CFB51 College Football Fan Community
The Power Five => Big Ten => Topic started by: ALA2262 on May 11, 2019, 11:41:14 AM
-
Athlon ranks the best places to coach in 2019
Debating the best job among all 130 college football teams or within any conference is always an ongoing discussion. The debate doesn’t start with a small sample size but should take into account more of a long-term (both past and future) in order to get a better snapshot of the program. Every college football program is unique and has its own set of challenges. But some programs are clearly better than others.
What exactly determines the best job in a conference or in college football? Each person’s criteria will be different, but some programs already have inherent advantages in terms of location, money and tradition. Georgia, Alabama, Ohio State and Texas are some of the nation’s best jobs, largely due to some of the factors mentioned previously. Do they have their drawbacks? Absolutely. But it’s easier to win a national title at Texas than it is at Oklahoma State. On the flipside, jobs like New Mexico State, UMass and Eastern Michigan have a different set of challenges. Recruiting to remote locations or conference affiliation plays a role in just how tough a job is at the FBS level.
Ranking all 130 college football jobs is no easy task. After all, the rankings are subjective based upon numerous factors, but we have ranked every college football program in the country, based on the attractiveness of the position from a coaching perspective. We considered many factors — tradition, facilities, location, money, ability to recruit talent — but in the end, we simply asked ourselves the following question: Where would we want to coach?
https://athlonsports.com/college-foo...UwMDQ0NTcwNgS2 (https://athlonsports.com/college-football/ranking-all-130-college-football-coaching-jobs-2019?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=pick6nl20190507&spMailingID=21454646&spUserID=Mjc4MTcwMjc4MzMwS0&spJobID=1500445706&spReportId=MTUwMDQ0NTcwNgS2)
-
It bears a striking resemblance to ELA's preseason rankings.
-
The best place to coach hasn't won a NC since the year I was born......mmmkay.
-
There’s so many different angles to take when it comes to the best places to coach, but let’s start with whether you’re an Alpha Male or a Beta.
Alphas no doubt are content only with the reigns of the Ohio States, Alabamas, SCs, and Texas’ but if you’re a Beta?
Who “Betas” there job more than Ferentz? Winning 8 games keeps your job without raising fanbase expectations beyond your capacity to even once in a while deliver a championship product. Think Addazio at BC and Fitz at NW - though those two CLEARLY have Alpha personalities a Beta would be perfectly content attaining their 7 wins = extension.
-
While it would be tempting to take the location into account (whether or not you'd want to live there), it wouldn't wind up mattering much as it is a dusk to dawn sorta job.
What are the local mediots like? Are you a "win at all costs" coach, or a "do things the right way" coach?
-
Individual rankings are click-bait. Programs should just be placed into tiers.
Top tier: USC, Texas, OU, Bama, OSU, Florida, FSU
2nd tier: Miami, ND, Penn St, LSU, UGA, Michigan
3rd tier: UW, UCLA, Oregon, Auburn, Nebraska, Clemson, Tennessee, A&M, Wisconsin
4th tier: other P5 programs with any kind of history - VT, BYU, MSU, etc...
5th tier: everyone else
-
Individual rankings are click-bait. Programs should just be placed into tiers.
Top tier: USC, Texas, OU, Bama, OSU, Florida, FSU
2nd tier: Miami, ND, Penn St, LSU, UGA, Michigan
3rd tier: UW, UCLA, Oregon, Auburn, Nebraska, Clemson, Tennessee, A&M, Wisconsin
4th tier: other P5 programs with any kind of history - VT, BYU, MSU, etc...
5th tier: everyone else
I'm not bagging on the Gators, but what is the case for Florida being in the top tier? I would also ask Athlon: What is the case for Florida at #5?
From Athlon:
5. Florida
You can make a strong case to put Florida No. 1 on this list — and even No. 1 in the nation. You have everything at your disposal to compete for national championships on an annual basis. There is no excuse not to be good at Florida.
Florida has won 3 NCs. That's good, but it's not top-5 good. The two previous coaches went a collective 52-36, and both got fired. The coach before them won 2 of those NCs and then left after a mediocre season, due to burn-out or brain tumors or some other problem. Florida hasn't won a conference championship since then. If there is no excuse not to be good at Florida, why wasn't Ron Zook any good? And why did Will Muschamp and Jim McElwain not do better than they did?
Florida strikes me as a top-20 program, rather than top-5 or top-10. Billingsley's all-time computer rankings have Florida at #20, Auburn at #15, LSU at #13, and Georgia at #11.
In fairness, the AP all-time program rankings have Florida at #10, ahead of all other SEC teams except for Bama.
-
Individual rankings are click-bait. Programs should just be placed into tiers.
Top tier: USC, Texas, OU, Bama, OSU, Florida, FSU
2nd tier: Miami, ND, Penn St, LSU, UGA, Michigan
3rd tier: UW, UCLA, Oregon, Auburn, Nebraska, Clemson, Tennessee, A&M, Wisconsin
4th tier: other P5 programs with any kind of history - VT, BYU, MSU, etc...
5th tier: everyone else
Solid point.
The Y is technically not a P5 team, but that's just nit picking for the sake of nit picking.
Yeah, I'm that bored.
