Started By
Message
re: USCe losing to the Citadel cost them Tom Herman
Posted on 2/16/16 at 10:08 am to CNB
Posted on 2/16/16 at 10:08 am to CNB
quote:
No they didn't
Uh, yes they did. Here is a thread from 11/19 from Mizzou fans here:
LINK
quote:
Personally I believe Mizzou is going to stay in the family as usual and hire Odom and save some money and keep the same thing going.
quote:
You have to really give Odom a look because of the defense.
Hell Killz had Odom on the top of his list once it wasn't Richt:
LINK
Point being there WERE Mizzou fans back then that expected Odom. You could tear this site a new a-hole with searching and not find one USC fan back in November positively wanting Muschamp to be the coach. That is my point.
quote:
Cute way of capitalizing random words for emphasis though. Nice touch.
You like that? After a few years on the Rant it is clear to me that people here are barely literate, so if you can help them get the point with bolding and capitalization why not?
0
Posted on 2/16/16 at 10:14 am to tween the hedges
What a pussy.
Posted on 2/16/16 at 10:18 am to GameCocky88
quote:
At the beginning of the search there wasn't really anyone else looking all that hard for a head coach so yes you were right about that.
bullshite to you too good sir. From the start USC fans here speculated who the new coach should be:
LINK
Muschamp wasn't mentioned EXCEPT to comment what a joke that choice would be:
quote:
This will probably draw laughs (as it probably should after some message board poster "confirmed" Muschamp to USC with similar info)
That is a night and day difference than Mizzou fan expectations.
quote:
However, in the post that you quoted from rooster, he said "considering the circumstances and who we were competing against..." again at the beginning of the search there was no competition, you being right, at the end there definitely was, rooster having some valid points.
My only beef with that perspective is that USC was the first Power 5 job to open and the last to be filled. We now know for a fact that Muschamp was a least a second choice, and he was probably even further down the list. Honestly I think your current AD is over his head (and he maybe lucked out) but that is another conversation.
Does any of that matter right now today? No. Do old fan expectations determine how good of a job Muschamp will do? No.
But lets be honest about this guys- none of yall wanted Muschamp. Any positivity yall have about the hire today was manufactured since the hire was made. Nothing wrong with that, but be honest about it. Some Mizzou fans wanted Odom from day one.
This post was edited on 2/16/16 at 10:20 am
Posted on 2/16/16 at 10:24 am to cardboardboxer
It's not that we didn't want him (and a few didn't/don't want him). It's that he wasn't our first choice.
And if you're telling me Odom was Mizzous first choice I'll laugh.
And if you're telling me Odom was Mizzous first choice I'll laugh.
Posted on 2/16/16 at 10:28 am to cardboardboxer
This one is for you, cardboardboxer. Just to further prove your point. 
quote:
If you would have told USC fans at the start of their long search that they would have ended up with Muschamp the response would have been something like "Frick you SEC Rant in your fat frickibg face! Their is no fricking way we end up with that Florida reject!"
quote:
scrooster
quote:
SCAR did fine considering the circumstances and who we were competing against to fill the position.
Mizzou ... notsomuch. Everyone is still laughing at Mizzou.
This post was edited on 2/16/16 at 10:36 am
Posted on 2/16/16 at 10:32 am to TigerTalker16
Posted on 2/16/16 at 10:37 am to CNB
quote:
It's that he wasn't our first choice.
That statement, while true, makes light of the situation.
Muschamp was not only not any USC fan's first choice, he wasn't the second, the third, the fourth or the fifth. In fact I can't find ANY list prior to the hire that has him even listed and some USC posters spouted off a dozen possible candidates.
His hiring was out of left field, and was a hiring that on paper (a failure at the better UF tries again at USC) was easily one of the worst made this offseason.
I think the moves Muschamp has made since the hiring have proven that some of conventional wisdom was wrong, and I personally hate to speak ill about the guy because he has my team's number (so he gets a free win a year eventually). But on paper day one (the longest open Power 5 job is filled with sloppy seconds) the hire was a disaster.
That is all I am saying.
It isn't hard to finally admit that. LSU fans eventually admitted that we were all right and Steele sucked. We just want the same from you.
quote:
And if you're telling me Odom was Mizzous first choice I'll laugh.
