Coaches doing well and producing consistent results don't need defending-- their own abilities speak for themselves. Same with players. What drives me crazy about the defenders of Quinn is they use circular logic to defend the guy. " Well he's got a young team so he can't be held accountable for the obvious mistakes."....next poster points out decisions he's directly made that contribute to the poor play... " Well if he had better players who were more experienced he'd be better." ...next poster points out flaws in the system... " Well if the players were more experienced we could evaluate his system better." These types of arguments abound here and it's insufferable because one side ( the anti Quinn group) is talking about the here and now and the other side ( defenders of Quinn) just make up, while true in their wording, complete excuses that are not based on the team he is coaching. He was charged with coaching a young team filled with inexperienced players.
He has to be judged based on how he's done with that roster.
He's done a poor to below average job developing players,
He's done a poor to below average job giving the team an identity
He's done a poor to below average job meeting management's objectives( making the team tougher to play against- stated after the bubble last year.)
He's done a poor to below average job consistently motivating the more experienced guys
He's done an average to above average job getting teh team's record to slightly above .500
He's done an average to above average job getting the team to play a few meaningful games and make a push this season
If anyone else would like to contribute to what he's done average to above average I'm happy to read it.