[StanfordMatt]

I hate turning this into a Dawkins vs. Monty debate because Dawkins' performance should be judged on its own merit. That being said, since a number of people seem intent on doing just that, it's worth pointing out that Monty's teams made it past the Sweet 16 a grand total of TWO times. Sure, you can minimize Dawkins' success last year by saying he had one great week just as you can say Michael Phelps only had one great week in 2008. Winning in March is what college basketball is all about.

Another issue I have with this debate is that a comparison of records is overly simplistic. Was Trent Johnson a great coach because we went 28-8 in 2007-08? No. The reason Trent did so well that year was because a pair of 7 foot lottery picks were destined for Stanford since the moment of their birth 20 years earlier. Trent's performance the past six years backs this up.

Johnny Dawkins' teams didn't measure up to expectations his first few years on the Farm. Was that entirely his fault? Yes and no. You could point to any number of explanations: bare cupboard left by Trent, first time head coach, and injuries in the case of 2012-13. Still, he also must bear responsibility. But his performance has improved over time. And yes, as someone who spent many nights as a student camped outside Maples from '02-'04, I am aware of what the standards should be for this program. But it's irrational to say that since Dawkins hasn't measured up to Monty so far, he needs to be fired based on the assumption that the next Mike Montgomery is out there somewhere just waiting for a phone call from Muir.

The bottom line is that Dawkins needs to maintain an upward trajectory. Last year's results were a start and his success on the recruiting trail suggests he's on the right path. Until that changes, I will continue supporting him and have no problem with the extension.

[StanfordMatt]

I hate turning this into a Dawkins vs. Monty debate because Dawkins' performance should be judged on its own merit. That being said, since a number of people seem intent on doing just that, it's worth pointing out that Monty's teams made it past the Sweet 16 a grand total of TWO times. Sure, you can minimize Dawkins' success last year by saying he had one great week just as you can say Michael Phelps only had one great week in 2008. Winning in March is what college basketball is all about.

Another issue I have with this debate is that a comparison of records is overly simplistic. Was Trent Johnson a great coach because we went 28-8 in 2007-08? No. The reason Trent did so well that year was because a pair of 7 foot lottery picks were destined for Stanford since the moment of their birth 20 years earlier. Trent's performance the past six years backs this up.

Johnny Dawkins' teams didn't measure up to expectations his first few years on the Farm. Was that entirely his fault? Yes and no. You could point to any number of explanations: bare cupboard left by Trent, first time head coach, and injuries in the case of 2012-13. Still, he also must bear responsibility. But his performance has improved over time. And yes, as someone who spent many nights as a student camped outside Maples from '02-'04, I am aware of what the standards should be for this program. But it's irrational to say that since Dawkins hasn't measured up to Monty so far, he needs to be fired based on the assumption that the next Mike Montgomery is out there somewhere just waiting for a phone call from Muir.

The bottom line is that Dawkins needs to maintain an upward trajectory. Last year's results were a start and his success on the recruiting trail suggests he's on the right path. Until that changes, I will continue supporting him and have no problem with the extension.