Started By
Message
2
Posted on 12/1/11 at 11:40 pm to DaleDenton
@SunHog, why does it matter so much to you that other people view the A&M job higher than you do?
Obsession noted.
Obsession noted.
This post was edited on 12/1/11 at 11:41 pm
Posted on 12/1/11 at 11:51 pm to GamerAg
quote:
@SunHog, why does it matter so much to you that other people view the A&M job higher than you do?
Obsession noted.
Just helping what limited debate is utilized on this board.
I've always wondered why UCLA and TAMU, who are mirror images of each other, in extremely large football states never achieve their potential as their big brothers have?
No one has given me a reason TAMU is the #1 opening besides they'd want to coach in the SEC.. Is that the only reason?
At least one guy pointed out he didn't want to coach at UCLA because of the lack of a football support compared to basketball in the past.
This post was edited on 12/1/11 at 11:53 pm
Posted on 12/1/11 at 11:54 pm to SunHog
Texas > ATM, PSU, UCLA, ASU, Old Myth,etc..
Posted on 12/1/11 at 11:57 pm to bama1959
quote:+1
Ole Miss should be a top job. You win 8 games and you're FB genius. Beat LSU or Bama on a down year and you'll be a God
Posted on 12/2/11 at 12:34 am to SunHog
Texas A&M
Penn St.
Ole Miss
ASU
UCLA
Penn St.
Ole Miss
ASU
UCLA
Posted on 12/2/11 at 12:40 am to SunHog
Your guarding this thread like its a baby.
Sometimes a coach and certainly anyone that I would want. Would not want the easier job. Coaches at least good coaches dont think well shite I'm not good enough for the sec so I will just take the Pac 12 thingy. Do you want to be the astronaut that walks on the moon? Or do you want to be the one testing out the new suits in the big arse pool. Remember there is a good chance you aint coming back.
Sometimes a coach and certainly anyone that I would want. Would not want the easier job. Coaches at least good coaches dont think well shite I'm not good enough for the sec so I will just take the Pac 12 thingy. Do you want to be the astronaut that walks on the moon? Or do you want to be the one testing out the new suits in the big arse pool. Remember there is a good chance you aint coming back.
This post was edited on 12/2/11 at 1:01 am
Posted on 12/2/11 at 1:09 am to SunHog
quote:
ASU
UCLA
Penn State
Texas A&M
Ole Miss
Ranking in order if money is equal across the board.
I'd go with
Texas A&M - Good facilities, resources, fan support, and lots of local talent.
UCLA - Lots of local Talent and a fairly easy conference
Penn State - Great facilities, fan support, and history. Would be higher but the scandal moves it down.
ASU - Good facilities, easier conference, quickly growing state, and can also recruit California.
Ole Miss - It's a SEC job but it is in a very tough division.
Illinois - Large school, nice facilities, populated state, lots of potential without much pressure
Washington State - Low expectations, conference isn't to tough, and new money and exposure coming in with the Pac's new TV deal.
kansas - least attractive bcs job open. Previous coach only got 2 years before he was fired so you have to win fast, Texas and OU will never let them get an advantage, no conference network, less money from conference payouts than schools in competing conferences, and very little fan support for football.
Posted on 12/2/11 at 7:41 am to SunHog
You're all showing your bias.. ASU is clearly the best job. They just improved their facilities so that's not lacking..
But it's much easier to win at ASU than it is in the SEC west..
ASU
Penn St (chance to be savior)
UCLA (new improved facilities + money + USC down schollies = chance to be important)
A&M (good school etc.. but playing LSU/ark/aub/bama every year = lose)
Ole Miss (read above)
But it's much easier to win at ASU than it is in the SEC west..
ASU
Penn St (chance to be savior)
UCLA (new improved facilities + money + USC down schollies = chance to be important)
A&M (good school etc.. but playing LSU/ark/aub/bama every year = lose)
Ole Miss (read above)
Posted on 12/2/11 at 10:33 am to SunHog
Penn State
Texas A&M
Ole Miss
UCLA
ASU
I have no interest in going out west.
Texas A&M
Ole Miss
UCLA
ASU
I have no interest in going out west.
Posted on 12/2/11 at 10:57 am to DaleDenton
quote:
UCLA
ASU
Ped State
aTm
Ole Miss
UCLA refuses to spend the cash necessary to produce a decent program and have HORRIBLE facilities. Seriously, if they wouldnt spend for an alum as coach, why would they change for someone else?
ASU
aTm
PSU
UCLA
Ole Miss
Penn State under normal circumstances would be #1 by a light year but its going to be a VERY tough job for the next guy.
Posted on 12/2/11 at 6:45 pm to adammwilson
quote:
I have no interest in going out west.
That's fair if you've been out here and didn't like it. I have no problem with that reasoning just like I have no problem when a coach goes 'Home'..
Posted on 12/2/11 at 7:27 pm to MissouriFan
quote:
I'd go with
Texas A&M - Good facilities, resources, fan support, and lots of local talent.
UCLA - Lots of local Talent and a fairly easy conference
Penn State - Great facilities, fan support, and history. Would be higher but the scandal moves it down.
ASU - Good facilities, easier conference, quickly growing state, and can also recruit California.
Ole Miss - It's a SEC job but it is in a very tough division.
Illinois - Large school, nice facilities, populated state, lots of potential without much pressure
Washington State - Low expectations, conference isn't to tough, and new money and exposure coming in with the Pac's new TV deal.
kansas - least attractive bcs job open. Previous coach only got 2 years before he was fired so you have to win fast, Texas and OU will never let them get an advantage, no conference network, less money from conference payouts than schools in competing conferences, and very little fan support for football.
All that just to say this...^^^^
Posted on 12/2/11 at 8:02 pm to SunHog
Texas A&M
Ole Miss
ASU
Penn State
UCLA
Ole Miss
ASU
Penn State
UCLA
Page 4 of 4
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News