Good points all around in this thread. One can indeed reasonably disagree whether Arch is a sure-fire upgrade, and worth the risk of an out-of-the-box aggressive move. Other people whose sourcing I trust think Miller would still be available to us in a couple of years (the Dayton extension is GOOD for us that way, IMHO – and if Arch wants to come here, he very likely has an out clause in the contract for our job – he certainly would have leverage to negotiate that with Dayton, which he may not have had with a power conference job). So…more time to evaluate Arch and MG, as I do think it’s fair to say the book isn’t fully written with either.
I also definitely agree that MG is an improvement over HWSNBN. A “B” grade over 3 years is vastly preferable to a “B-” over 10. Esepcially since we don’t play a junk system that limits our tourney ceiling.
