Started By
Message
re: Ranking by Athlon of Top Jobs
Posted on 2/28/13 at 11:17 am to GenesChin
Posted on 2/28/13 at 11:17 am to GenesChin
uh, Nebraska had success in the 60's,70's,80's, and 90's.
they have an unwavering fanbase, NO big brother in state, and play in the Big Ten.
talent pool is the only drawback to being clearly a better job than AU.
they have an unwavering fanbase, NO big brother in state, and play in the Big Ten.
talent pool is the only drawback to being clearly a better job than AU.
1
Posted on 2/28/13 at 11:43 am to therick711
1. Texas
2. Bama
3. USC
4. UF
5. Ohio St.
6. Notre Dame
7. Oklahoma
8. Michigan
9. LSU
10.Georgia
Also,
Auburn, A&M, Tennessee, Florida St., Clemson, Arkansas, Nebraska, Oregon, VT, South Carolina
round out the top 20 in no particular order.
2. Bama
3. USC
4. UF
5. Ohio St.
6. Notre Dame
7. Oklahoma
8. Michigan
9. LSU
10.Georgia
Also,
Auburn, A&M, Tennessee, Florida St., Clemson, Arkansas, Nebraska, Oregon, VT, South Carolina
round out the top 20 in no particular order.
Posted on 2/28/13 at 11:59 am to Gradual_Stroke
quote:
When has Texas ever been rolling? 1 championship in 40+ years isn't rolling. I'll hang up and listen.
They won 3 NCs in 7 years at one point. I'd say that's rolling.
This is not about history though, this is about potential given all the variables that surround a program. History can influence that because perception matters but its not everything or close to it for this discussion.
Texas, USCw and Florida are your top 3 in whatever order you want to put them and its really not even that close. After that you've got Ohio State probably at 4 then your bama, LSU, UGA, etc.
Posted on 2/28/13 at 12:01 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
then your bama, LSU, UGA,
One of these things is not like the other.
Posted on 2/28/13 at 12:03 pm to hsqb
Not really. The fundamentals of those 3 programs are pretty similar. Again, this is not about historical success. It's about how do you rank the potential for future success.
Posted on 2/28/13 at 12:05 pm to alabamabuckeye
quote:
The fact that Alabama is not #1 is laughable.
Posted on 2/28/13 at 12:06 pm to bgtiger
quote:
uh, Nebraska had success in the 60's,70's,80's, and 90's.
they have an unwavering fanbase, NO big brother in state, and play in the Big Ten.
talent pool is the only drawback to being clearly a better job than AU.
Auburn has a bigger budget and recruiting talent is better at AU. Our fan suppprt is probably on par. They may not have a big brother in state but that affects fan support and recruiting the most. We have similar soze fan bases and our recruiting is still better due to region.
There is a reason Nebraska is falling off the map. Talent is just not available which makes it a tough job
Posted on 2/28/13 at 12:12 pm to GenesChin
I'd agree. I would put Auburn around 10-12 and Nebraska 15ish.
Posted on 2/28/13 at 12:15 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
Not really. The fundamentals of those 3 programs are pretty similar. Again, this is not about historical success. It's about how do you rank the potential for future success
No, not really.
When a program can prove it can have consistent success every decade, every period of football history for 100 years...then there's something that separates that program.
They've proven they could do it at the beginning of the last century in the 20s and 30s...the middle of the last century in the 60s and 70s...in the end of the last century in the 90s...and the beginning of this century in the 2000s and 2010s...and currently ruling College Football.
Sorry, but that separates that program showing they have consistent success no matter the time period. You can't really put your finger on one thing, but there is something that makes them better than the other 2 programs mentioned.
This post was edited on 2/28/13 at 12:17 pm
Posted on 2/28/13 at 12:17 pm to hsqb
Wrong. That has more to do with making good coaching hires. Which is at least partially luck.
Bear Bryant would have won 6 NCs at LSU or UGA too.
Bear Bryant would have won 6 NCs at LSU or UGA too.
This post was edited on 2/28/13 at 12:18 pm
Posted on 2/28/13 at 12:18 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
Wrong. That has more to do with making good coaching hires. Which is at least partially luck.
Wrong. They can make good coaching hires because of the program's proven success, sustainability, national name brand throughout history and tradition.
Posted on 2/28/13 at 12:19 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
Bear Bryant would have won 6 NCs at LSU or UGA too.
No he wouldn't have.
Bama was already a National power when Coach Bryant took over. LSU & UGA, not so much.
This post was edited on 2/28/13 at 12:20 pm
Posted on 2/28/13 at 12:20 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
The fundamentals of those 3 programs are pretty similar.
I thought it was interesting when a gator poster made the argument for UGA, LSU, and tOSU as the best jobs in the country because they are the major schools in the US with the combination of: 1) incredible football talent within their home states 2) no significant in state competition and 3) the resources to dominate
Having said that, I still think #s one through three have to be Texas, Southern Cal, and Florida (in some order) because they are the flagship schools in the most talented football states in the country. Like I said before there's obviously a place for Alabama and Notre Dame in any top ten list of jobs because of their prestige and resources... but having to rely more on out of state recruiting is a disadvantage relative to other programs on that list.
This post was edited on 2/28/13 at 12:21 pm
Posted on 2/28/13 at 12:20 pm to hsqb
You don't know what you're talking about.
Posted on 2/28/13 at 12:21 pm to molsusports
Exactly.
Posted on 2/28/13 at 12:23 pm to hsqb
Sure that matters to a point but you also have to be in the right place at the right time. There is no divine right to success and what you're talking about is only one piece of the puzzle.
Posted on 2/28/13 at 12:24 pm to molsusports
quote:
they are the flagship schools
A&M is the flagship school in Texas. I'm not even trolling or bullshitting, this is a fact.
Posted on 2/28/13 at 12:26 pm to hsqb
quote:
Bama was already a National power when Coach Bryant took over. LSU & UGA, not so much.
That seems like a foolish thing to say.
LSU was probably the first Southern school to have a perfect season deserving of a national championship (in 1908). They also had some significant success in the 1930s (probably robbed again by the polls being located in Minnesota) and were unquestionably a national power in the 1950s and 60s.
Posted on 2/28/13 at 12:26 pm to Gradual_Stroke
Well that's not the perception, which is all that matters for this discussion.
Posted on 2/28/13 at 12:27 pm to molsusports
He has said a lot of foolish things in this thread.
Page 8 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News