That said, I think we had established some very strong momentum -- negative momentum -- in Greenberg's last year, and that carried on into the postseason with the entire assistant coaching staff leaving. Honestly, I don't think we would have done much better than 13-19 last year with SG at the helm, Erick Green's contributions notwithstanding.
My opinion is that while Greenberg had done some good things, he had used up his time at Tech. I'd put him in the same category as Elmassian--very effective in short periods of time, but with a style that can turn people off over extended periods of time. There's nothing wrong with those types of people, as they can be effective change agents. After awhile, it is best for all involved if they move on. Greenberg had (more than) reached that point.
DFS was gone no matter what and Harrell was looking for any excuse to get out of his LOI because he blew up in the post season tourneys and had teams after him that never gave him a 2nd look before.
Water over the bridge now.
I can understand the arguments for keeping Seth, but we were not in a good place at the end of 11-12...that season was ugly...tied for last place in the ACC...and while the prior 4 seasons had been pretty good, by the end of those 4, I think a lot of people were disappointed because it seemed as though we could've/should've done better with 4 years of Delaney, Allen, et al