Scott Cochran to UGA as on-the-field Coach per Bruce Feldman (merged)

#126
#126
GVF said:
Saban is pretty tight lipped. We will never know from him the true reason Cochran bailed. We will find out after he gets to UGA and settles in if Cochran has the same respect for not spouting off. But, he did not leave with Kirby even though they are tight. So, after what, 4 years now, he takes off and joins Kirby. Whatever it was, there was a disagreement on something strong enough for him to leave Bama. Could be a raise. Could be a desire to change roles. Could be some flack over the increase in injuries, most notably this season. Saban may eventually drop a hint, but I don't see him ever outright saying straight up.

And I'm not one to believe they are heading down. He will continue to develop coaches just as he does players. And he's never truly whiffed on identifying and bringing in on-field coaches.
Click to expand...
One reason I remember thrown out, aside from the huge raise Saban gave him, was the Alabama state pension retirement plan required 10 years of service to vest. That was year 9 for him
 
  • Like
Reactions: 05_never_again
#127
#127
Is this Cochran running the Georgia players through offseason workouts? What gives?

 
#128
#128
rjd970 said:
Is this Cochran running the Georgia players through offseason workouts? What gives?

Click to expand...

We had Osovet and the rest of the coaching staff doing similarly about a month ago. It’s not S&C territory.
 
#129
#129
Yeah there are some weird rules about coaches having limited contact during the off season. As I remember it was ok as long as there wasnt a football present. Shadow drills, and exercises were allowed. Part of evaluation.
 
#130
#130
05_never_again said:
It would be interesting to see if Richt would have won a title at Georgia if a CFP existed for his tenure. He would have been in a CFP in 2002 and perhaps in 2007 and 2012 (remember, a 12-0 Ohio St team who finished #3 was ineligible that year).

2007 might be a stretch because they had 2 conference losses and didn't even win their division, but they finished the season so strong and there would have been a campaign by the media to get another SEC team in.
Click to expand...
UGA wouldn't have gone in 2012. They were outside the top 4 after the conference championship game. I believe they were number 4 in 2002 and 2007. So 2002 would've been likely since they won the SEC, but who knows what would've happened in 2007. UGA was a 2 loss team that didn't play in their conference championship, so its likely they would've been jumped.
 
#131
#131
Atlanta917 said:
UGA wouldn't have gone in 2012. They were outside the top 4 after the conference championship game. I believe they were number 4 in 2002 and 2007. So 2002 would've been likely since they won the SEC, but who knows what would've happened in 2007. UGA was a 2 loss team that didn't play in their conference championship, so its likely they would've been jumped.
Click to expand...
I threw 2007 out there as a definite "perhaps," but I wouldn't be so quick to write off 2012. After the SECCG loss Georgia was ranked #6, but remember this is also in the pre-CFP era where the rankings 3-4 had no bearing on a bowl game. Also don't forget the 3rd ranked team, Ohio St, was ineligible. So effectively Georgia was ranked 5th.

The two postseason eligible teams ahead of Georgia were Oregon and Florida. Florida's only loss was to Georgia, and Georgia only had a 2nd loss by virtue of getting to play in an extra game, and it was to the #2 team in the country. Oregon had 1 loss to a Stanford team ranked #8 at the time, so they probably wouldn't have jumped them, but I absolutely could see them staying ranked ahead of Florida.

If the CFP existed, I could see the rankings having gone 1 Notre Dame, 2 Alabama, 3 Oregon, 4 Georgia. That would have avoided a Alabama/Georgia rematch in the semifinal, but left open the possibility for it in the final. People likely would have raised hell - Georgia's other loss was a 28 point beatdown to South Carolina, but it was on the road to a South Carolina team ranked #6 at the time and they finished the season #8 in the country.
 
#132
#132
05_never_again said:
I threw 2007 out there as a definite "perhaps," but I wouldn't be so quick to write off 2012. After the SECCG loss Georgia was ranked #6, but remember this is also in the pre-CFP era where the rankings 3-4 had no bearing on a bowl game. Also don't forget the 3rd ranked team, Ohio St, was ineligible. So effectively Georgia was ranked 5th.

The two postseason eligible teams ahead of Georgia were Oregon and Florida. Florida's only loss was to Georgia, and Georgia only had a 2nd loss by virtue of getting to play in an extra game, and it was to the #2 team in the country. Oregon had 1 loss to a Stanford team ranked #8 at the time, so they probably wouldn't have jumped them, but I absolutely could see them staying ranked ahead of Florida.

