2
Started By
Message
Posted on 11/27/17 at 12:22 pm to STLhog
11-2 is "winning" at Florida, or anywhere else for that matter. When's the last time Arkansas had an 11 win season? How many times has it ever happened?
Now, a few years later, he's the coach of the year.
But according to these goons the guy is a bum.
Lol
Now, a few years later, he's the coach of the year.
But according to these goons the guy is a bum.
Lol
Posted on 11/27/17 at 12:24 pm to Woopigsooie20
I don’t think it’ll be Venables. It’s a sexy name but wrong side of the ball for us. I’m pretty sure it’ll be an Offensive sided coach so my guess is Norvell or Kiffin.
ETA: and we can’t go from a Bert to a Bernt
ETA: and we can’t go from a Bert to a Bernt
This post was edited on 11/27/17 at 12:27 pm
Posted on 11/27/17 at 12:24 pm to BoarEd
You're using one season to try and make a point when he's never had another year anywhere close to that. It was an outlier and you're using it for the entire basis of your argument. Come on man.
Posted on 11/27/17 at 12:25 pm to BoarEd
quote:
11-2 is "winning" at Florida, or anywhere else for that matter. When's the last time Arkansas had an 11 win season? How many times has it ever happened?
Now, a few years later, he's the coach of the year.
But according to these goons the guy is a bum.
Lol
In his SECOND YEAR. Where he lost in the SECG and then lost the sugar bowl.
Look where the trajectory went after that.
He failed got fired.
By your logic. Burt winning 8 games here was WINNING AT ARKANSAS.
Are you drunk still?
BTW he's 8-8 and USC in conference and a terrific 14-11 overall.
Posted on 11/27/17 at 12:25 pm to Woopigsooie20
quote:
It blows my mind that some people would lose their god damn minds if we hired Gus and the same people would be ok with us hiring Brent fricking Venables
He's played for, and been part of winning, more national titles than your boy Gus has THREE TIMES OVER.
Posted on 11/27/17 at 12:30 pm to BoarEd
I'll take the guy who's won a national title, played for another and has won the SEC west as a coach 50% of the fricking time he's been in the SEC over a career assistant with no SEC experience.Posted on 11/27/17 at 12:33 pm to Porcine Human
quote:
It's easier to scheme around talent defenciencies on offense than on defense. That's why we need an offensive guy.
Read that again, slowly. Isn't the conclusion backwards?
quote:
Yeah the programs that can recruit top 15/10 classes can be a defense focused team, but pretty much no one else can outside of Patterson.
And Patterson does it in the Big 12, where all anyone cares about is offense, ever. Given his success, I'd say having a nasty defense is preferable to a wide open offense. Didn't the famous philosopher Michael Tyson say, "Everyone has a plan, until they get punched in the mouth."?
quote:
It's easier for the offense to attack weak links (low talent players) in a defense than vice versa.
Right. Until you run into one of those programs that can recruit top 15/10 classes that can be a defense focused team. Then you're fooked.
Posted on 11/27/17 at 12:36 pm to troyt37
quote:
Read that again, slowly. Isn't the conclusion backwards?
uh, no?
quote:
And Patterson does it in the Big 12, where all anyone cares about is offense, ever. Given his success, I'd say having a nasty defense is preferable to a wide open offense. Didn't the famous philosopher Michael Tyson say, "Everyone has a plan, until they get punched in the mouth."?
He's an outlier. No one else can do what he does on defense with that talent.
quote:
Right. Until you run into one of those programs that can recruit top 15/10 classes that can be a defense focused team. Then you're fooked.
Well, yeah. We're usually fricked when we play programs that recruit well. I'm not sure how getting a defensive guy remedies that.
Posted on 11/27/17 at 12:37 pm to Woopigsooie20
Well I don't know what to tell ya, bud. It ain't gonna be Gus.
The anti Venables shite cracks me up. It reminds me of the morons who hated Brandon Allen just cuz.
"Hey, you know Brandon Allen is an NFL caliber QB, right? And we are lucky to have him because I clearly remember watching Razorback games and holding my breath every time our QB threw a pass hoping we'd actually catch the ball. It could be way, way, WAY worse."
"Yeah, but I still don't fricking like him."
Lol. That's how you guys sound.
The anti Venables shite cracks me up. It reminds me of the morons who hated Brandon Allen just cuz.
"Hey, you know Brandon Allen is an NFL caliber QB, right? And we are lucky to have him because I clearly remember watching Razorback games and holding my breath every time our QB threw a pass hoping we'd actually catch the ball. It could be way, way, WAY worse."
"Yeah, but I still don't fricking like him."
Lol. That's how you guys sound.
Posted on 11/27/17 at 12:41 pm to BoarEd
quote:
Well I don't know what to tell ya, bud. It ain't gonna be Gus.
The anti Venables shite cracks me up. It reminds me of the morons who hated Brandon Allen just cuz.
"Hey, you know Brandon Allen is an NFL caliber QB, right? And we are lucky to have him because I clearly remember watching Razorback games and holding my breath every time our QB threw a pass hoping we'd actually catch the ball. It could be way, way, WAY worse."
"Yeah, but I still don't fricking like him."
