing or maybe Brennan was overbearing about just "getting er dun" so he could get the IPF going.

Which, as a fan, or if i'm a coach, or player, or a donor ... I don't mind. Particularly since, we aren't exactly hurting financially as an institution, and the funds will come from somewhere. Not the best way to do business, but ..... we've got an IPF coming !!!!!

I am not sure how things would normally work, but I’m wondering if the VP-Finance, VP-Development, and General Counsel might get involved in vetting a $3MM gift from a first-time donor???

Maybe next time.

This is just my sense but I feel it's safe to believe that proper protocols were documented and followed to vet out Rossi (and all donors) by the Foundation (not the athletic department), including background checks and anything else required prior to the pledge being accepted and at the time of the pledge, those that were responsible for vetting this out (the athletic department is not responsible for this) rightfully would have had no reason to question Rossi's ability to follow through on his commitment.

I also feel it's safe to believe that the trip to Indy was approved by the Foundation in advance, before any funds were allocated and that trips like this, for a group of donors are well within industry (athletic departments across the country and non profit organizations) standards and in no way are considered excessive. Further, there is no validation that any ISU staff member ever went into the strip club, only that "some on the trip" which could very well have been Rossi and one of his guests such as the pilot as the group may have gone in separate directions after the game as groups often split up and that no one else was there. Unfortunately, the implication that many assumed was that the entire group was there and there is no evidence of this.

For validation regarding accepted expenses for fundraising, look at these guidelines from Charity Watch:

According to Charity Watch, a good expense ratio to aim for is 35 percent or less. This means that for every $100 raised, your organization should have paid $35 or less. It is important to remember the expense ratio will vary slightly depending on the size of the organization.

This shines a light of context and perspective into these types of expenses and as many others have said, this type of trip and expense for donors (not just Rossi) is a drop in the bucket compared to what other universities spend on their donors. I hope and trust that there will be an opportunity for this to be validated in some way.

 

[fourthandshort]

This is just my sense but I feel it's safe to believe that proper protocols were documented and followed to vet out Rossi (and all donors) by the Foundation (not the athletic department), including background checks and anything else required prior to the pledge being accepted and at the time of the pledge, those that were responsible for vetting this out (the athletic department is not responsible for this) rightfully would have had no reason to question Rossi's ability to follow through on his commitment.

I also feel it's safe to believe that the trip to Indy was approved by the Foundation in advance, before any funds were allocated and that trips like this, for a group of donors are well within industry (athletic departments across the country and non profit organizations) standards and in no way are considered excessive. Further, there is no validation that any ISU staff member ever went into the strip club, only that "some on the trip" which could very well have been Rossi and one of his guests such as the pilot as the group may have gone in separate directions after the game as groups often split up and that no one else was there. Unfortunately, the implication that many assumed was that the entire group was there and there is no evidence of this.

For validation regarding accepted expenses for fundraising, look at these guidelines from Charity Watch:

According to Charity Watch, a good expense ratio to aim for is 35 percent or less. This means that for every $100 raised, your organization should have paid $35 or less. It is important to remember the expense ratio will vary slightly depending on the size of the organization.

This shines a light of context and perspective into these types of expenses and as many others have said, this type of trip and expense for donors (not just Rossi) is a drop in the bucket compared to what other universities spend on their donors. I hope and trust that there will be an opportunity for this to be validated in some way.

good post.

Regarding the strip club aspect to this controversy .. reportedly, one of the triggering aspects to this trip causing concern was when someone was reviewing the expense report and asked for more info for the 2:30am lyft ride. This is a normal question to ask ... purpose of ride, who was in car, and from where to where .. that is, prove it was business related and within guidelines. But I'm doubting this was Rossi and his buddies ... I would assume he isn't the type to ask for a receipt so he can give it to an ISU EE to seek reimbursment. Someone from ISU was in the Lyft car and therefore at the Strip Club, or I doubt the receipt would have been in the expense report. Now MAYBE Brennan was there too or MAYBE Brennan told an underling to "entertain" Rossi, no holds barred. Or maybe Brennan knew nothing about it at all.

Bottom line, spending too much did not get Brennanm fired as we later found out ... he appeared to be creating a very toxic culture at ISU .. this was a tipping point incident. This alone is not even close to a firing offense ... IMO.

