The question Hart & Turner must answer

[RGV Pony]

.. If we are talking letter of the law, is:

How is the student athlete best served. Never mind the effect on the brand or the alumni and donors. If it is detrimental to the student athlete that the staff finish out the season, the change should be made. If more harm comes from having the SAs endure a coaching shakeup twice (now and later), they might conclude they owe a duty to the SAs to subject them to the turnover only once.

Agree/disagree? Let's here some arguments on both sides