GW might not be the smart choice.

[onlydarksets]

Originally Posted by irish

I'm not against GW. History is.

Um...not really.

Look, that's really a poorly written article. The stats about coaching backgrounds and success rates are interesting, and that part seems researched well, but the author's conclusions have no basis in those stats - he makes them up. At best, he is saying he has no basis to compare GW to other former head coaches. Of course, that's not a compelling story. That's the problem with sleight-of-hand statistics.

Bottom line - I don't mind a bash-GW thread, but this article demonstrates zippy. The article is, in the immortal words of Schneed, ...