re: Just how good is Gary Pinkel, really?

and yet before then, in the 60's, 70's, and early 80's, Mizzou football was really pretty good, we still have the rightful claim on the 1960 Championship.

The administration, particularly Babs Uehling (hssssssssssss) did everything it could to kill sports at Mizzou and that was costly, but it's not like there was never football at MU before Gary either.

quote:

---

I see him being comparable to Snyder over at kstate. Now Mizzou wasn't as historically bad as kstate when he took the job, but I think the analogy (while it might be a stretch in many aspects) can still be made.

---

most coaches are comparable to some degree or another, look at their coaching trees, Snyders is like a tropical forest compared to Pinkels, and when it comes to game day chops the old man could beat Pinkel at his own game, (and he did), if that guy hadn't been recruiting in the black hole of a lost cornfield, imagine the dynasty that might have been.

quote:

---

Did you know Richt was a candidate for the Mizzou job when Pinkel was hired?

---

I did.

And?

No $4+M

He's a good coach who takes mediocre talent and turns them into monsters and draft picks.... I don't know if he would put out better teams if he had all the 4 & 5 Star players that he wants or if he is best at working with the 2 & 3 Star....

quote:

---

LSU's luck in 07 was a result of OTHERS helping them out after THEY had already lost. Auburn's "luck" in '13 was us WINNING in fortuitious ways

---

Luck: success or failure apparently brought by chance rather than through one's own actions.

Technically, there isn't a difference if its your team winning or other teams losing. "Luck" is "luck".

By your logic, had Mizzou and West Virginia both lost earlier in the day, and LSU beating Tennessee that night to go to the title game would mean that it was LSU's "luck" in WINNING that got them there, rather than what you claim--that LSU's luck was other teams losing.


But please. By all means continue to make your shitty threads about coaches.

Richt has played in a consistently better conference-division than Pinkel, that's not even debatable, so Richt has needed more talent, and he has won more div/conferences with it also.

quote:

---

Really don't see how you rank Richt higher than Pinkel

---

I mean don't the results speak for themselves?

quote:

---

Richt has had the same success the last 10 years

---

Why not compare their entire 14 year careers? Seems like it'd be pretty easy since htey started in 2001.



I know your first rebuttal will be that Georgia naturally attracts talent and recruits itself and it's easier ot win there etc etc and has advantages that missouri doens't. I get that...and I agree to an extent. But like the other MU fan said, Richt has played in a much tougher league top to bottom than missouri has the last 14 years. And on top of that, he's won far more.

Record at current school:
GP- 113-66 (63%)
MR- 136-48 (74%)

5 best seasons record wise:
GP- 12-2, 12-2, 11-3, 10-3, 10-4
MR- 13-1, 12-2, 11-2, 11-3, 10-2

Division titles:
GP- 4
MR- 5

Conference titles:
GP- 0
MR- 2

BCS Bowls:
GP- 0
MR- 3

Ranked finishes:
GP- 5
MR- 11

Unranked finishes:
Gp- 9
MR- 3

Seaons with more than 3 losses:
Gp- 10
MR- 6

Seaons with more than 4 losses:
Gp- 9
MR- 3

Top 10 finishes:
GP- 2
MR- 8

Top 3 finishes:
GP- 0
MR- 2

Bowl appearances:
GP- 11
MR- 14

Bowl wins:
GP- 6
MR- 9

League COY:
GP- 1
MR- 2


Ok...so you think that Richt/UGA have inherit advantages that missouri doesn't..fine. Like I said I agree. But there is a pretty big chasm in the numbers of these guys (over the same length of time), so while one may have "more advantages", he also has played in a tougher league.

I also noticed someone earlier pointed out the 15 years prior to pinkel. Here are the 10 years prior to richt:

8-4
8-4
9-3
10-2
5-6
6-6
6-4-1
5-6
10-2
9-3

You had a program wallowing in mediocrity outside of 2 10 win seasons during the entire decade. It was clearly stagnating/declining and not going anywhere before richt came. Richt took the program back to places it hadn't been in over 20 years, so it's not like any ol' guy could just walk into UGA and automatically start winning. Richt still had to do it.

I guess all things equal, it's not 100% apples to apples to just compare richt and pinkel's stats straight up. BUT, with as large of a disparity as there is, at what point do you say "eh ok, yeah I'll give the nod to richt"? I mean, there really isn't anything at all that would rank pinkel higher than richt other htan "pinkel wins with shittier players", which again is a 100% relfection on pinkel.

That doesn't really have much bearing on who the better coach is IMO. But UGA's is much, much better/higher than missouri's over the last 14 years.

So you're saying that Richt's had much, much better talent.