02-05-2016, 03:45 PM
(02-05-2016, 03:35 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Why don't you look at the results instead of the firings?
Because results are mixed. Some got better, some got worse, some stayed the same. The point is that none of those teams were content with status quo. They took risks to get better. Sometimes risks pay off, sometimes they don't.
Why don't you list some teams that continually stuck with a HC who was 0-for in the playoffs and it eventually paid off?
The training, nutrition, medicine, fitness, playbooks and rules evolve. The athlete does not.
