Started By
Message
re: Was Saban truly better than Bear?
Posted on 5/23/26 at 8:56 pm to SlingingSnakeStabler
Posted on 5/23/26 at 8:56 pm to SlingingSnakeStabler
quote:
First of all, you are incorrect in your calculations.
Excluding the last two season of his LSU tenure, McClendon won 61% of his games at 34-21-2 over that 5 year stretch from '73-'77.
Incorrect.
9-3
5-5-1
4-7
6-4-1
8-4
32-23-2 = .581
1
Posted on 5/23/26 at 9:05 pm to SlingingSnakeStabler
quote:
Another 5 year period that does include his last 2 seasons, '75-'79, he still won 61% of his games even when fired midway through '79 at 33-21-1
Also incorrect.
4-7
6-4-1
8-4
8-4
7-5
33-24-1 = .579
Posted on 5/23/26 at 9:18 pm to SidewalkTiger
quote:
Incorrect.
9-3
5-5-1
4-7
6-4-1
8-4
32-23-2 = .581
You are correct. I relied on Stassen, should have known better, which adds extra wins to LSU's columns because of forfeits in '75 and '76 by Ms. State. I don't agree with forfeits and had forgetten Stassen did that.
Stassen's Skewed Stats
Still though, the 58% winning percentage while being battered from every direction and having no support is still better than the total combined % of all coaches after McClendon until Saban arrived, even with Arnsparger's 75% calculated in.
And concentrating on his last five seasons or last 2 seasons is sort of disingenuous, in comparison to other coaches whose whole career at LSU is being considered, when he has an overall winning % of 70% and they refused to give him any slack at all.
This post was edited on 5/23/26 at 10:22 pm
Posted on 5/23/26 at 9:19 pm to SidewalkTiger
quote:
Also incorrect.
4-7
6-4-1
8-4
8-4
7-5
33-24-1 = .579
Again, Stassen, which was a mistake to use.
Posted on 5/23/26 at 9:22 pm to captdalton
quote:
No, they are just stupid in general.
That is the most indisputable part of the conversation. Everyone knows that.Posted on 5/23/26 at 10:35 pm to SlingingSnakeStabler
quote:
Still though, the 58% winning percentage while being battered from every direction and having no support is still better than the total combined % of all coaches after McClendon until Saban arrived, even with Arnsparger's 75% calculated in.
Winning 58% of your games isn't getting it done, regardless of whether you screw up the following hires or not. We're also leaving out the fact that the man actually hired to replace McClendon never coached a game at LSU due to dying in a plane crash, so LSU had to make an emergency hire in Stovall.
And your statement is only true because Curley Hallman, in particular, was so bad. If you remove him, the coaches between McClendon and Saban are 107-71, .601, which is still better than what McClendon was accomplishing.
quote:
And concentrating on his last five seasons or last 2 seasons is sort of disingenuous, in comparison to other coaches whose whole career at LSU is being considered
He did most of his winning during the early part of his career. We're discussing whether his firing was warranted or not, that comes down to "what have you done for me lately".
Ed Orgeron is a .718 coach at LSU and won a natty, but he got fired because he went 11-11 in his final two seasons and he deserved it. Why would you keep someone who is trending down?
Posted on 5/24/26 at 12:09 am to captdalton
We sucked in the 70's...he should have kicked our arse like he did.
Posted on 5/24/26 at 1:59 am to SidewalkTiger
quote:
Winning 58% of your games isn't getting it done, regardless of whether you screw up the following hires or not. We're also leaving out the fact that the man actually hired to replace McClendon never coached a game at LSU due to dying in a plane crash, so LSU had to make an emergency hire in Stovall.
And your statement is only true because Curley Hallman, in particular, was so bad. If you remove him, the coaches between McClendon and Saban are 107-71, .601, which is still better than what McClendon was accomplishing.
Hallman, Mike Stovall, DiNardo, and Archer all had worse win %'s and less wins than McClendon and much less distinguished careers than he had.
These 6 coaches, including interim Hal Hunter, combined for a total win/loss record of 124-99-6 and a win % of 55.46% over a period of 20 years.
Good 'ole McClendon did better than all of them with more wins in a shorter period of time and a higher winning percentage by a very large amount, at 70%.
Yet, a clinically retarded man who once played for LSU and later turned to a life of crime and villainy influenced the LSU admin to such an extent, over an extended period of time, as to have Cholly Mac fired because things weren't exactly as they were back in the '50's when LSU was somebody for a short period of time.
quote:
He did most of his winning during the early part of his career. We're discussing whether his firing was warranted or not, that comes down to "what have you done for me lately".
He won 16 games the last two full seasons of his career, which was mostly above average in the full scope of LSU's previous historical record.
quote:
Ed Orgeron is a .718 coach at LSU and won a natty, but he got fired because he went 11-11 in his final two seasons and he deserved it. Why would you keep someone who is trending down?
