Look, you've lost this argument. And I think if you had focused on my point, which is tied to the R-G article above about other coaches in Maui being impressed by Oregon, the team, and Altman the head coach, you would've been better served. Instead you tried to shift the argument to say that there really can't be a comparison between Helfrich and Altman because the sport matters, or that length of tenure matters, and I clearly showed you why they don't matter, but still ignoring all along that my point was always about how the coach's peers see him -- how Altman's peers see him versus how Helfrich's peers see him. That clear difference that I pointed out matters; that's the point you've failed to see repeatedly. Then you strangely went off onto a tangent about D-I men's college basketball head coaches being "more" of a fraternity than FBS head football coaches. Huh? And you failed to support your argument there too.