Recruiting Forum Football Talk XLV

Status
Not open for further replies.
#6,279
#6,279
Anyone believe the Gruden from behind doppelganger could be Will Bartholomew? I believe he would've been a redshirt freshman on the 97 team and along with Peyton started the D1 training facilities.
 
#6,280
#6,280
Why is everyone mad? Did Catbone's source say that wasn't Gruden's house or he wasn't member of CC?
 
#6,288
#6,288
HankHill said:
USC promoted an unpopular interim and look how its turning out.
Click to expand...

I think people are confusing "proven big-time winner" with a coach who turns out to be a very good hire. The examples mentioned: Texas, LSU, USC...none of them hired "proven big-time winners". The fact they may have hired their first choice is irrelevant.

And when UW hired Petersen he was not "proven big-time winner". He may have been an up-and-comer, like Frost or Campbell maybe today. And he has proven to be a very good hire. But that's not the same as a "proven big time winner".

There are very few "proven big-time winners" out there now and it'll be tough to hire one of them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#6,292
#6,292
LA Vol said:
Well, none of them are new members at Cherokee, the new owners of the Haslams' house, the secret dinner companions of Peyton Manning at Calhouns last Saturday, in possession of contracts signed a week ago or the reason UT is looking into buying a new plane. Unless we're talking about some unknown candidate not on the vet list prepared by the search firm we didn't hire.
Click to expand...

R u saying we hired a search firm
 
#6,293
#6,293
OrangenSC said:
I think people are confusing "proven big-time winner" with a coach who turns out to be a very good hire. The examples mentioned: Texas, LSU, USC...none of them hired "proven big-time winners". The fact they may have hired their first choice is irrelevant.

And when UW hired Petersen he was not "proven big-time winner". He may have been an up-and-comer, like Frost or Campbell maybe today. And he has proven to be a very good hire. But that's not the same as a "proven big time winner".

There are very few "proven big-time winners" out there now and it'll be tough to hire one of them.
Click to expand...

I don't think our program is considered undesirable, it's got to be considered at least on par with the programs listed below. It is then important to consider the recent market for big time programs making Head coaching hires when looking at our own search.

Florida - hired a guy that was 22-16 at Colorado State, previously SEC OC (A lot like Bobo on paper).
USC - hired an interim that had started the season as OC, no prior HC experience.
LSU - hired an interim that started the season as DL coach, terrible HC experience in SEC.
Texas - would be the equivalent of hiring Frost.

Gruden, Kelly, Petersen, or Patterson are about the only hires we could make that would be comparable to a Saban, Meyer, or Harbaugh hire. Frost would at least be as good on paper as Texas hiring Herman. In hiring Mullen, we could say we poached an SEC head coach with a winning record and a better track record for QB development than anyone else in the SEC. None of the programs listed above can claim to have made a better hire on paper than Mullen.

That's said, Petersen was my #1 when Kiffin was hired and is my #1 now, followed by Gruden, Kelly, Patterson, then Mullen. I would consider any of those guys homeruns, with Mullen being more like a triple. I would also be excited with Frost or Campbell. But really I'll just be happy as long as we make a better hire than Florida.
 
Last edited:
#6,295
#6,295
utvols88 said:
Roster is not bad and recruiting "toughness" is overblown.

we have a large amount of players out for the year. Who you saw play last week is not the lineup that is inherited.

You think Florida is easy to recruit when the entire country has a focus on it with three major programs instate?
Click to expand...

We're just going to have to agree to disagree on the roster. And the only way either of us will be proven right or wrong is when the season gets started next year. The S&C program is a disaster and they're about to go through another change.

Recruiting at Tennessee is all about effort. It's the one thing you can't fault Butch for. He worked very hard on the trail. Some guys just don't want to work like that.
 
#6,296
#6,296
HankHill said:
Ok if they didn’t, then why do we need the homerun proven coach?
Click to expand...

One reason is this fan base is about to seek other outlets for their entertainment. We have a whole generation of vol fans that have never seen a Tennessee team that is any more than average and many times pathetic. Kids raised in the shadows of Neyland stadium that wear Bama, GA, or FL gear to school. This is an absolute critical hire. This hire could shape the program for decades. Do you really think we should roll the dice of a coach with 2-3 years experience? Should we roll the dice with a coach that has a losing conference record?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#6,298
#6,298
drylo said:
They’re students representing their school. If they want to go play somewhere else and get paid cash, the schools aren’t stopping them. They choose to come play college ball because they think it’s a good deal for them. Get outta here with the “compensated fairly” nonsense.

Also, the players themselves aren’t responsible for the money in college sports in any real sense. The value is 100% in the schools’ brands. It wouldn’t matter if the top 500 kids (an astronomical number) coming out of high school each year went into some pro farm league instead of college ball — 102,455 would still show up to watch whatever scrubs were suiting up for the VOLS.
Click to expand...

This is an old and tired argument. The players are our there working their asses off, watching their bosses and companies rake in millions that most of them will never see. They at the very least deserve the right to change employers without penalty and they don't even have that.
 
#6,299
#6,299
OrangenSC said:
I think people are confusing "proven big-time winner" with a coach who turns out to be a very good hire. The examples mentioned: Texas, LSU, USC...none of them hired "proven big-time winners". The fact they may have hired their first choice is irrelevant.

And when UW hired Petersen he was not "proven big-time winner". He may have been an up-and-comer, like Frost or Campbell maybe today. And he has proven to be a very good hire. But that's not the same as a "proven big time winner".

There are very few "proven big-time winners" out there now and it'll be tough to hire one of them.
Click to expand...

Disagree about Petersen in 2014. He was a homerun hire.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#6,300
#6,300
RockyTop85 said:
Harbaugh (2015)
Petersen (UW) (2014)
Meyer (OSU) (2012)
Saban (2007)

Those are the last 4 I can remember. I may be setting the bar higher than others.
Click to expand...

That’s reasonable.

Mora? Bielema? Not sure what everyone’s criteria is

Has the last SEC “homerun hire” been 10 years ago? I tend to agree with you there
 
New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.

VN Store



Back
Top