My view on the great past-coach debate:
Saul is a good coach, who had bad luck here, especially in terms of some key injuries. I was not for firing him; however, I do think that Boals is an upgrade.
Jim Christian was a coach who abused his players. He apparently got the most out of them during the regular season by intimidation and fear. However, to win in the post-season one needs to have developed talent during the year and have inspirational coaching during the tournament. JC delivered neither. I was happy to see him go to those proverbial greener pastures.
Abuse, huh? Truly baffling to me the accusations people in the crowd with limited knowledge and vantage point are willing to throw out there.
It seems like there's a whole lot of room for nuance here that lives somewhere between Jim Christian is the best coach in the world and Jim Christian failed at OU because he's abusive.
My take:
Jim Christian and John Groce were stylistically quite different, and it's not surprising that a team recruited by Groce didn't mesh well with Christian. And the Sweet 16 team Christian inherited was about 2 inches away from losing to Akron in the MAC Championship game, and anybody taking over a MAC team whose line between success and failure hinges on an NCAA berth is more likely to fail than succeed.
Both Groce and Christian seem like mid-major quality basketball coaches. Both have had the chance to be more, neither has managed to make the most of it. They both have their strengths, both have their weaknesses. Groce had most of his career success at Ohio, so I'm inclined to like him more, but I don't understand why the only option people seem to think is available is to hate one and love the other.
And unless I'm missing something, accusing Christian of abuse seems like a huge stretch. Do you know something the rest of us don't?