|
Fudd...
I agree that in life, past performance is a good predictor of future performance. It relates that way in almost every personnel management theory as well. My problem with our past, is that it doesn't relate to us in comparison with the future. We have different coaches, players, donors, assistants, etc...Individuals are different. Employee A is lazy his first 5 years, what makes anyone think the next 5 will be any different.
The main thing here is that a program like X has done what they needed to do in the short term, to meet long term goals. They have met their long term goals for almost two decades. We have taken baby steps to see that the future is on the way. If in fact the theory of past performance predicts the future, then what makes everyone think that BG will find a way to win on the road in the A-10. I am not saying this will happen, but the theory can't hold true for some aspects of the game, and not others. Success can breed success, and failure, failure. But average breeds average. We are above average, but the end results of say, conference play are very average if not below average based on expectations and where they should be.
I just can't see giving someone a high grade, when the outcomes aren't all that impressive. I wish my undergrad grades were based on my future grad school grades. This is basically what the BG die hards are basing the grade on. Direction, not results.
|
