Pant suits and the metric system suck.

OaktownBear;842328636 said:

---

93 - I could almost forgive your ridiculous pant suit remark, but you made me agree with Eeyore and that is unforgivable.

Suit, pantsuit, skirt, kilt, dashiki, or go full "naked guy". I don't care. Just give me an athletic department that helps players succeed on the field/court and in the classroom, while maximizing wins and revenue.

---

The problem with the dumb "pantsuit" comment is that it reduces Sandy's issues to her appearance, to what she is wearing. First of all, that is NOT the problem -- if you are going to criticize, it should be on the merits of how she did her job. There's no need to make such reductive comments when you have much more substantial arguments to make. Secondly, it's entirely too similar to the kinds of comments women in the workplace have heard for years, that they need to look better or dress sexier. We should be better than that. Criticize Sandy for her performance, not her clothing.

sycasey;842328656 said:

---

The problem with the dumb "pantsuit" comment is that it reduces Sandy's issues to her appearance, to what she is wearing. First of all, that is NOT the problem -- if you are going to criticize, it should be on the merits of how she did her job. There's no need to make such reductive comments when you have much more substantial arguments to make. Secondly, it's entirely too similar to the kinds of comments women in the workplace have heard for years, that they need to look better or dress sexier. We should be better than that. Criticize Sandy for her performance, not her clothing.

---

Tedford: Poncho
Sandy: Pantsuit

I guess we were all just being sexists when we called Teddy "Poncho" as well eh?

BeggarEd;842328661 said:

---

Tedford: Poncho
Sandy: Pantsuit

I guess we were all just being sexists when we called Teddy "Poncho" as well eh?

---

I thought the poncho comments were dumb too, but it's different when you are making those comments about a traditionally repressed group who have been regularly criticized for how they dress in the workplace.

sycasey;842328656 said:

---

The problem with the dumb "pantsuit" comment is that it reduces Sandy's issues to her appearance, to what she is wearing. First of all, that is NOT the problem -- if you are going to criticize, it should be on the merits of how she did her job. There's no need to make such reductive comments when you have much more substantial arguments to make. Secondly, it's entirely too similar to the kinds of comments women in the workplace have heard for years, that they need to look better or dress sexier. We should be better than that. Criticize Sandy for her performance, not her clothing.

---

I think you give many of them too much credit. I don't think it has anything to do with what she wears. I think if she wore high heels and skirts, the same people would say "no more skirts and heels". It has to do with who wears these clothes, not the clothes.

OaktownBear;842328677 said:

---

I think you give many of them too much credit. I don't think it has anything to do with what she wears. I think if she wore high heels and skirts, the same people would say "no more skirts and heels". It has to do with who wears these clothes, not the clothes.

---

Probably yes. The point is that the comments are focused in the wrong direction. Who gives a crap about what she wears? If you want to criticize, criticize her performance.

Pantsuit is merely a way to attack her gender. Not a cheap shot but weak and impotent.

sycasey;842328673 said:

---

I thought the poncho comments were dumb too, but it's different when you are making those comments about a traditionally repressed group who have been regularly criticized for how they dress in the workplace.

---

Personal ridicule is always pathetic and it is pathetic whether it is making fun of the fact that Tedford supposedly wore a poncho or Sandy wearing pant suits.

However, given that it is extremely common for professional women to wear pant suits (in other words why would it be something to make fun of) and it is not common for men to wear ponchos (in other words you are making fun of the unusual choice in clothes), it is clear that the original subtext to calling Sandy "pant suit" has to do with the fact that she is a woman. Those that choose to ignore that or don't get it and use the term to refer to her without that intent, I'm sorry, but it is so naive that you deserve the criticism.

I've been heavily critical of Barbour in recent years, but there is a difference between criticizing her performance and implying that her gender has anything to do with the issues.

OaktownBear;842328692 said:

---

Personal ridicule is always pathetic and it is pathetic whether it is making fun of the fact that Tedford supposedly wore a poncho or Sandy wearing pant suits.

