Rating SEC Coaches

[GAVol]

Milo, I think you've flown off the reservation on this one. Saban was a good coach, but historically he's somewhere in the region of Gene Stallings.

And John Heisman coached at Auburn and Ga Tech in what later became the SEC. No he wasn't officially in the SEC, but I figured since they named a trophy after him, I'd grant him some leeway.

 

[OldVol]

Some of the things these whipper snappers are printing these days.

They shouldn't be allowed near a copy desk until they're at least 40.

 

[milohimself]

Originally posted by GAVol@Aug 1, 2005 8:59 PM
Milo, I think you've flown off the reservation on this one.  Saban was a good coach, but historically he's somewhere in the region of Gene Stallings.

And John Heisman coached at Auburn and Ga Tech in what later became the SEC.  No he wasn't officially in the SEC, but I figured since they named a trophy after him, I'd grant him some leeway.

[snapback]120623[/snapback]​

Come on, GAVol. Heisman died only three years after the creation of the SEC, he had been long since retired from the job.

I dunno. I think what Saban did is really impressive. He took a program that usually didn't do a whole lot, and built it into a powerhouse. That, to me, is the trademark of all great coaches. The only reason he won't be on that list as most of the rest of the guys you posted is because his stint with LSU only lasted 5 years. If it was 10, his success would rival ours over the past decade.

 

[OldVol]

Originally posted by milohimself@Aug 2, 2005 12:58 AM
Come on, GAVol. Heisman died only three years after the creation of the SEC, he had been long since retired from the job.

I dunno. I think what Saban did is really impressive. He took a program that usually didn't do a whole lot, and built it into a powerhouse. That, to me, is the trademark of all great coaches. The only reason he won't be on that list as most of the rest of the guys you posted is because his stint with LSU only lasted 5 years. If it was 10, his success would rival ours over the past decade.

[snapback]120676[/snapback]​

LSU is the 16th all-time winningest program in the country.

I don't think it's accurate to say they 'usually didn't to a whole lot.' I think it's fair to say they had been down for only a few years compared to their usual standards.

They went 9/3 in 97 and kicked the crap out of ND in the Independence Bowl. They were 10/2 in 96.

For several years they were not the usual strong LSU but they certainly weren't in the class of a Vandy or Miss St.

LSU has a rich tradition that will never allow it to go down and stay down.

Saban was merely in the right place at the right time. He did a good job recruiting, he did a good job coaching, but that's all LSU needed. They had the tradition, facilities and a rabid fan base long before Saban had been heard of.

To say he's in the top 10 of all-time SEC coaches is truly funny.

The writer of the article doesn't know a lot about the SEC.

 

[kiddiedoc]

What a looney bin. Notice the website? Cincinnati.com. Think Ohio State is still sour?

A couple of gripes (sorry if this is repetitive):

#1: Tuberville??? Sure, he had a great season last year, mostly due to having a GREAT TEAM. They were stacked beyond stacked. This guy defends their lack of prior success by saying: "Auburn's recruiting classes have not been the perennial top five juggernauts of Southern California, Oklahoma and LSU." Uh, isn't that part of the coach's job description? How can you be the best coach if you can't recruit as well as the next guy? Then, he bashes Fulmer for 2 "8 win seasons." Well, the past 4 regular seasons have produced TWO 7 win seasons and an 8 winner for the proclaimed "King of the Mountain." Guess again.

#2: SOS. Deserves to be co-number one with Fulmer. BUT. . . .wrong reasoning. "He may fail mightily this season, but the Gamecocks will win big before too long just as the Dolphins will with Saban." Yeah, just like the 'Skins did with Spurrier, too, eh? And I wouldn't go so far as to pick the 'Cocks for a title shot any time soon.

#3: Richt. "this team has basically been in the national title mix consistently the last three seasons and will continue to be there." Did I miss something? Seems like some team decked out in Orange took care of that early on last year (at home) and another team did that TWICE the year before that, the second time in their "other home."

#4: Meyer. Let's see. SEC wins? Zero. So let's put him above the guy with an .800 winning percentage and a recent national title. Perfect.