-
coaches seem to want to be where they can recruit the best, at least the best among their conference.
jobs where they have the best recruits nearby and then the things in place to attract those recruits
this would put Florida high on any list
-
I'm not bagging on the Gators, but what is the case for Florida being in the top tier? I would also ask Athlon: What is the case for Florida at #5?
From Athlon:
Florida has won 3 NCs. That's good, but it's not top-5 good. The two previous coaches went a collective 52-36, and both got fired. The coach before them won 2 of those NCs and then left after a mediocre season, due to burn-out or brain tumors or some other problem. Florida hasn't won a conference championship since then. If there is no excuse not to be good at Florida, why wasn't Ron Zook any good? And why did Will Muschamp and Jim McElwain not do better than they did?
Florida strikes me as a top-20 program, rather than top-5 or top-10. Billingsley's all-time computer rankings have Florida at #20, Auburn at #15, LSU at #13, and Georgia at #11.
In fairness, the AP all-time program rankings have Florida at #10, ahead of all other SEC teams except for Bama.
This isn't necessarily about all-time program...it's to coach the program in 2019. I had Florida in the 1st tier, then moved them down, the moved them back up. One thing you shared as a point against Florida is actually a mark in its favor, imo - the last 2 coaches going 52-36 and getting fired...that's not good enough.
The reason any random-ass HC can't just come into Gainesville and be great is because of in-state competition. That's why I previously posted that I was jealous of the OSUs and LSUs of the word - those with zero in-state competition. But why should the Gators be Tier 1 or top 5? UF has everything one would need - it checks every box. Recruiting, success, Heismans, climate, recruiting, facilities (finally), recruiting, etc.
I had ND and UM in Tier 1, with Florida and FSU in Tier 2...but the recent success just isn't there for the top 2 all-time winningest programs. The few times ND has been in the NC conversation late in the year in my lifetime, they've been destroyed facing an elite team (aside from '88). UM has...'06 as an 'almost' year, '97 of course, and...what else in the past 60 years? The 70s? Cool. Those 2 programs should probably list "fight song" before "success" in their resumes.
Now, back to coaches failing and the program's response to it: an elite program will not put up with being out of the NC conversation for more than a few years. UM got rid of Hoke despite his .608 win%. That's the sign of an elite program. But before him, RichRod went .405. THAT would be the example that would make me question how could anyone have a sub-.500 record at a Tier 1 program?!? Even with individual, fall-off-a-cliff seasons, Muschamp (.571) and McElwain (.647) weren't as bad. Zook was run out of Gville at (.622). I'm not going to do the research right now, but can you think of anyone else with 2 HCs over .800 win% of their past 5 hires, besides OSU? Spurrier and Meyer did it at Florida.
That's the one big unknown about FSU and PSU for me - Bowden and Paterno were there so long, I'm not sure what those programs really are. Fisher won a NC, but he inherited the program directly from Bowden. 4-5 coaches from now, what will FSU and Penn St even be?
Tier 1, for me, are the programs that are more likely than not to be successful programs after a lot of turnover. Once the big, legendary coach leaves, then what's the program still got in it? Is it still legit and strong, or was all the air let out? No one questions if Ohio St or Texas or USC will be good 4 coaches from now. I say that, but any of them could be in a swoon in exactly 20 years, but we'd label it as a swoon and not the new normal. Either their coach 20 years from now wins and makes the program relevant again, or he's gone. Texas had a mid-90s swoon, with OU, I believe. But they both came back strong. USC hasn't had a prolonged swoon maybe ever....but it's because they've run their .650 win% coaches out of town. Either .650 is good enough at your program, and it's Tier 3 or .650 gets you fired. In which case, your program has a chance at Tier 1, depending on luck, really.
-
Coach Bryant was on record as saying if Florida ever got a coach they would be a tough out. Or something to that effect. He, as usual, was right.
-
"There’s so many different angles to take when it comes to the best places to coach, but let’s start with whether you’re an Alpha Male or a Beta.
Alphas no doubt are content only with the reigns of the Ohio States, Alabamas, SCs, and Texas’ but if you’re a Beta?
Who “Betas” there job more than Ferentz? Winning 8 games keeps your job without raising fanbase expectations beyond your capacity to even once in a while deliver a championship product. Think Addazio at BC and Fitz at NW - though those two CLEARLY have Alpha personalities a Beta would be perfectly content attaining their 7 wins = extension."
(Quoted awkwardly because the button isn't appearing)
Ignoring the sort of oddity of the alpha-beta male perceived dynamic that makes me roll my eyes, you're reading this wrong.
There are basically no "beta" coaches. They're all alphas. Every one of them. No one gets a job with that much control and can be considered a beta. No one who has to put on that much charisma to recruit is a beta.
Perhaps you can say there are "alpha" jobs, i.e., the ones that have the history to more often contend for titles, and the K-States/Wisconsin's of the world could be called beta jobs. But that's not reflective of the coaches. Shoot, we're gonna sit here and pretend Hayden Fry's offensive line coach was a dang "beta." (It is reflective of how fans feel about coaches, which is it's own separate thing).
-
"Can you think of anyone else with 2 HCs over .800 win% of their past 5 hires, besides OSU? Spurrier and Meyer did it at Florida."
