Tulane's Coach was a "Good Man"

[Pony in SA]

Tulane's former coach was by all counts a "good man" and he had to deal with not even having a place for his team to work out, practice, etc. Tulane didn't use that as an excuse to keep him on -- they fired him and got Toledo and their AD took some initial heat but even said at the press conference that they were in the business to win games, period.

If PB can't win games (and we'll see what rest of the season holds), and he has been given 6 years to try and do so and said himself he needs to win, it is time to move on. I think any backlash, if any at all, for firing a "good man" will go away quickly.

[ponyboy]

Let's get something straight. Being a good man is by definition a good thing and, contrary to some stupid opinions posted by a few apparent Machiavellians in the last couple of days, doesn't impede success. But the mere fact that he's a good man but an unsuccessful coach here at SMU means that unless something extremely dramatic occurs in the next few weeks, he needs to be fired and replaced.

[Perkins Pony]

Saying that a coach is a good man is like telling your buddy about a girl who has a good personality. Coaches are supposed to win (ethically of course) and dates are supposed to be attractive (without being psychobabes).