Accountability

When leading a team or organization, one of the most important things you can do is to clearly establish expectations and the accountability system for those expectations. In my experience, when there is no accountability, or enforcement of accountability it's nearly impossible to maintain control of the team.



Point being, if we establish to everyone that certain things must be done, or there will be a series of actions that will take place, and those actions don't occur, then everyone loses buy-in. When there are no clear expectations or accountability there is poor performance.



So, my question is what sort of accountability has Bronco established for his team?



I'm not calling for Bronco to be fired, or for players to be punished every time they make a single mistake. What I am interested in knowing is what the expectations and accountability methods the players are held to.



If it were my team I would make it clear that mistakes are not acceptable. If you make a mistake that costs the team, it will be immediately addressed on the sideline. From that point on I would expect that mistake not to happen again. Perhaps, a three strike system for the same type of mistake before you are held accountable to the team, and the team's next best option is given a chance to perform. If the understudy met the standards needed, then he would continue to play until he needed to be replaced.



Would this not establish a culture that all players can buy-in to? The best player plays. If the best player cannot execute, he is accountable for his shortcomings and the next best option is given a chance to perform.



Works wonders in management. As I've observed an apparent lack of accountability throughout the entire organization, I am curious as to what the expectations and accountability methods are. Anyone know?

If you are a freshman or sophomore, you can lose your job based on performance. Heaps, friehl, other examples...



If you are a junior or senior, especially a walk on, you will never lose your position. Regardless of performance. Especially if you have super great hair.



Those seem to be the rules.



It explains why Jameson Frazier was starting over KVN, the heaps Riley debacle, and currently explains why Joe Sampson is starting over Craig bills, who happens to be a better tackler and in better overall position to make a play, even as a freshman. There are other examples too. Brandon Bradley starting over corby Eason for example.



There is no accountability. Unless you are on "Th short list" then there is plenty.



I don't think anyone can feign obstinacy that bronco favors people.

Saw this on twitter and followed it to the SLTrib site. This quote absolutely blows my mind.



"I really don’t [envision a scenario where Nelson would be pulled]," Mendenhall said. "I think Riley is improving our team."





Bronco can't fathom a scenario when he would need to bench Riley?



I'm actually at a loss of words.

Has the offense ever taken accountability in a believable fashion this year? I hear talk, I just see crap. I half hope, regrettably, that we do lose more games and then hit the reset button on offense. I think the offense is almost playing dispirited. All the dropped balls, half effort by Apo and Friel and even Hoffmans joke of a block down field on Jamal's run. Rah Rah Riley is "NOT HELPING THIS TEAM GET BETTER", Bronco! Unless its just so deplorable and falling apart that he is the only one holding it together and the Players have lost confidence in Doman.

fifthqb wrote:
When leading a team or organization, one of the most important things you can do is to clearly establish expectations and the accountability system for those expectations. In my experience, when there is no accountability, or enforcement of accountability it's nearly impossible to maintain control of the team.



Point being, if we establish to everyone that certain things must be done, or there will be a series of actions that will take place, and those actions don't occur, then everyone loses buy-in. When there are no clear expectations or accountability there is poor performance.



So, my question is what sort of accountability has Bronco established for his team?



I'm not calling for Bronco to be fired, or for players to be punished every time they make a single mistake. What I am interested in knowing is what the expectations and accountability methods the players are held to.



If it were my team I would make it clear that mistakes are not acceptable. If you make a mistake that costs the team, it will be immediately addressed on the sideline. From that point on I would expect that mistake not to happen again. Perhaps, a three strike system for the same type of mistake before you are held accountable to the team, and the team's next best option is given a chance to perform. If the understudy met the standards needed, then he would continue to play until he needed to be replaced.



Would this not establish a culture that all players can buy-in to? The best player plays. If the best player cannot execute, he is accountable for his shortcomings and the next best option is given a chance to perform.



