<p>How much of the last discussion is based on knowledge, and how much on speculation? There seems to be a tendency to demonize Zimmer somewhat. Apart from his few years at Brown, he has been part of the Chicago faculty for decades. I don’t have any sense that he is trying to turn Chicago into some generic brand, or that he gives a hoot what its USNWR ranking is. I do have the sense that he wants the University to compete straight up with its strongest competitors at every level, and I applaud that. I also have the sense that he is more or less in tune with the faculty former Young Turks (including John Boyer) who have been remaking the College for the past 20 years, quite successfully so far, and, more, that he doesn’t see the College as necessarily the focus of his attention.</p>
<p>So, while I certainly notice the resignations of Behnke and O’Neill, and wonder whether some conflict with Zimmer was involved, all I really have is the barest and weakest of circumstantial evidence for that. It’s not as if Behnke and O’Neill haven’t been moving the College in the general direction Zimmer (and others) seem to want, and pretty well, too. It’s not as if Chicago doesn’t have great marketing materials, and spread them around liberally, without losing much of its unique character. I think it would be very hard to conclude that Behnke and O’Neill haven’t done an excellent job, or to predict that their successor(s) will be a clear improvement, from Zimmer’s point of view or anyone else’s.</p>
<p>Is it possible that Behnke really IS leaving for personal/burn out reasons? And that O’Neill has resigned because the University is not going to have two college admissions deans going forward, and a decision had been made that O’Neill should not have the one job? (There must be some significant shortcoming in his abilities, or else the University would never have gone to the double-dean structure in the first place, however seamlessly it has appeared to work.)</p>