If you think that firing a coach after a 20-win season wouldn't qualify a school as a pressure cooker, then I tip my hat to you. Your standard of what pressure is is apparently a lot higher than mine.
Firing Brady this year would be on par with the Cutcliff firing at Ole Miss. The season ended in awful fashion, but co-West Champs, Top 4 in the SEC, and 20 wins is enough to make Skip stay the course for another year...
G-Man113, are you going to tell me that we fired DiNardo after already knowing we would hire Saban? You can recognize a problem with a coach that is large enough to prompt his dismissal without specifically knowing the EXACT list of people you'd interview... If you're telling me that Emmert & Dean knew about Nick Saban's availability before they let Gerry have it, you're delusional, and you're mistaken... So why MUST basketball know who we HAVE to hire before we let go a cull like Brady?
I thought you had a history degree. When I earned mine, you had to have some ability to comprehend what you read. I'll repeat the question...AGAIN. Read the whole thing, not just what suits you. If you're going to fire John Brady, then it would follow that you'd want to replace him with someone of greater coaching ability...am I right? Otherwise, what's the point? Who are you going to get to come in here who's better than John Brady, once we've fired the man coming off a 20-win season? If they're better than John Brady, then the chances are, they are in a pretty good situation where they're at. Why would they leave that situation to come to a school that has just fired a coach that won 20 games? Your analogy to DiNardo is flawed, and you know it as well as I do. DiNardo was fired after 2 consecutive losing seasons, in which he lost control of the program and insisted on retaining Lou Tepper. John Brady, if anything, has regained control of his program and righted the ship...that first-round abortion the other night, notwithstanding. The players themselves have come out and admitted that the coaching staff had them ready to play...and they just didn't execute. If you're going to fire a man who's just won 20 games, you had BETTER have a contingency plan for replacing him...although, the mere fact that he won 20 games and it wasn't enough for him to keep his job makes that all but impossible. Nobody any better will want to walk into a situation like that. I've already conceded that I'm not going to change your mind. Now, all I'm asking for is your suggestion as to who should replace John Brady if you were to get your way. You like to make it seem that you have all the answers...is that too difficult?
