Started By
Message
Dissecting Saban's and Spurrier's claims about UGA (and LSU) ....
Posted on 4/21/16 at 8:44 pm
Posted on 4/21/16 at 8:44 pm
This writer makes a good point ... but fails to mention that Saban said it first.
I'd excerpt, but I'm on my phone so I'm leaving it to someone else if you will:
https://www.al.com/alabamafootball/index.ssf/2016/04/the_secs_best_job_steve_spurri.html
I'd excerpt, but I'm on my phone so I'm leaving it to someone else if you will:
https://www.al.com/alabamafootball/index.ssf/2016/04/the_secs_best_job_steve_spurri.html
This post was edited on 4/21/16 at 8:54 pm
11
Posted on 4/21/16 at 8:49 pm to scrooster
Extremely whiney article.
The writer is rustled because Alabama wasn't mentioned?
It's kind of sad on the newspapers part to post that IMO.
The writer is rustled because Alabama wasn't mentioned?
It's kind of sad on the newspapers part to post that IMO.
Posted on 4/21/16 at 8:50 pm to scrooster
quote:
Discecting Saban's and Spurrier's claims about UGA (and LSU) ....
Quoted for posterity
Posted on 4/21/16 at 8:54 pm to scrooster
Maybe the HBC thinks the pressure to win Championships at Bama takes it down a notch.
Posted on 4/21/16 at 8:55 pm to shotcaller1
quote:
Quoted for posterity
Thanks
Big fingers - bad eyes - poor speller at times. My bad.
Posted on 4/21/16 at 9:02 pm to Lonnie Utah
quote:
Maybe the HBC thinks the pressure to win Championships at Bama takes it down a notch.
I dunno ... there's pressure at UGA, LSU, Florida, Tennessee, et al.
Both Saban and he are correct ... the recruiting should be much easier at LSU and UGA.
But all the pros at Bama outweigh the one con there ... that being the pressure to win championships. If anything, Saban has raised the standards there ... which is incredible.
I was not aware of UGA's failings in the facilities department.
Saban proved that LSU can, and should, win championships ... in a Sabanless western division.
This post was edited on 4/21/16 at 9:03 pm
Posted on 4/21/16 at 9:04 pm to scrooster
The guy is clearly just a Bama homer, all of his points are about Bamas success. It doesn't mean it's a better job or easier job to win at or should be.
That's what Saban and SOS were basically saying. Even though LSU and UGA haven't had the success of Bama, the job in their options , which I would consider pretty high on the knowledge about today's college football, is that these 2 programs have some clear advantages over other programs in the SEC. And the jobs are pretty coveted ones.
1. Loyalty to coaches almost to a fault
2. Pretty good pay
3. Good passionate fanbases
4. Recruiting, and I really think this is what they look at the most. With respect to Texas and Florida , high school football doesn't get much better than Ga and Louisianna in the south. The high school teams , outside of a couple, are just not the same in Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee, etc etc. and while other SEC schools have done a good job raiding these states, more Ga than La, If these programs start winning titles the chance of getting any player to leave that they want from their state , goes way down.
That's what Saban and SOS were basically saying. Even though LSU and UGA haven't had the success of Bama, the job in their options , which I would consider pretty high on the knowledge about today's college football, is that these 2 programs have some clear advantages over other programs in the SEC. And the jobs are pretty coveted ones.
1. Loyalty to coaches almost to a fault
2. Pretty good pay
3. Good passionate fanbases
4. Recruiting, and I really think this is what they look at the most. With respect to Texas and Florida , high school football doesn't get much better than Ga and Louisianna in the south. The high school teams , outside of a couple, are just not the same in Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee, etc etc. and while other SEC schools have done a good job raiding these states, more Ga than La, If these programs start winning titles the chance of getting any player to leave that they want from their state , goes way down.
