So why is it that many of these “must have” or “best” option out there coaches haven’t performed and others, like the guy at Indiana, are performing? Thoughts?
OT: Lincoln Riley
- Thread starter 18IsTheMan
- Start date
I think it just shows how hard hiring coaches is. There's just no way to know how a guy is going to do at a school. For every slam dunk hire that is Kirby Smart and works, you get a few Jimbo Fishers, Lincoln Rileys, and Tom Hermans.
I’d love to see them let him go. I don’t know that he’s really that great a coach but he isn’t bad and he’s beem there a long time bringing stability to the program. I feel like he’s pretty much hit a ceiling in recent years of what Kentucky football can reasonably expect to accomplish. If they let him go it’s pretty likely they will have a drop off which only helps us.
I think Jimbo was a sham from the get go. He made his name with a generational qb and he knew the wheels were coming off so he bolted to A&M. Herman's struggles surprised me. I thought he was going to be a great one, especially at Texas with their resources. Riley should have stayed at OU. He had built a really good program there and the USC job has been tough since Pete Carrol and the cheating left.
Kirby was the magic ingredient at Georgia. They already had all the resources a program could ask for and Richt handed him a pretty talented roster. Saban and quite a few other big name coaches had been saying for years that Georgia was the sleeping giant in college football. Kirby brought the energy and the training at the feet of Saban to Athens and unlocked the potential.
Clark Lea at Vandy is intriguing to me. He is definitely doing more with less up there. I think someone like him could do well at Carolina where he had at least average SEC talent on the roster.
I think the key for a coach becoming successful is that they evolve into more of a CEO mindset, with a caveat or two. You have to be willing to upgrade your coaching staff when it’s necessary, but can’t have a happy trigger finger. You have to build your system over time, but can’t ignore playing to the strengths you currently have. You have to be able to figure out and maximize NIL. And you have to be able to relate to and inspire your players. One caveat, if you are a genius on one side of the ball, then yes, keep your hands more on it until the system is fully in place. Wow, seems pretty simple, amazed not more coaches are successful 
. Seriously, it’s a way more complicated job than it was 25 years ago. The other caveat I would mention is timing. When you end up somewhere seems to be a huge factor in how coaches do once they take over, whether they had past success or not. Holtz and Spurrier did well for us, Saban obviously did well wherever he went in college. Past success doesn’t seem to transfer like it did in the past, Fisher, Herman, and so on and so on. Too many to list.
. Seriously, it’s a way more complicated job than it was 25 years ago. The other caveat I would mention is timing. When you end up somewhere seems to be a huge factor in how coaches do once they take over, whether they had past success or not. Holtz and Spurrier did well for us, Saban obviously did well wherever he went in college. Past success doesn’t seem to transfer like it did in the past, Fisher, Herman, and so on and so on. Too many to list.Not sure I would classify Lincoln Riley with that group. He was successful at Oklahoma. And I still believe he is a good coach. I think it has more to do with where he is coaching. Southern Call does not have a good track record and some coaches that have failed there have found success elsewhere.
No, it’s definitely not. Obviously football is the big money maker without a close second and it will always have the most fan interest. I just don’t share the view that I think most other fans have in that it’s a football school. That is cause we all want it to be but the football program itself needs to help out. Fan support could not be any better.
We definitely are a football first school if you consider fan support and facilities. You can certainly make the argument that all our facilities and environments are top level. Fan support is top level as well. Give us a reason to show up and we do. And for football, give us half a reason and we show up. All 3 of the main sports are important to us. The old, and I mean old fans remember the McGuire days. We built the Carolina Coliseum to be the largest ACC basketball arena back in the day. Founders Park is one of the best facilities in the country, Willy B is always up there in the toughest places to play. Throwing money at it has never been an issue, especially related to facilities. That the university has controlled. The other factors are much harder to control, especially over time.
I think Clark Lea caught lightning in a bottle with Diego Pavia.I don’t see Vandy having staying power.
For real. I would take much less to be a loser. Really, Jimbo wasn’t a loser but he underachieved with amazing consistency. Now Muschamp…there’s a guy who made bank off being a loser
Lea will need to do it again next year to prove it's for real. This year has been impressive, but Vanderbilt was terrible even by their standards his first 3 years there. And even with the good in this season, he did lose to Georgia State.
