The Monday Mailbag featured a couple of questions about this, but I felt that my response was long enough to warrant a full-on article. Enjoy!
Georgia Tech hasn't had a losing season in baseball since Jim Luck's final season as skipper in 1981. Since then, Tech fans have been treated to 32 straight seasons of a bigger number in the "W" column than the "L" column under Jim Morris and Danny Hall. While Morris's tenure saw 12 winning seasons, his teams lost in NCAA Regionals 9 straight years -- the final 9 of his run as Tech's coach. Hall has had a better record than that, although it could be considered marginal. In his first year (1994), Tech got 2nd place in the College World Series. Since then, he's been to 2 CWS (2002, 2006), 3 Super Regionals (all prior to the 2006 CWS run), and 12 Regionals.
Danny Hall's record of successful recruiting and regular season play have been well-documented. However, in recent years Tech fans have largely gotten frustrated with the lack of postseason success. Some of the most talented teams in the country haven't made it past the first round of the tournament since 2006 -- we do have a right to be frustrated, right?
I suggest that we do, but that there's another side of this we need to consider. Hall has made three CWS appearances in his time and has consistently brought top talent to the Flats. What do we stand to gain by firing him? In a game like baseball where the manager has so little to do with his team's performance, isn't Hall doing everything that a manager can by recruiting big-time talent, keeping them out of trouble, and making lineup decisions that get the team to the postseason?
Be frustrated as you may, but I can't imagine that there's much that Tech stands to gain by bringing in someone to replace Danny Hall. As hands-off as a head coach is in baseball, there's not much improvement that can be made by bringing in a different one.
Agreed? Disagreed? I want to hear your thoughts. Should we keep Danny Hall, or should he be considered "on the hot seat"?