A quick look says Bama did it in its past six. Oklahoma is .2 percent short and did in past six.
That being said, one of those two coaches has his winning percentage dragged down by his time at UF, and the other was good enough to win a conference title at Duke and 33 games in three years at South Carolina. The stat speaks to what a coach can accomplish there, but those were two pretty unreal coaches they landed on.
-
Right, any coach who wins NCs and/or 80% of his games is a rarity...but the top group of jobs expect to find those rarities. Not hope to, but require it, or they kick your butt out the door 3 years in. And why? Because they can, they've tasted the apex and need to get back to it again, and as many times as possible.
We could look at the "dud" of each program over the last 20-30 years and gauge them by that. What's the floor of a program?
We'd have to ignore 1-year coaches, of course, but among the coaches that were given multiple seasons to do well, who was the worst?
For Alabama, it's .511 (DuBose)
.715 for OSU (Cooper), as Fickel was a place-holder for 1 season. Remarkable that Cooper has been the worst of the last 30+ years (actually 45+).
.353 for OU (Blake) - the guys before and after him have excelled, so this was an obvious poor hire
.565 for ND (Weis) - you have to go back to the 80s with Faust to find worse (.535).
.432 for Texas (Strong)
.364 for LSU (Hallman)
.574 for Georgia (Goff)
.571 for Florida (Muschamp)
.405 for Michigan (Rodriguez)
.625 for Penn St (O'Brien) and he had unique circumstances. PSU is the hardest program to rate because Paterno was there 100 years
...except that FSU is the hardest, because they've only had 2 coaches the past 42 years, and both were over .750. Taggert is off to a rough start, tho
.500 for Nebraska (Riley)
.417 for Tennessee (Dooley)
.514 for USC (Hackett)
.560 for Miami (Shannon)
------------------------------------------------
So if we ranked them....
1. OSU .715
2. Georgia .574
3. Florida .571
4. ND .565
5. Miami .560
6. USC .514
7. Alabama .511
8. Nebraska .500
9. Texas .432
10. Tennessee .417
11. Michigan .405
12. LSU .364
13. Oklahoma .353
And then you'd have Penn St and FSU as wild cards, really. Is this list any better or worse than Athlon's? In terms of it's 2019, I'm a great coach, I want to go somewhere I can plug in my method and kick ass, win championships, and get a statue...it's a decent list.
-
good list
I'd swap Nebraska and Oklahoma
-
Oklahoma's .353 is sort of a special case.
Gary Gibbs succeeded Barry Switzer. He had played for Switzer and was a coach for him at OU. He righted the ship, which Switzer left under probation. And he had a decent record (44-23-2, .652), but he was fired because he went 2-15-1 against Texas, Nebraska, and Colorado. Then Howard Schellenberger was hired, and fired after one year (5-5-1, .500). At that point, OU hired John Blake, who had played at OU under Barry Switzer, was then coaching for Switzer at Dallas, and was hired on Switzer's recommendation. (I believe he was dismissed from Dallas right before getting hired at OU. He had complained to Switzer that Troy Aikman was a racist who treated his black teammates differently than he did his white teammates. The black players all supported Aikman against Blake.) The idea was that he was a great recruiter, and if he would hire a good OC and DC, he could let them make the major decisions. Then when it was immediately apparent that he was going to fail despite the good coordinators' work, firing him got tied up with the racial angle. So he got three years to prove himself incompetent (12-22, .353). On the way out the door, he instigated racial unrest within the program that caused several black players to quit, and he destroyed all the recruiting files so that Bob Stoops would have to start from scratch.
He then went on to be a dirty recruiter, as I'm sure he was at OU, for Mississippi State, Nebraska and North Carolina. He helped get North Carolina on probation for recruiting violations, costing Butch Davis (his H.S. coach and science teacher at Sand Springs, OK) his job with the Tarheels in the process.
I'm sure there are comparable examples at other schools. Sometimes programs just put up with a failing coach, or give him more time to fail, because of extenuating circumstances.
-
Yeah, it' a strong group of programs, and someone had to be at the bottom.
I view OU and Texas as sister programs, as OU gets all the players it wants from Texas, there might as well not be a border there (plus the state of OK not producing a ton of talent, population-wise). But also, OU is better at being Texas than Texas is, as if OU was the in-talent-state school and UTA was the border-pillaging state, if that makes any sense.
I guess all of that ignores A&M and the fact TX has supported anywhere from 4-9 P5-level programs over the years.
-
That's an interesting way of looking at it.
Here's another way. I see OU and Texas as somewhat analogous to Ohio State and Michigan. The "blue-bloodedness" of Texas and Michigan goes back further than it does with OU and Ohio State, with OU and Ohio State having more success recently.
Not a perfect analogy by any means. Ohio State and Texas are both located in their respective state capitals, while Michigan and OU are located in college towns, for example.
-
Ehhh, Columbus is the largest city in Ohio.
Another Texas tidbit - you gotta give them credit - they're signed on for home&homes with LSU, Alabama, Georgia, and Florida in the coming decade. I think it's smart, too, and a jab at A&M, to be playing games in SEC country, for recruiting purposes.
