NYTimes Column on College Football Coaches

An interesting article in the NYTimes today (November 28) about the right head coach being the critical ingredient in a successful college football program.  Granted that the author (Marc Tracy) is talking about marquee national football schools, but the message is equally applicable to relative small fry like HC.  Among other things, the column identifies a "general feeling of malaise and inconsistency" as two of the effects of "suboptimal coaching"  (hmmmm...) and argues that "[c]oaching changes do not slow down programs; bad hires do."  Tracy does allow that "there is a conceit that educating the athlete through sport is at least as much a team priority as is winning" and implies that who the coach is doesn't really matter too much at schools with that philosophy.  Gilmore's retention sounds like that's how HC may see the role of football on the Hill.  If so, the school should just come out and say so and explain why it's nevertheless worth spending $4 million a year on the sport.  If not, Gilmore should have been terminated after the Fordham debacle.