Best Coaches right now ....
This is an effort to use a different part of everyone's brain .... but still talk football !
With Urban Meyer leaving a lot is being said that the Florida job is the best job in America. I think "best" in pushing it ... but certainly an upper level team in the SEC (as well as nationally). Meyer was 65 - 15 in 6 seasons at Florida (2 MNCs). As they start naming potential replacements ... I started thinking about who are the top 3 college coaches - right now ?
If you look at each BCS conference the top coach may be:
Big East - none / ACC - Frank Beamer / SEC - was Meyer ? (god - not Saban) / B10 - tressel (ugh) / Big 12 - Stoops / PAC 10 - Kelly or Harbaugh (neither have a long track record) Outside of the BCS conferences - it has to be Chris Petersen.
So my top 3 right now .. probably (not in order) Beamer, Stoops & Petersen.
Beamer teams don't beat themselves / Stoops has delivered consistency (save last year) & Petersen has taken a nothing program to one that is discussed nationaly the last 3 - 4 years.
Who do you see as the top 3 college head coaches working today and why ?
Go Blue !
December 9th, 2010 at 2:03 PM ^
December 9th, 2010 at 2:20 PM ^
When has Saban ever cheated? His dismissal of players to make room for new recruits is sketchy, but clearly legal.
There is no indication that he cheats. Rather he FULLY understands the rules and coaches to the letter of the rules, if not the spirit of the rules. That is not cheating.
I'm not a fan of Saban's but don't throw around allegations that are only based upon your biases and not facts.
December 9th, 2010 at 2:46 PM ^
Some might consider the spirit of the rules more important than the letter of the rules.
December 9th, 2010 at 3:20 PM ^
Cheating is, by definition, committing fraud or violating the rules. What Saban does may have ethical questions, but it is not, strictly speaking, cheating.
December 9th, 2010 at 3:45 PM ^
So? If the definition of "cheating" requires you to violate a rule and you don't violate a rule you are "strickly speaking" in compliance with the rules.
But rules have a purpose. . The purpose here is to create fairness. Fairness between football programs and fairness towards student-athletes.
Unfortunately, rules are an imperfect tool to accomplish such purposes. Their greatest imperfection is that some people will look to create unfairness by finding loopholes in the rules.
Michigan was, by its own admission, in violation of the rules with regards to whether streching counts as practice time. Alabama finds ways, apparently within the rules, to cut players it no longer wants. Which is worse?
December 9th, 2010 at 4:04 PM ^
Look, your first problem is equating "legal" (or in this case, "within the bylaws," which are serving a quasi-judicial purpose here) and "moral." Morality and right/wrong are highly subjective. How laws, rules, or bylaws are written is not a moral question; as in, the letter of the law is just that. Each coach has to decide what he is and isn't willing to do within the bylaws. Saban does things that many won't. If the NCAA wants to impose a rule outlawing what he does, they would. Then he wouldn't be able to do it. But they haven't. So he's a piece of shit, and has a different moral compass, but at the same time, he's effective as hell. He is essentially gaining a competetive advantage, within the rules, because of his lack of morality. And it is allowed. Blame the NCAA if anyone: they shouldn't allow him to do what he does, because they should know that people (coaches) will do anything they can get away with (and much that they can't) to gain an advantage.
Oh, and if you're wondering, to me, what Saban does is far worse than what RR did. But my morals don't generally always line up with society's laws. Or, in this case, with the NCAA's bylaws.
December 9th, 2010 at 4:32 PM ^
may be it isn't equating "legal" with "moral".
I am, in fact, stating quite clearly that I consider "moral" to be more important than "legal".
Keep in mind that I didn't call Saban a "cheater" I merely responded to someone who was defending Saban, by saying that what Saban did was within the rules.
You would appear to agree. Michigan was "illegal". Alabama is "immoral" and Alabama is "worse".
I'll repeat. Laws or rules are written for a purpose. A moral purpose (generally). If you find a "legal" way to commit an immoral act you may not have violated the rules, but you have violated the purpose of the rules. Similarly, you can violate the letter of the rules without meaning to.
The NCAA may at some point make what Saban does against the rules. But that is frought with problems. How to word the rule. What counter-productive effect will there be. Can they pass it. Will Saban be able to find a clever way to circumvent that rule, etc.
December 9th, 2010 at 5:19 PM ^
You misinterpret my explanation for a defense of Saban's tactics. I am not a fan of the way he operates w/r/t playing with scholarships. I also do not disagree that he is violating the spirit of the rules, but he is not explicitly in violation of any NCAA bylaw. This was my point.
