Anyhow, I get how some people can look fondly upon the past and ask, 'what if?' However, we all know the program was in decline. Could you argue that we should have given him more time, and hoped he would have bounced back? Sure. What seemed apparent then, and still should be, is that he was not going to get us over the 5-3 hump. He was very close in 2003, and had that happened, it is doubtful we would be having this conversation. At the end of the '06 season, it seemed apparent to most that we needed to move another direction. We are on our second full-time coach. There seems to be progress, though not as fast as many would like. Let's ride it out, give Kill his due time, and evaluate after 5-ish seasons. I understand the frustration, but we need to have perspective.
For the sake of mental exercise, what if we did hire Mason now, or in 2-3 seasons. It assumes a lot since I doubt we want to do so, and I also doubt that he wants to coach again (of course, both are conjecture on my part, but i'll play my gut instincts). I believe Mason would be entering a toxic environment. Many fans and alumni, would think we are taking a step back, settling for mediocrity, would be further evidence of wasting money for a buyout, etc. Some media would be on board (as others have pointed out, this is a very strange turn on their part), others would be bashing the hire. In short, you would have some people pleased (though not ecstatic) and some people POed. There would be no excitement. There would only be a partial honeymoon period. People would expect results even faster. Unless he pulled a drastic turnaround in quick order, the fan base and media would turn on him (again) incredibly quickly. Assuming Mason could make the return to mediocrity, I do not think he could do it quickly enough before everyone changed their tune back to the incredibly negative view that was held in the mid-2000's about him. It just wouldn't work. It's silly talk.
