poncho0091
Senior
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2013
- Messages
- 2,563
Don't you have to normalize the stats based on the caliber of school he was coaching at? What is UVAs and Temples total defensive potential based on the talent they can get?
The results at Miami, however, are a joke. Completley and totally unacceptable. Good news is that their year 4 track record is promising. Perhaps this thing could actually work at Miami with the kids we can recruit. Our defensive potential as a school is as high as anyone else.
No you don't, because the caliber of school they are playing at is offset by the caliber of schools they are playing.
Go look at the UVA scheduele when Golden was DC and then rethink this post. They played 3 top ten teams one year. LOL. Smh
Funny, because UVA wasn't that bad back then. If Golden could've fielded a half decent defense while there, they might have been pretty good. Even worse is he had some talented players there on defense. I'd say nearly as much talent as what we had here under Shannon and when Golden took over. Brooks and Long are likely better than anyone we had here in that time period.
The question is about what is a realistic expectation given the team talent they can attract. One could argue the job he did at UVA was very good considering he was doing it at UVA. A top twenty defense there a good job. It is okay for people to acknowledge that They have done good a couple of times.
A top 20 defense is good, but its an outlier for Golden. That's the problem. When this coach is supposed to be a defensive guru, you expect jumps from 100+ ranked defense to maybe top 70 by the next year and maybe even top 50 the next year. Not start at 45, then fall to the 100's and then jump back to 90's. Good coaches maintain some consistency and good coaches consistently get the best out of their underrated players (See VT, TCU, Boise St). These teams are loaded with 3 star or less players and they do just fine in most years.