99, I don't want to be any other school. I want us to be George Mason. Part of the logic for hiring Hewitt was to maintain a program that was almost always at the top of an ever improving CAA. We did not, supposedly, need to gamble on a hot, up and coming assistant to rebuild our program from the ground up. He was supposed to maintain what had already been established, and hopefully improve on it. Instead of maintaining, we have been getting steadily worse while several of those that went with a hot assistant have passed us on their way up.
Now, we have a program that is in the cellar of the A10 and we don't have the hot up and comer at the helm. We have the most expensive guy we can afford, we are possibly stuck with him for another 2.5 years and we are a program that is on the verge of needing a complete rebuild. The only hope I see even the most optimistic of posters on here is that we hit the jackpot with our incoming recruits over the next two years. I don't doubt we will end up with with some very good recruits, but will they suffer from the same execution problems that seem to plague Hewitt led teams, that they just don't seem to be able to execute the plays that he is calling?
So, it is like we paid the big money for the low risk option, but got the downside results as if we went with the risky hot assistant and the gamble failed completely. I expect more than that.