Dave in Green

Boise State - Virginia Tech is not that much of a shocker when you look back on all the circumstances.It was the first game of the college season, broadcast nationally in prime time starting at 8 p.m. on Labor Day. There was huge pre-game buildup for months. Boise was coming off an undefeated 14-0 season where they only finished 4th in the national rankings, and there was a big national debate over just how good they were. For Boise, playing VT on the road was seen by many as the make or break team for America's favorite underdog college football team.There was lots of speculation that if Boise beat a strong VT team soundly that it would then have a clear path to the national championship game by virtue of being likely to run the table for the rest of the season.The game lived up to expectations. It was a real nail-biter game with Kellen Moore throwing a late TD pass for the 33-30 win.Then VT went and blew it all by losing their very next game to little FCS James Madison, and the debate began all over about just how good Boise State really was.

Trying to translate from business to sports, I'd look at the style of offense as a tactic -- a strategy planned to achieve a specific goal. If the tactic is an important element of a cohesive system, then you wouldn't want to give up on it too quickly if you thought it would negatively impact other elements of the total system. If the tactic isn't working due to inadequate execution, you'd want to continue working on the execution as long as you believed the personnel could in time get it right and run it effectively.Ianello appears to be committed to the pro set as an integral component of his total system. But the pro set is not as confining as some may think. There are variations avalable out of the pro set that can add flexibility and unpredictability. But no offensive system is going to be effective if it's not properly executed. If you can't properly execute the basics, adding more complicated wrinkles may only produce less effective execution. So as long as Ianello believes his players can be successful if they properly execute, it's understandable why he'd want to continue to try to tweak the basic pro set without blowing it up and starting over from scratch.I think there's a general misunderstanding that Ianello is inflexible about changing the offense to fit the abilities of his players. If you go back and look at what he said about the offense prior to last season, he was pretty clear on that subject:"On offense, we're going to base out of a multiple pro set and, for a lack of a better term, the very same system we ran at Notre Dame, which for the last five years was very successful," said coach Ianello. "It's the same system the (New England) Patriots run and the (Kansas City) Chiefs run and the (Denver) Broncos run. It's a multiple system and one that I'll fit to our personnel as opposed to us having to fit personnel to our system. That gives us a lot of flexibility in that regard."Analyzing a system failure can be tricky because there are many elements that can be incorrectly diagnosed as the source of the problem. Obviously, Ianello does not believe the pro set is the source of the problem. He believes he can fit it to his players.Some college football analysts believe that what we'll see more of in the future is a hybrid offense combining pro set principles while spreading the field. That suggests that the pro set is not dead but just needs a little tweaking. I don't see anything to suggest that Ianello might not be open to that kind of tweaking as long as he believes it fits his players.In the end, though, proper execution has to be the top priority.

