By Will Vandervort.

By Will Vandervort.

If I was Dan Radakovich what would I do about the current situation involving the Clemson baseball program?

First let me start off by saying that I am not Dan Radakovich. And secondly, I am glad I am not.

In the coming weeks Radakovich will more than likely have to make a tough decision on whether to retain Jack Leggett as Clemson’s head baseball coach or let a coach, who has earned Hall of Fame status and has won 1,325 ballgames, go. It will not be a popular decision either way.

Here are just two things Radakovich will be looking at. If he decides to let Jack Leggett go then is the baseball program better for it? If he decides to keep Leggett on, does Leggett agree to all of his terms, which could include the firing of one or two of his assistant coaches?

In his 35 years as a head coach, Leggett has never had to fire an assistant coach and is considered one of the more loyal and well respected coaches in the game.

But here is the deal. If Radakovich and Clemson part ways with Leggett, where does the baseball program go from here? It’s no secret in the college baseball world that Clemson is one of the toughest jobs to have.

Granted the program has a rich history, which includes 12 trips to the College World Series, 21 ACC Regular Season Championships and nine ACC Tournament titles. It’s one of the premiere jobs in the country for those looking on the outside. But the inside of the program is not as shiny as the outside.

There are commitment issues. Is Clemson willing to do whatever it takes in its power to bring Clemson back to the top of the mountain? For years, the Clemson coaching staff has been fighting with rival schools for recruits, despite not having all the advantages as other schools such as scholarship funding, facilities and more?

Will the new coach be as hand strung as the old coach?

Will there be more of a commitment when it comes to spending. Florida State, Virginia and South Carolina are spending more money in running their baseball programs on an annual basis. Will Clemson do the same?

Clemson is already making progress in regards to some of those things. A new $6 million facility is being built to Doug Kingsmore which will house a new players’ clubhouse and locker room area as well as a museum, team meeting room and new coaches’ offices. It will be a great recruiting tool for sure and for years to come. It puts Clemson on par with several other schools it competes with.

Next year, the program will be able to help players with financial disadvantages thanks to the Academic Common Market. This is a small step in helping its student athletes have different ways to offset the 25 percent scholarship rule, though they still have a long way to go.

If you are Dan Radakovich, wouldn’t you want your Hall of Fame head coach to have an opportunity to recruit and coach with these advantages before letting him go? I mean this is the same coach that has got you to the NCAA Tournament every year since 2009, despite having so many disadvantages.

Also, if you fire Jack Leggett, what if his replacement tanks? How does that make you look?

First off, people outside of Clemson will be stunned that you fired a Hall of Fame Coach who has done and won so much for your program? That outside perception and scrutiny will only be magnified if the new coach comes in and isn’t any better or the program gets worse.

It’s no secret Dan Radakovich has bigger aspirations than just being Clemson’s athletic director. How would his image look if his decision of letting Jack Leggett go turned out to be the wrong one? How might that affect his career?

I like what William Qualkinbush said earlier this week, everyone needs to understand all the situations. It’s not about becoming complacent or removing any modicum of expectation from the thought process. It’s about making sure what we expect from coaches, what their bosses do based on the environment that exists.

It’s clear expectations have become far too high on the staff over the past several years because of the significant issues in program support from on high and the enhanced commitment to baseball by Clemson’s peers. An understanding fan base that doesn’t take wins for granted and is less critical on a daily basis wouldn’t fix anything, but it would create a supportive environment for players and coaches that doesn’t require unrealistic achievement.

Dan Radakovich brought this up in mine and Robert’s talk with him last week, and even Qualk has talked about it on TCI or on the radio several times, in sports like women’s basketball and baseball, Clemson achieved at an elite level–at least in part–because other schools weren’t invested. Now other schools, even tiny ones, have thrown money at these sports, and Clemson has been slow to adjust.

Is that Jack Leggett’s fault? Is that Clemson’s fault? Or is it both?

So, if you were Dan Radakovich, what would you do? It’s not as easy as it looks, is it?