clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

Pernetti's in

Tim Pernetti was the frontrunner to be the next athletic director, with reported support from Greg Schiano, most of the administration, and influential politicians and boosters. All indications are that he will be named to the position today. Not that Rhoades or Mertens was necessarily anti-football, but naming Pernetti is a signal that Rutgers remains committed football and Schiano, and should ease any remaining fears in that department. In any case, these comments about the A.D. search are troubling; they're either accurate, and the search was a sham; or the comments indicate that Pernetti must take steps to heal any remaining divisions.

Several members confirmed to me yesterday that they met once, when folks from Parker Executive Search (hired Jan. 12 at a cost of $58,000 plus expenses) polled them on what traits and experiences they felt the new athletic director should have.

At least one source (likely a Pernetti supporter) claims that there was a fair competition between the three finalists; making the case that Richard Costello can shore up Pernetti's weaknesses. That seems to be following the Bob Mulcahy model. Even granting that Pernetti has a bright future (apparently outlining "an impressive position paper"), I remain troubled by his lack of administrative experience. He is stepping into a difficult situation, exacerbated by the violent trauma and upheaval of the past year. For everyone's sake, he had better succeed. Calm and stability would be a welcome change.

On last question: besides Bob Mulcahy, Kevin MacConnell was arguably the biggest loser in all of this, as he was the obvious successor-in-waiting. He was originally supposed to interview, but apparently did not (Pernetti assumed his role as the establishment candidate). If Pernetti is the choice, and Costello assumes many administrative duties, where exactly does that leave K-Mac?