• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your WyoNation.com experience today!

MW Media Days

bsu is a unicorn among all G5. They grew out of the fcs in the WAC with success in that era which set them up for this era. They had a bulldog administration that helped facilitate that. I'm not sure bsu could replicate bsu if they were starting in this era. In other words, they are an outlier which is foolish to draw any real comparison to. The remainder of the mwc programs, however, are not. You could argue the cali schools are in a recruiting hotbed for football, and I suppose that is another variable. usu challenging in football demonstrates that hurdle is not insurmountable. You are the one that is one-tracked mind. You sound like the people screaming about an air-raid offense when most people were just hoping for a functional passing game.

For any given year, there will be several challenges. Over nearly a quarter of a century, however, those challenges can be overcome and should be overcome more consistently than WYO has done. Holding those challenges as the sole reasons for lack of success while holding nothing/nobody else accountable is accepting of mediocrity.

Have you read the ad strategic plan? What, pages of bs? Unless there is a more detailed document, there were no key performance indicators, no measurables, nothing that someone could be held accountable for. Just a bunch of "goals". Has the media or anyone asked how the ad has addressed the deficiencies identified by the Sternberg Report? Nope, nada. Why? Because we accept mediocrity. Has anyone asked why the department isn't as successful as somewhere like unm--very much an attainable goal? Nope.

Now your turn, if our performance matches sjsu and sjsu can field 17 teams, what would it hurt to give the students and taxpayers a break?
So BSU enjoys some sort of unique advantage that other schools can't hope to replicate that is based on the time and place of what they accomplished in the FCS and WAC...This is something we agree on. Would you say there is version of this unique advantage that could be categorized as a unique disadvantage? Just on it's face...the unique advantage that BSU enjoys over the rest of the MWC is a unique disadvantage for those schools relative to BSU. It follows that there would be versions of this along many axes that would affect a different number of schools differently. I appreciate the attempt to hand-wave and try to get me to ignore the fact that there are forces that keep Wyoming from competing at BSU's level beyond what is in control of anybody in Laramie....but the fact that you admit the existence of that ceiling at least lets me know you are not a lunatic.

The observation that Wyoming is one of the least competitive if not the least competitive school in the MWC is problematic. There is something in your single track focus on "accepting mediocrity" that I think would bear some fruit if it were to change at UW. The disagreement we have here is a matter of degree though. I do not believe that change alone is keeping us from being BSU-lite in the MWC, would you agree with that? I agree that the strategic plan is a load of horse-leavings. Goals and accountability for not meeting them would be fantastic. The problem is that the goals that are attainable may be far lower than you and I are willing to admit...that is what i'm depressed about. If the UW ad and prez started ranting and raving tomorrow about goals and consequences for not achieving them....and then followed through over the next couple years by firing everybody that can't win a championship or land top research dollars...or whatever other pipe dream you might have for UW, I would predict a exodus of the best people. It would happen involuntarily at first and then the rest would see the writing on the wall and leave. It must be done with clear eyes that acknowledge the issues that are unique to Wyoming. Out of curiosity..I did a quick check online on population growth in the county's that MWC schools are based in. University of Wyoming is dead last and it's not close. That stagnation alone is a giant challenge to UW. It's located in an economically stagnant place. That matters and nobody at UW can do a damn thing about it. I think you believe that just because I notice that, I'm shrugging my shoulders and saying..oh well!...I am not. We should expect better....but just saying "don't accept mediocrity" does nothing.

The frustration at the core of this discussion is that you seem to be blind to my statements of concern about budgets and what I said about holding UW administration to account. I have repeatedly said I share your concern about prudently withdrawing from the public purse...I have also said that there is a fair amount of complacency that should be rooted out...yet you still accuse me of having a one-track mind. It's no-win with you....I either focus on one thing and get accused of having a "one-track mind" or I consider multiple things and get told that I'm making it too complex.

To directly answer your final question...if nothing will change and we can spend some percentage less....then I say go for it. I think, given my previous comments, you should have been able to predict that. I am not in favor of going to FCS or whatever. As Dylan Thomas said, UW should "not go gentle into that good night".
 
. The disagreement we have here is a matter of degree though. I do not believe that change alone is keeping us from being BSU-lite in the MWC, would you agree with that?
How should I know. We haven't seen change in nearly a quarter of a century at the top of the ad. What's the definition of bsu-lite? Can we match bsu in most sports? Not out of the realm of possibility, imo. Football? I would say it depends on your definition of byu-lite. Championships every year? Likely not. Championships every 4 or 5 years, maybe.

Our ad and president didn't want metrics in strategic plan because they have the luxury of not being held accountable to achieve those metrics. That is part of the culture accepting of mediocrity.

My point about budgets is that, if the ad and president cannot outline clear obtainable metrics that we are working for and they are held accountable for, student fees and taxpayer dollars should be mostly cut. Asking for accountability after nearly 25 years isn't exactly advocating for a hire and fire culture. You act like administration has little if any impact on success which is crazy, imo.
 