-
Austin, while "only" the 4th-largest city in Texas, is still a very large city, the 11th-largest in the country. Not that it matters to my point in my previous post.
OU and UT have locked in similar OOC schedules for the next 15 years or so.
OU plays home-and-home series vs. Tennessee, LSU, Bama, Georgia, Michigan, and Clemson, plus 2 home-and-home series with Nebraska.
UT plays LSU and Arkansas (2nd game of home-and-home series, I think), home-and-home series vs. Bama, Michigan, Ohio State, Georgia, Florida, and Arizona State.
Whether this has anything to do with future realignment issues, I have no clue.
-
Has Texas scheduled tougher OOC since dropping the A&M rivalry? I feel like Georgia has somewhat upped their OOC scheduling as GA Tech has become less and less relevant.
Personally, I want FSU to go 0-12 every season, but if they did, I'd expect Florida to schedule a new tough out every year.
-
I mean, A&M was a conference game, so they just traded that for TCU basically. It seems like Texas was good not great with UCLA/OSU series, plus old SWC games with Arkansas and sometimes TCU, some North Carolina, Stanford NC State and I guess a Rutgers.
Since losing A&M, it’s Cal, UCLA, ND neutral, Maryland and USC. So sorta a push.
Georgia has usually gone strong, at least since Richt arrived (it’s a little less clear in the 3 non-conf game era). Lot of Clemson’s, Good Boise, Ok State. Since Tech’s last Top-10 team, you had Clemson, UNC (neutral), ND, and two years with no marquee name.
-
I think USC would be hard to beat: metropolitan area, commitment from the school and fan base, rich recruiting base, history to match, and it's the biggest dog in the yard.
After that, Texas seems pretty cool (Austin is awesome). I would think Atlanta would be a better spot than Tuscaloosa, but if you're a college football guy, probably the history/tradition at Alabama is more important.
One spot this list got really wrong is UCLA. UCLA has had next to no commitment from the university for the last decade+. That makes it very difficult to compete. There's a reason the Bruins haven't been very good for a while.
-
UCLA has a nice stadium. 4 hours away and all that.
-
I think USC would be hard to beat: metropolitan area, commitment from the school and fan base, rich recruiting base, history to match, and it's the biggest dog in the yard.
The only thing that might give me pause is that it's not the biggest dog in the yard anymore, due to the Rams and [spit]Chargers[/spit].
For a long time, people gravitated to USC here because it had the sort of widespread support that a pro team would have. A lot of people with no connection to the school were "USC fans" because they were it for local football. Now they're just USC.
I expect it'll take 5 years, but I think the local support for USC football will wane significantly relative to pros, which is something you don't have in a place like 'Bama.
-
You know LA better than me, but my impression is that the alumni base and local fans have been strong enough to support the Trojans throughout their history. But it's true, there is more to compete with in LA than in Tuscaloosa.
-
That's the one big unknown about FSU and PSU for me - Bowden and Paterno were there so long, I'm not sure what those programs really are. Fisher won a NC, but he inherited the program directly from Bowden. 4-5 coaches from now, what will FSU and Penn St even be?
This is always what I wonder about those two schools. The biggest name coach is such a big name that it is hard to tell if the program can be top-tier without that one guy.
-
Ehhh, Columbus is the largest city in Ohio.
It is, but that is somewhat misleading when you look at metro areas. Cleveland is the largest there, followed by Cincy, then Columbus.
-
I think USC would be hard to beat: metropolitan area, commitment from the school and fan base, rich recruiting base, history to match, and it's the biggest dog in the yard.
I've thought this for a long time mostly for recruiting reasons. If you look at the programs that we talk about when we talk about "helmets" or "kings" or whatever, the only one of them located west of a roughly N-S line running through Austin, TX, Norman, OK, and Lincoln, NE is USC. They are all by themselves and frankly I think they are the most underachieving program in the nation.
-
You know LA better than me, but my impression is that the alumni base and local fans have been strong enough to support the Trojans throughout their history. But it's true, there is more to compete with in LA than in Tuscaloosa.
I do think it's true historically, as I think a lot of the older generation lines up on either side of the UCLA/USC divide. Especially many of those who didn't go to college, because they didn't develop their own rooting interest.
I think a lot of the younger generation will lose some of that. Especially as more and more of each generation go to college. Those two schools are very hard to get into, and there are a ton of other colleges here, so even if they grew up in a USC or UCLA household, their loyalties get divided once they go away to their own school.
-
It is, but that is somewhat misleading when you look at metro areas. Cleveland is the largest there, followed by Cincy, then Columbus.
Yeah, but a sizable chunk of Cincy's metro isn't in Ohio.
-
I've thought this for a long time mostly for recruiting reasons. If you look at the programs that we talk about when we talk about "helmets" or "kings" or whatever, the only one of them located west of a roughly N-S line running through Austin, TX, Norman, OK, and Lincoln, NE is USC. They are all by themselves and frankly I think they are the most underachieving program in the nation.
I've noticed that, too. Historically, I don't think it's fair to say USC has underachieved - there up there with all the big boys. But even under Carroll, to have those advantages and that winning % and to only have come away with 1.5 NCs.....that was underachieving.
