"Righteousness does not have to be popular. It just has to be righteous." -- Ben Shapiro
I applaud David Carducci for bringing to light the truth about Joel Nielsen on Flash Fanatics. Carducci understands the present malaise within the Kent State athletic department because he was the Director of New Media for Kent State from September 2012 – February 2018 until he decided to leave on his own accord. Certainly there are other people, other than myself, who agree with Carducci, but why do they choose to remain silent? Remaining silent in the face of unrighteousness is unrighteous regardless of what they want to believe.
Hopefully, Carducci's posts on Flash Fanatics, like the one below, will expose Nielsen for what he is and help bring about new leadership to the Kent State athletic department.
"I can see why you and others may consider Nielsen's tweeting habits to be no big deal. I come to it from a public relations/media perspective. As someone who holds a master's degree in PR from Kent State, I found it all troubling. The optics are awful. Nielsen is getting paid almost half a million dollars a year, and it doesn't strike him that he should probably show a little interest in KSU Golf if he's going to constantly share the good news of the Arkansas teams... It's especially thoughtless when they are playing in the same tournament. And if it bothers donors, and it does, that is a problem.
If you read the climate study commissioned by the university, you'll see that much of the assessment of Nielsen's performance is probably not an inaccurate, one-sided job assessment. The climate in the department is miserable and Nielsen is almost universally disliked.
People who are unappreciated, overworked and underpaid end up leaving or will not go that extra mile to do the best possible job. That is even more the case when the department "leader" is paid at a rate so significantly above the average of other athletic directors in the Mid-American Conference.
How much more could the marketing department accomplish and who could it hire if Nielsen was paid a reasonable salary and the extra $200,000 per year was targeted to marketing? The pay gap between Nielsen and the rest of the department is a problem.
I would also argue there have been few positive or sustained results during Nielsen's tenure. Sure, there are cases like the 2012 football season, which arrived thanks in large part to four future NFL players recruited by a coach who Nielsen let go. The program never built on that momentum. Quite simply, Kent State's athletic department is not in better shape than it was almost nine years ago when Nielsen took over.
Here are some examples I believe prove the point:
1. All four "priority" sports (Men's and women's basketball, football, and volleyball) have worse records in Nielsen's nine years than they did in the last nine year's under Laing Kennedy. That's a pretty big sample size.
2. After nine years, just about every program is down. The only teams that have shown some improvement during Nielsen's tenure are women's soccer and indoor women's track. Every other team has a worse regular-season combined with either fewer or an equal number of championships than it did in the last nine years under Kennedy.
3. Coaches and staff are miserable. Just look at the results of KSU's climate study, where results in athletics recored "statistically significant" lower responses than any other department on campus. As I've mentioned before, coaches share the story of Nielsen telling them "I don't care about department morale. I only answer to one person," meaning the KSU president who can give him an extension. His motto regarding staff has long been "you are replaceable." Say that enough, or have it repeated enough by deputies who are even embarrassed to say it, and loyalty withers. Nielsen is the living example of the old saying "a leader with no followers is just a guy out for a walk."
To anyone reading this who knows someone who works in the Kent State Athletic Department, I urge you to ask them about their feelings towards Nielsen and the job he has done.
4. Poor treatment of women is especially upsetting for a department run by a father of three daughters. It reached a point where a coach finally felt it necessary to file a federal complaint with the EEOC. The firing of Janet Kittell (under the guise of a retirement that was forced) was particularly disgusting. One of the reasons I soured on Nielsen and eventually lost all respect for him is his handling of a sexual harassment case of a member of his senior staff by a fellow member of senior staff. After an investigation found the accused guilty of sexual harassment, Nielsen told the accuser that she should leave if she is not happy at KSU, and she's just going to have to find a way to work with her harasser. I can't imagine he would have kept his job if this investigation took place during today's climate.
By the way, one longstanding rumor mentioned in a quote by a staff member interviewed in the above sexual harassment case suggests the department's inability under Nielsen to protect its own female student-athletes from being inappropriately ogled by the accused senior staff member. It's an alarming read. That senior staff member was finally let go just this past summer, a few days after Nielsen eliminated the position of Kittell.
5. More proof of Nielsen's poor track record with women on his staff is an F rating in a
recent study by the University of Minnesota on head coaches of women's collegiate teams. Using their formula, only 7 of the nation's 349 Division I schools scored worse than Kent State. Not good nine years into an athletic director's administration.
6. Donors are becoming fed up with Nielsen. I personally know donors who have decided to pull their money and/or no longer attend games for which they have tickets. Membership in the NADC, the leadership advisory organization supporting the Department of Intercollegiate Athletics at Kent State University, is sitting half full since the summer when multiple board members decided they had had enough.
7. Three words: The Game Plan. Laughable. When was the last time anybody heard about The Game Plan? It disappeared without a whisper! I wonder if it is still even an internal joke.
Here's the long-forgotten "scorecard."
I could go on and on. As was mentioned earlier in this thread, even giving credit to the good things that have happened under Nielsen's watch, the ROI on his salary simply isn't there. There is no way Kent State can justify continuing to pay any athletic director $452,000 per year. Is it six MAC athletic directors or assistant directors who have moved up to Power 5 jobs during Nielsen's time at KSU? It might be more. There's a reason Nielsen hasn't had a sniff.
I was in a senior staff meeting with Nielsen when he talked about the shelf life of presidents and athletic directors at Division I schools. Nielsen has lasted beyond that point.
Like him or not, it's time for Kent State Athletics to go in a different direction. I can't imagine a valid alternate argument. KSU Athletics has stagnated while dumping too much money into Nielsen's banking account. It's time to see if the Golden Flashes can find new life behind some new ideas by new leadership.
...And I promise you, when that day comes, there will be a party at the M.A.C. Center unlike any it has ever seen.
Based on my experience having worked at Kent State, the truth is actually far worse than what people on this board could possibly know. People are afraid to speak up. The climate study confirms that. According to staff, ever since the summer when the university ordered athletics to address some of the major problems raised by the climate study, Nielsen has turned on the charm and started an open-door policy in his brand new office. The chameleon approach does not appear to be changing many minds. After nine years of saying his staff is replaceable and he only answers to the president, most people at Kent State know who Nielsen really is."
Note: Since Carducci posted this on Flash Fanatics, only one person has responded to it. I understand Flash Fanatics has never been a bastion of truth and enlightenment, but even I am surprised with the limited response he has had on such an important topic as this.