However, given that it is extremely common for professional women to wear pant suits (in other words why would it be something to make fun of) and it is not common for men to wear ponchos (in other words you are making fun of the unusual choice in clothes), it is clear that the original subtext to calling Sandy "pant suit" has to do with the fact that she is a woman. Those that choose to ignore that or don't get it and use the term to refer to her without that intent, I'm sorry, but it is so naive that you deserve the criticism.

I've been heavily critical of Barbour in recent years, but there is a difference between criticizing her performance and implying that her gender has anything to do with the issues.

---

In fairness, I agree that PantSuit is pretty weak, but there was never really another derogatory nickname for her. A lot of people just really were sick of Sandy as the AD and ready to see her go. Whether you agree or not, many of us viewed her in a very negative light, and just as people would call Pete Carroll "Cheaty Petey", there's a natural tendency to want to refer to someone you dislike with a derogatory nickname. Again, PantSuit was the only thing anyone ever really came up with, so whatever.

I'm not gonna shed any tears over Sandy and her alleged "repression" given her half million dollar salary.

Also, a male football coach wearing a poncho or light waterproof jacket on the sideline isn't that weird.

In any event, she (Barbour) gone. Moving onward and upward.

GB54;842328655 said:

---

Pant suits and the metric system suck.

---

does ann coulter wear pantsuits or skirts?

From UC Berkeley press release:
Michael Williams ’82, a former Golden Bear student-athlete and current vice chair of the UC Berkeley Foundation, will oversee Cal Athletics on an interim basis until a national search is completed for the next Director of Athletics.
http://newscenter.berkeley.edu/2014/06/27/barbour-transition/?utm_content=buffer65d71&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

I think this is telling. Fundraising clearly was one weakness and it sounds like that's the expertise Dirks is looking for. Looks like Ratto was mostly right (albeit without addressing any of the other major issues).

BeggarEd;842328706 said:

---

In fairness, I agree that PantSuit is pretty weak, but there was never really another derogatory nickname for her. A lot of people just really were sick of Sandy as the AD and ready to see her go. Whether you agree or not, many of us viewed her in a very negative light, and just as people would call Pete Carroll "Cheaty Petey", there's a natural tendency to want to refer to someone you dislike with a derogatory nickname. Again, PantSuit was the only thing anyone ever really came up with, so whatever.

I'm not gonna shed any tears over Sandy and her alleged "repression" given her half million dollar salary.

Also, a male football coach wearing a poncho or light waterproof jacket on the sideline isn't that weird.

In any event, she (Barbour) gone. Moving onward and upward.

---

Well, it is when it is 80 degrees and you are standing in the sun for 3 hours on an artificial turf field. It was pretty obvious why Tedford went poncho on us.

You guys should really move on to discussing Sonny Dykes socks and how it bugs you so much you need to mock them. :bravo

82graddlsdad;842328712 said:

---

well, it is when it is 80 degrees and you are standing in the sun for 3 hours on an artificial turf field. It was pretty obvious why tedford went poncho on us.

---

lol

sycasey;842328656 said:

---

The problem with the dumb "pantsuit" comment is that it reduces Sandy's issues to her appearance, to what she is wearing. First of all, that is NOT the problem -- if you are going to criticize, it should be on the merits of how she did her job. There's no need to make such reductive comments when you have much more substantial arguments to make. Secondly, it's entirely too similar to the kinds of comments women in the workplace have heard for years, that they need to look better or dress sexier. We should be better than that. Criticize Sandy for her performance, not her clothing.

---

Agreed. It's an ad homenim attack. To demean your opponent. Who cares what she wears. She struggled in the job.

AirOski;842328724 said:

---

Agreed. It's an ad homenim attack. To demean your opponent. Who cares what she wears. She struggled in the job.

---

Ad hominem...now, we're really ramping it up.