 

[She_Also_Said]

His first time in seat, yes. Not his first opportunity. For whatever reason, he passed on it after accepting the job. Potential red flag there that should have been investigated by the search firm. Considering it appears the search firm did not identify several red flags, I hope they will not be used again

I wasn’t saying he backed out of the Montana State job to be a jerk. I truly hadn’t heard that before but easily found with a Google search..

His son was battling cancer and for his family, they felt it was in their best interest to stay put in Utah. His son battled cancer for 3 years and that was why he backed out of this offer.

Utah athletics: Kyle Brennan backs out of Montana State A.D. job, will return to U.

 

[normalbird]

My view is that, given the high cost of the game tickets and the relative undesirability of the accommodations, the decision to go to Indy was very last minute and unlikely received advance outside approval. I do agree that it was the “straw.”

My guess is that some of our remaining questions will be answered May 1. I’d like to know the status of the other $3MM pledge.

 

[DougSutton]

good post.

Regarding the strip club aspect to this controversy .. reportedly, one of the triggering aspects to this trip causing concern was when someone was reviewing the expense report and asked for more info for the 2:30am lyft ride. This is a normal question to ask ... purpose of ride, who was in car, and from where to where .. that is, prove it was business related and within guidelines. But I'm doubting this was Rossi and his buddies ... I would assume he isn't the type to ask for a receipt so he can give it to an ISU EE to seek reimbursment. Someone from ISU was in the Lyft car and therefore at the Strip Club, or I doubt the receipt would have been in the expense report. Now MAYBE Brennan was there too or MAYBE Brennan told an underling to "entertain" Rossi, no holds barred. Or maybe Brennan knew nothing about it at all.

Bottom line, spending too much did not get Rossi fired as we later found out ... he appeared to be creating a very toxic culture at ISU .. this was a tipping point incident. This alone is not even close to a firing offense ... IMO.

Let's suppose that based on what is at least known (that no ISU staffer has been confirmed to step foot into the strip club), that there was a group of donors and ISU staff that went to the game and after the game was over, the group split up. Perhaps some in the group went to a restaurant and a regular bar and the "some" Ryan referred to in his article only was confirmed to be Rossi and perhaps one of his guests. Then, at the end of the night, the group may have decided to meet up and Lyft's GEO IP pinged them at that address. I don't know the reality however this is just as if not more likely than what may people have assumed.

I shard in a previous post my own Lyft receipt from my home in San Diego that showed my home address more than 1 block away from my actual home, where i was picked up. There are 20+ bars and restaurants within a block of this location. What I feel is not fair is when people immediately jump to conclusions assuming they were in the club when there has been absolutely no confirmation of this.

My view is that, given the high cost of the game tickets and the relative undesirability of the accommodations, the decision to go to Indy was very last minute and unlikely received advance outside approval. I do agree that it was the “straw.”

My guess is that some of our remaining questions will be answered May 1. I’d like to know the status of the other $3MM pledge.

Regarding the last minute decision, this is not uncommon at all. I went to all 3 Chicago Cubs World Series Games at Wrigley Field and made the decision last minute to go to the first one with no plans for the 2nd and 3rd games until after the first game and that was flying from San Diego. I also went to a Super Bowl in Arizona while living there and didn't decide until 3 days before.

I still strongly believe the athletic department must have gone through some proper protocol to have the trip approved by the foundation in advance before the trip and am hopeful this can be validated somehow just to clear the air. An expense for a trip like this, to host multiple (not just Rossi) donors is a very minimal expense in the big picture compared to the collective amount of potential donations from this entire group.

Great question about the other $3M pledge and I agree, it would be great to know the status and further, who was responsible for these relationships, vetting them out, etc. From the little awareness I have about these types of things, there is always a responsible party for doing background checks and vetting out donors and my sense is that the responsible party is not in any way the athletic department. That's far beyond their competency.

 

[Reggie Redbird]

His son was battling cancer and for his family, they felt it was in their best interest to stay put in Utah. His son battled cancer for 3 years and that was why he backed out of this offer.

Utah athletics: Kyle Brennan backs out of Montana State A.D. job, will return to U.

Interesting that the person who hired him and was one of two parties in that discussion brought up the financial piece of it. I don’t see Montana State’s President lying about that being a major factor, especially as Brennan’s comment hit on the financial piece of it first. I’m surprised someone with Brennan’s background didn’t do his homework on that one.

Brennan then brought up his wife’s job and then the medical care piece. Perhaps with being a special place, Brennan and Famioy will seek to go back to Utah.

