Re: RPI 2017 Off-Season (Part II): Mr. Smith Goes to Troy
I too wish Coach Smith all the best going forward. Admittedly he was not my first choice but not being privy to the behind the scenes negotiations I can only hope the best decision was made.
That being said, I have dealt with several consulting firms in my 40 years in industry. In a number of instances I was assigned to act as my company's primary interface with the consulting firm. In short, I never could understand how a fortune 500 company could hire someone outside of their field of expertise and expect that they could make better decisions than their own internal subject matter experts. Most consultants would come in and immediately ask the question, "what conclusions would you like to see from this engagement?" Not once did I think the consultant was worth cost not only in dollars but in resources and time of the company's employees. I am not a fan of consultants.
As to the comments on 'not-so instant replay' reviews, apparently I am in the minority - I don't care how long it takes so long as they get it correct. If you want a fast-moving pace without correct calls then you can go to the WWE for entertainment. The problem is not with the replay mechanism itself in most cases. The problem lies in the quality of the judges and referees doing the reviewing. And based upon their horrible inconsistency on the ice as evidenced by blown offside calls, phantom penalties or those blatant ones not called at all, etc. why would you expect any better? The status quo will not improve until the refs are held accountable with full disclosure of their performance. Stewie are you out there?
Originally posted by Waite21
View Post
That being said, I have dealt with several consulting firms in my 40 years in industry. In a number of instances I was assigned to act as my company's primary interface with the consulting firm. In short, I never could understand how a fortune 500 company could hire someone outside of their field of expertise and expect that they could make better decisions than their own internal subject matter experts. Most consultants would come in and immediately ask the question, "what conclusions would you like to see from this engagement?" Not once did I think the consultant was worth cost not only in dollars but in resources and time of the company's employees. I am not a fan of consultants.
As to the comments on 'not-so instant replay' reviews, apparently I am in the minority - I don't care how long it takes so long as they get it correct. If you want a fast-moving pace without correct calls then you can go to the WWE for entertainment. The problem is not with the replay mechanism itself in most cases. The problem lies in the quality of the judges and referees doing the reviewing. And based upon their horrible inconsistency on the ice as evidenced by blown offside calls, phantom penalties or those blatant ones not called at all, etc. why would you expect any better? The status quo will not improve until the refs are held accountable with full disclosure of their performance. Stewie are you out there?
Comment