What I've been thinking on Jones resume

[Other_Guy]

Obvious the 1st thing I think about is how he replaced Brain Kelly at both stops and wonder if that is a bad thing that helps boost his results as a coach. Of course, Kelly took both schools to conference titles in3 years at each.

Then I think, Jones walked into a stable, good program and took MAC and BE talent and had success against MAC and BE talent. He beat N Illinois at CMU for their 1st win against them since 98 and had their 1st win at home against W Michigan since 93. He lost only 3 games in MAC play in 3 years.

He then tied for 1st in consecutive years (after a 4-8 start) at Cincy, again with BE talent against BE talent. Sure, he walked into solid programs, but continuing to win against the same level conference proves coaching.

I'll be glad when he has a potentially great team of good recruits so we can actually see if he can coach.

I know Ive post a lot lately, so if anyone wants me to chill on the posts I will lol :hi:

 

[Fijivol72]

Please stop!

 

[DERELICK_MY_VOLS]

Butch has already out coached Richt and Spurrier in his first year here with average talent....if he keeps or adds more top level recruits to this class and signs them all...and one more signing class like this one after that....then there should be no reason we will be back very soon k:

 

[vol2002]

Anybody doubting Butch 10 games in, based on how we preformed against three straight top 10 teams while using a true freshman quarterback and a roster that is severely undermanned is, in a word: AN IDIOT!!!!

All such folks should be flipped to ignore. (You can unignore them in 2016, if we are still losing by 30 points to these teams).

 

[daj2576]

Some key things to consider: 1) Jones recruited better than the previous year, every year he was at Cincy. Kelly's recruiting averages took big leaps each year he was at Cincy and Jones built on that. Bottom line, Jones can recruit independent of Kelly. 2) As you mentioned, Jones only won 4 games his first year at Cincy, that doesn't necessarily sell the idea that he inherited something incredible. The interesting thing is that those 4 wins are exactly what talent averages predicted his roster would win. Off the top of my head, I believe that Kelly left Jones a pretty unimpressive roster with some serious holes after he left for ND. Bottom line: Jones took that step back and then over-performed by 2-3 games a season 3) This is the first year that it seems that Jones will have a roster that slightly under-performs (1 game below, if we win out. That one loss is against an over-performing Mizzou team). 4) Even at one game below, it has been several years since UT had a coach that didn't have a far larger negative effect on talent. That goes back to Fulmer's tenure. Talent has been waning at UT over the past decade.

Here are some interesting charts that show recruiting and wins and how well they correlate at UT. Also visit this link to see how recruiting averages predict about 80% of the games played in the SEC this year. I keep it updated as close to real time as possible.

https://docs.google.com/a/mybloodis...Qgwl-hyfdEpwUHpyWXUzY3JWRFU1Skc1UTRiZ2c&gid=0

 

[Vols4us]

daj2576 nailed it with the charts. He also provides good logic.

What the charts don't show are the intangible aspects of the players relating to recognition, anticipation, focus, character, etc. You add in to that the coaching staff's ability. They are the factors that you cannot quantify that make a good program great and a bad program good. From what I can tell about the recruiting class coming in, they will be exactly what the team needs. It will take two more classes of that quality to make some big noise, IF, the coaching staff has the ability to take them to the highest level. That is a 3-4 year process if it is going to happen.

That being said, there appear to be some really good assistants and some really not so good assistants on the best staff in America based on their historical performance at other schools and 10 games into this season.

 

[daj2576]

daj2576 nailed it with the charts. He also provides good logic.

What the charts don't show are the intangible aspects of the players relating to recognition, anticipation, focus, character, etc. You add in to that the coaching staff's ability. They are the factors that you cannot quantify that make a good program great and a bad program good. From what I can tell about the recruiting class coming in, they will be exactly what the team needs. It will take two more classes of that quality to make some big noise, IF, the coaching staff has the ability to take them to the highest level. That is a 3-4 year process if it is going to happen.

That being said, there appear to be some really good assistants and some really not so good assistants on the best staff in America based on their historical performance at other schools and 10 games into this season.

