Coaching Preferences

None of the above.

If I had to choose, I guess Venables, Golding, and Sumrall. Though Sumrall vs Golesh is mostly a toss up. I fully expect both to fail spectacularly.

Heupel and Venables are both solid coaches. But Heupel doesn't seem to know how to take the next step. The jury is still out on whether Venables does. I'd rather roll the dice than accept I'll never be great.

Drink is washed up. Similar logic to the above. I'll choose the guy who still has some potential over the guy who seems to have shown his ceiling.

Drink is a toolbox but there’s no way you can put Golding ahead of him before he’s even coached a game without all of LSU’s assistants driving the bus.

Heupel and Venables are a draw, so far. One offensive and one defensive minded HC who have both had playoff appearances but haven’t been a real threat to win it all.

I would say Golesh over Sumrall since he beat Florida last year at USF and Sumrall just comes off as a younger, louder Billy Napier.

Venables is the only one I would even consider wanting for my team if we were forced to take one from the list. Sumrall may turn out good we just dont know yet. I dont care enough about any of the others to even rank them, just complete middle of the road generic cfb coaches.

quote:

---

koreandawg

---

Welcome back. You have been gone a while after your embarrassment in Omaha

- Heupel or Venables

Heupel just can't seem to keep the train on the tracks, while Venables has shown that he can learn from mistakes and get better

- Drinkwitz or Golding

Under Golding, our recruiting has really taken a step forward. His performance in the playoff games and the way he navigated the program through that coaching change was better than I could actually hope for.

- Sumrall or Golesh

Sumrall has the potential to be a great coach.

I’m a homer but I wouldn’t take anyone on this list but venables.

quote:

---

- Heupel or Venables
- Drinkwitz or Golding
- Sumrall or Golesh

---

If these are my options, I'll just rank them all together, 1-6

1. Golesh
2. Sumrall
3. Venables
4. Golding
5. Heupel
6. Drinkwitz

Heupel and Drinkwitz are at the bottom because we already know what they are capable of. Some or all of the four above might turn out to be worse, but at least there is hope that they'll be better.

Heupel has five seasons under his belt yet he's gone 2-9 against opponents that finished ranked in the final AP Top 25 the past three seasons. Heupel is Gus Malzahn 2.0.... he came out the gate on fire his first 2 seasons and then tapered off. Color me unimpressed.

Drinkwitz is going into Year 7 and continues to struggle to win big games. He's 4-18 against Final AP Top 25 opponents overall and 0-7 the past two seasons. This guy is never going to compete for championships.

Venables is 4 seasons in. He looked as if he was going to fail, going just 3-11 against Final Top 25 teams his first 3 years. However, he saw his best season in Year 4... made the Playoff and finished 2-3 against the Final Top 25. This is why I have him ahead of Golding. In the end, he's had four seasons and his record is very mediocre... but at least there is upward trajectory unlike Heupel and Drinkwitz.

Golding frankly has zero experience as a HC. I think there's less to get excited about. He may turn out to be good but he has no record.

Sumrall has had the most success of any of these coaches, however he's never had to build up a program. He took over programs that were already built up and maintained them well. Jury is out that he can build up a program himself. He also has never been even a coordinator at a major program (sorry Kentucky). Beating up on 10-11 cupcakes at Tulane and Troy is not the same as coaching at a major SEC program that should be competing for championships.

Golesh is my #1 of this group because he took over a horrific situation at USF and turned that program around in short order. He spent 2 seasons as an OC at Tennessee and saw pretty good success while there. He's also the youngest of the group.

I have to admit I was completely wrong about them moving to the sec, I thought it would hurt their football program a lot but they've more than held their own and seem to be in great shape with recruiting.

quote:

---

Tennessee struggled to beat 2-10 Arkansas last year, barely escaping at home 34-31.

---

That's a total mischaracterization of that game lol. Tennessee was up 17 with less than 5 minutes to go and stopped trying. Arkansas scored garbage-time TDs
By the same logic, OU struggled to beat a terrible Auburn team last year and a terrible LSU team

quote:

---

It'd be one thing if this all was happening in Year 1 or 2 but we're talking about his fifth season as HC.

---

I mean, Venables has had a losing season half of his time at OU including a 6-7 campaign in Year 3. Heupel has never had one.

quote:

---

Did Venables not come into Neyland and beat the Vols last season??

---

Didnt Heupel beat OU in Oklahoma the year before by double digits?

quote:

---

I'm basing my opinions on actual results.

---

Actual results say Heupel has won more games, has a higher winning percentage, has had no losing seasons, finished ranked higher on average, and spent more weeks ranked in both the AP and CFP polls than Venables.

Heupel has had two top 10 finishes in the AP poll, and Venables has never had one. Pretty sure Heup also has a better record against the top 25 than BV.

Venables Best Team: 10-3 #13
Heupels Best Team: 11-2 #6

Venables Worst Team: 6-7 (Year 3)
Heupels Worst Team: 7-6 (Year 1)

The difficulty is that Heupel and Venables may be better coordinators than head coaches, while Drinkwitz has shown flashes but can be too much of a loose cannon. Still, all three have been relatively consistent, just not elite. Golding, Sumrall, and Golesh remain too untested in the league to evaluate with much confidence.

Because we're looking at a three-year window, the answer may depend on whether a program already has talent in place or needs a rebuild. I wouldn't hire Golding as a head coach solely based on his time at Alabama, but he was an elite recruiter and at least kept things steady after Kiffin left him with solid athletes.

So the choice is between three coaches who have shown they can win but lack strong overall track records, and three coaches we think could win and recruit in the SEC, though we really don't know yet.

I guess we also have to consider the condition each would leave the program in.

Interesting.

- Heupel or Venables
Heupel's offense might not be as productive year-to-year as teams devise counters (à la Gus Malzahn). Venables' volatility is more of a red flag. Respected his defenses at Clemson, though. This one is close. Both coaches on the same staff would be dangerous.

- Drinkwitz or Golding
Golding is unproven but he can potentially attract recruits and get out of the way. He's also from the Saban tree and knows what type of program needs to be built. Drink already feels like he's declining, but he's done good work building and managing the program as a whole. He's probably more suited for the NFL.

- Sumrall or Golesh
Like both of these guys. This one to me is more about program building. I just feel like Golesh has a greater risk of CEO-like responsibilities outpacing his experience. Sumrall seems like a safer cultural fit if he's somewhere he can build a staff. Could be a wildly different take in a year or two.