Reusse: 1500ESPN- 2010 vs 2011 Start

[EG#9]

Mason would have had continuity with the players, system, and staff. Shane Potter likely wouldn't have been leading South Dakota over us. Tommy Becker likely would have been leading St. Thomas to a re-birth. We may have not been a bowl team, but we would have continued a program.

Speculation is great. Would the Columbus boys all have gotten in trouble and kicked out of school if not for the coaching change? We'll never know.

This is just idiotic, your own speculation is about two players who could not even get a D-1 scholarship after leaving Minnesota? Then you claim the players might not have gotten in trouble if Mason was the coach? Deal with facts. The facts clearly show a downward trend in the program and a complete lack of talent on the roster. None of what you wrote made any sense at all.

 

[GreasyGopher]

This is the first idiot that I have ever read that really means winning could be bad. You can not teach people how to win by getting to know losing. This concept is wrong on so many levels it demands an explanation by the writer. Give it to me. Why should winning not be part of the formula for future success? Since when in the planning cycle does the strategic plan not get modeled to the current situation? Every week they game plan because each opposing team brings a different set of problems that the "plan" may or may not be able to stop. So, the sytems expexts adjustments. How is that leaving the plan behind? Why would attempting to win not be part of the plan? Have you read and analyzed what you have written? Could you possibly fallen into a trap of writing diametrically opposed ideas in the same sentence. The point of the football season is not to be working toward next season. It is to finish this season with this team with the greatest success you can muster. At least 20% of the team will be gone and a new set of players joining the team. Before they step on the field, the plan may have to be adjusted to accommodate the new skill set, or it is not a plan at all. A plan always takes into consideration the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats to the team. Or it is junk. You can not predict who you will have on the team or the ability of the team before it arrives in spring and fall. Rebuilding happens during the season. It doesn't happen at any other point in history. The theory of the plan is only as good as its current execution.

I absolutely do not think losing is a good thing and I never said that.

Let's say your building a house, would you rather have the contractor build a house that is structurally sound from the ground up or would you want on that was throw together as quickly as possible and every shortcut imaginable.

Kill is in the process of constructing a structurally sound house that should stand the test of time. That doesn't happen overnight.

I guess the overall point of my post was that I don't want to see Kill sacrifice his long term vision for the program for short term success based on smoke and mirrors.

 

[Oneoldgopher]

I absolutely do not think losing is a good thing and I never said that.

Let's say your building a house, would you rather have the contractor build a house that is structurally sound from the ground up or would you want on that was throw together as quickly as possible and every shortcut imaginable.

Kill is in the process of constructing a structurally sound house that should stand the test of time. That doesn't happen overnight.

I guess the overall point of my post was that I don't want to see Kill sacrifice his long term vision for the program for short term success based on smoke and mirrors.

I love the house analogy. Because you are essentially correct that a house needs a solid foundation. However, you don't need a full basement to build a great house. That corner can be cut out entirely. Do I need to raise other analogous house references to show you that quality does not have to be sacrificed in the short term.

 

[thailleagle]

We're still talking about Mason? In 2011? Really?