I believe the biggest factor is recruiting. It is what made Fulmer successful. It is what makes Saban successful. More teams succeed with good talent than the inverse. Teams that rely on coaching and over performance instead of top recruiting (Petrino at Arkansas, Sumlin, Franklin) tend to top out well below the championship level. Conversely, talent can't help a totally inept coach (Dooley, Muschamp, Brown, Kiff). The best combination, in my view, is a staff that can out-coach and out-recruit their competition. I can't find a staff in America that does both to perfection. It seems to me that what school's should do is put guys who can recruit in their own high paid position, and then put guys who can coach in a separate and similarly high paid position. The recruiter gets the players and hands them to the coach. That would be my way to revolutionize the system as it seems the grind of recruiting tends to wear down the guys we rely on to scheme (see Fulmer).

 

[1972 Grad]

I believe the biggest factor is recruiting. It is what made Fulmer successful. It is what makes Saban successful. More teams succeed with good talent than the inverse. Teams that rely on coaching and over performance instead of top recruiting (Petrino at Arkansas, Sumlin, Franklin) tend to top out well below the championship level. Conversely, talent can't help a totally inept coach (Dooley, Muschamp, Brown, Kiff). The best combination, in my view, is a staff that can out-coach and out-recruit their competition. I can't find a staff in America that does both to perfection. It seems to me that what school's should do is put guys who can recruit in their own high paid position, and then put guys who can coach in a separate and similarly high paid position. The recruiter gets the players and hands them to the coach. That would be my way to revolutionize the system as it seems the grind of recruiting tends to wear down the guys we rely on to scheme (see Fulmer).

In other words, hire a bunch of vinyl siding salesman to hit the road recruiting. Right?

 

[Wylo]

Butch has already out coached Richt and Spurrier in his first year here with average talent....if he keeps or adds more top level recruits to this class and signs them all...and one more signing class like this one after that....then there should be no reason we will be back very soon k:

Richt won. Did not get out coached by Jones. Georgia drove the length of the field and scored to force OT. If anyone got out coached, it was us. Personally I believe it was a draw on coaching.

Did the USA coach out coach CBJ? Following your Georgia logic, just staying close constitutes out coaching. So decide.


Spurrier got cute and conservative. It cost him. It also took a miracle grab to get in fg range. But I'll conceed that one to you.

 

[GrowVol]

Obvious the 1st thing I think about is how he replaced Brain Kelly at both stops and wonder if that is a bad thing that helps boost his results as a coach. Of course, Kelly took both schools to conference titles in3 years at each.

Then I think, Jones walked into a stable, good program and took MAC and BE talent and had success against MAC and BE talent. He beat N Illinois at CMU for their 1st win against them since 98 and had their 1st win at home against W Michigan since 93. He lost only 3 games in MAC play in 3 years.

He then tied for 1st in consecutive years (after a 4-8 start) at Cincy, again with BE talent against BE talent. Sure, he walked into solid programs, but continuing to win against the same level conference proves coaching.

I'll be glad when he has a potentially great team of good recruits so we can actually see if he can coach.

I know Ive post a lot lately, so if anyone wants me to chill on the posts I will lol :hi:

I guess late in the 4th Qtr, you thought Spurrier outcoached CBJ a few weeks ago(wrong). Guess you where all good then when CBJ outcoached Spurrier.

 

[VOLINVONORE]

daj2576 nailed it with the charts. He also provides good logic.

What the charts don't show are the intangible aspects of the players relating to recognition, anticipation, focus, character, etc. You add in to that the coaching staff's ability. They are the factors that you cannot quantify that make a good program great and a bad program good. From what I can tell about the recruiting class coming in, they will be exactly what the team needs. It will take two more classes of that quality to make some big noise, IF, the coaching staff has the ability to take them to the highest level. That is a 3-4 year process if it is going to happen.

That being said, there appear to be some really good assistants and some really not so good assistants on the best staff in America based on their historical performance at other schools and 10 games into this season.