-
USC and Miami are the only top-tier type schools that you could do all your recruiting by car. Like literally.
The state of FL is chunked strangely, as different little enclaves 'belong' to each of the big 3, and it's closer to a checkerboard than 3 consecutive geographic areas. And the shit of it is, Alabama has its own inroads with IMG Academy, which is a black eye for FSU, Florida, and Miami.
-
I've noticed that, too. Historically, I don't think it's fair to say USC has underachieved - there up there with all the big boys. But even under Carroll, to have those advantages and that winning % and to only have come away with 1.5 NCs.....that was underachieving.
I think Carroll was just unfortunate that he coached before the CFP. His teams performed extraordinarily well against top-tier opposition but they seemed to have a boneheaded loss almost every year, just a completely inexplicable loss to a team that shouldn't have played them within three TD's.
-
Hard to disagree with that, but here’s some food for thought. North Carolina has some pretty strong in-state talent, plus is surrounded by several talent-rich states. You would think that *one* NC school would step up and be a national player, but that hasn’t happened yet.
-
I think Carroll was just unfortunate that he coached before the CFP. His teams performed extraordinarily well against top-tier opposition but they seemed to have a boneheaded loss almost every year, just a completely inexplicable loss to a team that shouldn't have played them within three TDs.
Harbaugh? O0
-
Hard to disagree with that, but here’s some food for thought. North Carolina has some pretty strong in-state talent, plus is surrounded by several talent-rich states. You would think that *one* NC school would step up and be a national player, but that hasn’t happened yet.
It should have happened sometime in the past, but that ship has sailed. Charlotte is picked over by the big SEC teams, Clemson is a short drive from there, and then there's the basketball school thing, academics possibly, and a lack of history. When was UNC ever the big dog even in the pre-FSU ACC???
-
I think Carroll was just unfortunate that he coached before the CFP. His teams performed extraordinarily well against top-tier opposition but they seemed to have a boneheaded loss almost every year, just a completely inexplicable loss to a team that shouldn't have played them within three TD's.
Pete was unfortunate that he got caught cheating and fled to the NFL
-
Harbaugh? O0
Meyer?
No... Wait. That was a 4-TD loss :57:
-
When did Meyer go up against Pete Carroll?
I was referencing the game where Harbaugh guided Stanford to an upset over USC.
-
41-point underdogs
-
It should have happened sometime in the past, but that ship has sailed. Charlotte is picked over by the big SEC teams, Clemson is a short drive from there, and then there's the basketball school thing, academics possibly, and a lack of history. When was UNC ever the big dog even in the pre-FSU ACC???
one season with Mack Brown?
-
When did Meyer go up against Pete Carroll?
I was referencing the game where Harbaugh guided Stanford to an upset over USC.
it wouldn't have been Michigan
-
one season with Mack Brown?
FSU was already there, and UNC had an epic defense, but couldn't beat FSU.
-
FSU has been in the ACC for a LONG time
guess I was thinking of Miami?
-
FSU has been in the ACC about as long as Penn State has been in the B1G. A good while, but I wouldn't exactly say a LONG time.
Speaking of, if the Big East was able to get Penn State or Notre Dame (or even both) to join in the late 80s/early 90s, I think today's CFB landscape would look a LOT different.
-
Individual rankings are click-bait. Programs should just be placed into tiers.
Top tier: USC, Texas, OU, Bama, OSU, Florida, FSU
2nd tier: Miami, ND, Penn St, LSU, UGA, Michigan
3rd tier: UW, UCLA, Oregon, Auburn, Nebraska, Clemson, Tennessee, A&M, Wisconsin
4th tier: other P5 programs with any kind of history - VT, BYU, MSU, etc...
5th tier: everyone else
I could quibble with some, but agree with your general point, that there are tiers, and depending on the moment, one job may be better or worse than any in it's tier.
-
When did Meyer go up against Pete Carroll?
I was referencing the game where Harbaugh guided Stanford to an upset over USC.
I was referencing the 49-20 win of Purdue over OSU this year.
-
Oh okay. So Meyer is the Carroll, and Purdue is the Harbuagh led Stanford squad?
Sweet.
-
Oh okay. So Meyer is the Carroll, and Purdue is the Harbuagh led Stanford squad?
Sweet.
Yep... The premise being "beaten by a team that shouldn't be within 3 TD's of them."
I thought you were criticizing Harbaugh--for obvious reasons--for something that happened to him at Michigan rather than crediting him with beating Pete Carroll.
-
Alabama lost to Louisiana Monroe under Saban, so that means he isn't a great coach, right?
As a part-time Stanford...appreciator (I wouldn't really say fan is accurate)...and full time disliker of Pete Carroll, I love that Stanford pulled that rabbit out of its hat under Harbaugh, but that doesn't mean Carroll couldn't coach (and, yeah, I think Meyer's OSU legacy is safe, notwithstanding the curious loss to Purdue). ;)
-
I'd say the Houstons, Cincinnatis and UCFs of the world are a cut above the dregs of the P5; Kansas, Rutgers, OSU3, etc.
-
I'd say the Houstons, Cincinnatis and UCFs of the world are a cut above the dregs of the P5; Kansas, Rutgers, OSU3, etc.
