to alter the original plan. I firmly believe a good/great planner should be able to adapt to those curveballs and still come up with a good plan that allows for future growth without potentially painting the organization into a corner. Maybe VT historically has been too focused on the short-term goals that it didn't give enough weight to the long-term goals. It is an okay approach to take as long as past decisions don't negatively impact achieving future short-term goals. I would consider VT's desire to join a P2 conference as a potential short-term goal even if it may be 5-10 years away. It is possible that VT may still have some work (i.e. achieve AAU membership, increase enrollment by at least 10K, increase research dollars by at least $500K, increase Lane's capacity to 75-80K, etc.) before it is in a solid position to achieve that goal. It is entirely possible that VT has unknowingly painted itself into a corner because the past decisions treated expansion of Lane as more like a patchwork quilt than 1 entire structure. It may have been the right decision at the time, but it doesn't always means it was the "right decision" for the long-term.