If the definition of "cheating" requires you to violate a rule and you don't violate a rule you are "strickly speaking" in compliance with the rules.
And yes - by the letter of the "law", Saban/Alabama has not violated a rule and are, in the eyes of the NCAA, in compliance. He may have found a loophole and be skating on the edge of compliance, but he is technically compliant nonetheless. Ethically speaking, this is just plain wrong, but he doesn't seem to have any compunction from doing so.
December 9th, 2010 at 5:30 PM ^
I'm thinking that if we were having this conversation in person, it would have gone much smoother.
I don't think we really disagree a lot here.
December 9th, 2010 at 3:52 PM ^
with that woman ... Monica Lewinsky " - William Jefferson Clinton
The SEC overlooks more "dirt" than any other conference. WTF - we get called out for practice time and not a "family atmoshere" and in the SEC you can redshirt 12 guys (just so happens that new recruits fill their starting spots) and who thinks that Cam Newton didn't know what his Dad was doing ??? Its OK to "sell" your son ... as long as the son doesn't know about it ?
The SEC loves their position in college football ... so lets just look the other way.
Go Blue !
December 9th, 2010 at 1:43 PM ^
I'd say
1) Harbaugh
2) Patterson
3) Kelly
December 9th, 2010 at 1:50 PM ^
Did you just whip out the current polls and make your selection? With a list like this, you have to justify it.
December 9th, 2010 at 1:46 PM ^
It's very hard to rank because of the circumstances. Is Tressel a better coach than Gary Patterson just because he is at OSU? Does the fact you can cut players in the SEC make Saban a better coach than when he was at State?
I'd say right now it has to be....Saban, Tressel and Stoops were the best because of what they have done even though none of them are my favorites.
Guys I like more that are up and comers and have brought teams up higher than their talent would suggest Kelly, Harbaugh, Rodriguez, Mullen, Fitzgerald,
December 9th, 2010 at 4:47 PM ^
UM has underachieved at UM if you use the rankings as a measuring stick.
<br>
<br>You can argue that the talent did not fit, had untimely defections, etc. But lack of talent? I cannot agree. UM's talent level is not that bad. RR has had average to excellent recruiting classes if you use the rankings as a measure.
December 9th, 2010 at 1:46 PM ^
- Saban
- Tressel
- Magnus
December 9th, 2010 at 1:54 PM ^
Suck up (regarding Magnus).
/s
December 9th, 2010 at 2:37 PM ^
Steve Sharik and Rich Brooks think these rankings are bullshit.
December 9th, 2010 at 3:09 PM ^
December 9th, 2010 at 1:57 PM ^
Beamer teams don't beat themselves.
So I guess James Madison is just a better team?
December 9th, 2010 at 2:36 PM ^
MGoRoasted.
December 9th, 2010 at 1:57 PM ^
I'd take Edsall.
December 9th, 2010 at 1:57 PM ^
1 GERG's hair
2 John Cooper
3 GERG's hair
December 9th, 2010 at 1:59 PM ^
What about GERG's stuffed beaver?
December 9th, 2010 at 2:16 PM ^
Leave his wife out of this....
December 9th, 2010 at 2:00 PM ^
1) Jim Harbaugh - took a 1-11 team and turned it into 11-1 in 4 years at Stanford.
2) Jim Tressel - six 10 win seasons in a row counts for something
3) Gary Patterson - Has maintained the success at TCU that began under Francionie.
Honorable Mention: Chris Pederson, Chip Kelly & Nick Saban.
December 9th, 2010 at 2:21 PM ^
Why would Gary Patterson be ahead of Chris Petersen?
December 9th, 2010 at 3:32 PM ^
Patterson has been successful at TCU for 10 years versus the 5 for Peterson at Boise.
December 9th, 2010 at 2:02 PM ^
there are head coach openings at both Miami and Florida, just one year after a change at Fla State.
Hotbed of talent? Yes.
Enormous pressure to win? Unquestionable.
December 9th, 2010 at 2:06 PM ^
- Peterson -- he's put Boise State on the map
- Tressel -- I loathe his existence, but I think that's because I didn't even have my driver's license the last time we beat OSU
- Mack Brown -- he's made Texas a dominating force (this season aside) for the last decade
December 9th, 2010 at 2:15 PM ^
To you and the OP Chris Peterson is a good coach but he hardly put Boise on the map. That title belongs to Dan Hawkins who took Colorado off the map. Hawkins is the one who got the ball rolling at BSU, Peterson just let it keep rolling.
