what i dont get about coach golden and coach d

[The Franchise]

You are overstating what he did at UVA and Temple. You're starting with a flawed premise, which is why you're scratching a hole in your head trying to figure things out. Simple answer to your questions: he's just not very good at what he's supposed to be good at. He's a defensive specialist who has installed a defense that has been historically bad and showed zero signs of improvement. He has no answers in the area where he's supposed to have answers.

Mike London won a championship at the FCS level. Look at him now. Sometimes, success at a lower level doesn't translate when you move up to play with the big boys. And Corch Al's success at Temple never reached a championship level like London's did at Richmond.

 

[Consigliere]

this is the MAC. all while pulling in the the best recruiting classes in the MAC. STOP PIT

Honestly, where does this come from?

In 2010, Temple's class average was 2.28* and 299 Points.
The best in the MAC was Toledo with 2.56* and 388 Points. Temple would be third for average and second for points.

In 2009, Temple's class average was 2.04* and 65 Points.
The best in the MAC was Akron with 2.33* and Kent State with 357 Points. Temple would be tenth for average and thirteenth for points.

In 2008, Temple's class average was 2.08* and 131 Points.
The best in the MAC was Ohio with 2.2* and Western Michigan with 241 Points. Temple would be seventh for average and fifth for points.

In 2007, Temple's class average was 2.13* and 90 Points.
The best in the MAC was Toledo with 2.32* and 238 Points. Temple would be fourth for average and ninth for points.

In 2006 (Al was hired in December, 2005), Temple's class average was 1.89* and 135 Points.
The best in the MAC was Akron with 2.17* and 265 Points. Temple would be twelfth for average and fourth for points.

Between 2006-2010: Temple's Average Ranking was 2.08* and 144 Points.

During that same time

Toledo: 2.26* + 214 Points
Kent State: 2.1* + 170 Points
Akron: 2.22* + 205 Points

 

[Consigliere]

You are overstating what he did at UVA and Temple. You're starting with a flawed premise, which is why you're scratching a hole in your head trying to figure things out. Simple answer to your questions: he's just not very good at what he's supposed to be good at. He's a defensive specialist who has installed a defense that has been historically bad and showed zero signs of improvement. He has no answers in the area where he's supposed to have answers.

Mike London won a championship at the FCS level. Look at him now. Sometimes, success at a lower level doesn't translate when you move up to play with the big boys. And Corch Al's success at Temple never reached a championship level like London's did at Richmond.

Occam's razor. I think you are correct. I just remember how bad Temple was and how terrible that program was when he started. It is perplexing.

 

[DuffleBagYoda]

this is the MAC. all while pulling in the the best recruiting classes in the MAC. STOP PIT

Honestly, where does this come from?

In 2010, Temple's class average was 2.28* and 299 Points.
The best in the MAC was Toledo with 2.56* and 388 Points. Temple would be third for average and second for points.

In 2009, Temple's class average was 2.04* and 65 Points.
The best in the MAC was Akron with 2.33* and Kent State with 357 Points. Temple would be tenth for average and thirteenth for points.

In 2008, Temple's class average was 2.08* and 131 Points.
The best in the MAC was Ohio with 2.2* and Western Michigan with 241 Points. Temple would be seventh for average and fifth for points.

In 2007, Temple's class average was 2.13* and 90 Points.
The best in the MAC was Toledo with 2.32* and 238 Points. Temple would be fourth for average and ninth for points.

In 2006 (Al was hired in December, 2005), Temple's class average was 1.89* and 135 Points.
The best in the MAC was Akron with 2.17* and 265 Points. Temple would be twelfth for average and fourth for points.

Between 2006-2010: Temple's Average Ranking was 2.08* and 144 Points.

During that same time

Toledo: 2.26* + 214 Points
Kent State: 2.1* + 170 Points
Akron: 2.22* + 205 Points

The MAC is lower competition that gets lumped in and compared with all FBS rankings. The difference between college and pro is there one PRO league. Where as college has many Leagues. If he came from one of the leagues with better comp. Then those rankings would hold more weight.

