My football dissatisfaction is self-explanatory.
For basketball, simply making the NCAA tournament most years is not enough to justify paying our coach a top 25 salary. According to USA Today's database, Mick made $2.2 million last year which puts him at #22 in the nation. For comparison, Hall of Fame coach Larry Brown (the guy who beat "Mick's best team yet" with just 6 players) made $1.9 million. Even more surprisingly, Chris Mack made a mere $1.1 million... half of Mick's salary.
For a top 25 salary (and our tradition), I expect top 25 talent and top 25 rankings most or all of the time. We are not nearly getting that. I'm not a Mick hater that wants him fired, I'm just being objective. I appreciate what he did over his first 5 years here, but I am still dissatisfied with his performance. I think that's reasonable.
I rarely post anything negative, because I don't really have much to add that hasn't been said way too many times. I do think having a place to vent is important for some fans though. And maybe venting is helpful; if fans don't voice their displeasure with subpar athletic performances, administration won't be motivated to change anything. College athletic departments don't exist to rack up wins, they exist to advertise for the school. Winning nationally-relevant games is a great way to do that, but it is just one means to an end. Look at football for example: attendance has been increasing over the last few years, despite a decrease in performance. Why spend millions to get a new coach, when statistics show fan support increasing? We will see what happens to attendance next year I guess.
If someone doesn't like negativity, justified or not, simply ignore it and move on. No need to argue with other Bearcat fans.