Meh. I think you generally know what you have in a head coach by year 2. At that point, they’ve had 2 off-seasons to implement systems, get players acquainted and up to speed, 2 full recruiting cycles, etc. Year 1 miscalculations and fuckups are pretty common and it’s hard to know how to weight the apparent issues (how much is on players, schemes, coaches, etc).
Sark has a track record as a HC, and that tells us something. He was also really young when he took over a shitty Washington program, and he obviously had some other issues that can compromise performance during his first go-round as a HC. Is it reasonable to suggest that he can do better at this point in his career, that he can be a better coach now than he was then? Sure. Do we know that yet? No.
We knew Strong wasn’t going to make it by year 2. Herman had a good second season, but still lost 4 games. I think that’s about who Herman was - he’d win some big games every now and then, but was going to consistently lose 3-5 games every year. We’ll see with Sark.
The record/results is one thing. I’m more interested to see how this staff adapts and adjusts as this season goes on, and then see if they eliminate this year’s issues in ‘22. Herman’s teams made the same mistakes year after year. He wasn’t terrible, but he wasn’t good enough and wasn’t getting better. We’ll probably know what we need to know about Sark next year.