Works wonders in management. As I've observed an apparent lack of accountability throughout the entire organization, I am curious as to what the expectations and accountability methods are. Anyone know?

Accountability is great. However, in the real world you do not pay people to sit on the bench and you certainly would not promote someone into a position you did not think they could stretch into and succeed. You play who you think is best - warts and all. Sometimes you are wrong.



IIRC, you are biased and have an agenda - Mr. Friend of Larks family. BTW - I was on the give Lark a look see back in 2010 before it was popular and I still would like to have gotten a meaningful look. But the coaches felt Nelson, then Heaps gave them the best chance. In 2011 they thought Heaps then Nelson gave them the best chance. Then this year they thought Nelson then Lark then Hill, but changed their mind before Lark got a real shot and decided Hill gave them the best shot. Then healthy Nelson gave them the best shot with Hillinjured. Now Lark is next in line again, but Kuresa got the Wildcat Op because Lark is not a wildcat style QB. Munns continues to lag behind and AO may redshirt after all.



Bottom line - this is not favoritism and the more you try to paint it as such - it just makes me see past your obvious bias and ask why are the coaches choosing to give meaningful reps to everyone but Munns before they hopefully consider Lark at some point.



When - and I believe he will - Lark gets his shot, I hope he does so well the coaches just drop their jaws - maybe like the patient OSU guy did when he got his shot.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

dmcougar wrote:
Has the offense ever taken accountability in a believable fashion this year? I hear talk, I just see crap. I half hope, regrettably, that we do lose more games and then hit the reset button on offense. I think the offense is almost playing dispirited. All the dropped balls, half effort by Apo and Friel and even Hoffmans joke of a block down field on Jamal's run. Rah Rah Riley is "NOT HELPING THIS TEAM GET BETTER", Bronco! Unless its just so deplorable and falling apart that he is the only one holding it together and the Players have lost confidence in Doman.

I have seen the same thing. I started watching Hoffman during the USU game and his body language made it very clear he was not happy with things. There are obviously serious problems with this team.

Cougarbib wrote:



Accountability is great. However, in the real world you do not pay people to sit on the bench and you certainly would not promote someone into a position you did not think they could stretch into and succeed. You play who you think is best - warts and all. Sometimes you are wrong.

I'll agree with some of this. But only poorly managed organizations don't have replacements in line for people. I've seen many middle mangers get benched because their performance was not up to par. In the real world you don't accept sustained underperformance.

Cougarbib wrote:

IIRC, you are biased and have an agenda - Mr. Friend of Larks family. BTW - I was on the give Lark a look see back in 2010 before it was popular and I still would like to have gotten a meaningful look. But the coaches felt Nelson, then Heaps gave them the best chance. In 2011 they thought Heaps then Nelson gave them the best chance. Then this year they thought Nelson then Lark then Hill, but changed their mind before Lark got a real shot and decided Hill gave them the best shot. Then healthy Nelson gave them the best shot with Hillinjured. Now Lark is next in line again, but Kuresa got the Wildcat Op because Lark is not a wildcat style QB. Munns continues to lag behind and AO may redshirt after all.



Bottom line - this is not favoritism and the more you try to paint it as such - it just makes me see past your obvious bias and ask why are the coaches choosing to give meaningful reps to everyone but Munns before they hopefully consider Lark at some point.

I'm tired of this response. I make no secret about me being a friend of the Lark family. However, I made a post several weeks ago saying that Lark's time has passed and I have moved on. I'd love to see him play, but at this point it's not going to make a difference. My problem is with the coaching staff playing favorites. You have to be kidding yourself if you don't think Bronco has his boys and that he favors them.



And I mean seriously kidding yourself. Is there anyone on this board that would logically dispute Bronco's affinity for Riley?

Cougarbib wrote:



When - and I believe he will - Lark gets his shot, I hope he does so well the coaches just drop their jaws - maybe like the patient OSU guy did when he got his shot.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

As lovely as your response was, it failed to answer my question. What is Bronco's accountability methods? What expectations does he have and what point does someone play themselves off the field?