Sure, but the Houstons, Cincinnatis and UCFs of the world change every 5 years. The dregs of the P5 remain the same.
-
consistency is key
-
Sure, but the Houstons, Cincinnatis and UCFs of the world change every 5 years. The dregs of the P5 remain the same.
No they don't. I'm not talking about any flash in the pan G5 like Boise, Marshall, etc. Those three schools that I mentioned are all in large cities that double as recruiting hot beds. It is a lot easier to breath a little life into one of those programs and dominate your crappy conference than it is to get anything, and I mean anything, going at a Rutgers, Kansas, Kentucky, etc.
-
------------------------------------------------
So if we ranked them....
1. OSU .715
2. Georgia .574
3. Florida .571
4. ND .565
5. Miami .560
6. USC .514
7. Alabama .511
8. Nebraska .500
9. Texas .432
10. Tennessee .417
11. Michigan .405
12. LSU .364
13. Oklahoma .353
I'm going to take a minute here to brag on my school's amazing consistency. Here are all of Ohio State's multiple-year coaches with the years and their winning percentage:
- Urban Meyer, 2012-2018: .901
- Jim Tressel, 2001-2010: .810
- John Cooper, 1988-2000: .715
- Earle Bruce, 1979-1987: .755
- Woody Hayes, 1951-1978: .761
- Wes Fesler, 1947-1950: .608
- Carroll Widdoes, 1944-45: .889
- Paul Brown, 1941-1943: .685
- Francis Schmidt, 1934-1940: .705
- Sam Willaman, 1929-1933: .695
- John Wilce, 1913-1928: .688
- Albert Hernstein, 1906-1909: .731
- Edwin Sweetland, 1904-05: .652
- Frederick Ryder, 1892-95 and 1898: .500
- Alexander Lilley, 1890-91: .375
-
I'd like to see where Clemson and Alabama were ranked as coaching jobs in, say, 1998.
These lists are so today-focused it's not even funny anymore.
When Dabo leaves to take over for Saban, Clemson will go back to being an average job. Or, if he stays and Bama gets another Shula, Bama will be an average job...
OSU is the best job, and has been forever.
-
meh, people always like to label certain jobs as good/better/worse/etc like it's a fixed thing or absolute. or they look at it like it's definitive, clear separating lines.
neither of those are true.
as for bama, anyone that thinks it's not routinely among the best is fooling themselves. you don't have the history of attracting the coaches and recruits, success on the field, and consistent excellence throughout cfb history without being one of the best stops.
bama has several of the most important aspects a program can have.
1 - rabid fanbase - alabama is among the largest and most committed fanbases in sports.
2 - admin committment - they have a board and admin that is committed to making football, and all other sports for that matter, the best it can be.
3 - funding - bama doesn't have the billions of dollars in endowments, but that's not what runs a football program anyway, so bringing them into the conversation is moot. bama does have an extremely profitable program, with a fanbase willing to support it. that's why fanbases matter.
4 - recruiting - i think this might be where most people find their hangup, but i don't know why. alabama isn't sitting in a huge metropolitan hotbed, but it's centrally located for several. and the states of alabama and mississippi produce top line recruits at a clip that's really impressive, especially for their size. but atlanta, nashville, memphis, and new orleans are all in 4-5 hrs of tuscaloosa. and then there's florida, which produces enough for teams like bama to reach in a steal some.
5 - history - second to none. it's been proven time and again, the top of the sport can be achieved at bama.
if bama wasn't a good job, among the best, then it would have multiple periods or tremendous success that it's had. bama isn't just bear and saban. we have 3 other national title winning coaches besides those 2. even the bad coaches have had successes at bama. bill curry and dubose won sec titles. fran would have played for one if we weren't on probation. shula had a 10 win season.
osu, mich, uf, uga, lsu, ou, texas, and a few others are right there too.
and in the future, this can change. for better or worse. but as it stands right now and has been for the last century, it's not just average, it's elite.
-
I still think it is USC for one reason, this map: https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Louisiana+State+University/University+of+Miami/The+University+of+Alabama/Penn+State+University/The+Ohio+State+University,+Columbus,+OH/University+of+Michigan/notre+dame+university/The+University+of+Oklahoma/University+of+Texas+at+Austin,+Austin,+TX/University+of+Southern+California,+Los+Angeles,+CA/@33.6996014,-107.0675172,5z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m62!4m61!1m5!1m1!1s0x8626a723780e1ca3:0xcdb21f2e63145453!2m2!1d-91.1800023!2d30.4132579!1m5!1m1!1s0x88d9b8021fc6387d:0x38c0cfaa41f031ce!2m2!1d-80.2771253!2d25.7191685!1m5!1m1!1s0x888602998cde20bb:0xdf0e29abdbae0912!2m2!1d-87.5391418!2d33.2140233!1m5!1m1!1s0x89cea6228cf2afef:0xfb5f04cd544613dd!2m2!1d-77.8608888!2d40.8072337!1m5!1m1!1s0x88388e8fdde8a7b3:0xab2cd8082156878f!2m2!1d-83.0309143!2d40.0141905!1m5!1m1!1s0x883cae38e7de1701:0x5ba14e5178e997e3!2m2!1d-83.7382241!2d42.2780436!1m5!1m1!1s0x8816cbf95890ee51:0x86e6f1b21194728a!2m2!1d-86.2490518!2d41.6177196!1m5!1m1!1s0x87b2682be67f50bb:0x4abecf8329041e54!2m2!1d-97.4457137!2d35.2058936!1m5!1m1!1s0x8644b59a91b6ed65:0x1127f4ad837647e0!2m2!1d-97.7335226!2d30.2850284!1m5!1m1!1s0x80c2c7e49c71a5ed:0xaa905a5bb427a2c4!2m2!1d-118.285117!2d34.0223519!3e0?hl=en
That is a map of all of Stewart Mandel's "Kings" (Note that I left out three because Google will only do a 10 destination map. The three that I left out are FSU, UF, and Clemson and I chose those three because they are all on the route anyway - FSU and UF are on the route from LSU to Miami while Clemson is near the route from Bama to PSU).