Is this Pavia's last year? He did 2 years Juco then 2 years at NMSU and is in his 5th year now at Vandy.
He's been the biggest reason for their success.
Riley's win percentage at SoCal ranks 11th all-time there, behind Kiffin, Helton and Sarkisian, all of whom were considered disastrous failures.
I read an interesting comparison between him and Jimbo Fisher.
Both were OCs who succeeded highly successful head coaches (Fisher for Bowden and Riley for Stoops). Both went on impressive runs of their own before abruptly jumping ship for another program. Both had trouble replicating their previous success at their new school and fanbases soured. Riley's downturn at SoCal seems to be a bit ahead of Jimbo's pace at A&M, but the trajectory is quite similar.
I read an interesting comparison between him and Jimbo Fisher.
Both were OCs who succeeded highly successful head coaches (Fisher for Bowden and Riley for Stoops). Both went on impressive runs of their own before abruptly jumping ship for another program. Both had trouble replicating their previous success at their new school and fanbases soured. Riley's downturn at SoCal seems to be a bit ahead of Jimbo's pace at A&M, but the trajectory is quite similar.
Texas won a national championship in the BCS era - 2005 -under Mack Brown, one of four in total, I believe, and prior to NIL. I'd count that as relatively contemporary. Texas is always a factor to watch due to resources, commitment, and heritage. They are on the upside of relevancy right now. It will help them that they can now legally do what they did surreptitiously before, and they have more than anyone with which to do. SEC membership will only legitimize them more. I want you to understand, even though I have a nephew working there, I do no not, have not, and will not pull for Texas unless they can help the SEC by beating a B1G team. Go, Aggies, when those two play.
I guess "relevant" was too strong a word. Texas has always been relevant they have just always underperformed since 2005 considering their resources. I recall Texas and UGA always being in the same conversation about underperforming programs considering their resources.
I wonder how many people recall that Muschamp was "head coach in waiting" at Texas under Mack Brown? If I recall correctly, he left Texas to take the UF job. I have to wonder if he ever looks back and regrets that decision.
And those impressive runs were built around Heisman trophy-level quarterbacks. Fisher with Winston, Riley with Mayfield, Murray, Williams, and Hurts.
Considering the fact that Muschamp was paid almost $20,000,000 by Florida and South Carolina just to not coach, I doubt it! That's not even factoring in the salary earned while coaching at those schools.
I wonder if Lea will stick with the option offense? Paul Johnson enjoyed relative success with it at GT which is somewhat similar to Vandy as far as recruiting goes. Vandy isn't going to be able to recruit top talent for a traditional offense but 2 and 3 star players are more than adequate to run a triple option.
I thought for a while that Carolina should have hired Johnson after Spurrier. He would have made us a true problem for opposing teams.
I have inside knowledge on Herman, even prior to him being at Texas, that made me want him to never be the coach at SC and never be the coach at Texas. Time proved me right. When he was at Texas, I became privy to even further insider knowledge, this time of things concurrent with his tenure at Texas, that only further validated my prior insights.
I am NO Tom Herman fan.
When Vandy hired Lea, I sat up and said, "If they give him enough time - maybe 8 years or so - I bet that will turn out to be about as good a hire as Vandy could make for their program."
Founders Park is rapidly aging and falling behind. It's a Top 25 facility, but not a Top 10 facility.
The resources and commitment are eye popping. I've lived in Austin for 19 years. When I arrived here as a grad student 19 years ago, I called my mom and said, "holy ****, you would not believe the money around here." And it still makes my eyes pop to this day. And Chris Del Conte plus Steve Sarkisian have finally gotten the **** show that is the Texas boosters under control and rowing in one direction.
Bear Bryant said it when he left A&M to come to Alabama. It's a lot easier to get it done where it's been done before. Even UPC, right here in our own state, proved that adage incontrovertibly. How many years between 1981 and their next championship. Look at Georgia. 41 years between their first national championship and their next one. Legacy schools go dormant, but their increased potential to regain leverage through continued emphasis on achieving success, like a birthright, is what separates the likes of them from the likes of everyone else. There you go.
This is the exact point I was trying to make in the other thread when I mentioned South Carolina's pitiful football history.
