I'm not going to defend Summitt.

But I will address how long it takes to turn a program around and some of the comments that have been made about his age and lack of success to this point.

It took Mike Krzyzewski 6 years to really get Duke going.

1st yr: 17-13, 6-8 in conference.
2nd yr: 10-17, 4-10 in conference.
3rd yr: 11-17, 3-11 in conference.
4th yr: 24-10, 7-7 in conference.
5th yr: 23-8, 8-6 in conference.
6th yr: 37-3, 12-2 in conference.

Saw an interview where Krzyzewski talked about his career. He'd gotten letters from guys telling him to please quit and spare the program after the second season and after the third season things got a lot worse for him. A few years ago when he was mentioned for a pro coaching job those same guys wrote him asking him to please stay for the good of the program. Krzyzewski had kept the letters and matched them up.

Everyone draws their own conclusions about how long a coach should have to turn a program around. But would Duke be where they are today if they'd canned Krzyzewski after the 2nd or 3rd year? The easy call for the AD was to fire him but to Duke's AD's credit he stuck by him.

Summitt has to be gone for what happened. But whether or not he might have turned the program around, we'll never know. If this thing hadn't happened, personally I don't think it was time to fire him and I don't think he was a bad coach.

As far as being too young, I was 24 when I opened a Fortune 500 oilfield service company's 1st offshore yard in Intercoastal City. And it went just fine. It's not the age. It's the man. Works the same way at the other end of your career when you start getting over 50, but it can turn into holding on to your highly responsible job vs being replace by someone younger. Don't be guilty of blank age criteria...you may be the next victim of someone's misplaced preconceived notion.