With Frank's win tonight and Bruce's early exit, it's inevitable for fans to draw comparisons between the two. I've seen Frank characterized as a winner who only yelled at a kid from SMEHS once and Bruce characterized as a milk-toast limp-twisted coach who never won anything. My how easy it is to re-write history when it serves our purposes. I haven't watched Frank enough this year to know if he's grown up. While he was here, I watched plenty enough to know he needed to. I'm not sure what it would have taken for him to grow. Maybe a mature AD whom he respected could have impressed upon him the need to represent the school and the program better than he did here. I watched enough of Frank's sideline antics to know I didn't want him leading our program. I've watched enough of Bruce to know he isn't the man to lead us to March relevance again.
It's a false paradigm to believe you have to have a Frank to win or a Bruce to represent the program well. It takes a man's man to do both. All you have to do is look inside an office at Vanier to see that. I don't know if there's a basketball version of Bill out there. Maybe his name is Brad. If so, hopefully another can be found.
It's a false paradigm to believe you have to have a Frank to win or a Bruce to represent the program well. It takes a man's man to do both. All you have to do is look inside an office at Vanier to see that. I don't know if there's a basketball version of Bill out there. Maybe his name is Brad. If so, hopefully another can be found.
