How is it even reasonable to think that our coaching staff, top to bottom, should have aligned in terms of schemes, techniques, philosophies? Shula was brought in at a time of the calendar year when it would have been impossible to go out and pick-and-choose a staff. At the time, I think the only reasonable choice was to keep as many of the coaches as he could get by with. I understand the need for some continuity or stability, but why would Shula be satisfied leaving his future and the future of this program (both of which I think he genuinely cares about) on the idea that, "Well, this was the hand I was dealt, my only choice is to make it work."
Who would ever fault him for saying, "Coach X is a hard worker, but he is not on the same page with the system we want to run."??
Who would ever fault him for saying, "Coach X is a hard worker, but he is not on the same page with the system we want to run."??