The bottom line is we have a chance at a fresh start with someone who will represent the university in a positive light and bring together a department. I wish Brennan the best and hopes he gets the help he needs for a productive future in athletics or whatever new adventure he chooses. Dr. Beggs may have to make some hires before we get a new or convince some folks to return.

 

[Bdub777]

His son was battling cancer and for his family, they felt it was in their best interest to stay put in Utah. His son battled cancer for 3 years and that was why he backed out of this offer.

Utah athletics: Kyle Brennan backs out of Montana State A.D. job, will return to U.

His son was battling cancer and for his family, they felt it was in their best interest to stay put in Utah. His son battled cancer for 3 years and that was why he backed out of this offer.

Utah athletics: Kyle Brennan backs out of Montana State A.D. job, will return to U.

The article you attached listed the medical issue at the end of a list of other issues, but I don’t know what any of that has to do with the circumstances of his departure here.

 

[DougSutton]

The article you attached listed the medical issue at the end of a list of other issues, but I don’t know what any of that has to do with the circumstances of his departure here.

It certainly has nothing to do with it but if you read above, I believe it was as a result of someone else bringing that situation up on this forum, which I completely agree has nothing to do with this situation.

 

[Reggie Redbird]

It certainly has nothing to do with it but if you read above, I believe it was as a result of someone else bringing that situation up on this forum, which I completely agree has nothing to do with this situation.

Doug, we definitely disagree on this situation. I believe ISU had enough, even taking this situation out of it, to make a change. However, a statement was made that this was Brennan’s first chance to be an AD. That was inaccurate. I was the one who mentioned that.

Whoever Brennan’s connection posting on here is, brought up the reason he didn’t take it. I cited facts from within the article that Brennan’s connection left out.

You may feel it’s not relevant. Others may feel him taking a job and backing out is a red flag to have looked into. A red flag doesn’t equal a guaranteed issue, and I would like to believe you know that.

 

[DougSutton]

Doug, we definitely disagree on this situation. I believe ISU had enough, even taking this situation out of it, to make a change. However, a statement was made that this was Brennan’s first chance to be an AD. That was inaccurate. I was the one who mentioned that.

Whoever Brennan’s connection posting on here is, brought up the reason he didn’t take it. I cited facts from within the article that Brennan’s connection left out.

You may feel it’s not relevant. Others may feel him taking a job and backing out is a red flag to have looked into. A red flag doesn’t equal a guaranteed issue, and I would like to believe you know that.

I was adding context as to why the other poster chose to comment on that situation because Bdub777 suggested it was not relevant, that it had nothing to do with the circumstances of his departure at ISU. That's all. That situation had nothing to do with his departure at ISU, they are completely separate circumstances.

I have no reason to defend Brennan or suggest he should or should not have been let go. I have no idea what the truth is although I do know there are multiple opinions. Some didn't like him at all, some liked him a lot. Some felt he was a terrible cultural fit at ISU, others felt like he did amazing things for the athletic department and that a lot of the cultural issues were as a result of others within the department that were toxic.

Any objective person looking at results that were accomplished during his time here compared to recent years would be impressed. I personally do not put responsibility for the fact that Rossi turned out to be unable to follow through on his pledge (or any other pledge that may or may not come through in full) on Brennan, nor do I feel $23,000 investment to take a group of donors to Indy for a football game was a bad thing, at all (this type of investment takes place all over the country in sports and non profit foundations).

Based on my knowledge of corporate protocols, I am beyond confident that the Foundation or an entity that oversees the athletic department is the responsible party for all background checks, vetting out of potential donors and may have even suggested to Brennan who to reach out to, especially considering he was new to Bloomington/Normal and wouldn't know who is who without someone informing him. I'm equally confident that a trip like this would have been disclosed and approved in advance. I'm hopeful that over time, this will be revealed.

 

[Bird Friend]

I was adding context as to why the other poster chose to comment on that situation because Bdub777 suggested it was not relevant, that it had nothing to do with the circumstances of his departure at ISU. That's all. That situation had nothing to do with his departure at ISU, they are completely separate circumstances.

I have no reason to defend Brennan or suggest he should or should not have been let go. I have no idea what the truth is although I do know there are multiple opinions. Some didn't like him at all, some liked him a lot. Some felt he was a terrible cultural fit at ISU, others felt like he did amazing things for the athletic department and that a lot of the cultural issues were as a result of others within the department that were toxic.

