Can someone explain the booster situation

[msza 228]

Auburn's "booster situation" is a curiosity to me. Can someone explain explain it or point me to an explanation.

I know Jimmy "Yella Fella" Rane is the richest man in the state, contributes millions of dollars to the program, and is on some of the boards.

But apparently he has a significant amount of influence over the football program, and apparently that is unusual.

How unusual is this? Is he the only booster with this sort of power at Auburn? How many other big time programs have this sort of issue/arrangement?

This "booster situation" is often mentioned as a negative by the media and even on these boards. If it's truly a negative, why doesn't the school do something about it? How far would the program fall without the financial support of the infamous 'meddlesome boosters'? Or is it not so clear cut whether it's a negative or positive?

Lots of questions!

Edit: sorry, I accidentally posted before I was done writing.

Edited November 1, 2022 by msza

[NWALA Tiger 3,535]

22 minutes ago, msza said:

Auburn's "booster situation" is a curiosity to me. Can someone explain explain it or point me to an explanation.

I know Jimmy "Yella Fella" Rane is the richest man in the state, contributes millions of dollars to the program, and is on some of the boards.

But apparently he has a significant amount of influence over the football program, and apparently that is unusual.

How unusual is this? Is he the only booster with this sort of power at Auburn? How many other big time programs have this sort of issue/arrangement?

This "booster situation" is often mentioned as a negative by the media and even on these boards. If it's truly a negative, why doesn't the school do something about it? How far would the program fall without the financial support of the infamous 'meddlesome boosters'? Or is it not so clear cut whether it's a negative or positive?

Lots of questions!

Edit: sorry, I accidentally posted before I was done writing.

Good luck on getting someone in the know to answer this directly.  They won't touch it with a 10ft pole LOL

[AEAugirl 9,632]

Who do you think writes the big checks?  The boosters.  That is the situation.

Its the same at every single college in America.  Auburn’s are no better nor worse than any other school.  The legend of Auburn boosters stems mainly from the days of Bobby Lowder yielding his power, and Jetgate kinda put it in the public eye. 

The people that tote the “meddling boosters” line never have an explanation as to why they don’t “meddle” in Bruce’s program nor can they say HOW they meddle.  

Edited November 1, 2022 by AEAugirl

[Mikey 16,576]

24 minutes ago, msza said:

Auburn's "booster situation" is a curiosity to me. Can someone explain explain it or point me to an explanation.

I know Jimmy "Yella Fella" Rane is the richest man in the state, contributes millions of dollars to the program, and is on some of the boards.

But apparently he has a significant amount of influence over the football program, and apparently that is unusual.

How unusual is this? Is he the only booster with this sort of power at Auburn? How many other big time programs have this sort of issue/arrangement?

This "booster situation" is often mentioned as a negative by the media and even on these boards. If it's truly a negative, why doesn't the school do something about it? How far would the program fall without the financial support of the infamous 'meddlesome boosters'? Or is it not so clear cut whether it's a negative or positive?

Lots of questions!

Edit: sorry, I accidentally posted before I was done writing.

The media intentionally over-blows the question of Auburn boosters. People who donate millions to AU do NOT go around trying to sabotage the athletic department. For example, the situation last February legally required an investigation by AU authorities and one was conducted. Evil boosters were not the cause of that that, facts were.

[TeamZero77 1,784]

24 minutes ago, msza said:

Auburn's "booster situation" is a curiosity to me. Can someone explain explain it or point me to an explanation.

I know Jimmy "Yella Fella" Rane is the richest man in the state, contributes millions of dollars to the program, and is on some of the boards.

But apparently he has a significant amount of influence over the football program, and apparently that is unusual.

How unusual is this? Is he the only booster with this sort of power at Auburn? How many other big time programs have this sort of issue/arrangement?

This "booster situation" is often mentioned as a negative by the media and even on these boards. If it's truly a negative, why doesn't the school do something about it? How far would the program fall without the financial support of the infamous 'meddlesome boosters'? Or is it not so clear cut whether it's a negative or positive?

Lots of questions!

Edit: sorry, I accidentally posted before I was done writing.

Every school has them. T Boone Pickens at Okie State, Jerry Jones at Arkansas, Bear Bryant Jr damn near runs the Alabama football program (atleast before Saban came). I don't buy into the rumor that the boosters sabotage the football program to get their way. Funny they don't seem to meddle in other sports at Auburn, just football. I'm just not buying it. 

The big boosters at Auburn are very successful in business. They didn't get to be uber rich by being stupid and making stupid decisions. And to hurt the football program, a program you give millions of dollars to, just to get your way and be in power, is not a smart decision. 

