Search results

I’ll make it even easier. If you want to go back to the first season after WW2, 6 coaches have won a national champion after a losing record in their first 2 seasons. - Jordan with Auburn in 1957 - Dietzel with LSU in 1958 - Schwartzwalder with Syracuse in 1959 - McKay with USC in 1962 (won...

They won more games than they lost for one

I hope so man.

To be fair, I said in my OP that one of the ways “out” is that the new world of CFB makes this data set irrelevant. I think there is a strong possibility of this, and honestly might be our only hope. A lot of people have brought up Sark or Norvell. If they win a champion they would be considered...

Granted, the n is not large. But we are talking about 25 years of outcomes here across 2 championship structures. It’s held true for a quarter century and through all the changes of the post-poll era. It’s not a perfect sample size but I don’t think you can scoff at it either

I think the slow build, impatient argument is a different argument than the one this data set is making. The premise of this chart is set in the title: Mario will have to be a statistical outlier to win big at Miami. That’s it. Every coach that’s won since 1998 has had the average 2 year record...

Those coaches had to leave to win, though. I’m not sure why it’s not working for Mario here but it’s not. I don’t think that’s debatable right now. What this question asks is will Mario be able to break a 25 year trend OR is this data completely irrelevant due to the new paradigm.

I think that’s what my post is trying to recast. I think the admin did hire him to win championships, but he is not on that trajectory. He’s also being paid as a championship coach with the resources to win…but he’s not. You and I know **** well he’s getting an extension the moment he wins 10...

I was one of those people tbh. For whatever reason he has not duplicated that here.

This is the central thesis of my post. Mario is performing below average period, let alone a championship level coach. The issue here is the investment level is that of a championship caliber coach and my doomsday fear is this is the final chip push. If Mario doesn’t work out, I don’t see this...

I don’t know how he would define it, but I would guess he would want a majority of his two deep to be recruited guys playing at a level consistent or above their rankings. My opinion that’s measured mostly by draft picks and raw production. So getting Mauignoa to start 3 years at tackle...

Well Trumpy, I have the same question. But the bad news is I think that may be close to maxing out for us. Time will tell

I think the portal issues are easy to explain: he has a recruit and develop philosophy. I’ve said before that on a scale of Dabo to Norvell he is closer to Dabo. He wants his own guys, culture, habits, etc. and he's banking on his development of high end talent in the long run. I think he views...

It’s a good call out. I try to look at outcomes based on current circumstances. For instance I didn’t look at Urbans metrics at Utah. But it’s a fair question. I am sure there are a lot of false positives out there. How many guys had a great start, never won a title, and then self destructed?

We will see

Just to be clear this does nothing on the topic of sustainability 😂

Here is my concern - and it’s shared throughout the post. I think there is a growing fear and realization that this is the the last bet for our admin. I don’t think there is life after Mario to the extent of this level of financial support. If the data show that Mario is not going to win a title...

We are one of the most underperforming programs in the country relative to strength of schedule and class composite. There is no doubt about that (or shouldn’t be).

Truth be told is we are barely mediocre. With this budget. And this talent.

Find me one and I’ll be happy to add it