For some of their posters (ones I personally respect that aren't on here trolling) he was. For others he was the "backup" or plan C. At the very least though he was ON THE LIST. Unlike Muschamp and USC fans.
(how you like that? bold AND capitalized)
Posted on 2/16/16 at 10:46 am to cardboardboxer
I think you did it again, and by "it" I mean miss my point. At the time of the beginning of our coaching search was Muschamp high on the board or high in the minds of USC fans? No, which I agreed with you on actually. My point was that at that time there were no other coaching opportunities available, which you agreed on here
The only argument that I made that was partially against yours you addressed in a reasonable manner.
Now onto the popularity, if you will, of the Muschamp to SC vs the Odom to Mizzou argument. I think that you again are right in regards to the fact that Odom was higher on Mizzou fans boards than Muschamps was on USC fans. However, I think you have shown enough intellect to allow that it isn't exactly an apples to apples comparison. Odom was on Mizzou's staff for almost his entire professional career, Muschamp has no ties to USC whatsoever. Again, I agree that Odom was higher in the eyes of Mizzou fans than Muschamp's was in USC's pre-hire, but there is definitely a reason for that which has nothing to do with HC ability.
quote:
USC was the first Power 5 job to open
The only argument that I made that was partially against yours you addressed in a reasonable manner.
Now onto the popularity, if you will, of the Muschamp to SC vs the Odom to Mizzou argument. I think that you again are right in regards to the fact that Odom was higher on Mizzou fans boards than Muschamps was on USC fans. However, I think you have shown enough intellect to allow that it isn't exactly an apples to apples comparison. Odom was on Mizzou's staff for almost his entire professional career, Muschamp has no ties to USC whatsoever. Again, I agree that Odom was higher in the eyes of Mizzou fans than Muschamp's was in USC's pre-hire, but there is definitely a reason for that which has nothing to do with HC ability.
Posted on 2/16/16 at 10:46 am to cardboardboxer
I love it
I guess my point is that in the long run I think we will be better off. But Odom is unproven, doesn't mean he's bad. He could be the next Dabo for all I know.
I guess my point is that in the long run I think we will be better off. But Odom is unproven, doesn't mean he's bad. He could be the next Dabo for all I know.
Posted on 2/16/16 at 10:49 am to CNB
I didn't want Odom as my first choice but he was my second choice if we couldn't get Herman. Everyone else was already taken at the time. My point is that I'd rather have an unproven coach than a proven failure.
Posted on 2/16/16 at 10:51 am to CNB
quote:
I love it
quote:
I guess my point is that in the long run I think we will be better off.
I would tend to agree with you.
quote:
But Odom is unproven, doesn't mean he's bad.
Sure sure. He is kinda a unknown. I think the tribulations he has had since his hire shows that he will have some growing pains.
Posted on 2/16/16 at 10:52 am to cardboardboxer
quote:
Muschamp wasn't mentioned EXCEPT to comment what a joke that choice would be:
The post you referenced was because a poster's credibility was shot after the Muschamp-to-USC-DC Rumors last January. Again, the entire fanbase was on board with hiring him as DC Last year, instead of that paint-eating moron Jon Hoke. A good number of people wanted him even with a HCIW stipulation.
Was Muschamp first choice? No. That's common knowledge. Were we happy to get him? No, but we were happy just to be finished with the search. It blew up in Tanner's face like a hand grenade. Most of us know he's in over his head as AD.
That said, as much of a disappointment a hire (on the surface) as Muschamp was, he's done a great job winning people over and assembling a staff.
I have no idea if he'll be successful here. But I do think his personality and attitude are a better fit for this program than someone like Rich Rod is. If you wanted a polarizing hire that would have caused great upheaval, the fanbase was near unanimous in their disdain for that guy.
I'm really not sure what some of you are fishing for. Even if we disagree with the hire and wanted someone else (pretty ubiquitous), it was evident that we had to settle for someone to take the job. So far, he's done well in it.
Posted on 2/16/16 at 10:54 am to GameCocky88
quote:
My point was that at that time there were no other coaching opportunities available, which you agreed on here
I guess my beef with that rationale is I don't see how competition could make yall the last Power 5 job to get filled, unless it was the worst Power 5 job that opened (and I don't think that was the case). I really just think your AD is over his head, the days of promoting legendary coaches is over for a reason.
quote:
However, I think you have shown enough intellect to allow that it isn't exactly an apples to apples comparison.
