re: To put an end to the Chavis debate

What debate? Everyone knows you coonasses were jizzing all over your pictures of Chief and laughing at the rumors that he was interested in the A&M job. Then, when he accepted the job, you melted hard until Steele was announced as LSU DC, at which point you melted so hard you nearly went bankrupt. Slowly, you've deluded yourself into believing a newly invented history. There is no debate. This is all well-recorded in a great many anchored tiger dropping threads.

quote:

---

Muschamp and Pelini are elite defensive coordinators though

---

You realize them having success and winning a championship at LSU gave them that title as elite Coordinators? Pelini's only other DC job was at Oklahoma where they were 55th nationally. Muschamps coaching career included West Georgia, Eastern Kentucky, and Valdosta State before he joined LSU.

quote:

---

Chavis could be a better fit with A&M

---

Because nothing says "better fit" like a massive talent downgrade, incompetent assistants, an unproven head coach who has won fewer and fewer games every year since 2012, and a gimmicky high school offense that "he's excited to work with" even though they weren't even ranked in the top 25 in yardage or scoring last year

quote:

---

quote:
Chavis is the only one who hasnt been a head coach??


For Steele that isn't a bragging point.

---

TBH it is not exactly one for Muschamp or Pelini either.

Lol

What an idiot

quote:

---

To put an end to the Chavis debate
Why are y'all so insecure about this? No one outside of Louisiana thinks Kevin Steele is a better defensive coordinator than John Chavis. Just accept the truth.

---

The simple fact that LSU is sitting on the #1 recruiting class right now leads me to beleive Steele is better as of July 2015 You'd think the "Chavis" name alone would have LBs lined up to play for him huh? You'll learn the hard way

quote:

---

Because nothing says "better fit" like a massive talent downgrade, incompetent assistants, an unproven head coach who has won fewer and fewer games every year since 2012, and a gimmicky high school offense that "he's excited to work with" even though they weren't even ranked in the top 25 in yardage or scoring last year

---

You are being sarcastic but you shouldn't be. Chavis is a better fit for a team with younger talent (who needs teaching of fundamentals), especially when the head coach lacks the understanding of defense to provide those fundamentals (or even the right attitudes) himself. Chavis's simple schemes are better for defensive players that have been playing the equivalent of flag football all their lives, as they are basically learning from scratch.

If anything Steele (who so far has been mostly praised for bringing in talent) is maybe a poor fit for LSU (a team I am told again and again ALREADY has superior talent). Seems a better fit for LSU would be an elite coach to make use of the CURRENT talent, as yall already have a ton of it.

quote:

---

TBH it is not exactly one for Muschamp or Pelini either.

---

I think Pelini did a great job as a head coach. When Nebraska's program hit a new low in my lifetime in a few years all will agree.

quote:

---

"Look, both LSU and A&M COULD HAVE upgraded! It is not either/or, as Chavis could be a better fit with A&M and Steele might be a better fit with a current LSU."

---

I don't think any LSU fans think Steele > Chavis. That would be statistically incorrect.

I think we are just optimistic that our recruiting went from very good to elite pretty much overnight even though without Steele and O even having a year under their belt at LSU.