i wouldn't necessarily say that the 5 years coach grant has been the coach were "steadily declining" i understand he only took the team to the ncaa tournament once but during his tenure except for his first year, we have been pretty consistent and have been near the top of the sec (except for this year...but this is his only bad year in addition to the first)..... bottom line, its not like we have had a losing record every year coach grant has been here.....the only losing record has been this year....
who is a coach that you guys think we can realistically hire that you know for a fact can do the things you guys are expecting us to do? every time a coach is hired, there's always a question mark.....hell, the next coach we hire that everybody thinks is a good hire, may do a worse job than grant.....for everybody thinking "it can't get any worse than the coach we have now" my answer is simply, yes it can....grant may not be a great coach but he is far far from the worse (we could end up with someone like a mark fox or tony barbee who had winning records at their previous schools so the perception would be that they're good coaches) those two examples have been consistently bad since coming to sec and i don't think anyone on this board can say grant has been consistently bad
Here's my logic. You're right in that Grant hasn't been outright bad. He has, however, consistently under-achieved.
His teams have consistently played good defense to the exclusion of all else. Turnovers, rebounds and scoring have all been worse than even average, let alone provided a competitive advantage. Then there's the 5 to 7 minute scoring drought every game against every opponent even approaching a quality opponent. And he's consistently been a poor marketer, though one could argue that he's created a product that is hard to market. Either way, after five years, that's on his watch.
You make a valid point that the next hire isn't guaranteed success. Trouble is, we know for a stone cold fact that unless Grant is an exception in all of sport on the order of Frank Beamer (who owes his one true flash to a single player, has done precious little of national note since Michael Vick, and is therefore at best a shaky example of a shaky preposition), we can't expect a whole lot more than we have now.
So if your goal is to win championships of any description, the rational play is to switch horses. True, the future would be uncertain. But under present leadership, the future is all but certain to disappoint.
Rational evaluation of the situation dictates a switch.