December 9th, 2010 at 2:21 PM ^
It was really Dirk Koetter who put Boise on the map. That got him the job at Arizona State, and Hawkins took over at Boise and took things up another notch, and now Petersen has done the same.
Koetter went 20-5 in his last two season at Boise (1999 and 2000) shortly after they made the move to Division I, yet he often is forgotten in their ascension.
December 9th, 2010 at 2:22 PM ^
Good call, I had completely forgot about Dirk Koetter. Thanks for the reminder.
December 9th, 2010 at 2:20 PM ^
Actually Dan Hawkins put Boise St. on the map. He also took Colorado off of it.
Edit: 1 minute late.
December 9th, 2010 at 2:07 PM ^
during the entire 1970s while Alabama, Oklahoma, Nebraska, OSU, Michigan and USC all ruled the Top 10.
December 9th, 2010 at 2:17 PM ^
December 9th, 2010 at 2:09 PM ^
I can't be the only one who thinks Mike Leach will land a job soon and be very successful.
December 9th, 2010 at 6:27 PM ^
Frank Beamer? Sorry, no. He could be a legitimate power in the country except he doesn't recruit hard enough. Good defense and special teams, bad offense. Tyrod Taylor hasn't gotten any better since he came to Tech.
Edit: Wasn't suppose to be a reply to you. Sawezzz
December 9th, 2010 at 2:18 PM ^
I concur with that statement. I'm just glad he didn't bring his crazy spread to Indiana or Minnehaha. Not that we could stop Indiana anyway. ugh
December 9th, 2010 at 2:18 PM ^
It's amazing that only one person so far has mentioned Harbaugh.
1) Harbaugh
2) Tressel
3) Brown
December 9th, 2010 at 2:24 PM ^
If this were a "coach of the year" vote, sure. But Harbaugh doesn't have anywhere near the track record of most of the other coaches mentioned so far.
Quickly rebuilding Stanford into a power has been impressive, no doubt. Frank Beamer did that at VaTech and has maintained that level for the past 15 years. Nick Saban has done it at multiple places and won national championships almost immediately after arriving. To me, that's more impressive.
Again, not saying Harbaugh hasn't done an excellent job -- I just think succeeding long term in high-pressure environments is more impressive.
December 9th, 2010 at 2:23 PM ^
Beauty contest that talks about who is hot at the moment. Today's genius is tomorrow's idiot, just ask some NFL guy like Ryan for Jet's after their latest loss.
Ranking college football coaches using their records and accomplishments over the past 5 years in total instead of this year alone........
Stoops
Tressel
Patterson
Saban/Miles
December 9th, 2010 at 3:04 PM ^
This.
Right now, everybody's saying Chip Kelly and Jim Harbaugh and Gary Patterson. A year ago it would have been Mack Brown and Nick Saban, and three years ago it would have been RichRod and Les Miles.
It's all about who's hot (not literally) at the moment, and that can change with any bad game or season.
December 9th, 2010 at 3:35 PM ^
I don't think you can say that Patterson is a hot at the moment coach. He has won 10 or more games in a season seven times since 2001 when he was named head coach.
December 9th, 2010 at 3:40 PM ^
Didn't mean to imply that Gary Patterson hasn't been successful long term, although he took over an already-successful program from Dennis Franchione.
December 9th, 2010 at 2:32 PM ^
If you are going to go by records and accomplishments over the past 5 years, where is Chris Peterson?
since 2006:
60-5
38-2 in conf
2 bcs bowl wins
December 9th, 2010 at 2:36 PM ^
take Beamer out. Winning the ACC every year is not much better than winning the Big East. You get a BCS bid by default. The ACC is 1-9 is BCS games. Beamer has never beat a top 10 team on the road. Sorry...no to Beamer.
December 9th, 2010 at 4:08 PM ^
Beamer beat 9th ranked West Virginia in Morgantown in 1989. He's definitely in the discussion as one of the best. It's not like Virginia Tech was a powerhouse school before he arrived.
December 9th, 2010 at 2:41 PM ^
Who you bring in to replace Gerg as DC? Most on this board agree that Gerg needs to be replaced. Would you take a 3-3-5 guy like Casteel (who probably still doesn't want to come to AA) or someone else who will be given free reign to rebuild the defense as he sees fit? Who would be your top 3 choices?