04-10-2026, 04:22 PM
When Dawkins was fired, the next guy was not much better and we spent 8 subsequent years with an aggregate sub-.500 record. Smith has so far been much better than Haase, but that’s not a guarantee that we will make it to the tourney again; so far he has delivered better play, but not a tournament appearance, and his best player just declared for the NBA draft and two other players have entered the portal.
When David Shaw retired (perhaps under some pressure) after many people on this board had wanted him out for several years, his successor not only did not improve upon his worst years (literally went 3-9 which was as bad as the worst of Shaw’s years), it turns out he got fired for a scandal. The man to replace him (permanently, as Reich was always a 1-year hire) is already being decried as a poor hire by people on this board (even though he hasn’t coached a single game). Going further back, when Buddy Teevens was hired, Wlat Harris wound up being, incredibly, worse. Not every hire is going to be a Jim Harbaugh; in fact, most are not.
Will the fact that the replacement could be as bad (or worse) than Paye be a reason to retain her? Of course not. But when you do the projected financials, you can’t just assume that there’s a $1.7 million in sales that we aren’t getting by retaining Paye; it has to be discounted by the probability that her successor will be able to return us to an attendance 5000/game and hosting the first two rounds of the tournament. More likely, we do somewhat better, attendance improves somewhat, maybe we make it back to the tournament but are not a top-4 seed, etc, and the extra revenue is a few hundred thousand, not $1.7 million. A buyout rarely pays for itself.
BC
When David Shaw retired (perhaps under some pressure) after many people on this board had wanted him out for several years, his successor not only did not improve upon his worst years (literally went 3-9 which was as bad as the worst of Shaw’s years), it turns out he got fired for a scandal. The man to replace him (permanently, as Reich was always a 1-year hire) is already being decried as a poor hire by people on this board (even though he hasn’t coached a single game). Going further back, when Buddy Teevens was hired, Wlat Harris wound up being, incredibly, worse. Not every hire is going to be a Jim Harbaugh; in fact, most are not.
Will the fact that the replacement could be as bad (or worse) than Paye be a reason to retain her? Of course not. But when you do the projected financials, you can’t just assume that there’s a $1.7 million in sales that we aren’t getting by retaining Paye; it has to be discounted by the probability that her successor will be able to return us to an attendance 5000/game and hosting the first two rounds of the tournament. More likely, we do somewhat better, attendance improves somewhat, maybe we make it back to the tournament but are not a top-4 seed, etc, and the extra revenue is a few hundred thousand, not $1.7 million. A buyout rarely pays for itself.
BC