Just like some nationally ranked high schools from other states get blasted by unranked Florida schools. By virtue of who they play regularly. Just like a 4 star from iowa will always be questioned because he dominates in a weaker environment....

 

[DuffleBagYoda]

I understand what OP is saying. I hope al can turn it around. But i recently stated that if a scheme is so complex that it HAS its best results when predominantly playing UPPERCLASSMEN then... We will never be dominant for more than a season or two every couple of years.

 

[Consigliere]

The MAC is lower competition that gets lumped in and compared with all FBS rankings. The difference between college and pro is there one PRO league. Where as college has many Leagues. If he came from one of the leagues with better comp. Then those rankings would hold more weight.

Just like some nationally ranked high schools from other states get blasted by unranked Florida schools. By virtue of who they play regularly. Just like a 4 star from iowa will always be questioned because he dominates in a weaker environment....

I get what you are saying. I think of the MAC as a scaled down experiment. A bunch of teams with inferior talent that are competing against each other. Everything is scaled down. So Golden didn't have the best talent in general and it wasn't the best even in the MAC (numbers above).

At the same time coaches come from the MAC or inferior divisions (FCS) and have success...Urban Meyer (MAC), Jim Harbaugh (Pioneer Football League, FCS) and Jim Tressel (Gateway Football Conference, FCS). This happens, coaches come from scaled down experiments and have success at bigger gigs.

 

[DuffleBagYoda]

The MAC is lower competition that gets lumped in and compared with all FBS rankings. The difference between college and pro is there one PRO league. Where as college has many Leagues. If he came from one of the leagues with better comp. Then those rankings would hold more weight.

Just like some nationally ranked high schools from other states get blasted by unranked Florida schools. By virtue of who they play regularly. Just like a 4 star from iowa will always be questioned because he dominates in a weaker environment....

I get what you are saying. I think of the MAC as a scaled down experiment. A bunch of teams with inferior talent that are competing against each other. Everything is scaled down. So Golden didn't have the best talent in general and it wasn't the best even in the MAC (numbers above).

At the same time coaches come from the MAC or inferior divisions (FCS) and have success...Urban Meyer (MAC), Jim Harbaugh (Pioneer Football League, FCS) and Jim Tressel (Gateway Football Conference, FCS). This happens, coaches come from scaled down experiments and have success at bigger gigs.

I truly understand why you view it this way. The problem isn't you. It's that with so many teams and differences in comp and schedule the rankings in all of college football are skewed.

Al can be great. Another poster said he's learning on the job. That is true. He didn't cut his teeth under a champ like jumbo did. Didn't win a chip at his last stop. And while he does have a presence, he is also stubborn to a fault. It seems he is determined to prove that his way can work ANYWHERE. Which is poisonous to anybody in any walk of life.

He needs to scrap this D. It's his scheme. DNo needs to go because he doesn't adjust well.

**** with the STATS. WE DON'T PASS THE EYE TEST

 

[DrCane]

Dude never won the MAAC despite having better recruiting classes than any other team in the conference.

They are fraud. Period.

Look no further than Al Groh for how successful this system can be.

Fvck all these coaches.

THIS, this, and ONLY this.

I have no problem hiring a MAC coach. Every coach needs to start somewhere. I do have a problem with hiring a MAC coach that did not completely dominate the MAC (much less, never even competed for a MAC championship).

Urban Meyer never dominated the MAC or won the conference. His best finish was 3rd.

Meyer did not go from the MAC to a BCS program. He went from Bowling Green to Utah. At Utah, he completely dominated the MWC and won championships every year that he was there. His final year at Utah, he went undefeated and won a BCS bowl game (Fiesta Bowl). More importantly, Urban beat ranked, quality opponents.

That's a totally different scenario from Al Golden.

