• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Will all the Bz Outers support Wake once his is gone, or.....

Correspondence courses and distance learning have been around a long time too. University of Phoenix is expanding an old model not taking over with a new model.
 
PhDeac said:
Correspondence courses and distance learning have been around a long time too. University of Phoenix is expanding an old model not taking over with a new model.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree. But brick and mortar are eventually going to be obsolete. I'm only stating an opinion. Technology is changing the way people interact and learn. I think a four year degree may be a thing of the past in fifty years. You may have your Harvards and Yales but they will be a niche market for the retro crowd.
 
That's a 2012 mindset. MOOCs were going to take over education. Now everybody is down on them and going back to the drawing board.

College holds way too many roles in society besides formal education to just give up to online education.
 
Dino Gaudino said:
Granted, the spectrum of opinions on the state of the athletic department ranges quite a bit in the higher levels of the DC
Click to expand...

How on earth is this possible? #culture? Ignorance? Stupidity? Blind hope? Desire for continued access to Wellman?
 
PhDeac said:
That's a 2012 mindset. MOOCs were going to take over education. Now everybody is down on them and going back to the drawing board.

College holds way too many roles in society besides formal education to just give up to online education.
Click to expand...

But how can you argue with "things will be different in 50-200 years"?
 
Only on a Wake board does the calling out of an absolute disaster coach become a referendum on distant learning. Good Lord. Maybe we can host the next national ADHD convention.
 
bigdoublezero said:
I mean, to be fair, things in general were pretty fucking different in 1814, postsecondary education included, so this isn't a huge leap of faith.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

"OMG, college is going to be different in 200 years!!! There's no way I'm ever giving money to Wake again!! :tard:"

I don't really understand that argument.
 
Please define "politics" in this context. Thanks.
 
Last edited:
deaclite said:
Please define "politics" in this context. Thanks.
Click to expand...

I interpreted it to mean that the higher donors don't want to rock the boat too much because they don't want to possibly lose the influence they've gained. Lower level donors can be more vocally #BuzzOut because they don't have as much to lose
 
BeachBumDeac said:
I interpreted it to mean that the higher donors don't want to rock the boat too much because they don't want to possibly lose the influence they've gained. Lower level donors can be more vocally #BuzzOut because they don't have as much to lose
Click to expand...

Exactly.
 
Makes a lot of sense and it's part of the problem with money in college sports. We are reaffirming the egos of rich guys instead of focusing on what is best for the student-athletes.
 
You'd think people wouldn't give a damn if they were fed up enough since they're the ones giving the money to the athletic department, not the other way around. But high society at Wake has gotten so cliquey that no one wants to piss off head cheerleader Wellman.
 
PhDeac said:
Makes a lot of sense and it's part of the problem with money in college sports. We are reaffirming the egos of rich guys instead of focusing on what is best for the student-athletes.
Click to expand...

If you want to talk about outdated models, it's the idea that major college athletics exist first and foremost to enrich the lives of student-athletes.
 
BeachBumDeac said:
I interpreted it to mean that the higher donors don't want to rock the boat too much because they don't want to possibly lose the influence they've gained. Lower level donors can be more vocally #BuzzOut because they don't have as much to lose
Click to expand...

That doesn't make any sense. How can anyone possibly have any influence whatsoever if we've been stuck with Bzz for 4 years? What does a higher level donor have to lose - saying they have influence in an Athletic Department whose face is Jeff [Redacted]? That isn't influence, it is high-roller suicide.
 
Late on commenting but to the original post - sorry, but that argument is somewhat unfounded - its like being ganged raped and told you are suppose to not complain and act like you enjoy it.

Are the players trying to play their best? Not the issue. Carl Tacy gave way to Bob Staak. Until Bzzz, I thought that was the worst coaching move of all time (at least at Wake, bringing in the high school coach at Maryland or Robinson at NC State rank right up there). Staak gave way to Odom, which was a good move, until he decided he couldn't compete/recruit against the big boys, and played a boring style of game which added to recruiting issues.

No doubt the highlight of Wellman's AD career was bringing in Skip Prosser (and Jim Grobe) - both perfect fits at the time for our beloved university. Unfortunately, Chris Paul bolted to the NBA and Skip had the audacity to pass away much too early - both leaving us high and dry. Still, Dino came in and won but not enough given he had 3 NBA first round picks and a 4th NBA free agent on the court at the same time.

And now we have Bzzz - a man of no true accomplishment (leading Colorado to .500, are you kidding me?) who arguably coached the worst ACC basketball team of all time his first year and has us solidly at the bottom of the conference where we once were typically highly competitive. Okay we are middle of the pack at this point in a bad ACC, but there's still a lot of basketball to be played - just wish it was not so painful to watch... sorry, nothing to rally around from my point of view
 
Kent said:
The fact that Wellman/Buzz/MSG board group think have brought me to a place where I have to wonder whether wins are, in the long term, good or bad for Wake is an almost unforgivable breach of stewardship over the school and program that I have cared about for decades. Stated another way, the harsh criticism of Buzz and Wellman is something they earned- not something a bunch of cynical internet assholes have unfairly dumped on them. If we are cynical internet assholes, it's only because they made us that way.
Click to expand...
To get to that place you have to believe Wellman doesn't have a high bar for Wake. You have to believe there is no such thing as a Cinderella period for a coach. You have to believe that Wellman is expected to back on his word to the new coach from whatever was said at the hire. You have to believe whatever problems plagued the new coach at the previous job had no chance of changing. You have to believe Wellman wasn't just throwing out AD-speak the past 3 years. You have to believe Wellman was going to evaluate the new coach's performance at Wake based on his performance at the previous job. You don't get evaluated like do you? You also have to believe the program is now in ruins.

You must believe most all of that and it was your choice, they didn't make you.

When you step back and see what happened, it's all obvious. Wellman hired a guy he thought would be a bball version of Grobe and our version of Stevens. Bad choice, but that was obviously the strategy. Once hired, the path was going to happen regardless of what happened. He empowered the new coach to clean up whatever was wrong (perceived or real, it doesn't matter), and was going to give the new coach a fair chance with his kids and system. He was going to support the coach during the Cinderella period and then have high expectations once it was over. He gave the new coach one extra Cinderella year because of the situation.

That's how I chose to view it. I did not like the previous fire. I questioned the hire as one that did not fit with the existing program, and really did not like the hire once I looked closely at the record after Stetson. I just accepted it was going to play out...like it has....and thought giving him the chance was the right thing to do. Common sense. But I've been attacked constantly by a group of posters, and sometimes personally, for thinking that way (and always "wrong"). Guess Wellman and Bz made people do that too.

He'll be gone at the end of this season. Wellman isn't a total moron...like you probably think.
 
Wellman may not be a total moron but he did look at Bzz ' s body of work and think "he's the guy." That tells me all I need to know. Additionally Stevens was recruiting the best players he could get to go to Butler. Butler. They were only 4 year players because that was all he could get. A great coach can work with that. As Stevens had some success he picked up better recruits. His best team had a 2 and NBA player. He would certainly recruit more NBA talent had he stayed. Anyone that for one moment thought of Bzz as "our Brad Stevens" well I don't know what to say to you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top