forums

A word on infrastructure

OriginalCanesCanesCanes said:
Apparently, you’re unwilling to have an adult discussion, but I get your unwillingness to have this mature discussion.

I mean you can’t even defend your original premise coherently.

Rather than defending your premise in a logical and fact based manner, you are resorting to trite and immature ad-hominem attacks, since you have nothing to provide.

I mean you can’t even delineate how we somehow approach Alabama’s infrastructure. That was your original premise after all.

But go ahead keep ****ing in the wind, instead of discussing some actual possible solutions that are feasible.
Click to expand...
lmao.

you claim to know and insult the experience or success of people you don’t know, but i can’t do adult discussions.

turns out i can, just not apparently with you. that’s okay.
 
Advertisement
Consigliere said:
Like I said, I am not concerned with Clemson and Bama. I am not concerned with the resources they have. I am not concerned with the disparity.

My first and real concern is fixing the primary issue. You know, I know, people who are capable of logical and rational thought know, that that we have a bunch of potatoes running athletics. It doesn't matter what we spend, how much talent we have or who our competition is yearly, because we constantly fail to hit low bars. We can't overcome the weak Coastal. We can't overcome the chitty ACC (sans Clemson).

This is why I am not concerned with teams we don't play yearly. I am not concerned with what Bama and Clemson spends/spent.

If we were a team that was constantly finishing 10-2 or 11-1 (during the regular season), wining the coastal, making the ACCCG and then losing to Clemson...I would be concerned about the tremendous gap in resources. Until that time, we should be able to hit these very attainable goals.

Please note: My bar isn't winning the Coastal. I want more. Much more. Also, I am not saying your point isn't a concern. I am just concerned with the things we actually can EASILY fix NOW.
Click to expand...
Not sure if we're talking by each other.

Yes we need to fix the leadership here. But we're attempting to drive a go-card around a race track at this point. Better driver would help for sure, but the first thing a better driver is going to do is pull into the pit and ask for an actual car with an internal combustion engine. We can talk about what vehicle is needed, what engine, axle, whatever analogy you like, and agree a better driver is needed as well.

Bottom line is our issues aren't 'just' head coach or ad, or culture or recruiting or evals or scheme or game plan. People talk facilities. I don't. They're the least of our issues. A thorough approach to evals, development and game planning would sure help.
 
Consigliere said:
We have a different opinion on what is the most important and first issue to fix.
Click to expand...
Not sure. First is irrelevant to a discussion board. We don't control either decision. I'd change ADs immediately. Not my choice.

I'm discussing what needs fixing. If you think it's pointless to discuss one thing until the other thing is fixed, then you're being pretty linear. Helps to think further down the road, IMO.
 
Ethnicsands said:
Not sure. First is irrelevant to a discussion board. We don't control either decision. I'd change ADs immediately. Not my choice.

I'm discussing what needs fixing. If you think it's pointless to discuss one thing until the other thing is fixed, then you're being pretty linear. Helps to think further down the road, IMO.
Click to expand...

And the right AD with the right vision/process may lead to things like your suggesting (e.g. Danny White).
 
Advertisement
Ethnicsands said:
Plenty of folks myself included been talking about we lack infrastructure and Alabama’s got it, also Clemson and OSU.

I thought it merits clarification and discussion.

When I say that, I am not talking about locker rooms or weight rooms or practice facilities or stadiums. I am not talking about capex almost at all.

To me, infrastructure is Alabama’s investment in people, processes and systems to support recruiting evaluations, player development, data analytics, quality control and game planning. These areas change the game for their coaches. Combined with the right coaches, culture and talent, the results are impressive.

This type of infrastructure is doable for UM. It’s not cheap and systems cost something but in this cloud world not a lot. Coaches aside, we probably need to spend $4-5 mm more on infrastructure to be serious. A serious staff is probably another 3-4 mm. If we spent that, we should be able to have a top 5 team.
Click to expand...

It all starts at the top my brother, and it's the same message I've been preaching on these boards for close to two decades.

1) We have a BOT comprised of about 85-90% of participants who don't even know what a football looks like and are completely apathetic to the program.
2) We have an underqualified un-athletic director manning the program.

Point #2 is a symptom of the disease that is point #1. Both of these points feed the larger culture program you touched on.
 
Jedi Master Cane said:
It all starts at the top my brother, and it's the same message I've been preaching on these boards for close to two decades.