If the CFP existed, I could see the rankings having gone 1 Notre Dame, 2 Alabama, 3 Oregon, 4 Georgia. That would have avoided a Alabama/Georgia rematch in the semifinal, but left open the possibility for it in the final. People likely would have raised hell - Georgia's other loss was a 28 point beatdown to South Carolina, but it was on the road to a South Carolina team ranked #6 at the time and they finished the season #8 in the country.
Click to expand...
Definitely no clear way to compare. Just like its unclear what the BCS would've done in 2017. Believe Clemson and OU were both ranked ahead of UGA, but UGA had more ranked wins and top 10 wins than both combined. Another interesting discussion is just how much a championship does for a resume. Basically a Chizik vs Richt thing. Imo Richt was the better HC, but it is telling that Chizik was able to do what Richt couldn't.
 
#133
#133
Atlanta917 said:
Definitely no clear way to compare. Just like its unclear what the BCS would've done in 2017. Believe Clemson and OU were both ranked ahead of UGA, but UGA had more ranked wins and top 10 wins than both combined. Another interesting discussion is just how much a championship does for a resume. Basically a Chizik vs Richt thing. Imo Richt was the better HC, but it is telling that Chizik was able to do what Richt couldn't.
Click to expand...
Oh no doubt. Clemson's 2016 title is why they were #1 heading into the CFP despite losing to Syracuse earlier that season.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Atlanta917
#134
#134
05_never_again said:
Oh no doubt. Clemson's 2016 title is why they were #1 heading into the CFP despite losing to Syracuse earlier that season.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Wish the playoff committee would stick to the current season and not allow past success to factor into their judgement. I was talking more along the lines of comparing HC resumes though. Like does Richt's sustained success give him the edge over Chizik who had no sustained success, but a championship?
 
#135
#135
Atlanta917 said:
Agreed. Wish the playoff committee would stick to the current season and not allow past success to factor into their judgement. I was talking more along the lines of comparing HC resumes. Like does Richt's sustained success give him the edge over Chizik who had no sustained success, but a championship?
Click to expand...
I think there's no doubt Richt was a better coach than Chizik, and not sure who would argue otherwise. That 2010 Auburn title was probably one of the most out-of-nowhere of all-time, and not only that but Chizik had basically nothing to do with it. They win 7 or 8 games that year without Cam.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Atlanta917
#136
#136
05_never_again said:
I think there's no doubt Richt was a better coach than Chizik, and not sure who would argue otherwise. That 2010 Auburn title was probably one of the most out-of-nowhere of all-time, and not only that but Chizik had basically nothing to do with it. They win 7 or 8 games that year without Cam.
Click to expand...
I think Cam had more to do with that championship than Chizik, but you have to credit Chizik for recruiting Cam. Richt had the same opportunity and chose to recruit him as a TE. Logically I guess you have to give it to Richt due to the way Chizik flamed out, but that championship still makes it interesting.
 
#137
#137
Atlanta917 said:
I think Cam had more to do with that championship than Chizik, but you have to credit Chizik for recruiting Cam. Richt had the same opportunity and chose to recruit him as a TE. Logically I guess you have to give it to Richt due to the way Chizik flamed out, but that championship still makes it interesting.
Click to expand...
Wasn't Gus the one who really wanted to recruit Cam? I suppose you gotta give Chiz credit for having Gus on staff as his OC, but other than that he got really lucky.

Richt is a better coach than Chiz, and it isn't even debatable, despite Chiz's title. Chizik overall went 38-38 (17-31) as a head coach over 6 years. Even with the title in 2014, he had a losing conference record at Auburn in just 4 years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Atlanta917
#138
#138
05_never_again said:
Wasn't Gus the one who really wanted to recruit Cam? I suppose you gotta give Chiz credit for having Gus on staff as his OC, but other than that he got really lucky.

Richt is a better coach than Chiz, and it isn't even debatable, despite Chiz's title. Chizik overall went 38-38 (17-31) as a head coach over 6 years. Even with the title in 2014, he had a losing conference record at Auburn in just 4 years.
Click to expand...
I agree. From a resume perspective Richt’s is better, but as a fan I’d probably take the championship even if it meant a losing season or two.
 
#139
#139
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top