Is the typical profile for a coach of the year usually someone who is new and achieves a big turnaround? For example, you can look at how much Colorado has improved over the past 2-3 years and make a decent argument that this was due to Coach Prime. Even though BYU's improvement over this year's expectations and over last year's performance probably was due in large part to Kalani, would it be out of the ordinary to give a coach of the year award to someone who has been in their role for 10 years and has been up and down during that time?

I love KS and think that, like any coach he has strengths and weaknesses — but I will take his specific blend of pros and cons. I think he's great for BYU. But I'm curious if neutral parties will have a hard time seeing this season as being worthy of "coach of the year" honors looking at the ups and downs of the program for the last decade. I'm not trying to make an argument — just wondering what has been typical in awards like that.