BULLHITTER wrote:firing a coach after one season smacks of poor management/ownership. hiring a coach is a collective decision, one in which all parties should, in theory, be on the same page regarding the players on the roster, the style of play, the future, etc., etc.
if for some reason said coach does something obviously outside of the agreed upon principles, then i'd imagine there'd be some cause for concern. but unless he took the job with a "win or else" caveat (and why would he do that), it's extremely short-sighted to recruit, interview, align oneself with philosophically then after underacheiving, utter a statement regarding said coach's inablity to "get the job done".
I agree on this point completely. Putting a guy in a situation where he needs to develop a team and a philosophy means that he should be given more than one season to see it play out. Especially if he is trying to develop talents. Its unconscionable that the owner tell the coach what type of offense to put in, though. This should be worked out during the hiring process. GM/coach/owner should have a similiar vision for a team.
Where I see this working with the Bucks is that new management probably wanted their own guy in place.
The Bucks have royally screwed up everything over the past season, especially with the way they treated their free agents and how they handled Yi and the draft. Expecting this season to go smoothly is ludicrous.
