re: 247 List of Top Jobs in College FB

quote:

---

Oregon has wayyyyy better facilities

---

Have you seen Washington's new facilities and updated stadium?

quote:

---

Washington was literally good for 1 year.

---

Washington is gonna be good for much longer than literally 1 year with Peterson at the helm.

quote:

---

multiple national title games in the past decade

---

All due to one person who is long gone.


Oregon isn't a bad job. They have facilities and Nike money, plus they will always have their brand. But if money were relatively close I'd pick Washington every time.

quote:

---

Washington has a great stadium

---

I've been to both stadiums. Autzen is better.

Garbage list.

Clemson #3? ... yeah that's why they had to hire their interim coach who had zero HC experience the last time it opened up. Turned out to be a good move, but if Clemson was the #3 job in America, then they could have had anyone they wanted at that time. Which was obviously not the case. Dabo has improved Clemson's stature since then, sure, but its still not a Top 10 job.

Oklahoma #5... no way. Oklahoma is a recruiting wasteland. This past Class saw just 3 kids from Oklahoma ranked in 247Sports Top 200 prospects. There were zero Top 200 kids from neighboring Kansas and Missouri. That means you have to go into Texas to recruit most all of your talent. You also have a formidable instate foe in Oklahoma State who is backed with T. Boone Pickens' money. While OU still wins most of those battles, there is still someone they have to share the state with, unlike other schools like LSU and Georgia =who have no real instate competition... at least not of OSU's calibur.

I even think Bama at #1 is a stretch. It's a Top 3 job for sure, but there are reasons why I believe some are better:

1. They share a state with Auburn. I know Bama is the dominant power in that state, but over the past generation those programs have essentially split the series. Bama has way more titles, but Auburn has claimed a good number of SEC Titles during the past 30 years, plus a National Title. Auburn is routinely a Top 10 recruiting school in the nation, so obviously they are a formidable foe to share a state with. There are only 4 states that produced two schools who made the Top 16 coaching jobs on this list: Florida, California, Texas, and Alabama. One of those has about 20% the population of the others.

2. Alabama the state produces a solid amount of talent, per capita. But its just a smaller state. Here are the number of kids in the 2017 247Sports Top 200 from the following states:
34- Texas
31- Florida
21- California
21- Georgia
9- Alabama
8- Louisiana

Alabama produces about a third of the talent that Texas, Florida, and California do, while also sharing the state with Auburn. That makes it a bit more difficult.

3. No privacy for coaches. Let's be honest. Whoever is coach at USC can go out to a restaurant and be left alone. In fact, he'll probably stay unnoticed most nights out in a city like L.A. At Alabama, you give up your privacy. If you go out to dinner, you will be mobbed by adoring fans. That has to get old at some point.

Sure, when all things are clicking, Alabama may be the Top job. But if all things are equal, and if you ask most coaches the following question: "Which school would you rather coach at if you took over after a decade straight of 8-4 seasons at that school?", I believe USC, Ohio State, Texas, and maybe even Florida would be chosen before Alabama.

quote:

---

Sure, when all things are clicking, Alabama may be the Top job. But if all things are equal, and if you ask most coaches the following question: "Which school would you rather coach at if you took over after a decade straight of 8-4 seasons at that school?", I believe USC, Ohio State, Texas, and maybe even Florida would be chosen before Alabama.

---

But they are looking at right now, and right now Bama is able to recruit nationally pretty well and regionally without equal. Clemson is doing that as well RIGHT NOW. It's more sustainable in Ohio or Texas or Louisiana etc. without having a superstar coach, but right now those schools aren't hurting because they have that.

These lists come out every year and change.

Nothing happens in a 1 year stretch that can move teams that much in these rankings

quote:

---

Nothing happens in a 1 year stretch that can move teams that much in these rankings

---

Some things can. New AD, new conference, booster donates $500m to improve facilities, etc.

Let's say Troy joins the ACC, they have to jump up a few spots, right?

I have no problem with Alabama listed as number one. It is.

But, Clemson and Florida State are way overrated in the list. Basically, yes, they have won lately. But, they are not top jobs in college football above some others in the list if the criteria is more than recruiting location for FSU, facilities for Clemson, and recent performance for both. Almost all other factors, they fall well short except Clemson has great fan support and a good booster program. But, FSU has neither, for example. Neither has a remarkable AD. Clemson's AD is a classic failure and has alienated the students and the faculty.

quote:

---

Florida State are way overrated

---

I think Florida State is a pretty plum job. It has its downsides (less money mainly), but they are the elite program in that league historically, have pipelines throughout Florida, are still "cool", and at this point have been an elite program for 30 years.

How are Clemson and Oklahoma better jobs than LSU?