Don't believe the rumors.

[msza 228]

15 minutes ago, AEAugirl said:

Who do you think writes the big checks?  The boosters.  That is the situation.

Its the same at every single college in America.  Auburn’s are no better nor worse than any other school.  The legend of Auburn boosters stems mainly from the days of Bobby Lowder yielding his power, and Jetgate kinda put it in the public eye. 

The people that tote the “meddling boosters” line never have an explanation as to why they don’t “meddle” in Bruce’s program nor can they say HOW they meddle.  

Interesting.

Greg McElroy (who I've always respected as an analyst) said as recently as yesterday that the AU "power brokers" have more power than the university president (around the one minute mark): 

 

Not discounting what you're saying but for the sake of conversation, this is a recent example of the spectre of the Auburn boosters.

 

[1716AU 728]

51 minutes ago, msza said:

Auburn's "booster situation" is a curiosity to me. Can someone explain explain it or point me to an explanation.

I know Jimmy "Yella Fella" Rane is the richest man in the state, contributes millions of dollars to the program, and is on some of the boards.

But apparently he has a significant amount of influence over the football program, and apparently that is unusual.

How unusual is this? Is he the only booster with this sort of power at Auburn? How many other big time programs have this sort of issue/arrangement?

This "booster situation" is often mentioned as a negative by the media and even on these boards. If it's truly a negative, why doesn't the school do something about it? How far would the program fall without the financial support of the infamous 'meddlesome boosters'? Or is it not so clear cut whether it's a negative or positive?

Lots of questions!

Edit: sorry, I accidentally posted before I was done writing.

Just a small example from another SEC school:

I taught at uat during the 2000's.  I had scheduled a meeting with Bob Witt during my fourth year to discuss a potential BIG $$$ donor.  And the possibility was very strong.

As I am sitting in the waiting area, Paul Bryant, Jr burst in and stormed his way, without a how do you do to anyone in the office, right back to Bob's door, opened it, went in, and slammed it behind him.  

Two admins from the Business school came right out, hurriedly.

I sat there gob smacked, until the secretary got a quick call, and cancelled my meeting.

Saban got everyone on board, but when he is gone, hell will break loose

[NWALA Tiger 3,535]

34 minutes ago, Mikey said:

The media intentionally over-blows the question of Auburn boosters. People who donate millions to AU do NOT go around trying to sabotage the athletic department. For example, the situation last February legally required an investigation by AU authorities and one was conducted. Evil boosters were not the cause of that that, facts were.

Did the boosters not play a part in Jetgate? Who's plane were they on LOL

[msza 228]

59 minutes ago, Mikey said:

The media intentionally over-blows the question of Auburn boosters. People who donate millions to AU do NOT go around trying to sabotage the athletic department. For example, the situation last February legally required an investigation by AU authorities and one was conducted. Evil boosters were not the cause of that that, facts were.

I've never heard anyone with any credibility suggest that the boosters intentionally sabotage the program. 

The pervasive rumor is that boosters sometimes butt heads with coaches, ADs, etc, over the direction of the program, and that the boosters have more recourse than many do at other programs to get their way.

Of course, we've heard some counter-arguments in this thread.

Edited November 1, 2022 by msza

[AEAugirl 9,632]

28 minutes ago, 1716AU said:

Just a small example from another SEC school:

I taught at uat during the 2000's.  I had scheduled a meeting with Bob Witt during my fourth year to discuss a potential BIG $$$ donor.  And the possibility was very strong.

As I am sitting in the waiting area, Paul Bryant, Jr burst in and stormed his way, without a how do you do to anyone in the office, right back to Bob's door, opened it, went in, and slammed it behind him.  

Two admins from the Business school came right out, hurriedly.

I sat there gob smacked, until the secretary got a quick call, and cancelled my meeting.

Saban got everyone on board, but when he is gone, hell will break loose

You are not kidding.  People think Saban has neutered Bryant Jr but while everyone is looking at football, Bryant Jr has been quietly placing exactly who he wants on their BOT and in other positions of power with the UA administration, many with ties to Bryant Bank. 

There will be a vacuum left when Saban retires and Bryant is going to flex.  

[CCTAU 3,312]

Booster has lotsa money.

You no has lotsa money.

[aubaseball 2,593]

It’s a topic that is completely baffling to me.   It’s the same group of people that everyone will come running to to pay the buyout of the current staff when they no longer want him around.   It’s the same group of people that will pony up money to go and hire the next guy to come in.   It’s counter productive to actually question the people that have the money to help Auburn.   

[tinman1 485]

1 hour ago, msza said:

Interesting.

