The fact that this somewhat pessimistic diary was posted on the anniversary of the massacre at Pearl Harbor is purely coincidental. Besides, we ended up winning that war. I expect that UM will do likewise.

Many useful comments below suggest a variety of pertinent factors pertinent to a team’s future expectations. I wondered how one would more systematically analyze these factors, maybe using some kind of human resource model (see link below). Also, if such models are used to better manage an organization, could they also help manage the team? Possibly the reason why the transition from LC to RR was so rocky in the first place is that it was not managed with sufficient oversight from the athletic department. We may have had some leeway in deciding how to best “time” the departure of LC and hiring of a new coach. Leaving at a time when Henne, Hart and Long graduated, I suspect, was not ideal for the program. Experiments have found that organization leaders make mistakes in managing their resources, often leading to cycles of “boom” and “bust.” The problem is that they try to fill short-term immediate needs (eg for a coach, for position players) without thinking enough about the broader organization and its future needs. For such reasons, companies like People Express Airlines went bankrupt. Similarly, athletic teams go through “bust” stages. As such, I would guess that management models have value not just in telling us what to expect with a younger vs an older team but, more importantly , how to strategically manage the team in a better way. Eg how to anticipate future position needs better, what kind of recruits to go after, when to go after them, when best to retire an old coach and hire a new one, etc. This area of management is outside of my expertise, but I would guess that “sports management” programs routinely deal with these types of models. I am certainly reinventing the wheel here, but maybe somebody can help develop this idea further. Below, I provide a format for thinking about some factors that might determine a team’s performance. The format is a kind of human resource model, as used in other organizations (see link) eg involving 1. The input: quality of potential recruits, competition for them, quality of signed recruits (eg recruiting rankings), what positions they play, how needed those positions are for the current and future teams, whether recruits will be needed to play early or later in their careers 2. The development of talent: How rapidly they can learn to acquire the necessary skills to run an offense and defense: In this sense, there is a progression in the “state” of recruit populations from the 1st to the 2nd, 2nd to the 3rd, 3rd to the fourth year* 3. The loss of talent: from loss of eligibility, early NFL entry, attrition expected when a new HC or Coordinator is hired, random attrition, etc 4. The Output: the expected performance of the according to recruits’ prior talent level, coaching quality, the match between recruits and coaching schemes, and the progression of learning from one year to the next. The overall team performance would be a sum of the contribution of each individual player, depending on how often he is used. Such use, as well sa the performance level would tend to be much higher in later years than early ones. *probably some kind of markov model http://www.lexjansen.com/sugi/sugi09/sd/001-09.pdf