What this chart shows is a steady decline in SEC wins over the last 9-10 years. If you would do another chart to show the (I hate doing this) actual * ratings of the players who played would show a similar decline. The fact is that our football program has been declining for a number of years and it will not be rebuilt in 1 or 2 years.

 

[Daloth]

Richt won. Did not get out coached by Jones. Georgia drove the length of the field and scored to force OT. If anyone got out coached, it was us. Personally I believe it was a draw on coaching.

Did the USA coach out coach CBJ? Following your Georgia logic, just staying close constitutes out coaching. So decide.


Spurrier got cute and conservative. It cost him. It also took a miracle grab to get in fg range. But I'll conceed that one to you.

Stop with your logic and facts.

 

[volglass]

Richt called the "intentional TD" defense with 1:30 left so that he could get the ball back to tie or win. He did not have any respect for our D at that time either and took his chances with his offense. I'm sure he figured the more times their offense was against our defense, they would come out ahead.

Brilliant coaching on Richt's part. Decent coaching on Butch's part.

 

[Other_Guy]

I guess late in the 4th Qtr, you thought Spurrier outcoached CBJ a few weeks ago(wrong). Guess you where all good then when CBJ outcoached Spurrier.

Huh? I'm not sure what's more confusing, the fact this doesn't make sense in regards to my post or the fact it simply does not make sense.:crazy:

 

[NashVOL93]

I believe the biggest factor is recruiting. It is what made Fulmer successful. It is what makes Saban successful. More teams succeed with good talent than the inverse. Teams that rely on coaching and over performance instead of top recruiting (Petrino at Arkansas, Sumlin, Franklin) tend to top out well below the championship level. Conversely, talent can't help a totally inept coach (Dooley, Muschamp, Brown, Kiff). The best combination, in my view, is a staff that can out-coach and out-recruit their competition. I can't find a staff in America that does both to perfection. It seems to me that what school's should do is put guys who can recruit in their own high paid position, and then put guys who can coach in a separate and similarly high paid position. The recruiter gets the players and hands them to the coach. That would be my way to revolutionize the system as it seems the grind of recruiting tends to wear down the guys we rely on to scheme (see Fulmer).

Love him or hate him, there's a guy in Tuscaloosa who has pretty well figured this out, if we're being honest.

 

[DERELICK_MY_VOLS]

Richt won. Did not get out coached by Jones. Georgia drove the length of the field and scored to force OT. If anyone got out coached, it was us. Personally I believe it was a draw on coaching.

Did the USA coach out coach CBJ? Following your Georgia logic, just staying close constitutes out coaching. So decide.


Spurrier got cute and conservative. It cost him. It also took a miracle grab to get in fg range. But I'll conceed that one to you.

When you are out manned against a team with superior talent...then get your team motivated and believing they do belong and can beat that top 10 team they are facing....that to me is out coaching. Cards are already stacked high against you to start with....there takes a lot of mental coaching to overcome that with a team that has been programmed on how to give up...so you say potater and I'll say potato.

 

[Other_Guy]

Conversely, talent can't help a totally inept coach (Dooley, Muschamp, Brown, Kiff).

Did you just say Mack Brown is a totally inept coach?

 

[daj2576]

In other words, hire a bunch of vinyl siding salesman to hit the road recruiting. Right?

No.

I doubt vinyl siding salesmen would have the least idea about what it takes to put certain measurable traits of a human in the correct spot on a roster to win a football game.

Similarly, the ability to peck out a few snarky sentences on a message board proves no ability to understand football.

 

[daj2576]

Did you just say Mack Brown is a totally inept coach?

Yup. He and Muschamp are two of the largest under-performing coaches in college football. We are talking historical levels, similar to Dooley and Kiff.

 

[daj2576]

Love him or hate him, there's a guy in Tuscaloosa who has pretty well figured this out, if we're being honest.

I am being honest.

Saban beats you with players, tons of them, who fit his system perfectly. His system is simple and easy to execute. In fact, he recruits so well that he should never lose a football game. Yet, he does. He loses football games to other coaches, with lessor talent, in systems that he does not understand how to defend. Look at the losses that he has had since starting at Bama, subtract LSU (who tries to play his game), and see what the remainder have in common. Answer: spread and/or read-option offensive attacks.