#5: Fulmer. Arguably the best recruiter in the nation. Not just "in the mix", but a TITLE in 98. An .800 winning percentage. Staying power. Wins close games. Can you say "Number One?" I'd give him the edge over SOS because Steve has inherited a disaster.

I could go on. . . .but I'll stop wasting my breath. This lunatic should be cleaning toilets for the Newspaper, not writing stories.

I bet the only people more pissed off than us live in Tuscaloosa.

 

[MyBloodRunnethOrange]

Originally posted by milohimself@Aug 2, 2005 12:58 AM
I dunno. I think what Saban did is really impressive. He took a program that usually didn't do a whole lot, and built it into a powerhouse. That, to me, is the trademark of all great coaches. The only reason he won't be on that list as most of the rest of the guys you posted is because his stint with LSU only lasted 5 years. If it was 10, his success would rival ours over the past decade.

[snapback]120676[/snapback]​

I agree that Saban is aood coach, and he did an impressive job at LSU, but to put him up there with the legendary coaches in the SEC is quite a stretch. The problem is that you can't claim that kind of status based on what he would have done, but on what he actually did do. If you could go on just a few seasons, then Bill Battle would certainly be included based on his first three seasons, but we all know how that went. The truth is that nobody can say what would have happened had he stayed.

 

[milohimself]

OldVol - I was just looking at LSU's record between Dietzel and Saban. Two ten win seasons in 37 years. Charles McClendon, Jerry Stoval, Bill Arnsparger, Mike Archer, Curley Hallman, Gerry DiNardo. All coaches met with occassional success but very few times was it sustained longer than 2 or 3 years. LSU's records are irratic, while Saban's tenure was arguably the best 5-year period in LSU's history.

Now I'm not saying Saban should be put up there on the list of greatest coaches, but as far as relatively short stints at schools go, or the first five years of anybody's college coaching career, one would be hard pressed to find many people that did better than Nick Saban.

 

[volmanjr]

How does Saban's first 5 stack up against Fulmer's first 5 and Spurierr's first 5?

 

[milohimself]

Saban:
48 - 16 (.750) 2 SEC West titles, 2 SEC titles, 1 National Title, 3-2 in bowl games

Fulmer (starting from 1993):
50 - 11 (.819) 1 SEC East title, 1 SEC title, 3-2 in bowl games

Spurrier:
49 - 12 - 1 (.803) 3 SEC East titles, 3 SEC titles, 2-3 in bowl games

It's hard to decide who was the best. Fulmer had the best record but fewer SEC titles than Saban and Spurrier. Spurrier was impressive but had a losing record in bowl games. Saban's record was the worst but he did produce two SEC titles and a national championship.

 

[OldVol]

Originally posted by milohimself@Aug 2, 2005 5:01 PM
OldVol - I was just looking at LSU's record between Dietzel and Saban. Two ten win seasons in 37 years. Charles McClendon, Jerry Stoval, Bill Arnsparger, Mike Archer, Curley Hallman, Gerry DiNardo. All coaches met with occassional success but very few times was it sustained longer than 2 or 3 years. LSU's records are irratic, while Saban's tenure was arguably the best 5-year period in LSU's history.

Now I'm not saying Saban should be put up there on the list of greatest coaches, but as far as relatively short stints at schools go, or the first five years of anybody's college coaching career, one would be hard pressed to find many people that did better than Nick Saban.

[snapback]120820[/snapback]​

However, talking about all-time greates, is what I understood the topic to be about.

If you're talking about 5 years stretches, or short SEC careers, that's a different basket of oranges.

To talk about Saban in the same breath as Shug Jordan, Bear Bryant, Robert Neyland, Vince Dooley and a host of other greats who spent 15 to 30 years or more, then that's the criteria for all-time consideration.

I'm not dissing what Saban did at LSU for his 5 seasons. I'm just stating hands-down that it's asinine to mention him with all-time greatest SEC coaches because he didn't stay long enough.

Some might argue he was the best SEC coach in history. Some might say the same about Francionne, but to talk about a coach who stayed a measley 2 years as being all-time great is also ridiculous.

The writer is probably too young to appreciate the historical aspect of the game.