|
|
Post by zeppelincajun on Jul 18, 2020 5:17:32 GMT 14
|
|
|
|
Post by cajunsrock on Jul 18, 2020 5:17:42 GMT 14
This seems to be the overall theme of yesterdays meeting. Let me also say I don't believe Dr. Savoie is a bad person, but he certainly came off ambivalent towards the motives of BLM. He stated he does not support an organization that has murdered police officers and innocent people, but at the same time denies there are some beliefs when it comes to education, decolonization and white sensitivity training that crossover. He tried his best to spin it, but failed to convince the majority of benefactors in the meeting that this is the right direction for the university to take at this time. He was not given any ultimatums, but was simply asked to walk some of his initial statement back. He politely declined and said that he will let things settle right now and make no further comments. So what's next for a number of major benefactors going forward? First, none of us know where the majority stand right now other than the pulse taken after this meeting. But there certainly were some major donors in attendance, including several in the Top 10 historically in donations. None of these people want to see the university hurt, but will make their decisions privately without discussion in the media or any message board. And for that reason, I will not name people or least the ones I know that attended the meeting. Now this doesn't take in account the many phone calls and emails Dr. Savoie has received from other supporters. He did mention many were negative towards the statements he has made and will not support athletics and academics at prior giving levels. The results of the meeting were clear after speaking with each other afterwards in phone conversations and texts messages. They will no longer support UL athletics and academics at their prior levels, if at all. A number of them have kept this years minimum levels for football tickets and baseball tickets, but there will be no more giving to RCAF and academics going forward. There are several other major donors that could not make the meeting and had requested their own personal meetings with Dr. Savoie, as of last night both have canceled their meetings after speaking with donors that attended yesterdays meetings. This is all the time I have today, but it's clear that moving forward the impact of Dr Savoie's actions will make it very difficult for Dr. Blohm, Dr. Maggard and RCAF to raise funds for the university. This happened before during the Jerry Baldwin debacle and it took us a number of years to recover. The most discouraging thought for me at this time, is we have the most qualified athletic director and best head football coach in place in the history of this university and it looks like this program will begin to decline under the weight of poor leadership and vision at the top, and serious deficits in fundraising. For me, the biggest disappointment with this entire thing is the timing. Our community is reeling from O&G decline, COVID and previous state budget woes. Why on earth would you give people a reason to question their loyalty or financial obligation to our University? I can promise you, folks are already looking to cut spending around here. Results of meeting are pretty much what I predicted they would be yesterday. Wonder if he will back off the requirement for more diversity courses to be taken in order for one to graduate. If people want to take these as electives, no problem and some may learn something from it. Ridiculous for engineering majors to be required to take these. Not much room in the curriculum for these. Some of that info is covered in there introductory to their discipline classes anyway. I don't even think they should be "required" for liberal arts students. Also wonder if we will see the BLM symbol on university billboards any more. Ending the diversity "requirements" and the symbol on billboards could help here. Although the President may have taken an ambivalent attitude in the the meeting, I get the impression he was surprised at the level of push back he received on the issue. Once again just because you don't support BLM does not mean you don't value the life of the individual black person, it just means you don't support the political organization that bears that phrase. Millions of people don't even realize how radical that group is. Glad Dr. Savoie is now aware of the concern. Meeting accomplished this at a minimum |
|
|
|
Post by zeppelincajun on Jul 18, 2020 5:25:15 GMT 14
|
|
|
|
Post by Bacca on Jul 18, 2020 5:36:48 GMT 14
|
|
|
|
Post by zeppelincajun on Jul 18, 2020 5:45:09 GMT 14
Seeking clarity from those who are praising Napier and Maggard when this video can be found on both of their Twitter feeds. Black Lives Matter is mentioned twice in the video, and Cole Prudhomme explicitly states he “stands together with his brothers and teammates in support of the Black Lives Matter movement.” Are Napier and Maggard bad leaders for spreading this message on their respective Twitter feeds?
|
|
|
|
Post by zeppelincajun on Jul 18, 2020 5:47:20 GMT 14
What about Bobby?
|
|
|
|
Post by Bacca on Jul 18, 2020 5:49:11 GMT 14
I have been calling for Bobby to be fired regardless of any comments he has made! |
|
|
|
Post by zeppelincajun on Jul 18, 2020 5:51:16 GMT 14
I have been calling for Bobby to be fired regardless of any comments he has made! Lol I almost added “jk we all know how we feel about Bobby” to my original post but wanted to it keep it based on supports of BLM. But yeah, I miss caring about Cajuns basketball. |
|
|
|
Post by balancedview on Jul 18, 2020 5:58:26 GMT 14
I'm Glad others are showing the other vocal people in support of Black Equality. for all the people upset over this, what comes across, is that those majority of benefactors in the meeting specially those major donors with money, dont want the university president to advocate publicly for equality and justice for Black people in our country. now, this is where communication is sooooooo important. because if that is not what these money benefactors are saying, then it sure sounds that way from the outside looking in.
its a bad look either way, and honestly this issues was always going to cause a divide. might as well get it over now, and in the open.If people have a problem with a behind the scene person attached to BLM, then they need to provide a means to support and cut out that person at the same time. yes its complicated but, it is what we are faced with at this point in history.
|
|
|
|
Post by zeppelincajun on Jul 18, 2020 6:08:04 GMT 14
Where do we stand on Peanut’s ability to lead men? I feel he has been commonly acknowledged previously as one of this university’s finest ambassadors over the last 15 years.
|
|
|
|
Post by balancedview on Jul 18, 2020 6:13:47 GMT 14
Well let’s see if he is a leader of men or a politician. I’m willing to be he is the latter. If this goes wrong, some very big money will be headed East. Both academically and athletically. Boy would that be ironic yeah it would. LSU is more vocal and public about their support of BLM than UL. but im sure that wouldn't stop folks from jumping on their bandwagon, or stop LSU athletic supporters from supporting their school. |
|
|
|
Post by zeppelincajun on Jul 18, 2020 6:26:05 GMT 14
What about Cantrelle? IMO, he’s shown some promising leadership as a young man with his representation of his university and spearheading the Sandlot League.
None of the men I’ve posted are the president of this university. Fully aware of that, but they are all ambassadors for this university. Should the university seek to distance itself from these men?
|
|
|
|
Post by balancedview on Jul 18, 2020 6:52:53 GMT 14
thats good stuff.
|
|
|
|
Post by zoomzoom on Jul 18, 2020 7:06:42 GMT 14
Savoy needs to morph into what most are saying, support the STATEMENT “Black Lives Matter” and not the organization. He didn’t lead...he was a lemming.
|
|
|
|
Post by balancedview on Jul 18, 2020 7:19:39 GMT 14
Savoy needs to morph into what most are saying, support the STATEMENT “Black Lives Matter” and not the organization. He didn’t lead...he was a lemming. Im interested in what statement would be good enough to keep both sides happy? i would love to see what the wording would look like. |
|