BeggarEd;842328706 said:

---

In fairness, I agree that PantSuit is pretty weak, but there was never really another derogatory nickname for her. A lot of people just really were sick of Sandy as the AD and ready to see her go. Whether you agree or not, many of us viewed her in a very negative light, and just as people would call Pete Carroll "Cheaty Petey", there's a natural tendency to want to refer to someone you dislike with a derogatory nickname. Again, PantSuit was the only thing anyone ever really came up with, so whatever.

---

"Cheaty Petey" is at least rooted in the idea that Carroll did something wrong professionally, encouraging boosters to pay his players so he could recruit better, or at least looking the other way while they did it (that might not be true, but people think it is and that's where the name comes from). So while it's a childish nickname, the reasons behind it are fair game. I don't really see the reasoning behind "Pant Suit" other than that she is a woman and isn't it funny that women wear pant suits.

BeggarEd;842328706 said:

---

I'm not gonna shed any tears over Sandy and her alleged "repression" given her half million dollar salary.

---

And I'm sure neither is Sandy, as she has certainly succeeded more than most in the professional world. But a lot of these kinds of comments do help to create an environment that makes it harder for other women trying to climb the ladder, and as such they are uncalled for.

DLSbear;842328577 said:

---

Ratto's piece, wow! He is spot on...

---

Except for the part that we will be looking for a new AD. While she was back in Texas looking for a new BB coach. I wouldn't doubt that we were looking for her replacement. I am sure we already have one signed, sealed and hired and may be announced today at the news conference. You don't release an AD from their duty's and then hold a news conference to say you are looking for her replacement. Based on the leak out of the athletic department, they have a new AD. Let's face it, the only reason that she is staying on is that she still has a year left on her contract. I am sure right now she is sending out resumes and as soon as she get's a descent offer she's gone.

bar20;842328732 said:

---

Except for the part that we will be looking for a new AD. While she was back in Texas looking for a new BB coach. I wouldn't doubt that we were looking for her replacement. I am sure we already have one signed, sealed and hired and may be announced today at the new conference. You don't release an AD from their duty's and then hold a news conference to say you are looking for her replacement. Based on the leak out of the athletic department, they have a new AD. Let's face it, the only reason that she is staying on is that she still has a year left on her contract. I am sure right now she is sending out resumes and as soon as she get's a descent offer she's gone.

---

My question, though, is why is she staying on through July 15. That's 19 days. Nearly 3 weeks. It seems like too much time.

sycasey;842328730 said:

---

"Cheaty Petey" is at least rooted in the idea that Carroll did something wrong professionally, encouraging boosters to pay his players so he could recruit better, or at least looking the other way while they did it (that might not be true, but people think it is and that's where the name comes from). So while it's a childish nickname, the reasons behind it are fair game. I don't really see the reasoning behind "Pant Suit" other than that she is a woman and isn't it funny that women wear pant suits.



And I'm sure neither is Sandy, as she has certainly succeeded more than most in the professional world. But a lot of these kinds of comments do help to create an environment that makes it harder for other women trying to climb the ladder, and as such they are uncalled for.

---

Also, to those who were trying to decide whether she is effective or not as an Athletic Director, it just gives the impression that her critics do not like her because of her gender, sexual orientation or appearance. It makes the rest of us question their objectivity and really weakens their case, whatever its merit. It is just so counter productive on so many levels.

okaydo;842328733 said:

---

My question, though, is why is she staying on through July 15. That's 19 days. Nearly 3 weeks. It seems like too much time.

---

It could be she has another AD job that would become available after that date or her replacement needed to give a 30 day notice from his current employment. At the upper management level you usually have a replacement in place before the current one in charge is given the ax.

bar20;842328740 said:

---

At the upper management level you usually have a replacement in place before the current one in charge is given the ax.

---

Name the last time that happened in college athletics?

GB54;842328655 said:

---

Pant suits and the metric system suck.

---

Knock off the sexist BS. It was past time to let Sandy go so I agree with the move and there is much to criticize Sandy about--messing up the demand and projections, the grad rates and the Dykes hire--but in 2014 on a Cal board we ought to be above sexist insults.

