I just can't understand why you're so intent on policing other people's opinion of what this program should be.
It's this weird juxtaposition of pollyanna-ish defense of KO (until recently) and the team's short-term potential with a fatalistic long-term view of the program. Just bizarre.
It's not bizarre. It's totally rational.
The university went all in on KO and welding his name to the program's brand. The public consciousness's association of poor performance, recruiting, the transfer woes, rumors of off the court issues...all of that is tied to the program. Not just Ollie. UConn extended him, UConn's marketing efforts rendered him the face of the program, UConn kept him around while certainly being aware of the issues being discussed in PMs...
There is no reset button once he leaves; the damage sticks around. The rest of the basketball world does not see the historical success and tradition of the program in anywhere near the same light as diehard fans posting on an internet forum.
I think many of the people who claim to skewer the "blind faith" and "pollyanna-ism" of people who support(ed) KO are guilty of the exact same thing when it comes to their views of the post-Ollie era. They refuse to acknowledge the permanence of the last three years and how much it has toxified the program.
I was all in on Ollie because a) I knew that the only way those issues could go away were if he fixed them himself, and b) I think that the fanbase as a whole collectively underrates how much of a detriment the conference is in terms of attracting a coach who could meet the fanbase's standards (because, let's be real - people will not be happy with merely finishing in the top 3 of the conference and making the tourney. It will always be blue-blood status). It was in his hands. Unfortunately it looks like he is not up to the task.