How should I know. We haven't seen change in nearly a quarter of a century at the top of the ad. What's the definition of bsu-lite? Can we match bsu in most sports? Not out of the realm of possibility, imo. Football? I would say it depends on your definition of byu-lite. Championships every year? Likely not. Championships every 4 or 5 years, maybe.

Our ad and president didn't want metrics in strategic plan because they have the luxury of not being held accountable to achieve those metrics. That is part of the culture accepting of mediocrity.

My point about budgets is that, if the ad and president cannot outline clear obtainable metrics that we are working for and they are held accountable for, student fees and taxpayer dollars should be mostly cut. Asking for accountability after nearly 25 years isn't exactly advocating for a hire and fire culture. You act like administration has little if any impact on success which is crazy, imo.
Your explanation of why there is no metrics is just one of plenty of reasons. You have zero insight into the motivational states of UW administration. For instance, the constraints of a stagnant economic situation seem perfectly plausible as an explanation of admin trying to not get over their skis with unattainable goals. There is not a line of the best and brightest trying to beat down the door and coach/teach/administrate at UW right now. If the result of a culture of accountability does not result in firing those who don't meet the goals...that confuses me. What is the consequence for not meeting goals? Take it to the top...last 20+ years have been utterly forgettable. Let's say you get what you want and they dust off the Sternberg report and they define what success looks like, when the administration inevitably falls short, fire the Pres whose replacement fires the AD. Wash, rinse and repeat. That is not an unlikely scenario....It's not crazy to have that concern even if I would like to see increased accountability. I detect no similar concern from you...it's all roses if they just define metrics for success and increase accountability. That can be done poorly just as well as anything else can.

Your understanding of what I "act like" has no bearing on what I've written. I have over and over said it would be better if UW had a top flight administration.

Maybe I'm straining at a gnat with you but it just seems like there is a group of people who share in your opinions that there is rampant rottenness in the people running things at UW. It's like it's easier to blame the people for the poor results than it is to look directly into the abyss of what Wyoming faces as a state and a University. Some of the things that make Wyoming "Wyoming" are definitely charming but need to go away and I think people would rather just blame the people than countenance becoming like other places.
 
Your explanation of why there is no metrics is just one of plenty of reasons. You have zero insight into the motivational states of UW administration. For instance, the constraints of a stagnant economic situation seem perfectly plausible as an explanation of admin trying to not get over their skis with unattainable goals. There is not a line of the best and brightest trying to beat down the door and coach/teach/administrate at UW right now. If the result of a culture of accountability does not result in firing those who don't meet the goals...that confuses me. What is the consequence for not meeting goals? Take it to the top...last 20+ years have been utterly forgettable. Let's say you get what you want and they dust off the Sternberg report and they define what success looks like, when the administration inevitably falls short, fire the Pres whose replacement fires the AD. Wash, rinse and repeat. That is not an unlikely scenario....It's not crazy to have that concern even if I would like to see increased accountability. I detect no similar concern from you...it's all roses if they just define metrics for success and increase accountability. That can be done poorly just as well as anything else can.

Your understanding of what I "act like" has no bearing on what I've written. I have over and over said it would be better if UW had a top flight administration.

Maybe I'm straining at a gnat with you but it just seems like there is a group of people who share in your opinions that there is rampant rottenness in the people running things at UW. It's like it's easier to blame the people for the poor results than it is to look directly into the abyss of what Wyoming faces as a state and a University. Some of the things that make Wyoming "Wyoming" are definitely charming but need to go away and I think people would rather just blame the people than countenance becoming like other places.
Why? Our athletic budget isn't that bad. When any business or institution has no metrics in a strategic plan, the plan is unattainable. That's bad leadership. Who said they had to have unattainable metrics? They are writing the plan; the can put whatever metrics they feel they can achieve. They can ask if any of the Sternberg report recommendations were addressed, how they were addressed, and what were the results. If you recall there were 4 or 5 major recommendations to improve athletics (not define what success is). Sorry, that's not unreasonable for institutions outside of WYO.

Thinking what you have is the best you can get for fear of being worse in the event of change is almost by definition accepting of mediocrity.
 
Thinking what you have is the best you can get for fear of being worse in the event of change is almost by definition accepting of mediocrity.
Without somebody saying that...you don't get to claim that is what is going on. You may suspect it...but you have no proof that is what is happening. You speak with such certitude about the question of why the administration is doing what it is doing....and you bristle at the very thought of the things I describe mattering. Why the pressure that direction?

And again...we agree on the other stuff. You are right ... they don't have to be unattainable. If you make an error in setting the metrics/goals and demanding accountability...you have still made an error the consequences of which may be worse than the status quo. That is all I'm trying to get you to see....It's actually something I'm pretty sure you believe. I'm trying my best not to straw-man you .... I would appreciate the same.

