Sooooo..... What's your stance Rav??? Would you rather have a lousy coach that's a "great" public figure yet gives you constant losing seasons with maybe one good year sandwiched in there? Or........ A "great" coach that is a lousy public figure yet gives you constant winning seasons and the occasional championship season squeezed in there to boot?I agree a coach is there to win games and I also honestly think he should teach somethings that you can not learn in a classroom but those things will be taught as by-product of playing collegiate sports.
I would prefer Bama's coach (regardless of whw it is) be an asset to the community also. I think you can do both
Let's face it the coach at Alabama is a very, very important public figure and they can do great things for the community with a lot less effort than the average University employee. I am not saying Saban should do those things just pointing out that certian public figures draw a crowd
using the all we want out of a coach is put a good football team on the field contradicts the backlash at DuBose for having lots of fun with his secretary, Wimp slapping his and Mike Price having a little fun with the dancers.
If Mike Price was a winning coach already at Bama would his actions be OK with you - How about DuBose excluding the NCAA trouble are we OK with having someone having some natural fun with his secretary as long as we win..?
Not comparing Saban to those clowns but the don't care what the coach does as long as he wins doesn't support the criticism others have faced for their transgressions that would not effect winning/losing
Optimally, we would all perfer to find the happy medium of both in a great caoch, but for debating purposes and since you posed this to start with..... If ya had to choose one.... Which way would you go??
Just asking...