It's really easy to criticize and poke holes in things because nothing's perfect. I'm pretty good at doing that myself when I want to. Everything is flawed, and sometimes the flaws are especially obvious. But there are also success stories related to systems and processes. I worked for two Fortune 500 companies for about 30 years. About half of that was under an executive with an engineering background. He was totally dedicated to process. Anyone in the department who didn't buy into it was replaced. I remember sitting in on the first executive staff meetings that would go on and on. He wouldn't turn anyone loose to do their jobs until they convinced him that what they were doing was within the process. His favorite line was: If you don't have a plan, you may end up somewhere else. This was my first exposure to this type of thinking, and at first I thought we were just wasting time in meetings as so many coroporate types are criticized for doing.Then I started seeing the results. Our department was producing some of the greatest successes and most consistent results in the corporation. I started becoming a believer. He wasn't just married to the process. He also emphasized quick response within the process. If something about the process slowed down the response to a time-critical situation, he got the staff together and we found a way to speed the process without compromising it. As our department continued to produce results, we were recognized within the corporation. Other departments came in and studied the way we operated, and adopted our best practices.This executive appeared to many to be an autocrat who ruled with an iron fist. In reality, he was a consensus guy. He assembled an executive staff of people who were all different from him. No "yes" men were allowed. On every major decision he always went around the table and demanded that everyone on his staff speak their minds no matter how their opinions differed from his. Then he'd go lock himself in his office, put a program together, and send us off to execute the plan.I was the only person on his executive staff without an engineering background. I always felt a little out of place. One day when I was alone with him in his office, he told me, Dave, I really value your input. You see things differently from the engineers. You think out of the box. Your input helps give me a more complete perspective.When he retired, one of his assistants who had totally bought into the system and process took over, and the department didn't miss a beat. Everyone carried on with what they were doing, and the superior results kept coming in.I don't know enough about Ianello to understand how he thinks and operates. No one on this forum does, though some may think they do from trying to read the tea leaves. I think in some ways Ianello may be at least similar to the executive I worked for. If so, I hope he has the whole package. I hope his assistant coaches are all smart in different ways and don't all think like him. I hope they are all encouraged to speak their minds, and that Ianello listens and uses all that input to develop a sound system and process. I hope he's flexible enough to modify the process to respond to time-critical issues without compromising the process.If Ianello does all this, I would be pretty confident about eventually seeing successful results. Since we haven't seen obvious, significant results yet, there are either flaws in the process or personnel, or it just hasn't had enough time yet to produce obvious, significant results in the context of a college football team with no history of consistent success.If Ianello fails, UA will have to go to plan B, and we'll all be miserable until that starts producing positive results, if it ever does. If Ianello succeeds the way my ex-boss succeeded, everyone on this forum is going to become a lot more pleased with the results of Zips football.

Doug, you make a great point about systems and processes. The one thing that stood out to me the most about Ianello when I did a long and deep internet search into his background is that he has strong organizational skills. In retrospect, organizational skills do not necessarily equate to short-term success, but are more long-term oriented.Best case scenario is that Ianello's organizational skills translate into a long-term winning program. If this is what UA is banking on, then they're not going to terminate him at the end of this season even if the program is still not producing consistent wins. If they're measuring him on the basis of the strength of the long-term systems and processes he's putting into place, then he gets three full seasons for sure.The great thing about going for short-term results is that you know pretty quickly whether or not you've been successful. While there are some indicators to measure progress toward successful long-term results, the only sure way to know is to be patient and wait for them to play out.If the long-term systems and processes are successful, it means that many years of success should follow.Needless to say, if the long-term systems and processes fail to produce results, you've doomed yourself to many years of misery.No wonder all Zips football fans are on edge.

CK, do you believe that UA has demonstrated all of the positive qualities you mentioned in soccer?If so, how could they not understand that the same applies to football?

It's going to be especially entertaining to watch where Texas ends up in all of this. All of the other schools have agreed to split their TV revenue equally throughout their conferences. But Texas thinks they're above all that. They've got the biggest single school TV deal with their Longhorn Network, and the greed behind refusing to share any of that money is a powerful motivator.When you see a college football power as big as Oklahoma refusing to remain in a conference with Texas unless Texas agrees to share their TV revenue, it makes you wonder if all the other major football powers are going to come to the same conclusion and play ditch Texas. If Texas doesn't agree to fold the Longhorn Network into someone's conference, they could end up as an independent or in a lesser conference with lesser schools that didn't make it into one of the elite conferences.I have to admit that whether or not all of this is good for the overall health of college football, watching the ruthless maneuvering of greedy people from a distance can be entertaining, like watching J.R. Ewing and associates in the old Dallas TV series.

Great post, Skip. It's so easy to look at things and say "someone did it, why can't we?" Realistically, you have to look at it and say that 1 out of 100 did it, so we at least have a 1% chance. We look at Boise State football or Butler basketball and say "that could be us" while others look at UA soccer and say the same thing. Yes, it's possible if everything goes right. But everything rarely goes right. And then the search begins for the scapegoat.