Greg McElroy (who I've always respected as an analyst) said as recently as yesterday that the AU "power brokers" have more power than the university president (around the one minute mark): 

 

Not discounting what you're saying but for the sake of conversation, this is a recent example of the spectre of the Auburn boosters.

 

Greg McElroy knows less about Auburn boosters than Harry the gate guard at Bryant Denny Stadium.  He gets his news from message boards and from a group of media folks who think they know what goes on at Auburn.  99% is pure gossip and speculation. 

[WarEagle1982 449]

This is an interesting topic.  I have a poster set that I use when teaching about different forms of government in my Civics classes (I am on my planning period right now, BTW).  One of the forms we discuss is Oligarchy.  The definition is “power lies with a small number of people based on royalty, WEALTH, family ties, education, CORPORATE, or military ties.”  The posters have examples of these types of governments and one of the examples of Oligarchy is most of our colleges and universities.  I have actually made the comment to my students to really read about the “behind the scenes” events the next time there’s a high profile football job open in the South and see if it doesn’t sound a lot like that.

[caleb1633 1,418]

Just to address some of the flawed logic on this thread:

1) "Every school has boosters. They aren't better or worse at Auburn than they are anywhere else." Yes, every school has them, but not all schools are equal and not all boosters are equal. Auburn boosters have played a visible role in exerting their influence in the past. While they may do so at other schools, it often isn't as visible. The visibility itself is problematic, as it feeds the perception in the college football world. Perception of booster influence matters, whether it's overstated or not.

2) "They don't meddle in other programs." Yeah, because there's not as much passion or money in those programs as the football program. The boosters don't care about the equestrian program as much as the football program for many of the same reasons as the fans. They also have more of a financial incentive to invest in the football program than the other athletic programs. Even with the recent success of our basketball program, it's not a stretch to say that it pales in comparison to the money made by the football program.

3) One thing not often understood with CEOs and corporate oligarchs is that they aren't usually selected for their ability in the industry that their company resides in, but rather for political reasons and the ability to generate profits for the shareholders. Their ability to do so in their companies doesn't directly transfer to understanding the right direction for a football program. We often mistake competence in one field for competence in every field. I think we're also projecting our own personality and values onto these boosters, thinking they wouldn't vandalize the football program for their own interests. Studies have shown that a disproportionate amount of CEOs are sociopaths.

TLDR: The boosters have tremendous ability and incentive to throw their weight around with the football program. They may sabotage it—intentionally or unintentionally—and there is clear evidence of this occurring in the past. How much were they involved in this? Difficult to say, but I wouldn't be surprised if they had some impact on this fiasco. Not to detract from Harsin's role, cause that guys sucks, but there were other personalities involved in this. His actions didn't occur in a vacuum.

[RunInRed 16,385]

Jimmy currently chairs the BOT.  He also has given millions and millions to the University, Athletics, etc.  He and others catch flak for being some controlling boogeyman that I’m not sure is fair.  In fact, it’s cheap cover for folks who have no clue how things work and just want someone to blame when things go wrong.

For the record, this booster ‘operating model’ is not unique to Auburn. Do you think the University President or AD hired Saban at Alabama? No, it was PBJ and McMahon. 

All that said, Roberts was fully empowered to select our new AD. And I suspect the President and AD will play their appropriate role in selecting our next Football Coach.

At the end of the day, coaches need to coach, administers need to administrate and booster needs to boost. And that appears to be what they are doing.

[AuGrad2004 100]

Think of it this way.. If you gave tens of millions of dollars to whatever, wouldn't you want a little say in decisions?  Saban also had interference from boosters until he started winning.  Then he had the power. 

[msza 228]

59 minutes ago, WarEagle1982 said:

This is an interesting topic.  I have a poster set that I use when teaching about different forms of government in my Civics classes (I am on my planning period right now, BTW).  One of the forms we discuss is Oligarchy.  The definition is “power lies with a small number of people based on royalty, WEALTH, family ties, education, CORPORATE, or military ties.”  The posters have examples of these types of governments and one of the examples of Oligarchy is most of our colleges and universities.  I have actually made the comment to my students to really read about the “behind the scenes” events the next time there’s a high profile football job open in the South and see if it doesn’t sound a lot like that.

Very interesting about colleges being literal 'poster children' for oligarchies, lol. I had never thought about it that way. In fact, I recall Noam Chomsky saying that a collegiate academic department is the closest thing to (pro-social) anarchy in the modern world. Talk about a different viewpoint!

