They have little to do with it and not enough for it to be a major point. Its not like Johnson is sitting down and helping the players with calculus. The extent at which head coaches affect academics is overblown and almost always used in support of coaches who aren't living up to expectations in other ways.
So the young men he recruited and the emphasis placed on academics Arent important to academic performance?
The difference Johnson winning coach of the year is a relative award. He won it over coaches who are largely no longer in the conference. That tells us nothing about how good a coach Johnson is against the current coaches in conference. The idea that just because he won a coach of the year means he's a great coach is an absolute claim. The comparison to Gailey isn't to make a claim about which is better (Johnson is better), but instead showing a comparison about how each is performing relative to their current surroundings. And Gailey was performing bad enough compared to those around him that we fired him. Johnson's recent record shows a similar level of performance. Think about it like this, if we lose every game for the next 3 years Johnson how silly will it look to be bringing up coach of the year awards from then? It's the same idea. ACC has improved it's coaching. We haven't. Johnson once was a good enough coach. He isn't anymore. The performance is displaying that.
So to you it appears that wins and losses solely determine if a coach is good or bad. Seems too simplistic to ignore the myriad of factors that coaches cannot control. Guess our complaining about injuries etc are wrong because they really don’t affect the outcomes. I guess it isn’t a factor for you that Tech requirements reduce the talent pool we swim in. Would you declare any good coach to be someone to fire if they have a sub par win/loss for two of three years even when there are mitigating circumstances?
Of course. Why would you blame the head coach when his defense has been terrible for 10 years through 3 different DCs. I take it you look at him firing another DC as a sign that he's trying his best to fix the issue. I'm sure it'll work as well as it did the last two times. How many DCs does it take before people look at the constant through the entire time? Then what about the mediocre recruiting? The bad special teams? The inconsistent blocking? The anemic passing game?
So his “mediocre” recruiting is totally on him and the unique requirements, majors and demands shouldn’
But hey, when missing bowls twice in 3 years is an excellent job then of course I'm sure you have great reasons why each of those things isn't actually Johnson's fault.