Any objective person looking at results that were accomplished during his time here compared to recent years would be impressed. I personally do not put responsibility for the fact that Rossi turned out to be unable to follow through on his pledge (or any other pledge that may or may not come through in full) on Brennan, nor do I feel $23,000 investment to take a group of donors to Indy for a football game was a bad thing, at all (this type of investment takes place all over the country in sports and non profit foundations).

Based on my knowledge of corporate protocols, I am beyond confident that the Foundation or an entity that oversees the athletic department is the responsible party for all background checks, vetting out of potential donors and may have even suggested to Brennan who to reach out to, especially considering he was new to Bloomington/Normal and wouldn't know who is who without someone informing him. I'm equally confident that a trip like this would have been disclosed and approved in advance. I'm hopeful that over time, this will be revealed.

Doug, from a Foundation source, the Foundation is not involved until a pledge is made unless specifically asked to do so. They do not vet the donor, they only carry the pledge on the books after the pledge is made; track it, collect payments, and disperse funds. They are legally required to ensure the money is dispersed in accordance to their bylaws.

University Advancement does the vetting. It’s important to note that. The legal obligation to vet a donor is on Advancement, not the Foundation. While they are both overseen by the VP of Advancement, they are separate entities. Which brings me to the point about whether the Foundation would have been asked about funding for the Indy trip. They would not have been involved until time to pay the bills, unless asked before the trip. Even then their role would advisory only. They can’t say no, but they can refuse to reimburse and question the appropriateness of items submitted for reimbursement.

Additionally, a pledge is not legally binding. You could tell ISU today that you pledge $10M, regardless of whether you can fulfill that pledge. It’s up to the AD and the VP of Advancement to determine whether you can fulfill it.

I bring this up because I feel like the Foundation is seen as having a bigger role in this fiasco than they actually would have had. I believe they’re getting a bum rap for asking for clarification on the Indy trip . . . which is their job. If you wish to point at someone for giving approval for the trip, for the Rossi pledge, for the other pledges that aren’t fulfilled for the IPF, look to the VP of Advancement. He’s really the only one with clear involvement with athletics fundraising.

 

[DougSutton]

Doug, from a Foundation source, the Foundation is not involved until a pledge is made unless specifically asked to do so. They do not vet the donor, they only carry the pledge on the books after the pledge is made; track it, collect payments, and disperse funds. They are legally required to ensure the money is dispersed in accordance to their bylaws.

University Advancement does the vetting. It’s important to note that. The legal obligation to vet a donor is on Advancement, not the Foundation. While they are both overseen by the VP of Advancement, they are separate entities. Which brings me to the point about whether the Foundation would have been asked about funding for the Indy trip. They would not have been involved until time to pay the bills, unless asked before the trip. Even then their role would advisory only. They can’t say no, but they can refuse to reimburse and question the appropriateness of items submitted for reimbursement.

Additionally, a pledge is not legally binding. You could tell ISU today that you pledge $10M, regardless of whether you can fulfill that pledge. It’s up to the AD and the VP of Advancement to determine whether you can fulfill it.

I bring this up because I feel like the Foundation is seen as having a bigger role in this fiasco than they actually would have had. I believe they’re getting a bum rap for asking for clarification on the Indy trip . . . which is their job. If you wish to point at someone for giving approval for the trip, for the Rossi pledge, for the other pledges that aren’t fulfilled for the IPF, look to the VP of Advancement. He’s really the only one with clear involvement with athletics fundraising.

Appreciate the clarification regarding the Foundation's role compared to Advancement to vet a donor. I was unaware of that. Regardless, I do believe the responsibility to vet out a donor and as a result, approve a pledge enough to make a decision to move forward with the allocation of funding towards, in this case, the IPF is above the Athletic Department and not their responsibility. I could be wrong and perhaps it will never be revealed but I still believe the Athletic Department must have gone through some type of request and approval process for this trip, in advance. I hope that at some point, this will be clarified.

 

[BirdGrad2011]

I'm simply sharing my perspectives and feel it is fair to seek truth. I fully acknowledge I could be wrong and perhaps there won't be any validation either way.

You’ve been told you’re wrong multiple times and multiple ways yet you still won’t stop.

 

[SlackBooDom]

You’ve been told you’re wrong multiple times and multiple ways yet you still won’t stop.

