....Mike Kinnison = Mark Hudspeth = Stan Jones.
All legendary. All unqualfied to be a head coach at Mississippi State.
All legendary. All unqualfied to be a head coach at Mississippi State.
The trifecta is complete.....
- Thread starter DowntownDawg
- Start date
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
(at least I presume you are saying this) that the #1 criteria for my head coach selection would be that he is a winning division I coach, I would definitely not go so far as to say that Kinnison is unqualified. If you will take nothing besides a Division I winning coach, then I guess technically he is unqualified in your eyes.
But, that guy is a winner. If he has mellowed, as has been suggested, that could be a real problem for someone that has survived on intensity. However, that guy is so intense that it got him in trouble, more than once. Shouldn't this cue a JR post on intensity since i have now used the word like 8 times in one post?
But, that guy is a winner. If he has mellowed, as has been suggested, that could be a real problem for someone that has survived on intensity. However, that guy is so intense that it got him in trouble, more than once. Shouldn't this cue a JR post on intensity since i have now used the word like 8 times in one post?
Yeah, it would be exactly like it is now, except he would have a bigger stadium and more fan support. I'm sure he could really dominate Arkansas Tech, Alabama Huntsville, and West Florida then. It's not like it's a whole new level of competition and the opponents are better, or anything like that.If he can constantly win at DSU what would change if he came to State beside he would have better recruiting tools?
...let's just hire Raffo since we are basing our decision on what a Big 10 school did in football. I mean, for every successful DII to D1A transition out there, there are probably 10 successful asst. coach promotions.
Seriously, you're Mr. "We should fire Croom/Stans because we are mighty MSU, and we can get somebody better." Well guess what, this is the one sport that you are actually right about. Even the most wool infested rebel says that our job is a top 20 job. That said, we don't have to settle for an asst. coach or DII coach. Go get me a proven D1 head coach, or at the very LEAST a top asst. at a top program. We deserve nothing less.
All that said, Kinnison over Raffo any day.
Seriously, you're Mr. "We should fire Croom/Stans because we are mighty MSU, and we can get somebody better." Well guess what, this is the one sport that you are actually right about. Even the most wool infested rebel says that our job is a top 20 job. That said, we don't have to settle for an asst. coach or DII coach. Go get me a proven D1 head coach, or at the very LEAST a top asst. at a top program. We deserve nothing less.
All that said, Kinnison over Raffo any day.
It's not like he would take D2 talent and compete against SEC talent if he were hired. He brings in D2 talent at DSU (since DSU is D2 and all) and competes against a comparable level of talent and has won more than 3 out of every 4 games there. If we hired him, he would (hopefully) bring in SEC talent and would probably continue to be successful.
...we could just go get somebody who has already been successful on the same level that we play on, that has experience playing against the same competition that we play against, and that is basically a proven commodity. Takes out some of the guesswork.
Downtown I think you and Toe are just playing the extremes in this argument. you are right that it is a new level of competition and he is right that the coach would be facing a new level of competition with players who, not in our case this year, are of relatively equal capabilities. Of course the head coaches would be considered better at the D-I schools too so there could be some disparity there, which again makes you right. The thing is that a coach kicking *** at the D-II level may be on par with an average coach at the D-I level. Simply put.....there are too many variables for either of you to be on the extreme end of this argument. So it probably comes down to personal preference and opinion in the end. So...
i personally would much rather have a proven winner at D-II who has at least been in control of a winning program, be it recruiting, staffing, line-up selection, or game time decisions than an assistant at D-I who has had none of that experience in a head coaching capacity.
i really need extremedawg to post after all my uses of the word extreme in this post.</p>
i personally would much rather have a proven winner at D-II who has at least been in control of a winning program, be it recruiting, staffing, line-up selection, or game time decisions than an assistant at D-I who has had none of that experience in a head coaching capacity.
i really need extremedawg to post after all my uses of the word extreme in this post.</p>
One might ask why Kinnison has been at DSU for so long if he's so good. It's common to see a coach move up the ranks as he has proven himself at each level along the way. He's clearly proven himself at the D2 level. Why hasn't he moved up?
I don't know the particulars of his situation. Just wondering.
I don't know the particulars of his situation. Just wondering.
wpnetdawg said:I would trade Hudspeth for Croom tomorrow.
</p>brother, meeeeeeee tooooooo
Uncle Leo said:One might ask why Kinnison has been at DSU for so long if he's so good. It's common to see a coach move up the ranks as he has proven himself at each level along the way. He's clearly proven himself at the D2 level. Why hasn't he moved up?
I don't know the particulars of his situation. Just wondering.
</p>
C
Cains Major
Guest
Latest posts
Get unlimited access today.