[GK3]

It generally seems to take about 4 years of true incompetence to get someone fired unless you are named Teevens or Harris.

This seems like a bit of a no true Scottsman argument.  I'm racking my brain for a coach who has had four years of "true incompetence" before being fired.  In addition to the two you mentioned, I think Rachel Hanson was fired after three years (2015 - 2017).  I'm not sure we have seen any other recent history of "true incompetence".  Maybe Johnny Dawkins, though I wouldn't call it true incompetence so much as "consistent underperformance" (we did win two NIT championships and make it to a sweet sixteen in his eight years).

Well, Cactus Jack won 28% of his games over 4 years, I feel that sort of qualifies as incompetence. Paul Wiggen won 36% with I think John Elway playing quarterback. I guess you have to define competence as it applies to football coaches.  What figure would you accept as representing competence?  What we as individuals would accept is probably significantly different than what the powers would be will accept.  They have shown willingness to dump the really bad coaches in less than 4 years. The great Bill Walsh won less than 60% of his games at Stanford.  I do not recall the fans calling for him to get a new offensive coordinator, or a new anything.  During those years we were happy if we won more than we lost and we went to a bowl game.  The Rose Bowl was such a rarity it was rarely suggested as a possibility.  Having watched Stanford Football since the mid 1950's, I have seen a fair number of coaches come and go and sat through some very bad football games.  At least then, the price of the ticket  to watch a disaster was cheaper than today.

BC

[GK3]

It generally seems to take about 4 years of true incompetence to get someone fired unless you are named Teevens or Harris.

This seems like a bit of a no true Scottsman argument.  I'm racking my brain for a coach who has had four years of "true incompetence" before being fired.  In addition to the two you mentioned, I think Rachel Hanson was fired after three years (2015 - 2017).  I'm not sure we have seen any other recent history of "true incompetence".  Maybe Johnny Dawkins, though I wouldn't call it true incompetence so much as "consistent underperformance" (we did win two NIT championships and make it to a sweet sixteen in his eight years).

Well, Cactus Jack won 28% of his games over 4 years, I feel that sort of qualifies as incompetence. Paul Wiggen won 36% with I think John Elway playing quarterback. I guess you have to define competence as it applies to football coaches.  What figure would you accept as representing competence?  What we as individuals would accept is probably significantly different than what the powers would be will accept.  They have shown willingness to dump the really bad coaches in less than 4 years. The great Bill Walsh won less than 60% of his games at Stanford.  I do not recall the fans calling for him to get a new offensive coordinator, or a new anything.  During those years we were happy if we won more than we lost and we went to a bowl game.  The Rose Bowl was such a rarity it was rarely suggested as a possibility.  Having watched Stanford Football since the mid 1950's, I have seen a fair number of coaches come and go and sat through some very bad football games.  At least then, the price of the ticket  to watch a disaster was cheaper than today.

BC