Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
18 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

All their symbols at the bottom of that graphic. What’s the last one?

I know man. I was teasing you. 212 is skeletors charity I think. I think it’s a Sandusky thing.

Posted
27 minutes ago, Dbeasy said:

That is exactly the same thought I had. There are some interesting perspectives but the overall approach is going to fail miserably. 

They're not doing anything groundbreaking wrt recruiting. Literally every program that can't recruit at a high level tries to make up for it with evaluations. It's been that way forever. The only difference is the guy they put in charge has the title of "general manager" rather than "head coach."

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
3 minutes ago, TXpride said:

They're not doing anything groundbreaking wrt recruiting. Literally every program that can't recruit at a high level tries to make up for it with evaluations. It's been that way forever. The only difference is the guy they put in charge has the title of "general manager" rather than "head coach."

And does he think we don’t have an army of analysts who are also prioritizing our rankings rather than the recruiting services? Only difference is that our head coach actually gets to participate in (have control over) talent acquisition. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
6 minutes ago, TXpride said:

They're not doing anything groundbreaking wrt recruiting. Literally every program that can't recruit at a high level tries to make up for it with evaluations. It's been that way forever. The only difference is the guy they put in charge has the title of "general manager" rather than "head coach."

It sounds like they’ve separated recruiting and coaching to the extent possible. Like, here’s your team , coach them. 

Posted
Just now, Pato del Muerto said:

It sounds like they’ve separated recruiting and coaching to the extent possible. Like, here’s your team , coach them. 

And if there were a draft, that approach might make a little more sense. I will be shocked if this little experiment doesn’t set them back at least a decade. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, Chili dog said:

And does he think we don’t have an army of analysts who are also prioritizing our rankings rather than the recruiting services? Only difference is that our head coach actually gets to participate in (have control over) talent acquisition. 

But do we have anyone on staff who spent 7 years working for the Senior Bowl? Advantage gooner.

Posted
1 hour ago, Pato del Muerto said:

It sounds like they’ve separated recruiting and coaching to the extent possible. Like, here’s your team , coach them. 

Phantom Island just did an episode about this, but coming from the angle of asking if the days of the workaholic coach are falling into the past.  With the context we have, it does seem relatively easier to find people who are good at eval, people who are good at gameplan/scheme, people who are good at talent acquisition, and people who are good at talent maximization versus finding 11-15 unicorns who are great at all areas. 

I'd still pay good money to hear the unvarnished truth about what happend with Thad Turnipseed and the AD's office.  It can't have been as simple as "he wanted to build a new basketball arena and they refocused fundraising on NIL."

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.



×
×
  • Create New...