I don't know the answer to this but maybe someone does. Has any other AD at OU been on more committees than her?

Schaus was on a few committees.

Julie's biggest committee post was the NCAA group that outlined/defined the needs of Group of 5 conferences/schools in the context of the craziness going on right now. What downside was there to her participation? We had a voice at the table.

Also, when people ask what she accomplished, one of her biggest goals/accomplishments was focusing on our student athlete's experiences while on campus. I'm not sure many realize how shitty that experience has been across several sports. When the department reached out to increase support for the women's B-ball program, they received an almost universal response from former players - other than many who played for Bob Boldon - that they "f'ing hated" their time at OU. Same for several other sports. Very, very few former basketball players give back to the school because of how they feel they were shortchanged during their athletic-academic careers. Basically the only football players who donate today are "the Hess boys," who do so out of respect for Bill Hess and all he instilled in them. The situation got a lot better as Julie focused on honoring Frank's legacy, so there's a pipeline once again. Many baseball, women's softball, swimming and (of course) track & field athletes still hold grudges about various things.

So you rather her sit on her ass and do nothing just so her resume doesn’t get better?

Like SBH has said many times having a voice at the table is highly beneficial.

I know you live in the past (and hate women)but people don’t stay at one school anymore. It’s not 1955

Since I know you’re going to bring it up, the wrestling debacle was the wrestling administrator’s fault for trying to cover up the mess the wrestling coach made. Everyone there is lucky to still have a job.

In the thread announcing Cromer's hire, your initial response to her hire was to agree that she has a "Very impressive resume."

Here's the link: https://www.bobcatattack.com/messageboard/topic.asp?FromP...

Sure, you went on to make an incoherent, narcissistic point about how you interview and hire.

But you're going to have to explain to me how someone with Cromer's credentials is a DEI hire. Especially since you, yourself, agreed they were impressive credentials.

Anyone who uses DEI hire indicates they hate not only women but any minority. I’m embarrassed you have a degree from the same institution I do. Truly vile behavior from a man living in the Jim Crow era. Good thing “O.U.” has passed you by.

Power four schools rarely hire from within.

She was the most qualified of the final three candidates.

Do your research on wrestling and don’t listen to a couple of student-athletes who didn’t know the full story. The wrestling staff severely injured a student-athlete. He is lucky to be alive. The culture is terrible. I’m not surprised you’re a part of it.

Also its difficult to draw conclusions on a role she didn't get 6 or 7 years ago as there are any number of possible reasons on why she didn't land the Arkansas AD job and almost all of which would by definition have nothing to do with performance.

The subtext of the criticisms of Cromer have been clear for years now. For some reason, RP and 1996 just feel comfortable saying it out loud over the last few months.

Yes, Clarence Thomas is trying to take us back to the Jim Crow Era. Turn off Fox News.

I don't think rpbobcat is a horrible person.

But I think he was pretty dumb to suggest Cromer was a DEI hire, especially given the fact that he spoke to her credentials being impressive when she was hired.

Think about the implication there for a second. That means that a candidate who has very strong credentials can still be a "DEI hire". Meanwhile, in that same thread, rpbobcat stated that his preference was for Jason Grooms who was -- at the time -- the Assistant Athletic Director of Football Operations at Vanderbilt.

Cromer's on-paper credentials were no doubt better than Grooms. His view was that Grooms would have been a better hire, despite Cromer's better credentials, and that Cromer was a DEI hire.

That means that a woman can be a DEI hire even when they're more qualified. Can anybody explain that?

Oh, so you sat in on the interviews then, I guess. How else would you know enough to suggest she wasn't the best candidate?

Is this true? Did he make this proclamation at the beginning of the search?

Your preference was Grooms, as you stated at the time. Make the case for his qualifications over Cromer's. Curious to hear it.

Also, in the span of two posts you went from "it's your opinion that. . .Nellis wanted to be known as the person who hired the first female AD. . ." to "Nellis said he wanted to hire a woman."