Very good post, golfing, as usual. IMHO, winning a round-of-64 game in the NCAA's is hardly a run. As success starved as we've been around here recently, we still know what an NCAA run feels like, and that's not it. If that's all you have to show for 6 years at that salary and with those expectations, you can't expect to be secure in your job. Likewise, if that's all Pitino has to show after 6 years, with the highly-ranked players he's recruited and presumably will continue to recruit, he shouldn't be secure at that juncture either.
It's appropriate to be questioning his performance at this time, even though he has a young, rebuilt roster. I have to give him until midway through the conference schedule, at which time I expect to see marked improvement and better cohesion. If we don't, you have to scrutinize his coaching. Not to always talk about the Grinch, but let's be honest here: Bo has far less talent on his roster than this year's Gopher team, and it showed early in their home loss, but they just trounced a Temple team that the Gophs struggled against. There's little question at this point that they'll finish ahead of us in the conference record. South Dakota reminded me a little of Wisconsin - excellent position defense that, despite a lack of quickness and athleticism, allowed the Gophers very few easy baskets or good looks from the perimeter.
The disquieting thing about Pitino so far - and I'm not the first to note it - is the inability to implement his offensive and defensive schemes, particularly full-court pressure defense and fast-break offense. (In contrast, Marlene Stollings had her team playing her schemes well in their first game under her.) Richard may indeed have a deep understanding of exactly how to play full-court D, but teaching such a thing is another matter. How much do his assistant coaches teach, and how good are they at it? How well does he delegate coaching to them? Or does he even have a thorough enough understanding of the offense and defense he wants to see that he's able to teach it? I find this somewhat Monson-esque - Dan hired Mike Peterson to coach his offense, and I think he wanted to run the same flow-tion offense they ran at Gonzaga, but he lacked the understanding of it that Mark Few had. Peterson did the best he could, but he was no Few.
I'm with those who say that, although there are exceptions, it's rare for a coach to come into head coaching fully formed. It's best to cut your teeth at a lower level than the best and best coached conference in the nation.