Lol. That's how you guys sound.
Dude, this entire thread has been explaining to you his downsides. I could get behind it if we hired him, but I wouldn't hold my breath.
Posted on 11/27/17 at 12:50 pm to Porcine Human
quote:
uh, no?
Uh, yeah it is. If it is easier the scheme around deficiencies (lack of talent) on the offensive side of the ball, then you need a coach that goes out and gets the defense he needs, and then scheme around the deficiencies on offense. Why is that not the logical conclusion?
quote:
He's an outlier. No one else can do what he does on defense with that talent.
Not really. This thread is about a guy who has put together killer defenses in two different conferences. I don't know about the recruiting advantages at Oklahoma while he was there, but Clemson hasn't set the world on fire.
Smart is starting out rather well.
Muschamp has won the East with two different teams now.
Michigan State has had a lot of success with a defensive coach.
Carroll at USC did what he did cheating, but also having kick-arse defenses, or don't we remember losing to them to the tune of about 135-7 in two years?
Posted on 11/27/17 at 12:55 pm to Porcine Human
I have not seen one single down side to Brent Venables.
I mean, I guess you could say because he hasn't been a head coach. That's a legitimate strike against him. But to me, and apparently people making these decisions, it's a risk worth taking. The guy is an outstanding coach.
Trying to fabricate some bullshite argument that we don't need a defensive coach doesn't count as a strike. It counts as a shitty argument. Because that's precisely what it is.
I mean, I guess you could say because he hasn't been a head coach. That's a legitimate strike against him. But to me, and apparently people making these decisions, it's a risk worth taking. The guy is an outstanding coach.
Trying to fabricate some bullshite argument that we don't need a defensive coach doesn't count as a strike. It counts as a shitty argument. Because that's precisely what it is.
Posted on 11/27/17 at 1:03 pm to BoarEd
Out of curiosity, do any of you guys know who got Venables his job at Clemson? Who pointed him out to Swinney?
Posted on 11/27/17 at 1:04 pm to troyt37
quote:
Uh, yeah it is. If it is easier the scheme around deficiencies (lack of talent) on the offensive side of the ball, then you need a coach that goes out and gets the defense he needs, and then scheme around the deficiencies on offense. Why is that not the logical conclusion?
You want a defensive coach... to scheme around deficiencies on offense? While it's easier to scheme around deficiencies on offense, it's still obviously not easy overall. It still takes a good coach to have an effective offense. My point is that trying to focus on defense with our talent level is basically futile.
quote:
Not really. This thread is about a guy who has put together killer defenses in two different conferences. I don't know about the recruiting advantages at Oklahoma while he was there, but Clemson hasn't set the world on fire.
Smart is starting out rather well.
Muschamp has won the East with two different teams now.
Michigan State has had a lot of success with a defensive coach.
Carroll at USC did what he did cheating, but also having kick-arse defenses, or don't we remember losing to them to the tune of about 135-7 in two years?
So in your example you include programs such as Oklahoma (who yes has a huge recruiting advantage over us), Clemson (who also has a huge recruiting advantage over us... they had the #9 class in 2015), Georgia, Florida, and USC. Come on man. Sure, Michigan State has had some good teams and defenses. The Big 10 isn't exactly known for its offense though.
This post was edited on 11/27/17 at 1:07 pm
Posted on 11/27/17 at 1:06 pm to BoarEd
quote:
Trying to fabricate some bullshite argument that we don't need a defensive coach doesn't count as a strike. It counts as a shitty argument. Because that's precisely what it is.
Yes it does. I don't understand why some of you are having such a hard time with this concept. It's widely accepted that it's far harder to field good defenses with lower talent levels than it is to field good offenses with lower talent levels. The dude has benefited from coaching at two schools with far more recruiting advantages than Arkansas. It'd be a huge mistake.
Posted on 11/27/17 at 1:14 pm to Porcine Human
Oklahoma has no inherent advantages over Arkansas. If anything Arkansas has a slightly better geographical and population density advantage.
Oklahoma has a perceptual advantage only. Something that is easily corrected for Arkansas with a single coaching hire.
Again, wrong.
Oklahoma has a perceptual advantage only. Something that is easily corrected for Arkansas with a single coaching hire.
Again, wrong.
Posted on 11/27/17 at 1:15 pm to BoarEd
quote:
Out of curiosity, do any of you guys know who got Venables his job at Clemson? Who pointed him out to Swinney?
I'd be more curious to know why he took a weird lateral move to Clemson and still has never been a head coach.
Even after winning the national title.
How is that not more of a red flag to you?
Posted on 11/27/17 at 1:16 pm to BoarEd
Wrong
Oklahoma has far more historical success than we do. That plays a huge factor into recruiting. If you think we can come close to recruiting on Oklahoma's level you're delusional.
Oklahoma has far more historical success than we do. That plays a huge factor into recruiting. If you think we can come close to recruiting on Oklahoma's level you're delusional.
Posted on 11/27/17 at 1:16 pm to STLhog
quote:
How is that not more of a red flag to you?
Because I know the story. As do our admins on the hill. They aren't concerned and neither am I.
Page 2 of 5
Latest Arkansas News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News