I'm not offended, you're all good. I personally think that Carter can be a capable OSU President, but that I understand why some academics would flag his lack of a PhD as an issue - it's a question worth asking. For example, Carter's never been in charge of a research-heavy university. While at the Naval Academy, he presided over an academy of 600 students (no significant research presence) and, while he was the president of the entire University of Nebraska system, each campus of the Nebraska system is led by their own chancellor. That isn't the case at OSU.
Sounds like you have a few degrees but I don't know how familiar you are or not with university governance. I'm just trying to say that, within academic circles, the PhD is both (a) letters after a name and (b) an indicator of ones pursuit of research and learning. In some ways, PhDs work a lot like the trades - they are apprenticeship programs for working under a recognized master, and going through that process indicates that other recognized masters of the trade vetted and approved of your entry into that trade. Conversely, a Bachelor's works like taking a workshop under a master tradesmen - you've learned some things but that learning was distilled and you haven't practiced independent work to a level that has been vetted and approved by masters (this is why there's honorary doctorates, which highlight that "outside practice" has been considered and recognized).
Many folks have a simplified view of how universities are actually governed (folks tend to think of universities as a college, when they're actually a set of more-or-less affiliated colleges, institutes, centers, schools, departments, etc. - each has different degrees of autonomy). OSU is a research-focused university - the research budget is larger than student tuition (and much of that tuition is for professional or research-level degrees in the first place). University research is largely funded, led, and pursued by doctoral-level faculty and staff (PhDs or relevant doctorate-level degrees in their field, like MDs, DVMs, JDs, etc.).
Outside of the Board, Provost, and Chancellors, the university will be governed and administered predominately (but not exclusively) by doctoral-level faculty at most levels (Faculty Senate, Department Chairs, School or College Deans, and other internal admin, like Vice-Presidents, etc.). Further, the shared governance structure of the university will ensure that Carter (or his VP's) will have to deal with long-term, tenured professional academics (PhDs, MDs, DVMs, JDs, etc.) to get much of anything approved and done. Many folks involved will expect that their University President innately understands and respects their professional opportunities, interests, and issues - having a doctorate only serves to imply that they do (but it's only an indicator).
You were confused why folks would question Carter's lack of PhD credentials. To me, the issue is the same as why hospital doctors would be concerned that a businessman is running and overseeing their hospital. The businessman might "get it" already through their outside experience, but their job depends on convincing those doctors of that. In the university example, only 6 of the 950 university presidents hold only a B.S. degree (and none of OSU peer institutions). So Carter is certainly an outside the box hire. Doesn't mean he can't succeed, but I get why folks would ask the question.
*edit 5 minutes later* back to Bjork? haha.