1) We have a BOT comprised of about 85-90% of participants who don't even know what a football looks like and are completely apathetic to the program.
2) We have an underqualified un-athletic director manning the program.

Point #2 is a symptom of the disease that is point #1. Both of these points feed the larger culture program you touched
Click to expand...



Where do you place “fans“ openly rooting for their own team to lose?
 
Jedi Master Cane said:
It all starts at the top my brother, and it's the same message I've been preaching on these boards for close to two decades.

1) We have a BOT comprised of about 85-90% of participants who don't even know what a football looks like and are completely apathetic to the program.
2) We have an underqualified un-athletic director manning the program.

Point #2 is a symptom of the disease that is point #1. Both of these points feed the larger culture program you touched on.
Click to expand...

If we hired the Admiral, instead of our current POS President, I have a feeling he would have installed accountability in athletics.
 
Ethnicsands said:
Not sure if we're talking by each other.

Yes we need to fix the leadership here. But we're attempting to drive a go-card around a race track at this point. Better driver would help for sure, but the first thing a better driver is going to do is pull into the pit and ask for an actual car with an internal combustion engine. We can talk about what vehicle is needed, what engine, axle, whatever analogy you like, and agree a better driver is needed as well.

Bottom line is our issues aren't 'just' head coach or ad, or culture or recruiting or evals or scheme or game plan. People talk facilities. I don't. They're the least of our issues. A thorough approach to evals, development and game planning would sure help.
Click to expand...
We need a fix I agree.
But throwing money on more analysis would not do a **** thing UNLESS the results are used by the Coaches and Staff.

Ed Reed sits there with a drawerful of data and plays.................. and No one on D even asks his opinion (supposedly Banda because he disagrees), but Banda wears the mantle of Coach, and Ed does not, soooooooooooo nothing is done, and it is NEVER used or applied.

That is B/S and we know it.

The only positive result we can wish or even hope for, is that everyone from Manny down, is ON the same **** page and not playing territorial protection.
The Tide has so many GA's and analysts that Saban may walk by them in the hallways and not even know their names or what the **** they do.
He just wants analysis that he can use and apply.
Apply to WIN because everyone is Laser focused on W's.
 
Advertisement
OriginalCanesCanesCanes said:
Apparently you don’t have much real world experience and/or success.

You are also conflating my asymmetrical remark with field tactics, that is not what I’m saying. I’m saying we succeed by doing it a different way - not the same way.

Of course we need better coaching and preparation, but that all goes together. Any idiot knows that.

We can’t be in Alabama because, we don’t have the resources.

Your original premise is about making our infrastructure similar to Alabama’s, and I defy that premise. We do not have the monetary resources to do that.

We do have the resources to hire better coaches, and improve the infrastructure to make it more efficient. Not make it bigger.

We don’t have those resources and we never will, because we don’t have the booster or fan base that they do, and that’s what pays for it. But we will never have armies of analysts or anywhere near the infrastructure that Alabama does.

That’s how wrong you are.

We don’t have to be a mini version of Alabama, we have to be the best version of a small guerrilla school with asymmetrical tactics. We haven’t done that well yet, but that is the goal
Click to expand...
Great post !!
 
OriginalCanesCanesCanes said:
Apparently, you’re unwilling to have an adult discussion, but I get your unwillingness to have this mature discussion.

I mean you can’t even defend your original premise coherently.

Rather than defending your premise in a logical and fact based manner, you are resorting to trite and immature ad-hominem attacks, since you have nothing to provide.

I mean you can’t even delineate how we somehow approach Alabama’s infrastructure. That was your original premise after all.

But go ahead keep ****ing in the wind, instead of discussing some actual possible solutions that are feasible.
Click to expand...
Another great post !
 
Consigliere said:
Like I said, I am not concerned with Clemson and Bama. I am not concerned with the resources they have. I am not concerned with the disparity.

My first and real concern is fixing the primary issue. You know, I know, people who are capable of logical and rational thought know, that that we have a bunch of potatoes running athletics. It doesn't matter what we spend, how much talent we have or who our competition is yearly, because we constantly fail to hit low bars. We can't overcome the weak Coastal. We can't overcome the chitty ACC (sans Clemson).

This is why I am not concerned with teams we don't play yearly. I am not concerned with what Bama and Clemson spends/spent.

