Staff Changes

Wistrom Disciple said:
Thank you for your contribution?  :dunno
Click to expand...
Was I unclear about the difference?

Analogy one is pointing the proverbial thumb and the self-reflection questions everything without bias.  
 

Analogy two starts with the assumption that it is external forces causing the failures, and the self-reflection is therefore limited in that context only. 
 

Not sure if you’ve ever read “From Good to Great” but one of the big takeaways is you should never be too specific about exactly where you’re going, and pigeon-holing the people you bring in into very specific roles to reach that narrow objective.  The world changes and your ideas might not be as perfect as you believe as you are one individual with your own biases (often created by limited experiences).  On the contrary, find the right people with strong but varied backgrounds, get them on the bus, and then coalesce their views to set a new direction together. 
 

The two approaches are diametrically opposed and picking one over the other very much defines how you solve problems and challenges. 

 
Canadian Fan said:
Was I unclear about the difference?

Analogy one is pointing the proverbial thumb and the self-reflection questions everything without bias.  
 

Analogy two starts with the assumption that it is external forces causing the failures, and the self-reflection is therefore limited in that context only. 
 

Not sure if you’ve ever read “From Good to Great” but one of the big takeaways is you should never be too specific about exactly where you’re going, and pigeon-holing the people you bring in into very specific roles to reach that narrow objective.  The world changes and your ideas might not be as perfect as you believe as you are one individual with your own biases (often created by limited experiences).  On the contrary, find the right people with strong but varied backgrounds, get them on the bus, and then coalesce their views to set a new direction together. 
 

The two approaches are diametrically opposed and picking one over the other very much defines how you solve problems and challenges. 
Click to expand...


Very good points and I agree with you that, based upon what we have seen from Frost, he is very loyal to his staff and his ways.  The majority of guys on his staff are still the same crew he had when he arrived at Nebraska, and the approach to coaching appears to be the same too.  I am hopeful he is hungry to look in the mirror, examine what has not worked, and find a new path forward that will create success at Nebraska.  

 
Skimming a few posts here and there.....do we really not think there are many evaluations that go on after the season, and even during the season?

This also isn't just a Frost and Miss thing.  There are several different people with input on Husker football.....from Frost to Moos to Osborne to Davison.

Frost has enormous support and these folks all communicate regularly behind the scene.

 
HuskerNation1 said:
You are inferring this implication.  Frost himself must have an honest internal self-assessment with his staff, his schemes, everything, every single year.  It's part of continuous learning and a strive for excellence.  He should feel obligated to tell his boss how his program will become better.  Again, I never once said Moos should be picking the staff. You chose to make that assumption. 

As for the role of a first and second line leadership relationship, sure there are some differences across various organizations, but there are many more similarities.  What do you think Moos is accountable for related to the football program?  Does he have a reason to be concerned with how things are progressing?  If the football team does not meet the goals for the season, how should Moos address that?  I believe the coach/AD relationship and engagement should be more than just the hiring/firing phase.  There should be continuous discussion back and forth before/after the season.
Click to expand...
You're right, I can see now where I took your initial question "does this assistant coach give Nebraska...." as posed by Moos instead of an internal question for Frost himself. Your rebuttals including that "the AD has a right to discuss staff with the head coach" is where I pulled the implication. Moos can ask the grand scheme questions but I don't think he should be involved with the staffing decisions. 

Moos certainly is responsible for the program but since day one of the Frost hire (and Hoiberg too for that matter) he has made it clear that he lets the coaches run their programs and has taken on more of a hands off approach. Changing that now is something Eichorst would do and we all saw how that worked out. 

Thank you, @TheSker, my thoughts exactly. The coach is constantly evaluating and presumably, the AD team is there whenever needed. 

 
Canadian Fan said:
Was I unclear about the difference?

Analogy one is pointing the proverbial thumb and the self-reflection questions everything without bias.  
 

Analogy two starts with the assumption that it is external forces causing the failures, and the self-reflection is therefore limited in that context only. 
 

Not sure if you’ve ever read “From Good to Great” but one of the big takeaways is you should never be too specific about exactly where you’re going, and pigeon-holing the people you bring in into very specific roles to reach that narrow objective.  The world changes and your ideas might not be as perfect as you believe as you are one individual with your own biases (often created by limited experiences).  On the contrary, find the right people with strong but varied backgrounds, get them on the bus, and then coalesce their views to set a new direction together. 
 

The two approaches are diametrically opposed and picking one over the other very much defines how you solve problems and challenges. 
Click to expand...
It's a very philosophical post which is fine but using LSAT/GMAT words doesn't mean you're adding wisdom to the discussion. In this case, it took until the underlined sentence above before there was a takeaway for how your posts apply to Frost and the program under the topic being discussed.

To which regarding said underlined post, Frost has changed assistants each year since he's been here. Last year he let go of two assistants that had been with him for 3-4 years already. He has made one great hire (Tuioti) and the two new hires that are hard for me to put a grade on after this weird year (Dawson & Lubick). Therefore, I am inclined to believe Frost's "direction of self-reflection" is acceptable for my liking at this stage of the program. 

 
HuskerNation1 said:
Very good points and I agree with you that, based upon what we have seen from Frost, he is very loyal to his staff and his ways.  The majority of guys on his staff are still the same crew he had when he arrived at Nebraska, and the approach to coaching appears to be the same too.  I am hopeful he is hungry to look in the mirror, examine what has not worked, and find a new path forward that will create success at Nebraska.  
Click to expand...
What if Moos, Osborne and other advisors.....like Mike Tomlin....have advised Frost to keep his staff in place as much as possible?

 
TheSker said:
What if Moos, Osborne and other advisors.....like Mike Tomlin....have advised Frost to keep his staff in place as much as possible?
Click to expand...


That's a major hypothetical and I doubt Osborn or others would tell Frost he has the best possible staff currently.  But I agree that Frost should take in as much perspective as possible to help him grow as a coach and leader, and Osborn and Moos have a lot of football experience he can learn from.  

 
HuskerNation1 said:
That's a major hypothetical and I doubt Osborn or others would tell Frost he has the best possible staff currently.  But I agree that Frost should take in as much perspective as possible to help him grow as a coach and leader, and Osborn and Moos have a lot of football experience he can learn from.  
Click to expand...
Is this Osborn you speak of associated with Winstrom and Peters?

 
You all are nuts. Where are we on the countdown? 265ish? 
 

and why do I feel like Moos and Frost get together often and play bun darts? I bet a lot of decisions get made then. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Huskers93-97 said:
One Exception. Say after year 5 we have not progressed as a program and Frost is being stubborn to stick with the assistants he has now. At that point it is on Moos to make sure the program gets in the right direction. If that is firing Frost or telling Frost he needs to evaluate his staff. There should always be checks and balances. At this point in Frost's career he is not Nick Saban. No one is questioning Sabans decisions because he is a proven winner and shows he will swap assistants to do what is best to win the most games at Alabama. Frost has not proven any of those things so he is not above being questioned.
Click to expand...


Agree you can't remotely compare the two when Saban wins big and Saban has shown repeatedly that he will make the tough calls to staff optimally. If Frost loses for five seasons he shouldn't get a sixth, a fifth season is being VERY patient. Frost really needs to fix things NOW, the more we lose the more our window of opportunity(to turn this around) closes. After four losing seasons he would be considered a bust by the CFB world. Prospective coaches, prospective players, and fans will lose interest/belief in this regime.

 
Back
Top