Started By
Message
re: Gene Stallings agrees with Pat Dye....sort of
Posted on 10/8/13 at 12:59 pm to DamnStrong1860
Posted on 10/8/13 at 12:59 pm to DamnStrong1860
Stallings has been out of the game for awhile...but was head coach at Aggie, Bama, and the Cardinals and DC for the Cowboys for something like 15 years. So I think he knows a little something. the game hasn't changed THAT much,,,,
That said, what does the ability to technically breakdown the X's and O's have to do with it? Oregon plays a different style of ball than Bama....are you going to give credence to one over the other? If they run the table in the SECor PAC they should be inconsideration regardles of their style of play.
That said, what does the ability to technically breakdown the X's and O's have to do with it? Oregon plays a different style of ball than Bama....are you going to give credence to one over the other? If they run the table in the SECor PAC they should be inconsideration regardles of their style of play.
This post was edited on 10/8/13 at 12:59 pm
0
Posted on 10/8/13 at 12:59 pm to therick711
I don't mind a woman being on the committee, as long as she's qualified. She starts in this "Awww, but they were left out last year", or "But I just LOVE the color of Oregon's uniforms", that's when they need to go a new direction.
Posted on 10/8/13 at 1:01 pm to CFBFAN1121
quote:
Don't know why this is such a hard concept to grasp
It's not. It's a dumb concept. As Dan Patrick said this morning, do you think Ricky Williams knows more about college football than Chris Fowler?
Posted on 10/8/13 at 1:01 pm to Beer Bryant
quote:
I don't mind a woman being on the committee, as long as she's qualified. She starts in this "Awww, but they were left out last year", or "But I just LOVE the color of Oregon's uniforms", that's when they need to go a new direction.
Now, this post is definitely sexist. good job.
Posted on 10/8/13 at 1:03 pm to Tiger 10S
quote:
She is more than capable, and perhaps less biased, than many on the committee. Do you think Archie, who is on the committee, will ever give LSU a fair shake? No way. Further, she is not an elected official as someone on this board asserted.
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't she a Stanford super fan? Also isn't Stanford a contender for the title this year?
Tells me that there is plenty of opportunity for her bias to be just as influential as Archie's
Posted on 10/8/13 at 1:03 pm to NYCAuburn
quote:
No one is suggesting stallings or Dye should be on the committee or any random coach or person who played football
Did I say that? My point is that you can make an argument against every single person who ends up on this committee. For some it will be bias; for some it will be lack of football experience; is a career as an NFL coach good enough or should it be College all the way?; maybe for some age (too young or too old) is the problem. There isn’t a perfect candidate out there.
Every year in the U.S., we elect people to run this country who have no political or legal experience. To me, that’s a good thing. It provides balance. Do you want a congress comprised solely of lawyers and career politicians? Why should this committee consist solely of former athletes?
Just because you used to play ball doesn't mean you have any interest in the integrity of the system. It just means you played ball.
Posted on 10/8/13 at 1:03 pm to Tennessee Jed
quote:
Now, this post is definitely sexist. good job.
There is a reason why in every other corner of the internet when someone says something like that the comments that follow are "Roll Tide!"
Posted on 10/8/13 at 1:04 pm to Tennessee Jed
quote:
Now, this post is definitely sexist. good job.
Had hillbilly bait on my hook.
Posted on 10/8/13 at 1:04 pm to StopRobot
quote:
It's not. It's a dumb concept. As Dan Patrick said this morning, do you think Ricky Williams knows more about college football than Chris Fowler?
obviously not, but would you say Chris fowler knows more about CFB than nick saban?
it easy to discredit the argument when you use shitty examples as a retort. again, no one is saying some random person belongs over her because they played football. they are saying she isnt qualified simply because she hasnt played/coached. its the easiest argument to make to discredit. because its the first one.
Posted on 10/8/13 at 1:04 pm to Beer Bryant
quote:
She starts in this "Awww, but they were left out last year", or "But I just LOVE the color of Oregon's uniforms", that's when they need to go a new direction.
Bella? Bella?
Posted on 10/8/13 at 1:06 pm to NYCAuburn
quote:
obviously not, but would you say Chris fowler knows more about CFB than nick saban?
Nick Saban recommended LSU hire Houston Nutt when he left at the end of the 2004 season. You guys need to read the E Myth.
Posted on 10/8/13 at 1:06 pm to dbt_Geaux_Tigers_196
Don't call her in for that, I like Beer Bryant and she will leave nothing but a smoldering husk after that post.
Posted on 10/8/13 at 1:06 pm to DamnStrong1860
quote:
ust because you used to play ball doesn't mean you have any interest in the integrity of the system. It just means you played ball.
Just playing ball is not the only requirement that is being sought after. I am not sure why this is so hard to grasp
quote:
There isn’t a perfect candidate out there.
correct, but wouldnt you say its better to pull from a qualified applicant pool than the unqualified
Posted on 10/8/13 at 1:07 pm to StopRobot
quote:
As Dan Patrick said this morning, do you think Ricky Williams knows more about college football than Chris Fowler?
this really has the media guys' who never played football panties all in a wad...
IMO, it depends on your definition of "know"... if you're talking about the starting QB for Oregon St it's Fowler.... if you're talking about picking up a blitzing linebacker it's Williams.
Posted on 10/8/13 at 1:07 pm to therick711
quote:
Nick Saban recommended LSU hire Houston Nutt when he left at the end of the 2004 season. You guys need to read the E Myth.
that has to do with my question how?
Posted on 10/8/13 at 1:08 pm to NYCAuburn
Intelligence should always be valued over experience. Condi will be, without question, the smartest person in the room.
Posted on 10/8/13 at 1:09 pm to NYCAuburn
quote:
that has to do with my question how?
Because you are confusing technical skills with high level management skills. Because you are begging the question with qualified applicant pool arguments when the WHOLE argument is what qualifies one to be an applicant. You're assuming away the whole problem. You're using one proficiency to assume another entirely different proficiency. You are assuming that the qualities that make someone a good coach are the same qualities that make someone a good committee member. You assume that coaching the game is more valuable then a high level superficial knowledge of the entire landscape.
So . . . pretty much everything.
Posted on 10/8/13 at 1:10 pm to Tennessee Jed
quote:
ntelligence should always be valued over experience.
So no one that has coached or played is intelligent?
Posted on 10/8/13 at 1:11 pm to dbt_Geaux_Tigers_196
quote:
Bella? Bella?
It's just the masses acting like the masses. They've been stupid since the beginning of time.
Posted on 10/8/13 at 1:11 pm to Tennessee Jed
quote:
Intelligence should always be valued over experience.
would you rather have the 55 year old brian surgeon who graduated from UAB but has been in the field for a while... or the Johns Hopkins grad cutting for the first time?...
This post was edited on 10/8/13 at 1:17 pm
Page 3 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News