Sadly...there is no game to attend right now where you and I can stand shoulder to shoulder and cheer on the brown and gold...we just have these topics to argue about. Thanks for the discussion...I really mean that.
 
Without somebody saying that...you don't get to claim that is what is going on. You may suspect it...but you have no proof that is what is happening. You speak with such certitude about the question of why the administration is doing what it is doing....and you bristle at the very thought of the things I describe mattering. Why the pressure that direction?

And again...we agree on the other stuff. You are right ... they don't have to be unattainable. If you make an error in setting the metrics/goals and demanding accountability...you have still made an error the consequences of which may be worse than the status quo. That is all I'm trying to get you to see....It's actually something I'm pretty sure you believe. I'm trying my best not to straw-man you .... I would appreciate the same.

Sadly...there is no game to attend right now where you and I can stand shoulder to shoulder and cheer on the brown and gold...we just have these topics to argue about. Thanks for the discussion...I really mean that.
You're off your game. You should at least cite scientific literature that supports your concept of athletic success having little to do with the ad https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/MF-10-2023-0629/full/html

There's a paywall, but I've read that article. It raises several good issues which highlights the likely limitations at UW...player capital being a big one. Or point out how Burman has managed to eliminate ad debt since 2018 or...he has done some things well.

My "beef" is that it seems, especially at the MWC level, we could at least build pretty competitive teams in other sports. We do have above average facilities, a college-town vibe, low crime rates, etc. Perhaps there are other roles Mr. Burman could fill and give the department a shot of young enthusiasm.
 
You're off your game. You should at least cite scientific literature that supports your concept of athletic success having little to do with the ad https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/MF-10-2023-0629/full/html

There's a paywall, but I've read that article. It raises several good issues which highlights the likely limitations at UW...player capital being a big one. Or point out how Burman has managed to eliminate ad debt since 2018 or...he has done some things well.

My "beef" is that it seems, especially at the MWC level, we could at least build pretty competitive teams in other sports. We do have above average facilities, a college-town vibe, low crime rates, etc. Perhaps there are other roles Mr. Burman could fill and give the department a shot of young enthusiasm.
You have no Idea what my concept of athletic success is. You continue to use straw-man techniques and bad-faith characterizations of my positions. The only things you "disagree" with me about are positions I have not taken and motivations you would have no way to know if I have, as I have not shared them here. I have repeatedly pointed out the large common ground you and I share as it relates to this topic. For some reason, seemingly because I won't completely tar the administration with the appropriate level of moral condemnation you deem appropriate, every observation of other impediments to athletic success at UW is met with derision.

You make claims of people's motivations like they are bedrock provable facts. I'm fine if you want to speculate but don't get surprised when it gets' pointed out that it is just that.
 
You have no Idea what my concept of athletic success is. You continue to use straw-man techniques and bad-faith characterizations of my positions. The only things you "disagree" with me about are positions I have not taken and motivations you would have no way to know if I have, as I have not shared them here. I have repeatedly pointed out the large common ground you and I share as it relates to this topic. For some reason, seemingly because I won't completely tar the administration with the appropriate level of moral condemnation you deem appropriate, every observation of other impediments to athletic success at UW is met with derision.

You make claims of people's motivations like they are bedrock provable facts. I'm fine if you want to speculate but don't get surprised when it gets' pointed out that it is just that.
Did you read the article or at least what you could access? If not, do so. It actually supports what you are saying. Tone is hard to convey in a message board, but I was actually smiling posting that thinking you'd find it very interesting and backing up exactly what you've been saying.
 
Did you read the article or at least what you could access? If not, do so. It actually supports what you are saying. Tone is hard to convey in a message board, but I was actually smiling posting that thinking you'd find it very interesting and backing up exactly what you've been saying.
Just read it. Do you find it convincing? I'm not an expert in evaluating research. The writer is definitely more articulate than I am. I have no idea what "upper echelon theory" is.
 
Basic
Just read it. Do you find it convincing? I'm not an expert in evaluating research. The writer is definitely more articulate than I am. I have no idea what "upper echelon theory" is.
Upper echelon theory is managerial activities/experiences drive outcomes for an organization. Basically, their modeling says I'm full of crap, lol. Convincing? I don't have any other research-based info to suggest otherwise. From the data points they (and others) have looked at, you are more right about the relative insignificance of the ad than my claim of administration being a problem.
 
Basic

Upper echelon theory is managerial activities/experiences drive outcomes for an organization. Basically, their modeling says I'm full of crap, lol. Convincing? I don't have any other research-based info to suggest otherwise. From the data points they (and others) have looked at, you are more right about the relative insignificance of the ad than my claim of administration being a problem.
Hmmm,... Interesting. It has to matter to have good people in that position though.

If the ability to draw talent is as big of a factor as the author claims.... Not sure that having a killer AD matters to recruits I suppose.
 
Last edited:

Latest posts

Back
Top