Posted on 4/21/16 at 9:06 pm to scrooster
quote:
Thanks
Big fingers - bad eyes - poor speller at times. My bad
Maybe you should lose weight
Posted on 4/21/16 at 9:09 pm to scrooster
Well, I think Spurrier is correct. Alabama is a great job, obviously, but Georgia is the best job in the SEC IMO. LSU as a job is fairly comparable to Alabama relative to their states' similar population levels and talent saturation, but without an intrastate rival. I would still put LSU behind Florida, though. That's not meant as an insult to Alabama either. Fourth in the SEC would still be top ten nationally. Honestly none of this really matters all that much, as you can win championships at any of those schools with the right coach.
This post was edited on 4/21/16 at 9:44 pm
Posted on 4/21/16 at 9:23 pm to stevo1905
But ... UGA would not build Richt an indoor practice facility.
Have you ever toured Bama's facilities? I have ... they are incredible.
Does SCAR have better facilities than UGA? I was told recently that we do .... matter of fact, Spurrier said it not long ago.
Smart will get better facilities we must assume.
I've never toured LSU's football facilities .... only their baseball facilities which are now second to none. So I assume their football facilities are on par with anyone's ... except Bama's.
Have you ever toured Bama's facilities? I have ... they are incredible.
Does SCAR have better facilities than UGA? I was told recently that we do .... matter of fact, Spurrier said it not long ago.
Smart will get better facilities we must assume.
I've never toured LSU's football facilities .... only their baseball facilities which are now second to none. So I assume their football facilities are on par with anyone's ... except Bama's.
This post was edited on 4/21/16 at 9:27 pm
Posted on 4/21/16 at 9:39 pm to scrooster
UGA hasn't prioritized facilities upgrades to keep pace with other elite programs, but things like that are temporary administrative issues. Their football program just fell into stagnation under Richt. They're building a new practice facility now so it looks like they're taking steps to improve.
A lot of the facilities stuff is probably overblown anyway though. They help with recruiting, but the right kind of coach will recruit well anyway. It's not like the players are working out with rusted plates in leaking weight rooms with puddles in the floor. I'm primarily talking about the inherent advantages each school possesses as a whole.
A lot of the facilities stuff is probably overblown anyway though. They help with recruiting, but the right kind of coach will recruit well anyway. It's not like the players are working out with rusted plates in leaking weight rooms with puddles in the floor. I'm primarily talking about the inherent advantages each school possesses as a whole.
This post was edited on 4/21/16 at 9:46 pm
Posted on 4/21/16 at 10:27 pm to stevo1905
There's no doubt UGA and LSU have the best recruiting bases with no in state competition. That does give them an advantage, but does that alone make them the top jobs? I'm not so sure. The thing that makes Alabama such a great job is that there is an unmatched commitment from the university and AD to win at the highest level. New facilities needed? Done. Highest paid coach? Done. Want to pay a kings ransom to keep a strength coach? Say. No more. That's a coaches dream right there, no restrictions to your success. No fighting for new facilities, or begging for more money for assistants. Couple that with rich tradition, a fertile recruiting area right in the center of the South East and I think Bama has to be on par with any job in the country. Our trophy case certainly bears that out over time.
Posted on 4/21/16 at 11:41 pm to scrooster
Counter Arguement:
Local Sports writers who feel the need to write this article.
Local Sports writers who feel the need to write this article.
Posted on 4/21/16 at 11:49 pm to scrooster
Georgia is arguably the best job in the SEC because of its location, its facilities, and its expectations. They are in a recruiting hotbed, they have top flight facilities, and there isn't as much pressure on the head coach to win national championships. It's also MUCH easier to beat the arch-rival then at other schools in the SEC.
This post was edited on 4/21/16 at 11:50 pm
Posted on 4/22/16 at 1:15 am to scrooster
Scarbinsky's logic is porous. CFB has changed over the years.
First, scholarship limits were introduced in the mid 70's. This began to level the playing field among schools. Second, and especially in the SEC, a major transition took place from the early 70's to the early 80's, i.e., integration. In about a ten year period the SEC went from being an almost totally segregated football conference to being fully integrated. Since I'm most familiar with LSU I'll mention that in '72 we had our first black player (Mike Williams - CB). By '82, 15 of our 22 starters were black.
