i agree. but you know that's not how it really works. many said the same thing when pruitt was hired, given the shape of the program, condition of the roster, the first year of the ESD and being behind the 8 ball on that cycle, his experience level, and the tutelage he would need from brand new AD w/no experience Fulmer etc.....
2 losing seasons in 3...he gone.
same basic deal here. new AD, new coach, behind the 8 ball in recruiting, potential "free" transfer stuff on the horizon for the first time....etc, etc, etc.
so we'll see. im hopeful. i do think the leadership structure is wholly different than what we've experienced for the majority of the last 15 years, so that's a plus. and for the first time in a long time, while i can't say i'm super excited about all these hires, they do NOT seem to be typical of what we've done in the past, i.e., being reactionary. There, at least on the surface, seems to be a more measured, deliberate, approach to it this time around. i don't feel like we "settled", at least because we had to react to poor results, a la Dooley, jones, pruitt, and many of the assistants along the way. i'm happy with the process so far. it hasn't necessarily netted the results we all wanted, but i can't argue with how they got where they landed. they had a plan, and executed it, i don't think they got surprised at any point. so if we can be a little patient, maybe this thing does turn around.
it'd be nice to get off to a good start this fall....i think that would help a lot in changing the perception.