I tried to find out more about Michael Williams.

https://www.linkedin.com/pub/h-michael-williams/1a/310/301

Along with having a strong background in finance and business, he was also a part of the Chancellor's Task Force on Athletics and Academics since January.

http://www.dailycal.org/2014/01/21/academics-athletics-task-force-discusses-challenges-student-athletes-inaugural-meeting/

Quote:

---

The formation of the Task Force on Academics and Athletics made up of faculty members, current and former student-athletes, coaches and nonathlete students was announced by Athletic Director Sandy Barbour in November after the NCAA report that revealed nationally low graduation rates for UC Berkeley's football and men's basketball programs.

---

I know he's just interim but this points in the direction that academics might've been a big factor.

Also, one way to read the improvement in APR was that it was the result of the task force:

http://www.insidebayarea.com/bay-area-news/ci_25702184/cals-academic-performance-football-improves

Quote:

---

Credit for the improved 2012-13 football mark is shared by former coach Jeff Tedford, who was fired after the 2012 season, and coach Sonny Dykes, who took over before the 2013 spring semester.

The Chancellor's Task Force for Athletics and Academics has worked since last fall to review the situation and provide suggestions. The task force will submit its report to Chancellor Nicholas Dirks late next month.

---

Enough athletic department talk and back to my question. I thought women's skirt suits were traditionally referred to as "skirt suits." If they were in fact just referred to as "suits" then I get the need to add "pant" to differentiate.

freshfunk;842328746 said:

---

Also, one way to read the improvement in APR was that it was the result of the task force:

http://www.insidebayarea.com/bay-area-news/ci_25702184/cals-academic-performance-football-improves

---

Except that says the task force meet last fall while the APR was for 2012-13.

I strongly suspected this was coming when SB wasn't allowed to make the MBB hire alone.

I appreciate her years of service, but also think it is time for a change.

BeggarEd;842328661 said:

---

Tedford: Poncho
Sandy: Pantsuit

I guess we were all just being sexists when we called Teddy "Poncho" as well eh?

---

No, you were just showing your inability to articulate clear insightful criticism.

JerseyGoldenBear;842328630 said:

---

Nevertheless, I do think that our football program has taken steps back with Dykes, almost back to the Holmoe era and I have no doubt that that played a role.

---

Maybe we really can step back to the Holmoe era but this time with him at AD. :p

FiatSlug;842328878 said:

---

No, you were just showing your inability to articulate clear insightful criticism.

---

Pantsuit Pantsuit Pantsuit Pantsuit Pantsuit Pantsuit Pantsuit Pantsuit Pantsuit
Pantsuit Pantsuit Pantsuit Pantsuit Pantsuit Pantsuit Pantsuit Pantsuit Pantsuit

Am I doing it right now professor pompous?

This thread should've died at the first post.

A grown man coming on here to proclaim his vindication over some opinion--never mind that it was a sentiment that many on here shared.

/thread

beeasyed;842329062 said:

---

This thread should've died at the first post.

A grown man coming on here to proclaim his vindication over some opinion--never mind that it was a sentiment that many on here shared.

/thread

---

I hear you but I think you're referring to the "I am vindicated" thread. That thread is not this thread.

As for Sandy, I agree that with her handling of football and academics, it was time for a change. But it's all about selecting her replacement. Given our current precarious position, this is going to be one of the most important Cal Athletics hires in a long time. I am guardedly optimistic that Dirks and Wilton are the right people to handle it.

Her job is to handle all sports so when I hear about her good work with non revenue sports, I see it as her doing her job rather a reason for which she is an exceptional AD.

She did get some incredible things done here and made same good hires but the APR falls on her shoulders and so does the stadium financing woes which are major issues.

To some degree, she is a victim of her own success, much like Tedford. JT raised expectations and when he failed to meet them we kicked him out. Barbour built the facilities and tried to build a big time FB program and generally has not done well there. Hopefully we find someone who has experience running a large enterprise, ideally an athletic department or organization with substantial revenue.