If we were a team that was constantly finishing 10-2 or 11-1 (during the regular season), wining the coastal, making the ACCCG and then losing to Clemson...I would be concerned about the tremendous gap in resources. Until that time, we should be able to hit these very attainable goals.

Please note: My bar isn't winning the Coastal. I want more. Much more. Also, I am not saying your point isn't a concern. I am just concerned with the things we actually can EASILY fix NOW.
Click to expand...

This is correct. We can’t make that leap until we win consistently in the coastal, beat the teams that were supposed to beat, and contend for the ACC championship, instead of constantly being shut out of it every year because of ridiculous losses.
 
OriginalCanesCanesCanes said:
This is correct. We can’t make that leap until we win consistently in the coastal, beat the teams that were supposed to beat, and contend for the ACC championship, instead of constantly being shut out of it every year because of ridiculous losses.
Click to expand...


I am not concerned with that right now (e.g. Bama and Clemson). I am concerned with cancer. We have a cancer at UM. A cancer that is self-inflicted. A cancer that is worse than anything that the NCAA could punish us with. That self-inflicted cancer is Blake James and our BOTs. As long as we continue under this “process”...all the resources don’t really matter. We can’t make the “leap” because of them.

These kids deserve better. They deserve a real AD. They deserve a competent AD with passion and autonomy. They deserve leadership. They deserve accountability. We deserve Danny White and he is a lot cheaper than the $4MM we wasted paying for the right to promote our DC from a failed regime.
 
Advertisement
Consigliere said:
I am not concerned with that right now (e.g. Bama and Clemson). I am concerned with cancer. We have a cancer at UM. A cancer that is self-inflicted. A cancer that is worse than anything that the NCAA could punish us with. That self-inflicted cancer is Blake James and our BOTs. As long as we continue under this “process”...all the resources don’t really matter. We can’t make the “leap” because of them.

These kids deserve better. They deserve a real AD. They deserve a competent AD with passion and autonomy. They deserve leadership. They deserve accountability. We deserve Danny White and he is a lot cheaper than the $4MM we wasted paying for the right to promote our DC from a failed regime.
Click to expand...

AD I agree with.

BOTs are never in play. That’s not how it works. An entire university is their responsibility. Only a few care or are involved in, or have input, regarding football decision making. Why worry about some people whose major concern is the medical school, or other areas they have greater interest in?

You should know most of them don’t give a shlt about football, and defer to a very small clique. So most of these members or not even important with respect to football. They have no say and no standing. The only BOT members that we need to be concerned about are the ones that carry weight regarding football, and that’s just a very small handful
 
OriginalCanesCanesCanes said:
BOTs are never in play. That’s not how it works. An entire university is their responsibility. Only a few care or are involved in its decision making

You should kniw most of them don’t give a shlt about football, and defer to a very small clique. The only BOT members that we need to be concerned about are the ones that carry weight regarding football, and that’s just a very small handful
Click to expand...

I don’t think you read my post. Read about changing the process.
 
Advertisement
Consigliere said:
I don’t think you read my post. Read about changing the process.
Click to expand...

So if you’re going to change the process, you have to address it correctly, and talking about the BOT as a monolith, doesn’t address the problem. You have to get to the small number (around 5 or so) of BOT members who have pull and can influence decisions,. Some of whom, quite frankly, are very unhappy right now. From what I’ve been told.

This is like where a committee makes product purchase or formulary decisions, and you’re an outside vendor. You have to find who are the decision-makers on that committee, and focus on them. They carry everybody else with them. These are the kinds of specifics that need to be talked about.

Otherwise it’s just academic general discussions that don’t lead anywhere.
 
OriginalCanesCanesCanes said:
So if you’re going to change the process, you have to address it correctly, and talking about the BOT as a monolith, doesn’t address the problem. You have to get to the small number (around 5 or so) of BOT members who have pull and can influence decisions,. Some of whom, quite frankly, are very unhappy right now. From what I’ve been told.

This is like where a committee makes product purchase or formulary decisions, and you’re an outside vendor. You have to find who are the decision-makers on that committee, and focus on them. They carry everybody else with them. These are the kinds of specifics that need to be talked about.

Otherwise it’s just academic general discussions that don’t lead anywhere.
Click to expand...

You’re still missing the point. Please ask if you want me to clarify. Also your “source” may not be informed of the problem. Not saying your “source” isn’t legit, I am just saying they may be incorrect about the problem.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top