Really wanted to see him hired at USC, too. He seems to have been stringing USC along. He doesn't seem to have it as a HC.
It's interesting in hindsight. He was THE hot name in 2015 and 2016, but it just goes to show how a coach's stock gets overinflated when people are desperate to find the next big thing. When demand exceeds supply.
You look back and you really wonder what all the fuss was about. He had one great year at Houston (11-1) and then a good year (9-3). That's it. It was solely on the basis of those 2 season that he was christened the next can't miss coaching hire. All things considered, resources and talent pool, he flopped at Texas and is now floundering at FAU.
I guess it's just the nature our our impulsive society, but there's not really a proving period for coaches anymore. You put together one great season and folks come sniffing around immediately.
Lincoln Riley has a 72-22 record as an HC at the top level of college football. If Southern Cal has a losing record this season it will be the first of his HC career and just like that people are labeling him a failed HC. I do not see him as a failed HC just because of the last two years. Mainly this current season. They were 8-5 the year before. He was 55-10 at Oklahoma and 22-12 so far at Southern Cal. Should he get booted this season, he will have no problem landing another P4 HC job.
I think the big issue with Herman is he has a tendency to piss off the wrong people. Coaches also have to play politics with people of importance to the program and it seems he sucked at that part and lost a lot of support really quickly. Who knows what it would have been like if he had played nice? Kiffen had the same problem his first time around as an HC. He learned from that mistake thanks a lot to Nick Saban.
I never said he was a failed head coach, just that he's not living up to the expectations the SoCal fans had. They were expecting OU-level production, and they haven't gotten it yet. Factor in that they appear to be trending down, from 10 wins, to 8 wins, to something less than that this year. Plus you have the transition to the Big 10. It's no secret that Riley bolted OU because he didn't want anything to do with the SEC. Well, he went to SoCal who then jumped to the Big 10 and with their performance so far this season, some are starting to say they can see why he didn't want to mess with the SEC.
I think it's more a lesson in being content where you are. He should have stayed at OU. Both he and OU would likely have been much better off than either one is right now.
It's a relatively short list of coaches who have taken high-level production from one school and replicated that at another school.
Bryant was right. Both Georgia and Clemson, while not winning a NC for a long time, weren't wandering in the wilderness either. Both were winning programs with fan bases that expected and somewhat demanded the teams at least contend for championships.
Since 2000 Carolina has had 3 10 win seasons. All three were back to back from 2011 to 2013 and Carolina fans are still clinging to those seasons like they were last year. Georgia has had 15 and Clemson has had 12. I think it was Vince Lombardi who said "...winning is a habit, unfortunately, so is losing...". I think the Carolina fan base and athletic department expectations for football are to have "winning seasons" and not much more. Until the expectations and demands increase, nothing is really going to change.
What's your solution to fixing South Carolina football and making it a nationally relevant program?
Good question. They were pretty bad up until the late 80s under Rich Brooks.
Wild card there is Phil Knight. We have absolutely nothing even remotely close to that in terms of financial support. Phil Knight on his own is probably 100X all of our booster combined.
So in that sense, I'd say it's not comparable.
Not that I can think of off-hand. That's why I'm asking the question. The poster I responded to continues to talk about how Beamer isn't getting it done while denigrating any success we have had. I'd love to know his solution.
Edit: Florida before Spurrier never won ten games in a season. There's a lot of 7, 8, and 9 win seasons, but that's the extent of it until they hired Spurrier. They are the last "first-time" national champion, back in 1996. Also hard to compare ourselves to them considering that was nearly 30 years ago and they're in a recruiting hotbed. Perhaps, though, this post-Urban Meyer desert for Florida success is their program reverting to its historical standard.
IN my opinion, we SC football fans have to be realistic as to our goals. What's "realistic" to me? Shoot for, (not necessarily achieve) 8-4 annual seasons, win the bowl game more often that not, finish in the Top 20. Hopefully, make an occasional appearance in the playoffs. Maybe that's unrealistic. Not sure, especially not knowing what our NIL funding looks like.
Given that most years, we have 3-4 creampuff wins, 8 wins seasons are a reasonable goal. Maybe also the ceiling. Might pop to a 9 or 10 win season once in a blue moon, but our history says that's not even realistic.
Latest posts
Get unlimited access today.