Why do you think it's likely the next hire will be just as bad? That's what I don't get. Flood basically got the job by default as Rutgers got caught in a panic.
The next coach will likely have head coaching experience and experience running a program -- something Flood did not have. The hope is that the next coach will always have winning experience. History has shown that most of the best coaches at P5 schools had winning experience at the lower levels. So, even if Rutgers doesn't open the band for an established name, there are people much more affordable that could be the next coaching legend.
Flood really hasn't shown much in his time here to warrant the support that some give him. He really hasn't.
First of all, you took my post way too seriously. But...
Just being better than Flood is pointless. A coach can be
way better than Flood and still not beat most of the teams in the Big Ten East. Which is part of why I keep harping on the theme that talking about firing Flood is wasting one's breath. Firing people is easy. Hiring good people is really hard. The discussion should be 99.9% on what comes after Flood.
Our schedule's not likely to get easier anytime soon. I think it's unrealistic to expect RU to spend enough money to hire a coach that can really kill it in recruiting, that can attract the sort of coordinators that can go head-to-head with OSU and Michigan in game-day adjustments, etc.
In other words, we're likely to be just one of the many CFB teams that makes a change hoping for better just to find out over the span of 5 years that things aren't so very much better. The odds are that we'll have an unhappy fan base again at that point and we'll be having these same discussions. Not saying it's gonna be that way; but the odds are not in our favor at the amounts RU is likely to spend.
Given all that, I was joking about how, by talking about patience now, I can always claim in 5 years that we weren't patient enough (which, as I already pointed out, will be completely ********).
Get it?