August 21st, 2012 at 9:46 AM ^
Like others, I was a bit irritated at first, but if we frame it as a list based on resume, then several of these guys clearly belong here, I would think. I also thought about what some of these coaches have been able to do at various schools when it came to improving their outlook. A few examples that came to mind:
Frank Beamer took over a somewhat moribund Virginia Tech team in the 1980s and, although it took him about five or six seasons to get them started, he turned them into a presence in the ACC with some level of bowl appearance for the last twenty years.
Mack Brown turned an awful North Carolina squad into a decent team as well, at least for a time, and he's taken Texas from historically average (with flashes of above average to good) at best to three Cotton and two Rose bowls in his time there (of course, the last couple years haven't gone so well in Austin).
Even Mark Dantonio might have an argument here, at least if being something of a turnaround artist is among the criteria (noted that he does not have the seniority as an HC that some others on the list do) - he took over a program that was fragmented and a broad parody of itself and turned them into a team that won 11 games in consecutive seasons. They may not repeat that performance this year, but the contrast from the Williams-Smith (and three games of Watts) era is profound.
Mike Gundy took over the middling Oklahoma State program that Les Miles left, oddly enough, and has turn them into a Big 12 favorite as well. Les Miles even improved on Nick Saban's performance at LSU a little bit, at least in the consistency department.
August 21st, 2012 at 9:50 AM ^
August 21st, 2012 at 9:51 AM ^
That hurt my feelings.
August 21st, 2012 at 10:13 AM ^
August 21st, 2012 at 10:19 AM ^
I was a bit surprised not to see Wisconsin's staff on the list, even losing Chryst.
August 21st, 2012 at 11:29 AM ^
They also lost the o-line coach that has churned out all those huge linemen for the past six years. UW's offensive staff is a pretty unknown entity at this point. And they have a tough act to follow.
August 21st, 2012 at 11:36 AM ^
but on the capacity to get MORE out of LESS skilled players (Hoke taking RR's players and going from 3 years of historic failure to 11-2 is pretty impressive). The quality also should be based not entirely on past results but future expectations. For instance, did the recent record of a coach decline or exhibit player discipline problems (Meyer at UF). Or did the coach's record improve dramatically (Hoke). In addition, how stable is the coaching situation, based on the health and reliability of coaches. Consider Meyer's on-again off-again commitments and illnesses as well as his self-serving insistence on a contract that lets him leave if more dirt is unearthed at Ohio. Contrast that with the lifetime commitment of Hoke's best assistant.
Finally, the linked article is suspect in that it leaves out so many intangibles: eg a coach's capacity to obtain lifetime commitments from top assistants, like the former Baltimore Ravens coordinator, who has coached some of the best defensive players ever to play in the NFL.* Consider also the coach's ability to inspire loyalty as well as success, etc. I think that such inspiration derives in part from the emotional intelligence of a coach---which is higher in a coach who is not self centered but rather directs credit toward his players and assistants (another interesting contrast between Hoke vs Meyer).
*interestingly, even though Meyer makes himself the center of attention, it was Mattison who either directed and/or recruited Meyer's only title teams. He had joined Meyer's staff not because he thought it was a move up but because of the instability at ND. Then, he left Meyer for the NFL. By contrast, he left the NFL to join Hoke. That, plus Mattison's lifelong commitment to Hoke--even at this stage of his career-- says a lot.
August 21st, 2012 at 11:35 AM ^
How is tsiO on there when they haven't even played a game under the new coaching staff?
August 21st, 2012 at 1:06 PM ^
Did anyone who made that list watch the Sugar Bowl? Michigan won that based by the slimmest of margins because Beamer made EVERY single wrong decision in that game.
August 21st, 2012 at 8:04 PM ^
Beamer made some bad decisions, but I also felt like his team absolutely dominated Michigan for much of the game. Also, how many BCS bowls has Beamer been to at this point?
August 21st, 2012 at 1:12 PM ^
Texas coaching staff is overrated, especially in light of recent years. I'll take issue with the Ohio staff being on there as well - the crew hasn't spent a season together in their current roles, let alone one game. I'd argue USC should be somewhere on the current list, how they were left off is beyond me.
August 21st, 2012 at 7:55 PM ^
August 21st, 2012 at 3:38 PM ^
What a joke. OSU hasnt even played in a game. Who knows if Urban and his staff can even coach in the B1G.