In 5 full seasons, Garrett will have exactly 1 winning year.
Is just 1 winning season out of 5 seasons really the mark of a good head coach? Shouldn't a good head coach be able to get more out of his team than that?
And this is not a taking a shot at Garrett mods, this is just asking a legitimate question regarding a coach's record. At what point is the head coach responsible for the performance, or lack off, for the team he is in charge of? And is 1 winning season out of 5 really an indicator that the program is headed in the right direction? Cant an argument be made that almost any head coach could luck into 1 winning season out of 5? Even the door mat teams of the league usually luck into a winning season every 5 years or so, it is really nothing special at all.
Even if Garrett is not the reason for our losing, at what point does it become clear that he is not the reason for wins either. Garrett does not bring anything to the table that is unique or gives his team an edge. So I think it is a legitimate question to ask at what point is the head coach responsible for his team's continued lack of success, outside of one single good year.