No, we saw he was failing from the get go

By: NYTrojan

failures you ignored because they weren't 100% reflected in the record due to some heroic efforts by a few supurbly talented players.  We warned you that this was not the kind of play you can sustain.

You're just too simple to have seen them yourself.  We pointed them out and you poked your fingers in your ears and said "lalalalala" 

Now you can't do that anymore because the only metric you ever looked at is suffering too.  Just like we said it would.

Which is why my question is important to this conversation.  If the team isn't getting better (just like it didn't during the 'good' years too) then perhaps the discussion about having the coach removed isn't so infantile after all.  

Yes, Ws and Ls are all that matter season to season, but to actually evaluate a program and how it is being run you need to have a deeper view than that.  A poor record can be forgiven if you are seeing the little things that lead to long term success (a la Pete Carroll's first year).  A good record can buy you time, but doesn't excuse sloppy play and teams that get worse as the year goes on.  Teams that fall on their face and quit against good competition.  

What is infantile isn't calling for Helton's job.  What is infantile is your assessment of the quality of the program Helton has built:  It looks at the simplest and most broad metric alone in a vacuum.  

Post Please Log in OR Register for an account before posting.