Alex clearly has a lot of heart. I hope he finds success somewhere, and I hope the Zips find more players like him.Also, I hope someone at UA notices what the 49ers are doing and gets a little proactive about marketing Infocision Stadium.

Thanks, Districtballer. This will be a big game for the Zips, and it makes it a lot easier to check out the opposition with you keeping us updated.Do you do this on the forums of all of VCU's opponents, or do you have soft spot in your heart for the Zips?

Sorry I missed your earlier reference, trimmy10. And, yes, GP1, I know there's no end. Somebody, somewhere is probably already brainstorming the next phase.

I agree with GP1 that we need to try to suppress our preconceptions and keep an open mind. No one really knows how the college football landscape will change with these superconferences. For one thing, with 16-team conferences, there may be fewer OOC games for the annoited teams and fewer opportunities for the lesser teams to have the opportunity to prove that they can compete with these higher level teams.Voters may be reluctant to vote a lesser team into the Top 25 if the lesser teams don't have opportunities to demonstrate that they belong there. Merely beating up on other lesser teams may not be enough. The bowls that will be left for the lesser teams may be scraps.Let's face it, when the big guys circle the wagons of their elite little fraternity, the little guys can easily get shut out.Looking at it from the optimistic point of view, the little guys have a chance to get together and create something better. Maybe they start playing with the rules and create a more entertaining football game than the big guys are playing. In basketball, the ABA used the 3-point shot to differentiate itself from the NBA, and fans loved it. Instead of trying to copy the big guys in hopes of being admitted into their little fraternity, why not think in terms of producing a better show than the big guys put on?For example, why not consider rules that open up the offenses to the point that teams are routinely scoring 100 points per game? That can easily be accomplished with a few rule changes, and high-scoring offenses tend to attract more casual fans than defensive slogging.Let's think in terms of David and Goliath, and let's go looking for a good slingshot.

I've already disabled signatures.

I think the potential merger of what's left of the Big East and the Big 12 has already been mentioned somewhere on ZN.O.But the really interesting new twist is the reported merger talk between Conference USA and Mountain West to create a 22- to 24-team conference. Where will this all end, and is it really good for college football or just for ESPN?MWC, CUSA discuss first super, duper conference

I have a suggestion for those who repeat the same thing about Ianello in almost every post:1. Go to My Controls.2. Under Menu, go to Personal Profile and select the Edit Signature option.3. In the Edit Signature box, summarize your oft-stated opinion of Ianello and select the Update my Signature button at the bottom.Now your feelings about Ianello will automatically show up at the bottom of each of your posts without you having to repetitively type it in every time you post.This will free you up to focus on composing new thoughts in your posts that others may actually find worth reading.The really cool part of this is that there's an option under Board Settings called "Do you wish to view members signatures when reading topics?" that others can use to avoid seeing your signature, which they don't need to see anyway because they already know your thoughts on this subject.Everyone wins!

I would take time before the game to try to explain to the kids that the Zips football team is at a low point, but that they're not giving up. They're determined to keep trying as hard as they can even though they have been losing. I'd tell the kids that the stadium is not crowded because many fans have given up on the Zips, but the Zips haven't given up on themselves. I'd try to turn it into a life lesson for the kids that no matter how bad things may seem, you should never give up trying to improve.