The thing about the map that stands out to me is that 12 of Mandel's 13 "Kings" are on or east of a roughly North-South line running through Norman, OK and Austin, TX. IMHO, USC is THE best job in all of CFB because they are the only "King" located West of that line.
We all know that Florida has a LOT of HS talent but there are three "Kings" in state (UF, FSU, Miami) and three more not too far away (LSU, Bama, Clemson). In addition to that there are a number of schools that could arguably be considered "Kings" and are at-least "Barons" also competing for that talent. I'm thinking here of schools including Auburn, UGA, etc.
The difference for USC is that the Trojans are the ONLY "King" out there. IMHO, USC should be a playoff contender nearly every year for that reason. They simply don't face the recruiting competition that the rest of the "Kings" have to deal with. They ought to be able to flat out dominate California recruiting and then occasionally pull a kid from Texas, Florida, or OH/PA and be the most talented team almost every year.
-
So, USC has all the tools, but no toolbox.
-
So, USC has all the tools, but no toolbox.
They had one less tool after they fired Lane Kiffin
-
I'm going to take a minute here to brag on my school's amazing consistency. Here are all of Ohio State's multiple-year coaches with the years and their winning percentage:
- Urban Meyer, 2012-2018: .901
- Jim Tressel, 2001-2010: .810
- John Cooper, 1988-2000: .715
- Earle Bruce, 1979-1987: .755
- Woody Hayes, 1951-1978: .761
- Wes Fesler, 1947-1950: .608
- Carroll Widdoes, 1944-45: .889
- Paul Brown, 1941-1943: .685
- Francis Schmidt, 1934-1940: .705
- Sam Willaman, 1929-1933: .695
- John Wilce, 1913-1928: .688
- Albert Hernstein, 1906-1909: .731
- Edwin Sweetland, 1904-05: .652
- Frederick Ryder, 1892-95 and 1898: .500
- Alexander Lilley, 1890-91: .375
Willaman and Fesler also starred as Buckeye players under Dr John Wilce's tutelage.
In fact Fesler played for both Wilce and Willaman, as he was the top player on the team during that particular coaching change.
-
if people in the west cared about cfb, i'd be inclined to agree usc might be the best. but they don't and therefore i don't.
-
Youth participation out west has plummeted due to concussions.
-
sometimes, when the fan base isn't quite so rabid, it's better from the head coach's perspective
not as much scrutiny and pressure
-
That just goes back the question of are all HCs alphas, because I can't fathom an alpha wanting a less-pressurized job.
-
sometimes, when the fan base isn't quite so rabid, it's better from the head coach's perspective
not as much scrutiny and pressure
USC is sort of like the West Coast version of Miami (or I guess I should say Miami is the East Coast version of USC since the Trojans have a longer history). When they're good, they're REALLY good, but both need to get the right coach to have success. Recruiting is rarely an issue, but support most definitely is. Neither of them play in on-campus stadiums, neither have particularly good facilities, neither are huge public schools with hundreds of thousands of alumni (yes, they're both larger-than-average for privates, but still can't compare to schools like Ohio State and Texas), and honestly I don't think either of them have the same level of drive to be successful that schools like Oklahoma, Alabama, and Ohio State do. I think both schools' runs are more luck than "win at all costs". Pete Carroll wasn't USC's first choice (at the time he was viewed as little more than a mediocre NFL coach), he just happened to be the right guy at the right place at the right time. For Miami, Butch Davis stockpiled the talent, and Larry Coker reaped the rewards. Both programs eventually came back down to earth, and neither of them has been particularly good in at least 10 years.
If both of them are going to be successful, they'll need to start giving their fans a reason to get excited again. Smaller, on-campus stadiums would be a good start.
-
That just goes back the question of are all HCs alphas, because I can't fathom an alpha wanting a less-pressurized job.
Pete the cheat is obviously an alpha coach. He did alright there w/o the pressure of the SEC.
maybe Pete left because there wasn't enuff pressure.......... not because he was caught cheating and fled
-
That just goes back the question of are all HCs alphas, because I can't fathom an alpha wanting a less-pressurized job.
I think you are right to the extent that most of these guys aren't going to shy away from "pressure", but I don't think that means that they actively seek it.
I think what most of these guys are seeking is the place where they are most likely to succeed and I think that place is USC.
