Something feels off to me. And it's how sports organisations handle change.

The data scientist identifies a chronic problem. Proposes fixing it now. Clear timeline. Clear accountability.

The response? "Let's not be so definitive. This is an evolution."

That phrase killed another innovation.

When you've seen the same reasonable language once, it will appear everywhere. "It's a journey." "We're evolving." "Let's keep talking."

These aren't neutral phrases. They're competitive disadvantages disguised as wisdom.

Reasonable is the new no. It’s how smart people in good organisations keep things from changing while still looking collaborative.

Here's what I mean.

Your data quality is poor. Has been for months. You've spent three years building trust with your head coach. Every insight strengthened that relationship. Then last Tuesday, your coach made a selection decision based on corrupted performance metrics. The player failed. The coach's decision backfires.

That trust you built. Gone in a single moment of preventable failure.

Or worse - the ethical nightmare: You know the data has holes. The chronic issues have been documented, discussed, "evolved" for months. Yet you're still presenting insights as gospel to stakeholders who trust you completely. They don't know they're standing on quicksand. But you do.

There's no grey area here. Fix it or disclose it.

Meanwhile, your biggest rival fixed their data issues six months ago. One painful month of rework. Now they're making better decisions, faster, with total confidence.

They decided. You're still discussing.

Here is what strikes me: Commitment is binary. You're 100% in or you're 100% out.

There's no partial accountability. No evolutionary accountability. You commit and own the outcome, or you don't.

This stacks up. The teams that dominated didn't have more resources. They refused to let ‘reasonable’ stay reasonable when it meant admitting their foundation was rotten.

So why would organisations choose comfort over clarity?

It's risk management through rhetoric. Can't fail at something you never committed to. Can't be held accountable for an "ongoing conversation."

But here's the paradox: You can't lose by deciding. If it works, you have answers while competitors are still discussing. If it doesn't work, you have invaluable data immediately. Nearly all decisions are reversible.

Inaction breeds fear. Action breeds learning.

Every day you choose reasonable over resolution, competitors gain ground.

So here's your competitive advantage for next week.

Monday morning. Team meeting. Chronic problem surfaces (it always does).

Someone will propose action. Someone else will counsel patience: "We're always open to having the conversation."

Translation: "Let's do nothing while feeling good about ourselves."

That's your moment.

Say this: "We decide by Friday, or we table it permanently."

Then ask three questions:

Watch what happens. Some will call you aggressive. "Ultimatum-ish."

Good.

Because someone will step up. Someone always does when the choice becomes real instead of rhetorical.

And when they do, something shifts. People feel relief. Humans crave clarity. The noise stops. The work begins.

Your biggest risk isn't making the wrong decision. It's making no decision while feeling strategic about it.

The New England Patriots have a phrase: "Do Your Job." Three words. No evolution. No journey. Clarity and accountability.

That's why they won six championships while others had conversations.

You can build the most sophisticated analytics operation in sports. But if it's built on unfixed foundations while you're having conversations about conversations? You'll be remembered as the GM who invested millions in elaborate systems that produced elaborate nonsense.

Next Monday's meeting is coming. Another chronic problem. Another chance for reasonable to kill change.

What will you do?

Will you let comfortable sound strategic?

Or will you force the choice that creates competitive advantage?

Your rivals already decided.

They're not smarter. They just stopped letting reasonable sound reasonable.