Scarbinsky should know this. So for him to write: "There's one school that's won more SEC titles than LSU and Georgia combined" is mostly irrelevant. A more pertinent era to compare "the best coaching jobs" would begin around 1980. The point to be made is not which school has won the most titles, but where could a given coach win most at.
The success Bama has seen since '09 is due more to Saban than to Bama (and likewise in the Bryant era). So consider the era from 1980 to Saban's first SEC title at Bama ('09). In that 29 year period Bama won 4 SEC's ('81, '89, '92, and '99) and one NC ('92). In that same period (SEC's / NC's):
UF (8/3)
LSU (5/2)
UGA (5/1)
UTenn (5/1)
AU (5/0)
He also takes some cheap shots at Spurrier (which generally speaking I have no problems since Steve didn't seem to have either). He writes: "Spurrier's been there and been undone by that team. He was victimized by the Crimson Tide long before Saban arrived." But consider, Spurrier's coaching record was 7-4 vs Bama and 3-1 head-to-head w/ Saban. Maybe Scarbinsky's got this backwards.
First, scholarship limits were introduced in the mid 70's. This began to level the playing field among schools. Second, and especially in the SEC, a major transition took place from the early 70's to the early 80's, i.e., integration. In about a ten year period the SEC went from being an almost totally segregated football conference to being fully integrated. Since I'm most familiar with LSU I'll mention that in '72 we had our first black player (Mike Williams - CB). By '82, 15 of our 22 starters were black.
Scarbinsky should know this. So for him to write: "There's one school that's won more SEC titles than LSU and Georgia combined" is mostly irrelevant. A more pertinent era to compare "the best coaching jobs" would begin around 1980. The point to be made is not which school has won the most titles, but where could a given coach win most at.
The success Bama has seen since '09 is due more to Saban than to Bama (and likewise in the Bryant era). So consider the era from 1980 to Saban's first SEC title at Bama ('09). In that 29 year period Bama won 4 SEC's ('81, '89, '92, and '99) and one NC ('92). In that same period (SEC's / NC's):
UF (8/3)
LSU (5/2)
UGA (5/1)
UTenn (5/1)
AU (5/0)
He also takes some cheap shots at Spurrier (which generally speaking I have no problems since Steve didn't seem to have either). He writes: "Spurrier's been there and been undone by that team. He was victimized by the Crimson Tide long before Saban arrived." But consider, Spurrier's coaching record was 7-4 vs Bama and 3-1 head-to-head w/ Saban. Maybe Scarbinsky's got this backwards.
Posted on 4/22/16 at 1:22 am to AlwysATgr
Spurrier lost to Dubose twice in the same year though.
Posted on 4/22/16 at 1:49 am to Korin
quote:
Spurrier lost to Dubose twice in the same year though.
So how is that relevant to which job is best?
Maybe Bama should have kept DuBose since the guy he beat 2X in '99 would blow-out Saban's teams in '00 and '01. IOW, DuBose >>> Spurrier >>> Saban - in Scarbinsky's world.
Posted on 4/22/16 at 2:30 am to AlwysATgr
quote:
The success Bama has seen since '09 is due more to Saban than to Bama (and likewise in the Bryant era).
Wait. Let me get this straight. Your thesis is that the coach and not the university name is responsible for success on the football field? Holy shite! What a revelation!
If not for Spurrier and Meyer, Florida wouldn't have been as good as they became. The same goes for Dye at Auburn, Fulmer at Tennessee, Dooley and Richt at Georgia, and Saban and Miles at LSU.
Coaches are, have been, and will always be the single most important factor when it comes to a football program's success or failure.
Posted on 4/22/16 at 2:50 am to RollTide1987
quote:
RollTide1987
Yep - but that's not what Scarbinsky is saying. He's suggesting that a bad coach like DuBose at Bama is better than a good coach like Spurrier at UF. I'm refuting his argument on his own terms.
quote:
Coaches are, have been, and will always be the single most important factor when it comes to a football program's success or failure.
Couldn't agree more.
Posted on 4/22/16 at 5:50 am to scrooster
Wait a minute. A rival coach said their facilities were better than ours? Crazy stuff. Did you expect him to say something different?
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News