If you're risk averse, you're going to want to keep Fuente because what if Coach ABC comes in and does worse? Then we're out $15 mil +.

But, if you're not risk averse, you're all about trying something new, given the perceived schematic regression on both sides of the ball. The thinking here is Coach ABC can't be worse, right?

If you owned a stock for four years, and year one it had amazing returns, year two almost as good, and year three it started going almost completely opposite year two, you'd start asking yourself when it would be a good time to sell. Then, if three months into the new year, it really started tanking, you'd have to decide if you're going to hang on for the long haul, for better or worse, betting on a reversal of fortune, or if you're going to cut your losses and sell.

The difference here is football is easier to forecast than Wall Street insofar as if a team has a coach that begins to regress after initial success, it can be rather telling. However, sometimes 2 out of 4 seasons may not be enough data.

Like I said, it depends on risk aversity.