Tater

January 31st, 2015 at 3:44 PM ^

I think I'll wait until NSD to start thinking about 2016.  Harbaugh is going to put a great class together regardless of one player committing early to PSU.  

East German Judge

January 31st, 2015 at 4:41 PM ^

Agreed,  and don't forget about his 2012 comment:

"I've been saying it for a long time, I will not hire an assistant coach until I've seen his wife. If she looks the part, and she's a D-I recruit, then you got a chance to get hired. That's part of the deal," Franklin said Wednesday on Nashville's 104.5 FM The Zone, according to coachingsearch.com.

tragictones

January 31st, 2015 at 4:41 PM ^

I'm not sure if I agree or disagree.  My main question mark about Franklin is: what does he bring to the table? He is an offensive coach. (Maryland OC, KSU OC, and WR coach at several stops.)  Yet, when he was in charge of the offense at Maryland, they were mediocre on offense (68th, 102nd, 80th)  Similarly, they were poor offensively at Vanderbilt under Franklin (98th, 82nd, 94th).  If the offensive side of the ball is his specialty, why are his teams winning with defense and poor on offense?

On the other hand, you can't discount that he does win games (especially with defense.)  Vanderbilt finished in the top 25 defensively all three years he was head coach there.  Penn State had the #2 defense nationally last year.  Also, his record is very comparable to Harbaugh's (at the college level.)  Both coached 4 seasons in FBS.  Both took over bottom-feeders.  Franklin's record was 31-21 in 4 seasons (.596).  Harbaugh's at 4 seasons at Stanford was 29-21 (.580) 

I wouldn't say he is a mediocre coach based on his results at Vandy and sanction-depleted PSU.  The results are actually impressive.  But, I'm not sure what he brings to the table.  He isn't a brilliant offensive mind and who knows how much of his defenses are his doing.

tragictones

January 31st, 2015 at 5:31 PM ^

He hasn't won any BSC bowl games.  He was never a head coach at the NFL level.  So, zero on both measures.  But, those aren't useful measures in determining if a college coach is mediocre or not.  Those are the stats we use to think about all-time greatness (or, I suppose NFL desirablity.)

To clear the point of my post wasn't to compare him to Harbaugh.  It was to compare him (favorably) to an undefined image in my head of a "mediocre" coach.  I compared him to Harbaugh to demonstrate that he has credentials above that of a mediocre coach.  I don't really care how many BCS wins or NFL wins a coach has at the 4 year mark of his career if I'm trying to gauge how he compares to his contemporaries.  I would only weigh those measures towards the end of his career if I were trying to determine his place in the all time record books.    

 

J.Madrox

January 31st, 2015 at 6:17 PM ^

We don't know for sure whether Franklin is a mediocre coach. But I personally believe he is mediocre because he has never had a really great season to show he is anything other than a medicore coach.

Their overall records at college may be similar, but Harbaugh produced an 11 win regular season whereas Franklin's best was two 8 win years. I think if a coach is better than mediocre they produce a better than mediocre season at whatever school they are at. I don't  believe guys suddenly produce better results when they get bigger jobs, so I don't think Franklin will produce much better than 8 and 4 seasons at PSU.

He could prove me wrong, I dislike Franklin and PSU, so I hope he doesn't prove me wrong, but nothing he has produced so far leads me to believe he is much better than mediocre. But we could also have different opinions on what that word means.

alum96

January 31st, 2015 at 6:58 PM ^

I am not a Franklin fan but to say a coach is not good because he didnt take f***** Vanderbilt to a BCS game in 3 years or win a NFL game is just stupid reasoning.  How many damn NCAA coaches have won a NFL game - what a ridiculous bar.

Did John Beilein win a NC at West Virginia?  Did he get to a final 4?  How many NBA player did he produce before Michigan?  That's the same bullshit reasoning people used to say Beilein wasnt good before UM.

You are not going to the damn BCS in 3 years at Vandy.  That doesn't mean you are not good.  I took a long hard look at Franklin in diaries during the coaching search and I did not come away that impressed - his defensive coordinator I was very impressed with on the other hand.  But I'd never judge a guy by saying he didnt take XXX team to a bowl game in 3 years.  Every team (almost) has its limits.  You could see Urban's early when he took Utah to ridiculous heights early - and we know after the fact he is not just a great coach but truly elite.   That is the exception to the rule.  Bill Snyder is a great coach and how long did it take for him to turn KSU around?  Steve Spurrier is elite and never took Duke to "a BCS bowl".  Etc.

tragictones

January 31st, 2015 at 11:53 PM ^

I'm not really fond of your assertion that "if a coach is better than mediocre they produce a better than mediocre season at whatever school they are at."  The Gene Chiziks, Mark Manginos, Brady Hokes, Larry Cokers, etc of the world make me uncomfortable with that criteria.   I think those coaches are all mediocre despite producing better than mediocre seasons at one point or another.

