Setting the good hire/bad hire aside for a second, I really wish people would stop using terrible arguments.
Terrible argument #1: Day hired him, so he must be good!
Day could hire literally anybody and that would apply. It's a bad argument right from the start......and then when you realize people like Tim Beck and Bill Davis were also hired by championship winning head coaches, it really hammers it home. Just because he was hired, doesn't make him good.
Terrible argument #2: Matt Patricia was a hated hire, and he worked out!
OK? So now every single hire that fans hate is going to also end the same way? I refer back to Tim Beck. My reaction to this hire or the Patricia hire have 0 bearing on whether or not either of them are good hires. So why use one to bolster the other?
Agree or disagree all you want.....but at least bring arguments that hold water for more than half a second.
