Posted by tarvolon on 5/28/2013 12:00:00 PM (view original):
IMO, at any school with baseline prestige that's the same as the rest of the conference, having a consistently winning record in conference should be plenty. If you're coaching Austin Peay, making the PT every three years is unrealistic expectations. Should there still be firings at Peay? If you've been there 10 seasons and have an overall conference record of 64-96, with a peak of 9-7 in your 6th season, then yeah, I'd say you can be fired. But if you're flitting between 8-8 and 12-4 every year, winning the regular season crown every once in a while, that's enough to keep your job, even if you never end up in the postseason.
Whereas at Memphis, with a baseline prestige higher than anybody else in the conference, the standards should be higher. And at Virginia, with piles of recruiting money every year, they should be even higher than that.
Again, I'm not a D1 player. I understand that my impressions from real life may not always match up to HD. But I think that, once you've factored in that turnarounds in HD D1 take longer than in real life D1, real life D1 provides a good first approximation for appropriate standards.
i sort of agree, sort of disagree with this.
i guess to me the point of firings it to open jobs for other guys. whats the point of firing a guy for having a 64-96 record with D prestige, when there are a ton of other D prestige jobs? i guess if d1 was full, i could see it. but with 200 openings in low d1, i cant see how firing a guy in that situation benefits someone else. if nobody gets a benefit from you firing someone, and its a negative for you firing that person, whats the point?
i suppose if the requirements were low enough, i could support d1 firings across the board. that would basically ensure someone didnt get fired from a low end program in an empty conference (unless they were god awful), because of all the sim games, but if low d1 filled up, people would start to get fired from full low end conferences.