ADVERTISEMENT

OT: What coach do you think is better than they are being labeled?

Harvey Specter

Well-Known Member
Feb 4, 2016
4,720
15,730
113
Take out the obvious polarizing corches like Muschamp, Petrino, Gus, etc. This is for coaches that the majority of people are writing off but you think are still pretty good.


Charlie Strong is mine. Don't know what happened at TX but I think he's a pretty good corch.
 
I get totally befuddled when I hear people say that they think Chip Kelly wouldn't do well at a big program in the SEC. Don't know if that counts.

I think Brian Kelly is an ass, but I think he'll do well once his stop at notre dame ends.

Same with Kevin Sumlin. Even though I said he was horrible the other day, I meant that as a fit for AU. I think he'll be fine the next place that he goes as well
 
  • Like
Reactions: Harvey Specter
yeah - Lane as a corch isn't in doubt...
but as a head man of a program? seems to be written off...

I think he's going to win big somewhere before it's all said and done
 
  • Like
Reactions: wcw3au1
I'd love to have LANE. Guy can croot, corch up a QB and call a ball game. He was never nearly as bad as made out to be and I'm sure learned a few things from the GOAT. I kinda like Sumlin for similar reasons.

I mean lets be real Arben isn't gonna get some proven championship caliber corch.
 
I'm not sure that I think Lane will ever be able to overcome some of his flaws and consistently be a great coach. I think he's too self destructive
 
Take out the obvious polarizing corches like Muschamp, Petrino, Gus, etc. This is for coaches that the majority of people are writing off but you think are still pretty good.


Charlie Strong is mine. Don't know what happened at TX but I think he's a pretty good corch.

B9315478886Z.1_20141217015453_000_GCH9EC055.1-0.jpg
 
Mark Stoops. Has a nice resume and Kentucky has gradually gotten better. They're a QB away from contending for the east. I'm not sure if he is that great of a coach. He just looks like a total derp so you expect Kentucky to be horrible.
 
I get totally befuddled when I hear people say that they think Chip Kelly wouldn't do well at a big program in the SEC. Don't know if that counts.

I think Brian Kelly is an ass, but I think he'll do well once his stop at notre dame ends.

Same with Kevin Sumlin. Even though I said he was horrible the other day, I meant that as a fit for AU. I think he'll be fine the next place that he goes as well
I like Kevin Sumlin. He can clearly recruit. He's another that I can't figure out what went wrong
 
Take out the obvious polarizing corches like Muschamp, Petrino, Gus, etc. This is for coaches that the majority of people are writing off but you think are still pretty good.


Charlie Strong is mine. Don't know what happened at TX but I think he's a pretty good corch.

What happened at T is what would happen at AU. External interference kills.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MomentInTheSun
Mark Stoops. Has a nice resume and Kentucky has gradually gotten better. They're a QB away from contending for the east. I'm not sure if he is that great of a coach. He just looks like a total derp so you expect Kentucky to be horrible.
His face just doesn't inspire confidence but the guy clearly has some corching ability
 
I like Kevin Sumlin. He can clearly recruit. He's another that I can't figure out what went wrong
The younger me used to dismiss that 'culture fit' was important. The older me living in Los Angles totally understands now. I have no idea if that's what it is, but I definitely understand how some outside factors can affect work performance
 
What happened at T is what would happen at AU. External interference kills.
I don't disagree, but does Alabama not have just as much external influence as anywhere else? I know everyone says that "well they just all have a commitment to winning" which I don't doubt but that's still a lot of people wanting to be a part of the program. I imagine the people at AU that want influence have a commitment to winning too, but why does most influence cause trouble And Alabama's not?
 
I don't disagree, but does Alabama not have just as much external influence as anywhere else? I know everyone says that "well they just all have a commitment to winning" which I don't doubt but that's still a lot of people wanting to be a part of the program. I imagine the people at AU that want influence have a commitment to winning too, but why does most influence cause trouble And Alabama's not?
They did until the fear the thumb streak. Then it was get Saban and get out of his way or $$$ will go bye bye.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT