Started By
Message
Put a number on your expectations
Posted on 1/1/17 at 2:00 am
Posted on 1/1/17 at 2:00 am
What's a reasonable long term winning percentage you think a solid coach can achieve at Arkansas? 70-75%? That averages out to slightly better than a 9-4 season. For comparison purposes, I put winning percentages and an "average" season next to some coaches we are familiar with:
Ken Hatfield: 76% slightly less than 10-3 average
Houston Nutt: 61% slightly less than 8-5 average
Bobby Petrino: 68% slightly less than 9-4 average
Danny Ford: 46% roughly 6-7 average
Bret Bielema:49% slightly better than 6-7 average
Les Miles (just for shits and giggles): 77% roughly 10-3 average
Ken Hatfield: 76% slightly less than 10-3 average
Houston Nutt: 61% slightly less than 8-5 average
Bobby Petrino: 68% slightly less than 9-4 average
Danny Ford: 46% roughly 6-7 average
Bret Bielema:49% slightly better than 6-7 average
Les Miles (just for shits and giggles): 77% roughly 10-3 average
6
Posted on 1/1/17 at 2:03 am to DiafGtfo
65%
Posted on 1/1/17 at 2:08 am to DiafGtfo
65%
Posted on 1/1/17 at 7:35 am to DiafGtfo
60%
Posted on 1/1/17 at 7:46 am to TheCheshireHog
Many of us are old enoug to remember when there were only 10 games in a season--11 if you got to a bowl game. So when I look at this, my first instinct so to say "8 wins per yr is pretty cool." But then I look deeper and see that 8 wins would equal 5 losses, which is not really reflective of a good season in my opinion. 5 losses usually means losing at least 4 SEC games each year.
So....I'd say that an average year would have us losing somewhere around 3-4 games per year. So given that we play 13 games including bowl, that's 9-4(69.2 %) or 10-3(77%)
9-4 looks right--69%
So....I'd say that an average year would have us losing somewhere around 3-4 games per year. So given that we play 13 games including bowl, that's 9-4(69.2 %) or 10-3(77%)
9-4 looks right--69%
Posted on 1/1/17 at 8:05 am to DocHog
65-70% with the occasional rebuilding year where the number dips and strong senior class year where the number rises
Posted on 1/1/17 at 8:28 am to DocHog
Coaches winning percentages at Arkansas:
Frank Broyles: 70.8%
Lou Holtz: 73.5%
Ken Hatfield: 76%
Jack Crowe: 37.5%
Danny Ford: 46.5%
Subtracting First Season in parentheses
Houston Nutt: 61.0% (59.5%)
Bobby Petrino: 66.7% (74.4%)
Bret Bielema: 49.0% (56.4%)
70% is a rather stupid number to demand. 70% is not going to happen in the SEC for Arkansas, not for the coach who is building it up. 65% would be a very good coach, especially one that doesn't have a great first season. Sustaining it for a period of time is also an issue.
We have disadvantages. 1: We have a small in state recruiting pool. 2: We don't do the pay for play on the scale of the rest of the SEC.
With that in mind, we need a coach who can develop players and talent and be a solid program. Right now it isn't happening. A new hire will also be a crap shoot.
Frank Broyles was one of the best at identifying assistant coaches in the history of football and he played in a softer conference and he STILL only had a 70% winning percentage.
Here are ALL the years we've finished with a winning SEC record:
1995: 6-2 regular season SEC record (played in SEC champ game)
1998: 6-2 regular season SEC record (tied for 1st in SEC West, did not play champ game)
2002: 5-3 regular season SEC record (tied for 1st in SEC West, played in SEC champ game)
2006: 7-1 regular season SEC record (played in SEC champ game)
2010: 6-2 regular season SEC record
2011: 6-2 regular season SEC record
2015: 5-3 regular season SEC record
In 25 years of SEC play, we have 7 winning records in conference play. We seem to do it about every 4 years with the exception of Bobby Petrino.
For our next coaching hire, whenever it happens, We should either hire an up and coming coach OR an ex-NFL head coach.
If Bielema can pull off a winning record in the SEC next year, I'm on board with keeping him for at least another 2 or 3. If he can't, it's time to shop around.
Frank Broyles: 70.8%
Lou Holtz: 73.5%
Ken Hatfield: 76%
Jack Crowe: 37.5%
Danny Ford: 46.5%
Subtracting First Season in parentheses
Houston Nutt: 61.0% (59.5%)
Bobby Petrino: 66.7% (74.4%)
Bret Bielema: 49.0% (56.4%)
70% is a rather stupid number to demand. 70% is not going to happen in the SEC for Arkansas, not for the coach who is building it up. 65% would be a very good coach, especially one that doesn't have a great first season. Sustaining it for a period of time is also an issue.
We have disadvantages. 1: We have a small in state recruiting pool. 2: We don't do the pay for play on the scale of the rest of the SEC.
With that in mind, we need a coach who can develop players and talent and be a solid program. Right now it isn't happening. A new hire will also be a crap shoot.
Frank Broyles was one of the best at identifying assistant coaches in the history of football and he played in a softer conference and he STILL only had a 70% winning percentage.
Here are ALL the years we've finished with a winning SEC record:
1995: 6-2 regular season SEC record (played in SEC champ game)
1998: 6-2 regular season SEC record (tied for 1st in SEC West, did not play champ game)
2002: 5-3 regular season SEC record (tied for 1st in SEC West, played in SEC champ game)
2006: 7-1 regular season SEC record (played in SEC champ game)
2010: 6-2 regular season SEC record
2011: 6-2 regular season SEC record
2015: 5-3 regular season SEC record
In 25 years of SEC play, we have 7 winning records in conference play. We seem to do it about every 4 years with the exception of Bobby Petrino.
For our next coaching hire, whenever it happens, We should either hire an up and coming coach OR an ex-NFL head coach.
If Bielema can pull off a winning record in the SEC next year, I'm on board with keeping him for at least another 2 or 3. If he can't, it's time to shop around.
Posted on 1/1/17 at 8:56 am to Killean
So, we should accept between 4 and 5 losses per yr(assuming we play a bowl game.)
That would put us around 65%.
I suspect you are too young to remember the SWC during Broyles' era. It wasn't soft at all
And the SEC was certainly no killer back then either.
To me, this thread is another way of seeing if BB is the right coach for us. It would appear that all he has to do is lose 4-6 games per yr( this would be 7-9 wins) for an average of 5 losses per season, and many would be very happy.
An average of 5 losses per season isn't good enough for me. But we are Arkansas, and we don't believe anymore--like we did when I was a kid-- that we deserve to be in contention for top 10 rankings and conference success.
We'll leave that to traditional powers who have more recently been in national title contention and/or have been seen as powerful programs such as Baylor, Mich St, Wiscy, Washington, Ok St, and Mizzou.
No way we could ever replicate that kind of success.
Because of the SEC, we are poor, we can't recruit, we have integrity and others don't, etc.
That would put us around 65%.
I suspect you are too young to remember the SWC during Broyles' era. It wasn't soft at all
And the SEC was certainly no killer back then either.
To me, this thread is another way of seeing if BB is the right coach for us. It would appear that all he has to do is lose 4-6 games per yr( this would be 7-9 wins) for an average of 5 losses per season, and many would be very happy.
An average of 5 losses per season isn't good enough for me. But we are Arkansas, and we don't believe anymore--like we did when I was a kid-- that we deserve to be in contention for top 10 rankings and conference success.
We'll leave that to traditional powers who have more recently been in national title contention and/or have been seen as powerful programs such as Baylor, Mich St, Wiscy, Washington, Ok St, and Mizzou.
No way we could ever replicate that kind of success.
Because of the SEC, we are poor, we can't recruit, we have integrity and others don't, etc.
Posted on 1/1/17 at 9:06 am to Killean
I don't think 70% is completely unreasonable (or at least high 60s). Definitely on the high end of things, but definitely doable. Bobby Petrino probably would have had a higher win percentage if he had been around a little longer (that 5-7 mark his first season didn't help).
I think a reasonable four year run for an Arkansas coach would be something along the lines of
6-7
8-5
9-4
11-2
Rinse and Repeat. This averages out to 65%.
In all honesty, right now this is a moot point since we aren't anywhere near close to that.
I think a reasonable four year run for an Arkansas coach would be something along the lines of
6-7
8-5
9-4
11-2
Rinse and Repeat. This averages out to 65%.
In all honesty, right now this is a moot point since we aren't anywhere near close to that.
Posted on 1/1/17 at 9:12 am to DiafGtfo
68%
Posted on 1/1/17 at 9:20 am to Hawgnsincebirth55
quote:
65-70% with the occasional rebuilding year where the number dips and strong senior class year where the number rises
Same here.
Posted on 1/1/17 at 9:47 am to Killean
Fun fact of the day, Arkansas has had six coaches average 70% wins.
The father of Arkansas Football John Futrall (yes the gent the liberal arts building is named after) though he got most of his wins by beating up on Ft. Smith High school.
B. N. Wilson (engineering professor) who was our second ever HC and is said to have treasured till his dying days this quote from a newspaper "Thugs, pug-uglies, and roughnecks. Such are B. N. Wilson and the University of Arkansas football team." If he hadn't died 70 years ago he'd be my pick for the job.
Norman Paine (the World War 1 coach) who was hell on wheels OOC but never won a conference game for the Hogs. 8-1 OOC record though.
Then you have the golden years of Arkansas football with Hatfield, Holtz, and Broyles.
We've had six coaches that averaged 60% or better wins and two coaches that missed that mark by a hair.
So, even if you leave out our first two HCs, it is possible to pull off 60% wins, but there are 20 coaches who haven't managed it (though two of those came damn close). Bert is almost exactly in the very middle of Arkansas coaches by winning percentage, which isn't something to brag about because we've had some woeful coaches.
We have a 15 million dollar buyout clause for the definition of average for an Arkansas coach.
Bert is coming back next year but unless he really turns it up a notch he's going to be yet another middle of the road Arkansas coach.
I don't think its too much to ask that our coach win at 55% clip at least. Bert has not pulled that off.
The father of Arkansas Football John Futrall (yes the gent the liberal arts building is named after) though he got most of his wins by beating up on Ft. Smith High school.
B. N. Wilson (engineering professor) who was our second ever HC and is said to have treasured till his dying days this quote from a newspaper "Thugs, pug-uglies, and roughnecks. Such are B. N. Wilson and the University of Arkansas football team." If he hadn't died 70 years ago he'd be my pick for the job.
Norman Paine (the World War 1 coach) who was hell on wheels OOC but never won a conference game for the Hogs. 8-1 OOC record though.
Then you have the golden years of Arkansas football with Hatfield, Holtz, and Broyles.
We've had six coaches that averaged 60% or better wins and two coaches that missed that mark by a hair.
So, even if you leave out our first two HCs, it is possible to pull off 60% wins, but there are 20 coaches who haven't managed it (though two of those came damn close). Bert is almost exactly in the very middle of Arkansas coaches by winning percentage, which isn't something to brag about because we've had some woeful coaches.
We have a 15 million dollar buyout clause for the definition of average for an Arkansas coach.
Bert is coming back next year but unless he really turns it up a notch he's going to be yet another middle of the road Arkansas coach.
I don't think its too much to ask that our coach win at 55% clip at least. Bert has not pulled that off.
Posted on 1/1/17 at 11:16 am to Arksulli
Broyles gets more credit than he should because the record WAS soft many years.
In 1969, Arkansas played 2 teams that finished with a winning record. We lost to both of them.
You'll also notice that Frank Broyles fell off a LOT when integration happened.
The 1960's, 1970's and 1980's are what people want. We were in a conference where we were the 2nd best team behind Texas. Way behind Texas. The 1980's, when Ken Hatfield did so well and when most of our expectations were built.. was when the conference was so down that it would break apart.
Where do we rank historically in the SEC West?
5th.
SEC West teams all time AP rankings:
Alabama - 4
LSU - 11
Auburn - 16
Texas A&M - 18
Arkansas - 21
Other SEC teams ahead of us:
Florida - 10
Tennessee - 14
Georgia - 15
What advantages do we have? None actually. We don't have more money to spend on coaches than any SEC West schools except for Mississippi and Mississippi St. We don't have more fertile recruiting grounds, we don't have a better national presence. Our fanbase needs to stop pretending that shite should be handed to us. We're sitting exactly where we have been historically. Improving requires taking chances.
If we examine all the post-Broyles coaches that were here for at least 4 years, you see a few things emerge:
Holtz and Nutt were better at the start of their tenure than at the end.
Hatfield improved and was run off.
Petrino improved and torpedo'd his own run.
Danny Ford wasn't very good at adapting to the game but could recruit well.
Bielema hasn't done too horribly, but there are issues that need addressing. If he addresses those issues, we have a chance next season to keep getting better. If he does not, then he will be replaced within 2 years.
The 2014 and 2015 teams were significantly better than their records at the end of the season. The 2016 team wasn't as good as its record. Our primary issues are lack of defense and inability to run the ball. Bielema's running game has gotten worse every year he's been here. We also aren't as good in the 2nd half. I suspect that this is because of the size and lack of conditioning of our offensive line. We have big guys who get tired. We need people who wear the other team out. Defensively teams are using 8 to 10 people rotating on the line. Offensively we don't sub. It's not a method that works anymore.
In 1969, Arkansas played 2 teams that finished with a winning record. We lost to both of them.
You'll also notice that Frank Broyles fell off a LOT when integration happened.
The 1960's, 1970's and 1980's are what people want. We were in a conference where we were the 2nd best team behind Texas. Way behind Texas. The 1980's, when Ken Hatfield did so well and when most of our expectations were built.. was when the conference was so down that it would break apart.
Where do we rank historically in the SEC West?
5th.
SEC West teams all time AP rankings:
Alabama - 4
LSU - 11
Auburn - 16
Texas A&M - 18
Arkansas - 21
Other SEC teams ahead of us:
Florida - 10
Tennessee - 14
Georgia - 15
What advantages do we have? None actually. We don't have more money to spend on coaches than any SEC West schools except for Mississippi and Mississippi St. We don't have more fertile recruiting grounds, we don't have a better national presence. Our fanbase needs to stop pretending that shite should be handed to us. We're sitting exactly where we have been historically. Improving requires taking chances.
If we examine all the post-Broyles coaches that were here for at least 4 years, you see a few things emerge:
Holtz and Nutt were better at the start of their tenure than at the end.
Hatfield improved and was run off.
Petrino improved and torpedo'd his own run.
Danny Ford wasn't very good at adapting to the game but could recruit well.
Bielema hasn't done too horribly, but there are issues that need addressing. If he addresses those issues, we have a chance next season to keep getting better. If he does not, then he will be replaced within 2 years.
The 2014 and 2015 teams were significantly better than their records at the end of the season. The 2016 team wasn't as good as its record. Our primary issues are lack of defense and inability to run the ball. Bielema's running game has gotten worse every year he's been here. We also aren't as good in the 2nd half. I suspect that this is because of the size and lack of conditioning of our offensive line. We have big guys who get tired. We need people who wear the other team out. Defensively teams are using 8 to 10 people rotating on the line. Offensively we don't sub. It's not a method that works anymore.
Posted on 1/1/17 at 12:33 pm to Killean
I agree with everything you said which proves in my mind that although we aren't a powerhouse by any means we still deserve better than what we're getting now
Posted on 1/1/17 at 1:21 pm to DiafGtfo
65% seems about right. Bobby's number would have gone down a little with a few more seasons but still probably be around 65%.
Posted on 1/1/17 at 1:41 pm to Hawgnsincebirth55
Killean,
AP doesn't prove anything. See 1964 AP NATIONAL CHAMPIONS if you need a reference about bias and flaw in the polls. Suffice it to say that TAMU is pretty much in the same area that we are historically, and that we were much better before we went to the SEC and gave up our Texas recruiting. If so, I don't think the SEC is worth that. You might disagree
I think we could both agree that Arkansas is disadvantaged enough that it will take superior coaching for us to have chance to win in the SEC. Why do you think BB is a good enough coach to win at Arkansas?
I notice that you think we weren't really a 7-6 team this year; we should have been worse. Why is that ok for a coach in yr 4 of his tenure? Is it because others have had the same struggles? I don't follow this implicit transitive property of Arkansas FB coaching. Is there an intrinsic flaw at Arkansas that requires all coaches to worsen by year 4? Please explain
Since BB is being retained, I can assure you that I hope that your faith in BB is well-placed, and that I have to come back here and eat some serious crow!!!
AP doesn't prove anything. See 1964 AP NATIONAL CHAMPIONS if you need a reference about bias and flaw in the polls. Suffice it to say that TAMU is pretty much in the same area that we are historically, and that we were much better before we went to the SEC and gave up our Texas recruiting. If so, I don't think the SEC is worth that. You might disagree
I think we could both agree that Arkansas is disadvantaged enough that it will take superior coaching for us to have chance to win in the SEC. Why do you think BB is a good enough coach to win at Arkansas?
I notice that you think we weren't really a 7-6 team this year; we should have been worse. Why is that ok for a coach in yr 4 of his tenure? Is it because others have had the same struggles? I don't follow this implicit transitive property of Arkansas FB coaching. Is there an intrinsic flaw at Arkansas that requires all coaches to worsen by year 4? Please explain
Since BB is being retained, I can assure you that I hope that your faith in BB is well-placed, and that I have to come back here and eat some serious crow!!!
Posted on 1/1/17 at 2:13 pm to DocHog
You should probably read all the post before you comment on shite.
Now, there's this thing called strength of schedule. That affects where we end up.
We had one bad SEC loss - Missouri.
Now, we also had one good SEC win - Florida
We also beat both Mississippi's.
We were favored in ONE SEC game all year.
We won all of our regular season non-conference games and lost to Virginia Tech in the bowl. Tech was favored over us and ranked higher.
I don't think Arkansas is that good. I don't think college football is designed to let teams improve significantly. I think football as a sport will be on a slow decline. I would like a better coach, but I don't think it's a realistic option right now. Bielema might be able to improve, he's still fairly young.
If you replace a coach without a plan, you hire Ed Orgeron. We don't want to hire a coach that was so shitty he was fired and replaced with Houston Nutt.
Arkansas hasn't been a football power since before integration. We've been in the top 5 exactly once since 1978. We lost badly that week.
We've had exactly one top 10 finish in the past 30 years.
In the 25 years we've been in the SEC we've finished ranked 5 times.
We've been ranked in the preseason 6 times since joining the SEC. 3 times we finished with a higher ranking, 3 times we finished unranked.
Right now, Bret Bielema has the same bowl record as Bobby Petrino, 2-1. That's the best at Arkansas.
Now, there's this thing called strength of schedule. That affects where we end up.
We had one bad SEC loss - Missouri.
Now, we also had one good SEC win - Florida
We also beat both Mississippi's.