Oh sure. I don't think Muschamp was on many fan's wish lists no matter the fanbase.
Well except maybe people who wanted to see an Auburn melt.
Posted on 2/16/16 at 11:04 am to cardboardboxer
quote:
I guess my beef with that rationale is I don't see how competition could make yall the last Power 5 job to get filled, unless it was the worst Power 5 job that opened (and I don't think that was the case). I really just think your AD is over his head, the days of promoting legendary coaches is over for a reason.
Maybe it was the worst job open. Dunno. There are circumstances beyond Tanner's control, despite his atrocious management of the situation.
Miami hired an alum who fell in their lap.
UGA hired an alum (and if that job hadn't opened, Smart is probably in Columbia right now)
Mizzou hired an alum on-staff.
VaTech hired a guy who didn't want to come to the SEC.
Maryland hired a guy who was probably on our list, honestly.
We lost the hiring war, no doubt. But maybe he's the right guy, regardless.
Posted on 2/16/16 at 11:13 am to RoyalAir
I would agree with this. While we were the last to get filled the only guys we actually missed on were Smart, who RoyalAir provided intel on and Herman who this thread is about. To me, Herman is positioning himself for another role and I'd rather him do that in Houston than at USC.
Also I find deeming Muschamp's time at UF a failure to be a bit much. Back to CB's point, would I fanboy/whiteknight for him if he were at Auburn still, probably not and that's mainly due to not having a reason to until he becomes our HC.
Also I find deeming Muschamp's time at UF a failure to be a bit much. Back to CB's point, would I fanboy/whiteknight for him if he were at Auburn still, probably not and that's mainly due to not having a reason to until he becomes our HC.
Posted on 2/16/16 at 11:15 am to GameCocky88
quote:
Also I find deeming Muschamp's time at UF a failure to be a bit much
What would you deem it then?
Can you see why UF fans would disagree?
Posted on 2/16/16 at 11:19 am to RoyalAir
quote:
Maybe it was the worst job open. Dunno. There are circumstances beyond Tanner's control, despite his atrocious management of the situation.
Sure sure. At some point it is time to round the wagons and think positive.
quote:
Also I find deeming Muschamp's time at UF a failure to be a bit much
I don't, he did fail there. But maybe he learned from it.
Hell the best coach in the NFL today failed in his first NFL head coaching job.
Posted on 2/16/16 at 11:20 am to cardboardboxer
Pete Carroll sure did.
Posted on 2/16/16 at 11:21 am to roadGator
well my rationale behind that statement is this. We as fan's judge our coaches by wins and losses. Yes, looking strictly at that doesn't bode well for Muschamp. But what makes up those wins and losses? Your teams ability to score points vs their ability to keep the opposing team from scoring points. Now, for comparison's sake, lets look at McElwain's performance this year. Would the UF fan base say that his performance was a failure? No, he went 10-4 and took the Gators to Atlanta, bravo. However, if you go back and look at the stats ppg vs ppga, McElwain's team this year actually under-performed the team Muschamp fielded 3 out of the 4 years. So saying that the resulting wins vs losses wasn't what was hoped for is true, saying he was an outright failure is a bit harsh.
This post was edited on 2/16/16 at 11:22 am
Posted on 2/16/16 at 11:24 am to GameCocky88
That's digging deep because it's only wins and losses at the end of the day that matter.
I've said it before and I'll say it one last time.
I hope Muschamp works out for you guys.
I'm just skeptical that he has the makeup to be a HC in the SEC. My skepticism is based on my experience watching him on the sidelines, seeing his press conferences and his result while at Florida.
I will be surprised if he's able to become a great head coach but I'd be happy for him if he does just that.
I've said it before and I'll say it one last time.
I hope Muschamp works out for you guys.
I'm just skeptical that he has the makeup to be a HC in the SEC. My skepticism is based on my experience watching him on the sidelines, seeing his press conferences and his result while at Florida.
I will be surprised if he's able to become a great head coach but I'd be happy for him if he does just that.
This post was edited on 2/16/16 at 11:28 am
Page 8 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News