Cougarbib wrote:
Bottom line - this is not favoritism and the more you try to paint it as such - it just makes me see past your obvious bias and ask why are the coaches choosing to give meaningful reps to everyone but Munns before they hopefully consider Lark at some point.

This isn't favoritism? Bib I wish I had the faith in the coaches that you do at this point. I've been a big Bronco supporter but the last few weeks of how the QB has been handled have seriously set me back. In no way do I want Bronco to leave but he really needs to change the perception that his top priority is the program and not a single player. There's 80+ other players in that locker room.



"I really don’t [envision a scenario where Nelson would be pulled]," Mendenhall said.



"I'm a fan of Riley"- Mendenhall



"I love Riley"- Mendenhall

BlueIsBetter wrote:
If you are a freshman or sophomore, you can lose your job based on performance. Heaps, friehl, other examples...



explains why Joe Sampson is starting over Craig bills, who happens to be a better tackler and in better overall position to make a play

I agreed with everything you said until this. Sampson is better than Bills is this year. More physical, better cover skills. Which is why they put Sampson in the nickel spot when Bills comes in to play the other safety position. BEcause he covers better, and there is no argument. He also does not miss tackles, and hits. Sampson is one of the 3-4 best players on D, and Bills is not this year.



Otherwise, I agree.

Lawboy wrote:

If you are a freshman or sophomore, you can lose your job based on performance. Heaps, friehl, other examples...



explains why Joe Sampson is starting over Craig bills, who happens to be a better tackler and in better overall position to make a play

I agreed with everything you said until this. Sampson is better than Bills is this year. More physical, better cover skills. Which is why they put Sampson in the nickel spot when Bills comes in to play the other safety position. BEcause he covers better, and there is no argument. He also does not miss tackles, and hits. Sampson is one of the 3-4 best players on D, and Bills is not this year.



Otherwise, I agree.

Craig Bills running through his reciever with his arms in the air not looking back for the ball is one of the reasons OSU went up 35-24. If he had turned his head at all, that play ends that drive but instead it cost us a 1st down and a score. Blue likes to criticize based on his invented ideology without any basis in fact.

For a student of behavior organization and leadership, Bronco sure has missed the boat when it comes to accountability.



Not only does it threaten the productivity of a single player, it threatens the identity and performance of an entire organization.



Bronco's idea of "accountability" seems to be let the players live with their own mistakes. As in, if Riley throws an interception, Riley is then accountable for making up that TD. Which, is a really weird philosophy because Bronco is accountable for the entire performance of the team.



Bronco doesn't get different behavioral models are better for different environment. A "come in get your work done as you please" mentality may work for a software company but no so much for the military. A rigid schedule with quotas works well for a factory, but no so much for a retail store where customer experience is key.



Leaving mistake-prone players out on the field to sort out their issues doesn't work in football. Neither does playing favorites with walk-ons while scholarship players earn their stripes on the scout team.



It's football, Bronco, not an executive program at a Fortune 500 company.

Lawboy wrote:

If you are a freshman or sophomore, you can lose your job based on performance. Heaps, friehl, other examples...



explains why Joe Sampson is starting over Craig bills, who happens to be a better tackler and in better overall position to make a play

I agreed with everything you said until this. Sampson is better than Bills is this year. More physical, better cover skills. Which is why they put Sampson in the nickel spot when Bills comes in to play the other safety position. BEcause he covers better, and there is no argument. He also does not miss tackles, and hits. Sampson is one of the 3-4 best players on D, and Bills is not this year.



Otherwise, I agree.

:whistle:



Wondering how you feel about this still?



Craig Bills is the best open field tackler on our team, in the same way that Brian Logan was the best tackler on our team the years he played for us.



It is about fundamentals, and Sampson doesn't have any. Unless you call launching yourself like a spear at a ballcatcher, and acquiring multiple penalties. Open field tackles? Not so much...