Doug has on his own used phrases like, “what little I know of this” and then in-depth explained processes. He’s used Lyft receipts and researched GPS technology. Cited studies. There’s one person in this entire mess defending what happened, and a university fully capable of making decisions has led to dismissals of jobs… and Doug still doesn’t think we have the full story and maybe department culture wasn’t on Kyle and this trip wasn’t him and everything else. Of all actually involved and vetting facts with documents and in-person talks, Doug will rectify this on a message board.

 

[Hamdonger]

Impressed?.
Yeah- he fired Dan. Thats a big one that should move basketball forward.

He increased ticket prices across the four ticketed sports- The only one of those sports that didn't have a decline in attendance was women's basketball.
His two hires both had really poor seasons (i'm willing to give a pass on these as obviously one year isn't fair to judge).
Yeah, he got the IPF going. But the Rossi money isn't coming. There are strong voices saying the University hasn't received a dime of one of the other big gifts. So we are going to have to pay for that with loans. In that case, we should have just borrowed the money years ago and it would be built.
I used to compare the Athletic Department philosophy to State Farm nice. No matter who you encountered from the department, they were friendly and just oozed ISU pride. They were positive and engaging. (I'll totally admit that same State Farm nice meant the department moved slow and put us behind).
That friendliness was lost under Brennan. The goal seemed to be to make as much money as possible and hence, the used car salesman vibes some of us have alluded to. They've even started to nickel and dime the lab schools for anything Athletics related under him.I live near campus. I'm on it almost every day. The whole feeling around the athletic block, whether just walking through or at events, has changed substantially. Interactions with the department, for basic things such as customer service, have become less than desirable, all the way down to simple ticket fixes or questions. They've lost some really great people that is reflected in the basics.

Last 2 paragraphs are hard to argue with...

 

[normalbird]

Let's suppose that based on what is at least known (that no ISU staffer has been confirmed to step foot into the strip club), that there was a group of donors and ISU staff that went to the game and after the game was over, the group split up. Perhaps some in the group went to a restaurant and a regular bar and the "some" Ryan referred to in his article only was confirmed to be Rossi and perhaps one of his guests. Then, at the end of the night, the group may have decided to meet up and Lyft's GEO IP pinged them at that address. I don't know the reality however this is just as if not more likely than what may people have assumed.

I shard in a previous post my own Lyft receipt from my home in San Diego that showed my home address more than 1 block away from my actual home, where i was picked up. There are 20+ bars and restaurants within a block of this location. What I feel is not fair is when people immediately jump to conclusions assuming they were in the club when there has been absolutely no confirmation of this.



Regarding the last minute decision, this is not uncommon at all. I went to all 3 Chicago Cubs World Series Games at Wrigley Field and made the decision last minute to go to the first one with no plans for the 2nd and 3rd games until after the first game and that was flying from San Diego. I also went to a Super Bowl in Arizona while living there and didn't decide until 3 days before.

I still strongly believe the athletic department must have gone through some proper protocol to have the trip approved by the foundation in advance before the trip and am hopeful this can be validated somehow just to clear the air. An expense for a trip like this, to host multiple (not just Rossi) donors is a very minimal expense in the big picture compared to the collective amount of potential donations from this entire group.

Great question about the other $3M pledge and I agree, it would be great to know the status and further, who was responsible for these relationships, vetting them out, etc. From the little awareness I have about these types of things, there is always a responsible party for doing background checks and vetting out donors and my sense is that the responsible party is not in any way the athletic department. That's far beyond their competency.

Doug, I’m going to surmise that since WGLT reported that 9 tickets were purchased and 8 rooms were purchased, there were 9 members of the group, including a couple. I believe WGLT writes that there were 3 separate ticket transactions too. This could be either due to the size if the group or the availability of seats. Also, almost 4 hours passed between the end of the football game and the beginning of the Uber ride. I’m as morbidly curious as anyone else re the details of this mess, but will try harder to focus on the future.

 

[RedbirdSoxFan]

Doug, I’m going to surmise that since WGLT reported that 9 tickets were purchased and 8 rooms were purchased, there were 9 members of the group, including a couple. I believe WGLT writes that there were 3 separate ticket transactions too. This could be either due to the size if the group or the availability of seats. Also, almost 4 hours passed between the end of the football game and the beginning of the Uber ride. I’m as morbidly curious as anyone else re the details of this mess, but will try harder to focus on the future.

Do we know who the other 7 were that attended the game, shared the hotel rooms, attended the pole watching adventure, and were occupants of the Uber ride?