[msza 228]

30 minutes ago, caleb1633 said:

Just to address some of the flawed logic on this thread:

1) "Every school has boosters. They aren't better or worse at Auburn than they are anywhere else." Yes, every school has them, but not all schools are equal and not all boosters are equal. Auburn boosters have played a visible role in exerting their influence in the past. While they may do so at other schools, it often isn't as visible. The visibility itself is problematic, as it feeds the perception in the college football world. Perception of booster influence matters, whether it's overstated or not.

2) "They don't meddle in other programs." Yeah, because there's not as much passion or money in those programs as the football program. The boosters don't care about the equestrian program as much as the football program for many of the same reasons as the fans. They also have more of a financial incentive to invest in the football program than the other athletic programs. Even with the recent success of our basketball program, it's not a stretch to say that it pales in comparison to the money made by the football program.

3) One thing not often understood with CEOs and corporate oligarchs is that they aren't usually selected for their ability in the industry that their company resides in, but rather for political reasons and the ability to generate profits for the shareholders. Their ability to do so in their companies doesn't directly transfer to understanding the right direction for a football program. We often mistake competence in one field for competence in every field. I think we're also projecting our own personality and values onto these boosters, thinking they wouldn't vandalize the football program for their own interests. Studies have shown that a disproportionate amount of CEOs are sociopaths.

TLDR: The boosters have tremendous ability and incentive to throw their weight around with the football program. They may sabotage it—intentionally or unintentionally—and there is clear evidence of this occurring in the past. How much were they involved in this? Difficult to say, but I wouldn't be surprised if they had some impact on this fiasco. Not to detract from Harsin's role, cause that guys sucks, but there were other personalities involved in this. His actions didn't occur in a vacuum.

Well put, thanks.

[JuscAUse! 1,404]

3 hours ago, TeamZero77 said:

Every school has them. T Boone Pickens at Okie State, Jerry Jones at Arkansas, Bear Bryant Jr damn near runs the Alabama football program (atleast before Saban came). I don't buy into the rumor that the boosters sabotage the football program to get their way. Funny they don't seem to meddle in other sports at Auburn, just football. I'm just not buying it. 

The big boosters at Auburn are very successful in business. They didn't get to be uber rich by being stupid and making stupid decisions. And to hurt the football program, a program you give millions of dollars to, just to get your way and be in power, is not a smart decision. 

Don't believe the rumors.

I buy 80% of what you posted.  But make no mistake, a genius for finding and processing wood products , or playing guitar and singing, or play acting in Hollywood,  building a huge business or even being a great heart surgeon , does not make you a genius in any other subject. 

[AuburnEagle79 2,165]

It's a situation that happens most places. You give big $$$ and you get some pull. 

[caleb1633 1,418]

10 minutes ago, AuburnEagle79 said:

It's a situation that happens most places. You give big $$$ and you get some pull. 

Big pull may = Big say, but that Big say doesn't always = Good ideas

[PoetTiger 1,896]

16 minutes ago, AuGrad2004 said:

Think of it this way.. If you gave tens of millions of dollars to whatever, wouldn't you want a little say in decisions?  Saban also had interference from boosters until he started winning.  Then he had the power. 

Saban starting winning so fast they just had to leave him alone. There are problems with Auburn AD Dept and “the giving units” Donations often come with an expectation of influence and in some cases Auburn’s “giving units” have overstepped. This is not abnormal as I am sure other schools do it, the problem Auburn has is keeping family business in house, and showing a willingness to compromise when a preferred candidate is not unilaterally accepted. It can be fixed and I think that is the ultimate goal of Roberts, and hiring Cohen was step 1.

[AuburnEagle79 2,165]

1 minute ago, caleb1633 said:

Big pull may = Big say, but that Big say doesn't always = Good ideas

That's true. But denying the big say and also losing the big $ is not always a good idea.

It's a fine line to walk here.

[TigerHorn 1,351]

You are all missing a critical piece of this puzzle - the legal difference between how the bammer and AU BOT's are structured and positions filled. The bammer process, which I still struggle to accept is legal in today's world, is that they are a "self perpetuating" BOT. That may not be the exact legal term, but it conveys the point. In a nutshell, all of their seat appointments and most of their business (as a direct consequence) is conducted behind closed doors. They pick their own members. It is run with an iron hand. State sunshine laws apparently do not apply. 

AU in stark contrast has a very public appointment process that is subject to the state's politics. Our BOT as a result will NEVER display the unity and iron hand control that UAT's does. Net result of that is that our BOT bickering occurs more often and leaks more often to the public in contrast to UAT. We also end up with some very questionable BOT appointees at times. 

Beyond that, every school has its boosters, only AU people see fit to constantly trash the people who enable the program to exist it seems.