Did you specifically choose such an unreliable measure because it was a stat Harbaugh achieved and Franklin hasn't?  Or do you think that "a better than mediocre season" (defined as BCS bowl worthy) is necessary, but not sufficient?  If that's the case (not sufficient) what other more reliable measures do you suggest using?  I think good coaches (above mediocrity) demonstrate some level of consistency (consistent improvement, consistently exceeding expecations, consistently beating the vegas odds, etc.)

alum96

January 31st, 2015 at 6:51 PM ^

Franklin is a mediocre offensive coach who struck it gold with his coordinator on D.   Dude is from Yale and someone I was very interested in getting for us in the post Hoke search if not Muschamp.  Most people in the Big 10 dont know about him because he is new but let's hold the breaks on giving Franklin the credit for the defense which is not his football background. It would be ilke saying Les Miles is a great defensive coach.

Roc Blue in the Lou

February 1st, 2015 at 12:38 AM ^

Did he beat Bama while at Vandy??  Did he ever win the SEC East???  Cuz, after its first 3 years in the league Mizzou has 2 SEC East Titles...and I wouldn't consider Mizzou a power house.  Not even comparable with what Sir James did at Stanford.  And that without regard to his amazing NFL Run.

tragictones

February 1st, 2015 at 9:18 AM ^

No SEC East titles either.  Neither of those things mean he is a mediocre coach. One doesn't need to perform that high above historical standards of the program to simply be considered "better than mediocre." 

Lots of great coaches fail to win conference/division titles in their first three years of coaching FBS (Harbaugh at Stanford, Dantonio at Cincy, Saban at MSU)  But, it was clear to anyone watching closely that (1) these guys were a step up over their predecessors, (2) that things were heading the right direction under their watch and (3) that they were better than mediocre. That's exactly why bigger, better programs offered them jobs, despite their utter lack of championships.  Because the ability was plainly obvious.

Under Franklin (24-15), Vandy was much better than their historical average and they were certainly heading in the right direction.  He is not an elite coach like 2003 Saban or 2013 Dantonio.  But, he's certainly on par with "better than mediocre" 1997 Saban (19-16-1) and 2006 Dantonio (19-17).  

SteelBrad

January 31st, 2015 at 3:45 PM ^

Good luck to him.

For the first time since the Lloyd Carr days, when I didn't follow recruiting closely, I honestly don't get worked up about who goes where. Harbaugh will get good players and those players will work their asses off.

It's not going to happen overnight, but Michigan is going to be very, very good.




Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

991GT3

January 31st, 2015 at 3:54 PM ^

way overblown. There are many good players and losing one or two or ten for that matter will have minimal impact so long as we have good coaching.

Mr. Yost

January 31st, 2015 at 4:41 PM ^

2014 Team Rankings

#1 Alabama

#3 OSU

#4 FSU

#21 Oregon

2013 Team Rankings

#1 Alabama

#2 OSU

#10 FSU

#19 Oregon

2012 Team Rankings

#1 Alabama

#3 FSU

#5 OSU

#13 Oregon

2011 Team Rankings

#1 Alabama

#2 FSU

#7 OSU

#11 Oregon

Your final four teams, all great recruiting during the past 4 years...and the one team that's slightly off that top 10 dominance, is in the top 20 and they run a system that doesn't rely on top talent (unlike Michigan's system).

Recruiting isn't everything, because I saw a lot of Michigan in those years as well...but if you want to win, it's a hell of a lot easier with good/great players.

It's not overblown. Losing one player is, but losing 10 isn't and it's not only about great coaching. 

You need both if you want to be successful and these rankings prove that. Give me Alabama and Nick Saban EMU or Georgia State and I bet I win. Good coaching isn't great without good players and good players aren't great without good coaching (see Brady Hoke). 

 

Drbogue

January 31st, 2015 at 5:26 PM ^

Very true. But look at Michigan is those years:

2011 - #21
2012 - #7
2013 - #5
2014 - #31

Harbaugh is now coaching (and hopefully developing) those players. All is not lost and thankfully we are starting from a much better position than 2008. I agree that recruiting matters but I think it's a mixed bag. What matters more is having a coaching tree that identifies the types of players that will work for their system and developing them in that system. Think MSU.




Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Drbogue

January 31st, 2015 at 5:28 PM ^

Very true. But look at Michigan is those years:

2011 - #21
2012 - #7
2013 - #5
2014 - #31

Harbaugh is now coaching (and hopefully developing) those players. All is not lost and thankfully we are starting from a much better position than 2008. I agree that recruiting matters but I think it's a mixed bag. What matters more is having a coaching tree that identifies the types of players that will work for their system and developing them in that system. Think MSU.




Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Chitown Kev

January 31st, 2015 at 7:54 PM ^

and Florida's been as shitty as Michigan lately. (12, 3, 4, & 8 over the same period). As far as the NFL is concerned, I'd argue that Dallas, New Orleans, Green Bay and (I can't believe I'm about to say this) Chicago had more offensive talent than Harbaugh's 49er teams. and RR didn't have "great" recruiting classes at WVU. So yes, recruiting is important bu coaching up is even more important.

991GT3

January 31st, 2015 at 7:00 PM ^

and results. How about TCU and Baylor.

Look I get if you recruit good players and have good coaches the results will show. However, the difference between a 4-5 star player and 3-4 isn't that great. Whatever the difference coaching will make up for it.

Moriato (?) was the second string QB on his high school team. What was Cardale Jones rating?

M_Born M_Believer

February 1st, 2015 at 2:10 AM ^

2015 (incomplete)= 25th
2014= 21st
2013= 40th
2012= 41st
2011= 31st

Certainly not the elite rankings that Mr. Yost is referring to.

TCU
2015=31st
2014=50th!
2013=30th
2012=37th
2011=26th

Baylor
2015=40th
2014=35th
2013=31st
2012=45th
2011=46th
All this lends to the statement is put out earlier. One can compensate half the equation by being very good on the other half. BUT, if you are talking about being the best of the best. The surest path is elite coaching AND elite coaching.

While MSU/TCU/Baylor could get on the field with Bama or OSU. Most betting people would take Bama and OSU 10 times out of 10 and be right most (7-8) times.

Harbaugh is elite, there are 2 recruiting cycles on campus that are elite, 2015 needs to be closed out, then 2016 will finish the job.

alum96

February 1st, 2015 at 11:53 AM ^

Yes i was going to ask how the logic would have worked if TCU or Baylor had been in the final 4.  I think TCU was built very much like OSU and could have been hot and won the whole thing just like OSU did.

Look the bottom line is you need talent and you need coaching.  MSU is basically running the Wisconsin model (redshirt almost everyone, play a ton of 4th year and 5th year players sprinkled in with some elite younger talent) that Alvarez had down but with way more continuity then Wisconsin has had of late in coaching.  TCU has an excellent coach who has been a defensive whiz for 15 years and this year junked his old fashioned offense and went air raid with a premium QB.  Bayor has a system and finally is playing "some" defense.

All 3 of those teams just so happened ot have an elite to excellent QB.  As did OSU.  As did Oregon.  As did FSU.  Bama was the one exception but they have so many 5 stars dropping out of every pore it's relatively moot.

Good coaching, good players, well above average QB play - it's not that difficult of a recipe.  Finding all 3 components at once is the difficult part.

M_Born M_Believer

February 1st, 2015 at 2:12 AM ^

2015 (incomplete)= 25th
2014= 21st
2013= 40th
2012= 41st
2011= 31st

Certainly not the elite rankings that Mr. Yost is referring to.

TCU
2015=31st
2014=50th!
2013=30th
2012=37th
2011=26th

Baylor
2015=40th
2014=35th
2013=31st
2012=45th
2011=46th
All this lends to the statement is put out earlier. One can compensate half the equation by being very good on the other half. BUT, if you are talking about being the best of the best. The surest path is elite recruiting AND elite coaching.

While MSU/TCU/Baylor could get on the field with Bama or OSU. Most betting people would take Bama and OSU 10 times out of 10 and be right most (7-8) times.

Harbaugh is elite, there are 2 recruiting cycles on campus that are elite, 2015 needs to be closed out, then 2016 will finish the job.

M_Born M_Believer

February 1st, 2015 at 1:46 AM ^

Well stated Mr. Yost. It is the combination of high level recruiting AND great coaching that gives you the best chance to win. One can try and overcome one or the other with one half of the equation ( TCU with great coaching; Baylor with a unique scheme; USC or Clemson with excessive talent), but to consistently be in the discussion for the playoff, you NEED both. I would still contend that Bama would have beaten OSU had Lane Kiffin had not been such a dope.

Based upon this notion, that I why I believe Michigan will be on top again soon.

Step one is to finish strong with this class (that's looking at you Clark, Weber, Smith, and Marshall)

Step two, strong 2015 football season (10-3)

Step three, slam dunk 2016 recruiting cycle

That puts us in great shape as a program for 2016 and beyond.....