Zach, I know you've read my posts where I've said that there must be clear signs of progress this season, and that so far I'm as disappointed with the results of the first three games as everyone else. I've been pretty clear in saying that I need to see some clear signs of progress this season. So far there have only been minor signs in some areas -- not enough to convince me that the Zips as a team are on the way up, but enough that I'm willing to see how they do in a few games against weaker opponents. I'm taking it game by game, and each game without clear signs of progress makes me less optimistic.I would say that if we reach the midpoint of this season (three more games) without some clear signs of progress that UA should start considering contingency plans. By the end of the season, UA should be prepared for the possibility of bringing in a new head coach if they believe that's what it will take to turn the program around. The end of the season would be the right time to change head coaches if that becomes necessary. On the other hand, if Ianello's plan starts producing results this season, I think he would earn the right to coach a third season to prove that the progress is sustainable.Look, we Zips fans are united in wanting to have a winning football team that represents UA well on the field, But we will never be in total agreement over exactly what defines clear progress or what level of team performance earns Ianello our support to return for a third season. That's OK. Look at any sports fan forum and there is always disagreement among fans over details.Let's just be aware that the level of our discussion on this forum is a representation of the quality of Zips fans.

I would have accepted 0 wins in the first season if someone I trusted had told me it would eventually lead to a winning program. The jury is still out on that, regardless of the early returns. I've been around too long to panic and pull the plug based on early returns. Over the years I've seen too many things turn out differently from what I thought they would to believe that I can accurately predict results with incomplete data.That is not saying that I predict success. That is saying that I'm just smart enough to know that I'm not smart enough to know.

Gozips19, you need to post more often. Thank you so much for a detailed, intelligent, firsthand analysis of the good, the bad and the ugly.

Personally, I don't mind at all when a few people call me names like "apologist." It means they don't have a reasonable point to make, and I can quit paying attention to them and spend more time focusing on what those who are more thoughtful have to say.

It sure is fun to be able to follow a Zips team that's falling in the ratings without creating a panic. I don't have a fraction of the soccer knowledge of most of you posting here. But I do understand the concept of a great coach with a strong program having lost a lot of top players to the pro draft, and quickly rebuilding on the fly. So I share the feelings of the hardcore soccer fans that there's no reason to panic. It's a young, inexperienced team with lots to learn. But the young players are high quality, and the coach is a master. I feel confident that they will be in the hunt for a second straight national championship come post-season time.

Thanks for straightening me out on the Austin Peay thing, Zipmeister. Because some have suggested on the forum here that the Zips won't be able to beat FCS VMI, so I thought that meant that Cincinatti may have run the score up more on FCS Austin Peay than against the Zips. But if Cincinnati tried as hard against the Zips as they did against Austin Peay, that means the Zips are probably at least a little better than Austin Peay. So there's at least one FCS team the Zips might have a chance to beat, and that gives hope for the VMI game.

However many points it takes to give the Zips players some self-confidence. The offense needs to score enough points to make them believe that they can score against FBS teams. The defense needs to hold VMI to few enough points to make them believe that they can keep FBS teams from scoring at will.

I wonder why Cincinnati didn't take it easy on Austin Peay, beating them up by a score of 72-10, and continuing to pour it on in the 4th quarter by outscoring them 21-7 in the final 15 minutes?

InTheZone, sounds to me as if you may have a case of premature evaluation.I'm willing to let the game play out before suggesting what might be best to do next.

Skip, I agree with your observations. I think Moore deserves an opportunity to demonstrate what he can do against a weaker team. Nicely had his share of opportunities against weaker teams and produced mixed results. Moore produced reasonable results against Cincinnati's 2nd and 3rd stringers with the game out of reach. If he can perform that well for a whole game against VMI, then he is at least comparable in performance to what we've seen in the past from Nicely in certain games.It may turn out that Moore will never be any better than Nicely in terms of producing results with the teammates they have to work with. Or, given a similar opportunity, maybe Moore will turn out to be better or worse than Nicely. I don't know how to accurately gauge that right now based on what I've seen from Moore's performance in his first three D1A games against three clearly superior teams.I'm truly interested in the thoughtful opinions of others who may know more and see more than I do. That's why I asked the questions of akron football. I don't know whether or not his opinions are based on something I've not seen or don't understand. If they are, I'm more than willing to listen to anyone's thoughtful explanations and try to improve my knowledge.