I really wish we could stop with the labels of "lovers" or "haters" when opinions aren't so (pardon the pun) black and white. For that matter, I think you have your descriptions of the factions backwards. This conversation started because Johnno suggested that if we get a new coach, we will be top 4. There was no reason, logic or factual information behind it and people rightfully questioned it.
Ironically it's the "lovers" who appear to be the sensible thinkers. I don't think that any aren't considering that there should be a review and possible change of coach at the end of the season. It's sensible and logical.
The thought process of: 1 New coach 2 start winning, is if anything, the most illogical and irrational thought in the argument. It's the Bolton/Beverage effect. Except that people don't seem to reference that for every Bolton, you have 2 Waters. For every Beverage, you have 2 Neelds. Three years ago it was the Hinkley effect and we can all see how that's working out.
If you can logically and rationally explain to me how a change of coach will improve the club's position, then I am on board, because I am yet to see one argument that doesn't have a giant plot hole in the middle of it.
Jasper, the highlighted sentence above shows that you may have some issues with logic and rationality, so it may be difficult for me to explain. Your question is worded in definitive terms; "how a change in coach
WILL improve the clubs position". Obviously you are asking for an impossibility here Jasper. Nobody can tell you that a change of coach
will definitively bring a positive result unless they are ancient Druid oracles. This should be obvious to you so I'm not sure why you ask the question or why you view the obvious uncertainty of future outcomes as a "giant pothole" in decision making. If you need certainty of future outcomes before you make a decision... suggests you will never make a decision. However decisions (judgement calls) are necessary. This is what people in power and authority do all the time.. make judgement calls in the
hope of achieving a better outcome in the future; based on their knowledge of the present and past.
A logical and rational question for you to have asked in this instance would be something along the lines of "So after what we know of Bucks as a coach after 5 years, and what we know about the teams performances under him; are we now in a position to make a judgement call about whether or not it is time to look for an alternative to get us to where we want to be?. The ancillary questions attached to this then are: 1. are there any better alternatives currently available?; or; 2. is Bucks still the man for the job and he's just been unlucky so far?".
You would note that there is no talk of a nonsensical definitive guarantee about future outcomes in the wording of this question... because you cannot ever get this... but you can judge where we are now and what has been achieved over the last 5 years and make a logical and rational judgement call about what direction to take for the future. There are cold hard facts backing that up and there are also all the extenuating factors of unbelievable injuries and the MM transition fallout.
So it is a judgement call. 5 years is a big sample size to make that call on. These are the sorts of strategic and far seeing decisions that people in power have to make. The board will be making these deliberations about Bucks at years end Jasper.. whether you like it or not.. that's their job.
Apart from the obvious uncertainty of the future outcomes... what is the "giant pothole" with the club changing coaches then please Jasper?