-
That just goes back the question of are all HCs alphas, because I can't fathom an alpha wanting a less-pressurized job.
I dunno... If you look at the list of current FBS head coaches (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_NCAA_Division_I_FBS_football_coaches), and sort it by the year they were hired, you see a lot of guys who have been at their current coach for a long time, could certainly move up to more "premier" jobs if they wanted, but haven't.
Patterson at TCU. Gundy at OkSU. Frank Solich who has tasted "pressure" jobs and seems to enjoy killing it in the MAC. Kyle Whittingham at Utah. Fitz at NW (although that's a special case as it's his alma mater). And that's leaving Ferentz off the list as the longest-tenured in the business. I'd say that several of them (Patterson, Gundy, Whittingham) would be looked at for "bigger" jobs if they wanted to move.
I do think there are some coaches who are "climbers", in that they want to always move up to the next biggest job. But personality-wise, would you say that Gundy, or Whittingham, or Fitz aren't "alphas"?
-
But also, what could be more alpha than making TCU a helmet program?
-
keep working
-
The Big Ten Conference has established a new benchmark in the how-high-is-up world of college sports finance: It recorded nearly $759 million in revenue during its 2018 fiscal year.
The figure, which far exceeds any comparable annual figure for a college sports conference, was revealed in a new federal tax return that the conference provided Wednesday in response to a request from USA TODAY. It is a year-over-year revenue increase of 48 percent, with the conference reaching $512.9 million in fiscal 2017.
The return also showed that commissioner Jim Delany was credited was just over $5.5 million in total compensation for the 2017 calendar year. That, too, is a single-year record for a conference.
The revenue total was driven by new TV agreements that took effect at the start of the 2017-18 school year and resulted in payments of roughly $54 million to each of the 14-team conference’s 12 longest-standing members. Maryland and Rutgers received smaller revenue-share amounts, but both schools also received loans from the conference against future revenue shares.
In February, the Southeastern Conference reported just under $660 million in revenue for fiscal 2018, resulting in an average of $43.7 million being distributed to the 13 member schools that received full shares. Mississippi did not get a full share because its football team was banned from postseason play.
The 10-team Big 12 recently reported $374 million in revenue for 2018.
-
Reality: You’re making the 2nd-most money by a conference.
SEC: Hold my beer...
-
(https://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Screen-Shot-2016-10-19-at-7.03.44-AM.png)
-
"I dunno... If you look at the list of current FBS head coaches (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_NCAA_Division_I_FBS_football_coaches), and sort it by the year they were hired, you see a lot of guys who have been at their current coach for a long time, could certainly move up to more "premier" jobs if they wanted, but haven't.
Patterson at TCU. Gundy at OkSU. Frank Solich who has tasted "pressure" jobs and seems to enjoy killing it in the MAC. Kyle Whittingham at Utah. Fitz at NW (although that's a special case as it's his alma mater). And that's leaving Ferentz off the list as the longest-tenured in the business. I'd say that several of them (Patterson, Gundy, Whittingham) would be looked at for "bigger" jobs if they wanted to move.
I do think there are some coaches who are "climbers", in that they want to always move up to the next biggest job. But personality-wise, would you say that Gundy, or Whittingham, or Fitz aren't "alphas"?"
I can't exactly tell what side OAM and bwarbiany are on, but to answer OAM's question, as people, yes, they're all alphas. You could perhaps argue some are slightly more alpha or whatnot, but you don't get to be the HC of that kind of team being reserved and deferential.
I assume some who don't move on find the next opportunity less ideal than what they have going. As in, they have built something, and don't want to leave it to clean up someone else's mess. Now perhaps cleaning up messes is the most alpha, but that's another lens to look at it with.
Patterson is an interesting one, but he seems to be wanting to build. I can't get a read on Gundy. He seems to simultaneously spar with is true boss and be settled. Solich isn't still at Ohio necessarily because he likes it (though I think he does), but because he was 65 by the time he was hirable for a better job, and almost no notably better jobs hire that old.
Let's put it this way, we can all agree Barry Alvarez could not be construed as beta. Yet he turned down Miami to stay at Wisconsin. Running any program is super hard. You're talking about different kinds of hard, I suppose. Building Wisconsin and TCU to contenders is harder than doing it at USC or Bama, but those latter two jobs are harder in different ways.
(Also, if taking on a massive challenge with limitless self assurance if "alpha," let us all appreciate the most alpha coach of all, Mike Shula. No college experience and he got the Bama job at 38. That's impressive.)
-
(Also, if taking on a massive challenge with limitless self assurance if "alpha," let us all appreciate the most alpha coach of all, Mike Shula. No college experience and he got the Bama job at 38. That's impressive.)
not just bama, but a run down, heavily sanctioned bama with reduced scholarship numbers and post season bans. AND taking over in the summer AFTER spring ball and the debacle that was mike price. almost unheard of.
fwiw, the alpha male bs has been largely debunked.
-
Yeah, nobody is knocking Solich's door down. When he didn't wind up getting to be Nebraska's Earle Bruce he found a nice little niche to slide into.
Really he has been working miracles at Ohio U, but they have a pretty hard ceiling. They were so bad before he showed up. Like one or two wins a year bad.