As stated above McClendon went 16-8 during his last two full seasons. That's substantially better than 11-11.
As for Orgeron, he started smoking crack during his last years at LSU, started running around campus with no shirt on while tweaking his nipples while passing by co-eds, hanging out in every coonass dive within a 50 mile radius of Baton Rouge and performing weird coonass sexual rituals on every skank at the bar, hired underage children of prostitutes to coach practices while he was away getting drunk, etc...
It's not quite the same as McClendon's situation was.
Posted on 5/24/26 at 2:11 am to SlingingSnakeStabler
quote:
Hallman, Mike Stovall, DiNardo, and Archer all had worse win %'s and less wins than McClendon and much less distinguished careers than he had.
I've addressed that. He won a lot more at the beginning of his tenure, not so much toward the end.
No one reasonable is keeping a guy who is losing now because he won a lot of games 17 years ago. Perhaps that's why you're confused over the reasoning behind his firing.
quote:
As stated above McClendon went 16-8 during his last two full seasons. That's substantially better than 11-11.
Sure. That's why it took 5-7 years for him to get fired vs just the two for Orgeron.
quote:
As for Orgeron, he started smoking crack during his last years at LSU, started running around campus with no shirt on while tweaking his nipples while passing by co-eds, hanging out in every coonass dive within a 50 mile radius of Baton Rouge and performing weird coonass sexual rituals on every skank at the bar, hired underage children of prostitutes to coach practices while he was away getting drunk, etc...
Alabama fans have weird fantasies.
This post was edited on 5/24/26 at 2:12 am
Posted on 5/24/26 at 2:32 am to SidewalkTiger
quote:
Alabama fans have weird fantasies.
Here he is jogging shirtless, which isn't so bad. But, what he mumbled and the things he supposedly did with his hands while passing by good looking women is what they begged him to stop doing. Weird.
quote:
I've addressed that. He won a lot more at the beginning of his tenure, not so much toward the end.
No one reasonable is keeping a guy who is losing now because he won a lot of games 17 years ago. Perhaps that's why you're confused over the reasoning behind his firing.
But he won 16 games his last two full seasons, which is great for a team like LSU. The mistake they made was letting a complete lunatic convince them that they should be beating Alabama regularly in the 70's, needed to play more "modern" football, and needed to cheat more like other programs were supposedly doing.
quote:
Sure. That's why it took 5-7 years for him to get fired vs just the two for Orgeron.
McClendon had a couple of uncharacteristcly poor seasons in '74 and '75, and the wolves started to feast. They actually thought they were Alabama. I mean, that is one of the main reasons for gearing up the machine used to crush McClendon, because they weren't Alabama like. Alabama hardly even knew they existed, yet their whole program was in turmoil over them.
Then, as now, the people who ran LSU were scatter-brained lightweights.
Posted on 5/24/26 at 2:39 am to SlingingSnakeStabler
quote:
But he won 16 games his last two full seasons
15
Not sure why you have such a problem with a dude, who wasn't even winning 60% of his games, getting fired, but it's a weird hill to die on.
This post was edited on 5/24/26 at 2:41 am
Posted on 5/24/26 at 2:58 am to SidewalkTiger
quote:
Not sure why you have such a problem with a dude, who wasn't even winning 60% of his games, getting fired, but it's a weird hill to die on.
But he won 70% of his games. That you decide to arbitrarily pick a random amount of years to start calculating his win/loss record is of little concern in this conversation.
During '69 and '70, Bear Bryant went 12-10-1 with a 54% winning percentage. It's a good thing a retard former player didn't form a vigilante committee to run him out of town. Good for Alabama, that is.
Posted on 5/24/26 at 3:17 am to SlingingSnakeStabler
quote:
But he won 70% of his games. That you decide to arbitrarily pick a random amount of years to start calculating his win/loss record is of little concern in this conversation.
Winning a lot of games at the beginning of the tenure doesn't mean anything when you're losing a lot at the end of it.
Brian Kelly ran into that problem last year, coaches have ran into it since the inception of college football.
Red Drew won 64% of his games at Bama, you guys fired him for the abortion that was Ears Whitworth. Why? Because Drew started trending down.
quote:
During '69 and '70, Bear Bryant went 12-10-1 with a 54% winning percentage. It's a good thing a retard former player didn't form a vigilante committee to run him out of town. Good for Alabama, that is.
Sure, he had a couple of down years, then immediately went 11-1 the following season. Charlie wasn't doing that; he was struggling year after year.
McClendon had a two year stretch where he went 9-12-1, he didn't get fired for that. He followed it with a 6-4-1 season, he didn't get fired for that either. In fact, he coached three more seasons at LSU.
