Jump to content
  • Join Today

    Join today and enjoy site benefits and fewer ads presented

  • Members do not see this ad. Join today.

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, puc86 said:

why learn to eat cilantro if it makes you vomit if there are plenty of other foods that aren’t vomit inducing?

Whoa.....Leave cilantro out of this. That stuff makes or breaks carne asada tacos. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Members do not see this ad, Register
  • Replies 25
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Now that the board has had a chance to do its meltdown and appropriate exaggerations and overreactions, let us take a more serious look at how the rebuild is going. Remember that a rebuild follows spe

Of all the adjectives I can think of to describe you, whimsical is not among them ....

Major factor, IMO, covid. 

I can agree with this part, as it breaks everything it touches 

3 minutes ago, BrassBulls12 said:

 That stuff makes or breaks carne asada tacos. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, puc86 said:

What if there are more examples? Would they all be because of unique situations? And if so why do we not aim to make our situation more unique instead of the path that typically leads to more terming than turnaround? If the whole team needs to be your players just to get back to where the team should have been when you got here the only thing you are building to is a bad path that’s ceiling is mediocrity. Positive change is possible day one in any situation and the quicker you can implement it the faster the path to success. There is nothing that says year one you have to fail, year two you get back to where you started and year three you get to finally break even and year four having recruited every single person left on the roster you can finally demonstrate the reason you were hired. The entire “process” idea is a fairy tale people tell in order to feel better about sustained failure and it flys in the face of facts and reason.

There are always examples of quick turnarounds. USF could quickly turnaround if the coaching staff went out a recruited a lot of JUCO players, they have good talent to start with, and the players buy into the system immediately. Under that way your will have quick success for three years (long enough for the coach to get a contract with a high- paying school). The coach that follows up has nothing to build on so the program sinks back into mediocrity (at best).  

If you don't have those three items it takes more time. The rebuild path listed is not built out of some fantasy. This is how programs at Oklahoma State (under Gundy), Minnesota (under Fleck), Virginia Tech (under Beamer), Florida State (under Bowden), Florida (under Hall), Miami and Louisville (under Schnellenberger, sp.?) were built. Indeed, USF under Taggart was rebuilt this way. Taggart's first year the team sucked. The second year it was improved but there was still a lot of losses. Third year began rough but showed results. It wasn't until the fourth year that USF was a conference title contender.

So no, process is not a fairy tale. It is a series of objectives that has been proven to work. Why do you think that everyone says to wait until the third year? The third year is the one that tells you if you are on the right track. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, puc86 said:

What if there are more examples? Would they all be because of unique situations? And if so why do we not aim to make our situation more unique instead of the path that typically leads to more terming than turnaround? If the whole team needs to be your players just to get back to where the team should have been when you got here the only thing you are building to is a bad path that’s ceiling is mediocrity. Positive change is possible day one in any situation and the quicker you can implement it the faster the path to success. There is nothing that says year one you have to fail, year two you get back to where you started and year three you get to finally break even and year four having recruited every single person left on the roster you can finally demonstrate the reason you were hired. The entire “process” idea is a fairy tale people tell in order to feel better about sustained failure and it flys in the face of facts and reason.

Glass half empty ↑   Glass half full ↓

1 hour ago, Triple B said:

What also flies in the face of facts and reason is not acknowledging that this season is like no other in the modern history of college football ...

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Buller64 said:

There are always examples of quick turnarounds. USF could quickly turnaround if the coaching staff went out a recruited a lot of JUCO players, they have good talent to start with, and the players buy into the system immediately. Under that way your will have quick success for three years (long enough for the coach to get a contract with a high- paying school). The coach that follows up has nothing to build on so the program sinks back into mediocrity (at best).  

If you don't have those three items it takes more time. The rebuild path listed is not built out of some fantasy. This is how programs at Oklahoma State (under Gundy), Minnesota (under Fleck), Virginia Tech (under Beamer), Florida State (under Bowden), Florida (under Hall), Miami and Louisville (under Schnellenberger, sp.?) were built. Indeed, USF under Taggart was rebuilt this way. Taggart's first year the team sucked. The second year it was improved but there was still a lot of losses. Third year began rough but showed results. It wasn't until the fourth year that USF was a conference title contender.

So no, process is not a fairy tale. It is a series of objectives that has been proven to work. Why do you think that everyone says to wait until the third year? The third year is the one that tells you if you are on the right track. 

Because you are looking at the extreme examples of where years of failure somehow led to success when most typically it leads to you being fired and the cycle starting again. Also the example of CWT ignores the fact that he came in determined to run a Harbaugh style West Coast Offense that contributed to his failures and if not for for pivoting he would have continued to fail and would have joined the masses of coaches that’s plan to fail for three years leads to their firing. Losing to McNeese wasn’t a necessary component of rebuilding it was part of the slew of mistakes that CWT made in the rebuild process that could have and should have been avoided.

3 minutes ago, BDYZR said:

Glass half empty ↑   Glass half full ↓

 

I’m not completely convinced that there is a glass

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Members do not see this ad, Register


×
×
  • Create New...

It appears you are using ad blocking tools.  This site is supported through ads.  Please disable in order to enjoy full access to The Bulls Pen.