[pincemob]

Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think there has been a coach in 30 years who survived 6 years without ever finishing above 5th place in the Pac 10.  I googled every bad coach I could think of and not one survived that long, let alone turned it around afterwards either there or anywhere else.    We have gone 39-51 in probably the weakest Pac 10 since the mid 80s.  The overall records have been padded by creampuffs.  Our ending RPIs of 95, 160, 151, 69, and probably around 70 this year bear this out.  Just as disappointing to me have been the Pac 10 tourney performances.  It is a smaller sample, but each year we went in with maximum motivation/incentive to win, and yet never managed more than 1 win. 

I have heard some nice things about Dawkins and I don't think he's the entire problem here.  I think the players & fans are also responsible for a winning culture/environment and those groups have not done their part.  If he had a top-10 recruiting class coming in (landing Jabari Parker for instance), I might have a different view but as things stand today it seems like a good transition time.  I'll trust Muir to make the call but I would be very interested in what basis he feels there is to keep Dawkins.  Are there any historical examples of coaches who had so little success at age 50 who built great programs later on?  I think a safer bet for the future would be an up-and-coming mid-major coach with a good record over several years.   

[pincemob]

Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think there has been a coach in 30 years who survived 6 years without ever finishing above 5th place in the Pac 10.  I googled every bad coach I could think of and not one survived that long, let alone turned it around afterwards either there or anywhere else.    We have gone 39-51 in probably the weakest Pac 10 since the mid 80s.  The overall records have been padded by creampuffs.  Our ending RPIs of 95, 160, 151, 69, and probably around 70 this year bear this out.  Just as disappointing to me have been the Pac 10 tourney performances.  It is a smaller sample, but each year we went in with maximum motivation/incentive to win, and yet never managed more than 1 win. 

I have heard some nice things about Dawkins and I don't think he's the entire problem here.  I think the players & fans are also responsible for a winning culture/environment and those groups have not done their part.  If he had a top-10 recruiting class coming in (landing Jabari Parker for instance), I might have a different view but as things stand today it seems like a good transition time.  I'll trust Muir to make the call but I would be very interested in what basis he feels there is to keep Dawkins.  Are there any historical examples of coaches who had so little success at age 50 who built great programs later on?  I think a safer bet for the future would be an up-and-coming mid-major coach with a good record over several years.