[76lsjumb]

I mean, if only we hadn't fired Buddy Teevens, who had an undeniably superior record to his successor.

BC

Not sure I understand your point... are you suggesting the next coach is guaranteed to be the equivalent of Jim Harbaugh?

Actually the next coach was Wlat.

Just to clarify, by "next coach" I meant the coach AFTER Wlat, since I [mis]understood the argument to be that, in order to get to the next good coach [i.e., Harbaugh] after Buddy, we first had to go through the worse coach [Wlat].  From BC's later post re analogies, I was clearly overthinking the earlier riposte.

And, I confess, BC isn't really wrong, although, as bad [or, at least, somewhat-less-than-good] as Dawkins was, I would still submit that his overall coaching career at Stanford ranks higher than Haase's, at least to this point.  I'm just a little bemused at how much greater the vitriol here was w/r/t Dawkins compared to what it is now w/r/t Haase.

[76lsjumb]

I mean, if only we hadn't fired Buddy Teevens, who had an undeniably superior record to his successor.

BC

Not sure I understand your point... are you suggesting the next coach is guaranteed to be the equivalent of Jim Harbaugh?

Actually the next coach was Wlat.

Just to clarify, by "next coach" I meant the coach AFTER Wlat, since I [mis]understood the argument to be that, in order to get to the next good coach [i.e., Harbaugh] after Buddy, we first had to go through the worse coach [Wlat].  From BC's later post re analogies, I was clearly overthinking the earlier riposte.

And, I confess, BC isn't really wrong, although, as bad [or, at least, somewhat-less-than-good] as Dawkins was, I would still submit that his overall coaching career at Stanford ranks higher than Haase's, at least to this point.  I'm just a little bemused at how much greater the vitriol here was w/r/t Dawkins compared to what it is now w/r/t Haase.