I have no clue what the real circumstances were for us hiring [Redacted] but I am confident that we will never be able to predict the future and guarantee that a new hire will succeed. Forbes was hired based on his potential to succeed and our next coach will be hired on the same principle, good faith presuming.
Blue balls!
Have to figure at this point people are just venting at the expense of any kind of logic.
Probability theory allows us to make predictions about the future based on past data. Sure there is error and stochasticity in these predictions, but we have some power to look at the past a make predictions about the future and then make decisions accordingly. I mean you're doing it in your assessment of Forbes right now, since he hasn't made the tournament yet, he is unlikely to consistently do in the future, therefore we should fire him. So a decision maker here would need to look at the landscape of potential or likely HC replacements and predict if they'd be more successful, and if there are several likely better options, then make a move. You're suggesting a fairly haphazard approach of hiring and firing as independent decisions until we get lucky. That is basically what we've done since Skip died and it is not working.
Haphazard or not, your opinion doesn’t suggest the existence of a preferable alternative way to manage a sports program. The refusal to make a change without the guarantee of improvement is just the refusal to make a change. The guarantee isn’t possible - we are limited to just making a well informed decision
My opinion is that it’s not bullshit to consider who you are going to replace a coach with before you fire them. Your opinion is that it is bullshit. We disagree and, using past data, I predict that we are unlikely to change each other’s opinion.
That is a straw man argument, and you know that.
Lol. Looks like my last prediction is on point.
I think @Colonel Angus is more obnoxious than DR. Second person I’ve ever muted!
Right. A program finishing in the 100+ range now would indicate that not only have we not made the tournament, but we don't appear very likely to in any short order either.
And to continue here - I'm sure there is a big of a difference in opinions, which is healthy. My current opinion (not quite as strongly held as before this season) is that 2. is true if we stay on course. And 1. his accomplishments at two different levels and stops before Wake plus his management of the portal and annual roster turnover are pretty decent indications towards that view that he will get us over the hump soon enough.
You just keep getting annoyed when posters respond to your calls for moving on from Forbes by asking who would you replace him with. You said it was bullshit to ask and have called it LOWF in the past. I think it’s a legit question, maybe not for you but certainly for the AD. The firing decision shouldn’t be done in a vacuum because it’s immediately followed by a hiring decision and things could definitely get a lot worse for our basketball program then they have been for the last three years.
I have the patience for you to actually just state your opinion with me instead of just rage quitting the argument. You’re seemingly suggesting that hiring and firing needs to be coordinated in advance to guarantee a preferable replacement. I don’t believe that level of coordination is necessary or always possible. The presumption is that in the entire field of candidates there will be a worthy replacement, even if you don’t know exactly who that is before the coach is fired. You may call that haphazard, I believe it’s surplus of labor.
