Bushi, I get what you're saying, and all the others too, about giving Hill more time.
But... can you please explain to me then why it has taken teams like Bath, Gloucester, Irish, Sale & Wasps a little less or a little more than a year to start to 'click' (granted, not perfectly, but all performing better than we are within less time) - whilst we are expected to allow Hill a 4th year to still settle in?!?
For those who like to reference Exeter, it is worth noting that Baxter was only in charge of them for their final year in the Championship (I believe), before moving on to the premiership. Arguably that is the same length of time as Hill, with a squad of equally similar strength, but facilities and funding which are in some ways inferior to ours. After last weekends performance no one will deny that they are a better team than us. As far as I am aware, Baxter is also NOT a 'level 5 qualified coach'!
Anyway, I'm not trying to be combative, but I do genuinely fail to understand why it is taking Hill so long to show measurable and consistent gains with the team. You must acknowledge that the odd successful performance this season, whilst fantastic to watch, were the anomalies - with the majority of our games (wins and losses) being relatively dour affairs and representing the norm.
Cynically, if we do make the Top 6 next year, it will be on the strength of our temporary (Hill's admission, not mine) Argentinian and other hired guns, whilst we pave the way for a younger, more homegrown squad - requiring yet again more time to develop, bed in and succeed. It is, I'm afraid, in my unbalanced opinion, utter madness to consider Hill as our long term future.
Couple this with the fact that Hill requires a defense coach to teach defense, an attack coach to teach attack, a forwards coach or two to teach the forwards and a ref coach to teach discipline I really fail to understand what it is that HE actually brings to the party.
(ps all views expressed here are my own - please accept and respect that!)