I can say that Saban falls short of perfection, without taking anything away from his BCS championships. The way the system is set up currently, he has been able to lose a game that he should win, and still make it. That all changes next year. It is very likely that he can no longer absorb a late season loss and still play in the big game.

 

[warreng]

It's easy to win with 4 nfl caliber RBs. Saban is to a point now where the team pretty much runs it self. It's a machine, and saban just makes sure the parts are of the highest quality. Cake walk.

Which you could use to argue On both sides of him staying/leaving bammer

 

[volfan411]

I am being honest.

Saban beats you with players, tons of them, who fit his system perfectly. His system is simple and easy to execute. In fact, he recruits so well that he should never lose a football game. Yet, he does. He loses football games to other coaches, with lessor talent, in systems that he does not understand how to defend. Look at the losses that he has had since starting at Bama, subtract LSU (who tries to play his game), and see what the remainder have in common. Answer: spread and/or read-option offensive attacks.

I can say that Saban falls short of perfection, without taking anything away from his BCS championships. The way the system is set up currently, he has been able to lose a game that he should win, and still make it. That all changes next year. It is very likely that he can no longer absorb a late season loss and still play in the big game.

The commentators were talking about it last night how Saban hates the read option and that it makes him do things on defense that he does not like.

I think you started to see some of that when Dobbs came in the game.

 

[NashVOL93]

I am being honest.

Saban beats you with players, tons of them, who fit his system perfectly. His system is simple and easy to execute. In fact, he recruits so well that he should never lose a football game. Yet, he does. He loses football games to other coaches, with lessor talent, in systems that he does not understand how to defend. Look at the losses that he has had since starting at Bama, subtract LSU (who tries to play his game), and see what the remainder have in common. Answer: spread and/or read-option offensive attacks.

I can say that Saban falls short of perfection, without taking anything away from his BCS championships. The way the system is set up currently, he has been able to lose a game that he should win, and still make it. That all changes next year. It is very likely that he can no longer absorb a late season loss and still play in the big game.

But if his system is simple and easy to execute, and he teaches it well, while not completely blowing clock management and play calls during games, is that not good coaching? Serious question. I fail to see anything wrong with it.

I've actually thought about this before as it relates to his system, recruiting, and coaching. You are correct that he has lost football games. Auburn 2010 and Texas A&M 2012 come to mind. But in those games, Saban's system was beaten not by another system, but by a truly special player, one who has enough skill and talent to completely disrupt any gameplan. In his instance, these were both later recognized as the best in college football. These players, of course, are Cam Newton and Johnny Manziel. There's no amount of coaching or scheming that can really account for either of them. It's the nature of their game.

To use a really weird reference, but one that I hope someone on this board will understand, Newton and Manziel are the Mule to Nick Saban's Seldon's Plan. They can't be accounted or planned for and they will disrupt any scheme designed to contain them. The fact that they both happened to play in spread offenses isn't as relevant as one might think. And now, you've gotten your college football-Isaac Asimov analogy for the year.

 

[volfan411]

It's easy to win with 4 nfl caliber RBs. Saban is to a point now where the team pretty much runs it self. It's a machine, and saban just makes sure the parts are of the highest quality. Cake walk.

Which you could use to argue On both sides of him staying/leaving bammer

I agree with the talent but he is the one who keeps on convincing them to come play for him. He is a proven commodity for putting players in the NFL.

 

[GAVol]

Richt called the "intentional TD" defense with 1:30 left so that he could get the ball back to tie or win. He did not have any respect for our D at that time either and took his chances with his offense. I'm sure he figured the more times their offense was against our defense, they would come out ahead.

Brilliant coaching on Richt's part. Decent coaching on Butch's part.

It wasn't exactly brilliant strategy. He had no choice. If he didn't let us score, we were going to run the clock down inside 20 seconds and kick a go ahead FG.