^ Princeton routinely loses bidding wars. They are the most poached department. So, it sounds to me like Chicago didn't make the effort to give Monk's partner a job or whatever because of the freeze or simply because they are that dysfunctional.
Yeah, this whole notion that Princeton and Harvard don't lose bidding wars is silly. Of course they do. Princeont has lost about half their faculty to Duke, NYU, Harvard, Columbia, UCSB, etc. Harvard has lost wanted hires to Arizona (Fiel) and NYU (Tadory). Harvard just lost Meadow to Columbia. Garip might leave for Cornell. And Killellewald could also leave to three other departments. If Chicago went through the trouble of giving Monk an endowed chair I don't buy the argument that they would not give his partner a position to make him stay. The location at Princeton isn't an improvement. It looks like Monk actually left because he did not like the department (after all he left before being a year there). That doesn't bode well for Chicago's future, which already looked pretty dim before his departure.
Agreed. Something major must have gone down at Chicago for Monk to leave so soon. Junior people don't just leave tenure-track jobs before even being there a year.
I love this vision of successful sociologists offering themselves up as prizes to be won in a competitive bidding process. The whole thing is made so melodramatic here. If you've been intimately involved in senior recruitment you know that the compensation gets largely neutralized (unless one of the institutions is truly resource poor, e.g., Wisconsin), there are norms against repeatedly going back and forth (you can iterate once, maybe twice, each direction), and then candidates go where they want to be based on other preferences (geography, family, departmental collegiality, etc.). Whole thing is more Waltons than Dallas.