For the record, I still like Al Golden, but I wouldn't be heart broken if he took the PSU job. And he's a loser & fraud if we go into next year with the same staff.

 

[Consigliere]

Dude never won the MAAC despite having better recruiting classes than any other team in the conference.

They are fraud. Period.

Look no further than Al Groh for how successful this system can be.

Fvck all these coaches.

THIS, this, and ONLY this.

I have no problem hiring a MAC coach. Every coach needs to start somewhere. I do have a problem with hiring a MAC coach that did not completely dominate the MAC (much less, never even competed for a MAC championship).

Urban Meyer never dominated the MAC or won the conference. His best finish was 3rd.

Meyer did not go from the MAC to a BCS program. He went from Bowling Green to Utah. At Utah, he completely dominated the MWC and won championships every year that he was there. His final year at Utah, he went undefeated and won a BCS bowl game (Fiesta Bowl). More importantly, Urban beat ranked, quality opponents.

That's a totally different scenario from Al Golden.

For the record, I still like Al Golden, but I wouldn't be heart broken if he took the PSU job. And he's a loser & fraud if we go into next year with the same staff.

All I was saying was Urban didn't either because the OP implies that this is somewhat key. As if winning the MAC alone is a guaranty of success in the future.

 

[Consigliere]

The MAC is lower competition that gets lumped in and compared with all FBS rankings. The difference between college and pro is there one PRO league. Where as college has many Leagues. If he came from one of the leagues with better comp. Then those rankings would hold more weight.

Just like some nationally ranked high schools from other states get blasted by unranked Florida schools. By virtue of who they play regularly. Just like a 4 star from iowa will always be questioned because he dominates in a weaker environment....

I get what you are saying. I think of the MAC as a scaled down experiment. A bunch of teams with inferior talent that are competing against each other. Everything is scaled down. So Golden didn't have the best talent in general and it wasn't the best even in the MAC (numbers above).

At the same time coaches come from the MAC or inferior divisions (FCS) and have success...Urban Meyer (MAC), Jim Harbaugh (Pioneer Football League, FCS) and Jim Tressel (Gateway Football Conference, FCS). This happens, coaches come from scaled down experiments and have success at bigger gigs.

I truly understand why you view it this way. The problem isn't you. It's that with so many teams and differences in comp and schedule the rankings in all of college football are skewed.

Al can be great. Another poster said he's learning on the job. That is true. He didn't cut his teeth under a champ like jumbo did. Didn't win a chip at his last stop. And while he does have a presence, he is also stubborn to a fault. It seems he is determined to prove that his way can work ANYWHERE. Which is poisonous to anybody in any walk of life.

He needs to scrap this D. It's his scheme. DNo needs to go because he doesn't adjust well.

**** with the STATS. WE DON'T PASS THE EYE TEST

I hear you.

 

[The Franchise]

You are overstating what he did at UVA and Temple. You're starting with a flawed premise, which is why you're scratching a hole in your head trying to figure things out. Simple answer to your questions: he's just not very good at what he's supposed to be good at. He's a defensive specialist who has installed a defense that has been historically bad and showed zero signs of improvement. He has no answers in the area where he's supposed to have answers.

Mike London won a championship at the FCS level. Look at him now. Sometimes, success at a lower level doesn't translate when you move up to play with the big boys. And Corch Al's success at Temple never reached a championship level like London's did at Richmond.

Occam's razor. I think you are correct. I just remember how bad Temple was and how terrible that program was when he started. It is perplexing.

He taught a ****** how to spell "cat". That's how you need to look at the Temple success. He's a dude who can build something from the gutter and get you to a decent level, but he never did anything great at Temple other than teach a ****** how to spell "cat".

Like I said above, Mike London actually won a championship at the FCS level. It doesn't always translate.

 

[Biscuits]

I don't see what he did at Temple and UVA as significantly relevant. Lots of coaches have succes at one stop and fail at another.

It's what he's doing here that matters, obviously.