Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

Well, if only because my wife could take over Bama tomorrow and they'd still be pretty damn good for like 3 years.

MD's recruiting prowess would skyrocket as helmets recruit themselves, and his Xs and Os are superior as, unlike Saban, he has demonstrated the ability to do more with less. 
Saban can't win without a gigantic talent advantage. In the NFL the talent is more or less even across the board, and he was horrible at that level. 

What he's able to do is remarkable. You see other helmet teams that have all the recruiting advantages in the world, and they can't do what Saban is doing at Bama. Even a phenomenal coach in Meyer at OSU can't quite do what Saban is able to do. 

I still think it's bigger than Saban though. It's institutional support with palatial facilities, it's demographic changes turning the Southeast into the most fertile recruiting bed of the country, it's being in a state [and region] where there's no professional sports competition so the ENTIRE state is about Alabama [and Auburn] football. And you couple that with the long history and the "helmet" appeal and it's a job that's just ready for the right coach to knock out of the park.

USC can't compete in the same sense because few people in California care about CFB, they are fighting with other in-state schools for recruits, and can't dominate the news because there's too much else going on [such as pro sports]. UM/ND/OSU can't do it because they're in a more crowded recruiting patch and the Midwest isn't as fertile for recruiting as the Southeast, and there's a lot more pro competition for attention. The Florida schools have too much parity, UGA has been plundered by surrounding states and deals with competition from pro sports, etc. 

Granted, any other coach probably couldn't have done what Saban has done as well. As most of you point out, it's like he's tailor-made to excel at that job. He's been able to map out "the process" of exactly what needs to be done to take advantage of all the advantages that Alabama has. Saban is that guy. He understands the job in a way that others in the past perhaps didn't, and that understanding is what has allowed him to tailor what he's doing to perfectly fit the job.

I can't believe he doesn't get bored.  You roll out the schedule in a given year, and what 9-10(?) games are gimmes off the bat.  It's a 24/7/365 job, and really you are tested maybe 3-4 afternoons a year.  I think most would have already searched for a new challenge.  But he's not competing with anyone else.  He's competing against himself.  He's competing for perfection.  I'm not sure anyone else, maybe Belicheck, is wired that way.

As for cheating?  I don't buy any talk of paying players any more or less than I think it goes on in general.  You want to talk PEDs, still, meh.  But that's the only "cheating" talk that I wouldn't dismiss out of hand.

I'm not as impressed with Saban not getting bored as I am with his players not getting bored.   Perhaps all that freshman talent prevents the upper classman from relaxing.  I don't know.  But even at USC when they were grabbing 5 star after 5 star, they had games the team looked bored.  Same with Miami or FSU under Bowden.   They all had runs, but nothing close to Saban.   Different kids, same focus.. same results.   

The only argument I can make against Saban is he has gotten more 2nd chances, after his team loses once in a season, than coaches got in previous eras.

Bama may have been the best team this season, but did they really deserve another chance for the championship after they did not even win their division?

In a different era, Saban would probably have less championships.   That all said, he definitely is the king of this era and makes the most of his NCG appearances.

This is a good point regarding comparing across generations.
And OAM, I'm not sure we're saying much different things. Not every game Alamaba loses under Saban is because of a stupid play or two (Auburn this year, for instance), but they are all a bunch of 20-ish year-old players; it isn't an NFL-level team, it's just a really, really good college program; perhaps (quite likely) the best of all time.

And the point about MSU/Alabama and fit is also a really good one. Though I think coaches like Meyer, Saban, Carroll, Bowden, etc. are probably also of one type, whereas Dantonio, Chryst, and Shaw are of another. Unfortunately for Notre Dame, I think Kelly is more of the latter, which is not what ND really wants/needs. But the Meyers, Sabans, Carrolls of the world are hard to find--particularly in a system that requires success at non-helmet schools to get to the helmet schools. What would Alvarez have done at a true helmet school? How would Parseghian have done if he stayed at Northwestern? Interesting questions. 

It depends on the context.  If they swapped jobs, right now, I'd imagine that Saban would actually fare better in Manhattan than Snyder would in Tuscaloosa.  Why?  Because Saban has rings galore, and can probably still nab a lot more 4+ star recruits than Snyder currently does. Snyder is all about developing players and grabbing JUCO/transfer kids.  He'd probably recruit decently, but not nearly as successfully as Saban would.
I don't think either one would win a natty at the other's school, but I think both are capable of winning 9-10 games consistently.

I wasn't thinking of them swapping today, but if saban started at KSU vs Bill going to bama early in his career. 

This is a good point regarding comparing across generations.
And OAM, I'm not sure we're saying much different things. Not every game Alamaba loses under Saban is because of a stupid play or two (Auburn this year, for instance), but they are all a bunch of 20-ish year-old players; it isn't an NFL-level team, it's just a really, really good college program; perhaps (quite likely) the best of all time.

And the point about MSU/Alabama and fit is also a really good one. Though I think coaches like Meyer, Saban, Carroll, Bowden, etc. are probably also of one type, whereas Dantonio, Chryst, and Shaw are of another. Unfortunately for Notre Dame, I think Kelly is more of the latter, which is not what ND really wants/needs. But the Meyers, Sabans, Carrolls of the world are hard to find--particularly in a system that requires success at non-helmet schools to get to the helmet schools. What would Alvarez have done at a true helmet school? How would Parseghian have done if he stayed at Northwestern? Interesting questions.

I think at ND he would have been great.

I don't think UNL did until before they hired Callahan, but that was too late at that point. And even then all they did was kick the tires.

Similar for ND (after Davie) and Miami (after Davis). He was 10-11 years in at UW, and had it rolling. It wasn't going to happen but he got a nice raise of it.