We were favored in ONE SEC game all year.
We won all of our regular season non-conference games and lost to Virginia Tech in the bowl. Tech was favored over us and ranked higher.
I don't think Arkansas is that good. I don't think college football is designed to let teams improve significantly. I think football as a sport will be on a slow decline. I would like a better coach, but I don't think it's a realistic option right now. Bielema might be able to improve, he's still fairly young.
If you replace a coach without a plan, you hire Ed Orgeron. We don't want to hire a coach that was so shitty he was fired and replaced with Houston Nutt.
Arkansas hasn't been a football power since before integration. We've been in the top 5 exactly once since 1978. We lost badly that week.
We've had exactly one top 10 finish in the past 30 years.
In the 25 years we've been in the SEC we've finished ranked 5 times.
We've been ranked in the preseason 6 times since joining the SEC. 3 times we finished with a higher ranking, 3 times we finished unranked.
Right now, Bret Bielema has the same bowl record as Bobby Petrino, 2-1. That's the best at Arkansas.
This post was edited on 1/1/17 at 2:14 pm
Posted on 1/1/17 at 2:29 pm to Killean
I think that we will always need superior coaching to win here. Now more than ever. I think that beilama is an average coach, not a bad one, but that's not good enough here. We need a good coach. It can be done Killean. Oregon did it, Baylor did it, northwestern has done it to an extent, Tcu did it, OK lite did it. I could go on and on. Hell vandy started to win under Franklin so don't say it can't be done in the sec. Bottom line we dont have to settle for a 7 win ceiling football team even in the sec but we need an above average coach and I don't think beilama is that guy
This post was edited on 1/1/17 at 2:32 pm
Posted on 1/1/17 at 3:14 pm to Hawgnsincebirth55
Killean,
Don't cuss at me when I'm trying to have a reasonable discussion with you
You and I don't agree; it's not a big deal.
But I didn't post "shite" just because you disagree with my post.
55, I think you are spot on
Don't cuss at me when I'm trying to have a reasonable discussion with you
You and I don't agree; it's not a big deal.
But I didn't post "shite" just because you disagree with my post.
55, I think you are spot on
Posted on 1/2/17 at 1:02 am to Killean
quote:
don't think Arkansas is that good. I don't think college football is designed to let teams improve significantly. I think football as a sport will be on a slow decline. I would like a better coach, but I don't think it's a realistic option right now. Bielema might be able to improve, he's still fairly young. If you replace a coach without a plan, you hire Ed Orgeron. We don't want to hire a coach that was so shitty he was fired and replaced with Houston Nutt.
Two points here that are discussion worthy.
You bring up a good point about how college football isn't designed to let teams improve significantly. CFB is a resource intensive sport. I think it's no small secret that programs with the most resources (recruits, fans, money, tradition) field better programs than other programs. So given the amount of resources put into a program, we should have a coach who facilitates a win-loss record on par with the resources dumped into a program.
Just a few lists of rankings of certain things:
HC Salary: 13th nationally
All time wins: 21st
AP Ranking (all time): 21st
Historical Rankings: 19th
Win Percentage: 32nd
Stadium Capacity: 21st-25th (depending if you use 72k or 76k)
Athletic Budget: 16th
Bottom line is, you can see a trend there that we are around 20th overall when it comes to our rankings. On average, the 20th ranked team finishes around 9-4 every year (69%). So I think an average of a 9-4 record is a reasonable expectation for an average year in Arkansas (given some variation between seasons).
The other thing was regarding Ed Orgeron. Clearly he was a miserable failure as a HC at Ole Miss. But he went from the DL coach at USC to a HC position. He wasn't even a coordinator at the time. He was clearly unprepared for a HC job. People learn from their mistakes. Clearly, given his results at LSU, he has learned a little bit from his mistakes. That being said, I do think LSU's administration managed to luck out on the hire.
Page 1 of 2
Latest Arkansas News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News