Posted on 5/24/26 at 4:41 am to SidewalkTiger
quote:
Winning a lot of games at the beginning of the tenure doesn't mean anything when you're losing a lot at the end of it.
Brian Kelly ran into that problem last year, coaches have ran into it since the inception of college football.
But McClendon won, as has been said over and over, 8 games during each of his succesive last 2 full seasons. Not exactly on a horrible downsroke, was he? Again, during that time period, 8 wins was damn good. Not Alabama good though, as most teams weren't, and that was LSU's Achilles Heel, for some unknown reason. Why the frick compare yourself to Alabama; that's idiotic.
quote:
Red Drew won 64% of his games at Bama, you guys fired him for the abortion that was Ears Whitworth. Why? Because Drew started trending down.
Red Drew wasn't fired; he stepped down. He also continued at the University of Alabama as the head Track and Field coach for the next 10 years and as the Associate Professor of Physical Education until his retirement in '64.
He grew weary of coaching football.
quote:
Sure, he had a couple of down years, then immediately went 11-1 the following season. Charlie wasn't doing that; he was struggling year after year.
Not really. After the attacks from within and the complete stonewalling of him and his assistants by the admin after the 2 bad years, unlike Bryant's experience after 2 bad years, McClendon still went 6-4-1, 8-4-0, and 8-4-0 until he was fired the next season midway through after, you guessed it, losing to Bama.
The circus that LSU always been turned vicious and they turned on one of their own icons of coaching like rabid and nonsensical nutria rats feasting on cattails in a gluttonous frenzy.
If Bryant had to face down a psychotic former Heisman winner and his loud mouth in cahoots with the AD, the Board of Superivisors, and other assored admin, Bryant may have not done as good as he did after faltering.
quote:
McClendon had a two year stretch where he went 9-12-1, he didn't get fired for that. He followed it with a 6-4-1 season, he didn't get fired for that either. In fact, he coached three more seasons at LSU.
Again, the seasons of '74 and '75, when McClendon went 9-12-1, is when the scavengers inside the gates came for him. Even with their voracious and craven efforts to oust him and extreme and horrendous purposeful distractions, he pulled himself up and finished out with his head up and with a pretty damn good last two full seasons.
He was a great coach and that is what great coaches do, against all odds.
This post was edited on 5/24/26 at 5:38 am
Posted on 5/24/26 at 6:17 am to SlingingSnakeStabler
I applaud you for taking a common sense approach to this. You are clearly an erudite man, yet you explain things in a way that even most simpletons can digest. Most but not all.
Clearly Cholly was one of LSU’s better coaches. His overall winning percentage, despite being internally sabotaged, is higher than LSU’s all-time winning percentage.
You know what they say. There are lies, damn lies, and statistics. If you cherry pick and manipulate statistics you can support any argument in the world.
For example, if you exclude Nick Saban’s 5 best seasons at LSU, he has a winning percentage of 0%. Yes, if you exclude Nick Saban’s 5 best seasons, he had zero wins. And if you exclude his 5 worst seasons at LSU he had zero wins and a .000 winning percentage. So clearly he was LSU’s worst coach. His .000 winning percentage is proof. That is the type of disingenuous and dishonest argument you often find here. But after all, it can be expected as this, as we are often reminded, is a LSU site.
Clearly Cholly was one of LSU’s better coaches. His overall winning percentage, despite being internally sabotaged, is higher than LSU’s all-time winning percentage.
You know what they say. There are lies, damn lies, and statistics. If you cherry pick and manipulate statistics you can support any argument in the world.
For example, if you exclude Nick Saban’s 5 best seasons at LSU, he has a winning percentage of 0%. Yes, if you exclude Nick Saban’s 5 best seasons, he had zero wins. And if you exclude his 5 worst seasons at LSU he had zero wins and a .000 winning percentage. So clearly he was LSU’s worst coach. His .000 winning percentage is proof. That is the type of disingenuous and dishonest argument you often find here. But after all, it can be expected as this, as we are often reminded, is a LSU site.
This post was edited on 5/24/26 at 6:21 am
Posted on 5/24/26 at 7:04 am to MizzouTrue
quote:
Bear Bryant did win in 1978. It was a split title; something that hardly existed in Saban’s time
Funny enough…Saban’s first title was split with USC in 2003
Posted on 5/24/26 at 7:17 am to jchamil
Oh you have done it now. There are going to be some upset people that you pointed that out. Hopefully they don’t try to sexually assault you as that seems to be their natural response when they are angry. Or happy. Or just feeling kind of meh.
Posted on 5/24/26 at 8:01 am to VFL67
Are you stupid
Posted on 5/24/26 at 8:03 am to SlingingSnakeStabler
But I wasnt Living then No pain
Page 5 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News