That's exactly what I'm saying. All 3 of those coaches were let go pretty quick (3 firings in the span of 10 years). If A&M has such a tradition of not making change, why the short leash with 3 different coaches? Or are you only referring to RC? Or "fixture" coaches? Cause if so that's a whole nother point than "We hang onto coaches too long".BoozingAg said:Aggies2009 said:That keeps being repeated over and over and still anyone has yet to tell me a single school that's fired 4 football coaches in 15 years. Or fired 3 coaches in 10 years. If it's such a tradition, why have we fired more coaches than every team out there in the last 15 years? I guess Arkansas did, but one of them was due to off-field issues, not performance (and that led to an emergency hire who lasted only a year, further muddying their waters). Anyone else?EMIN was WOW! said:This.Quote:
At this point, it's being against change for the sake of being against change, which is kind of one of our worst Aggie traditions.
In addition, A&M just paid the 3rd highest buyout in the history of college athletics in order to make a change.
For a school that supposedly has a tradition of not making change, A&M has made quite a bit of history in that department.
Fran, Sumlin, and Sherman weren't here long enough or won enough to really get that fixture status we so love. BK was kept around for reasons that had nothing to do with basketball and was given every opportunity to succeed including a revolving door of assistants, just so we wouldn't have to make a HC change.
People went crazy over the fact Slocum was named AD for not other reason than he is a familiar face.
A&M has no one to blame but themselves for that ridiculous buyout they paid Sumlin.
For what reason was Kennedy kept around and what's your source on that?