RIP Coach Leach

[ScoJacks]

Am I crazy to think the win% qualifier isn’t necessary? In what scenario are they saying sorry coach but your 30% win% means you can’t enter. Why would that coach even be up for consideration?

There should be room for innovators, program builders, etc that are qualified to get in based on overall impact. Would someone even be considered an innovator if their “innovation” caused them to lose all the time? Kind of seems self explanatory.

I agree. Paul Johnson's win% is 59% at the FBS level, does FCS count for him?

I mean even Cristobal. I believe he has a long career ahead of him, but he currently stands at .551. If you just looked at FIU at face value, sub .400, you’d think it wasn’t a great tenure. But turning that program around made a huge impact. Winning multiple PAC12 championships at Oregon. Rebuilding Miami, going to national championship….I think eventually he’ll get over 59.5, but does it mean he’s a bad coach now because he rebuilt multiple programs?

Cristobal hasn’t won chit or innovated chit. Copying Saban’s 2012 program manual without the same results ≠ HOF levels of innovation.

I understand that. My point was his win% is lower because he’s taken on 3 rebuilds

Oregon and Miami ain’t exactly Texas Tech Wazzu and Miss St. The Cristobrew is some strong Kool-Aid

You’re getting a little excited bud. I was purely using our coach as an example. I do think he’s a good coach but I also believe Cristobal has a LONG way to go to be a hall of famer. My criticism remains the win% qualifier is pointless. If the % is too low that coach would not be a candidate anyways. If coaches like Leach and Schnellenberger are even in the conversation with their “low” win%, then in my mind they should already be in. Their impact on the game has more significance than their win%. Schnellenberger **** near built two programs from scratch, and his win% took a hit during the process. That’s my point. Leach was a main driver of this new offense with a giant coaching tree which is more significant than his win%. That’s my point.

I can only go off the examples you’re offering. Rebuild + Mario is hilarious for 2/3 of his gigs.

Oregon was 4-8 when they brought him in. Miami was going in the wrong direction hard. One player drafted in the 7th round and a joke of program to national championship appearance and multiple first rounders with more on the way. It’s not like he walked into winning teams like Kirby at Georgia.

Oregon was 7-5. Stop talking to me.

Oregon was 4-8 under Helfrich. Who was the Co-offensive coordinator the following year? You can stop replying to me whenever you want.

 

[Ironmanfootball]

Am I crazy to think the win% qualifier isn’t necessary? In what scenario are they saying sorry coach but your 30% win% means you can’t enter. Why would that coach even be up for consideration?

There should be room for innovators, program builders, etc that are qualified to get in based on overall impact. Would someone even be considered an innovator if their “innovation” caused them to lose all the time? Kind of seems self explanatory.

I agree. Paul Johnson's win% is 59% at the FBS level, does FCS count for him?

I mean even Cristobal. I believe he has a long career ahead of him, but he currently stands at .551. If you just looked at FIU at face value, sub .400, you’d think it wasn’t a great tenure. But turning that program around made a huge impact. Winning multiple PAC12 championships at Oregon. Rebuilding Miami, going to national championship….I think eventually he’ll get over 59.5, but does it mean he’s a bad coach now because he rebuilt multiple programs?

Cristobal hasn’t won chit or innovated chit. Copying Saban’s 2012 program manual without the same results ≠ HOF levels of innovation.

I understand that. My point was his win% is lower because he’s taken on 3 rebuilds

Oregon and Miami ain’t exactly Texas Tech Wazzu and Miss St. The Cristobrew is some strong Kool-Aid

You’re getting a little excited bud. I was purely using our coach as an example. I do think he’s a good coach but I also believe Cristobal has a LONG way to go to be a hall of famer. My criticism remains the win% qualifier is pointless. If the % is too low that coach would not be a candidate anyways. If coaches like Leach and Schnellenberger are even in the conversation with their “low” win%, then in my mind they should already be in. Their impact on the game has more significance than their win%. Schnellenberger **** near built two programs from scratch, and his win% took a hit during the process. That’s my point. Leach was a main driver of this new offense with a giant coaching tree which is more significant than his win%. That’s my point.

I can only go off the examples you’re offering. Rebuild + Mario is hilarious for 2/3 of his gigs.

Oregon was 4-8 when they brought him in. Miami was going in the wrong direction hard. One player drafted in the 7th round and a joke of program to national championship appearance and multiple first rounders with more on the way. It’s not like he walked into winning teams like Kirby at Georgia.

Oregon was 7-5. Stop talking to me.

Oregon was 4-8 under Helfrich. Who was the Co-offensive coordinator the following year? You can stop replying to me whenever you want.

Co-OC LOL. just stop.

 

[RVACane]

Oregon was 4-8 under Helfrich. Who was the Co-offensive coordinator the following year? You can stop replying to me whenever you want.

@Andrew please look at the quoting. It’s gone back to how it worked 10 years ago.

 

[Baba Yaga]

@Andrew please look at the quoting. It’s gone back to how it worked 10 years ago.

 

[RVACane]

He’s on it.

 

[TheOriginalCane]

Oregon was 7-5. Stop talking to me.

Mario was hired as the OC in late 2016 after Oregon went 4-8. Mario was promoted to head coach during the 2017 season when Taggart left for F$U.

 

[Ironmanfootball]

Oregon was 7-5. Stop talking to me.

Mario was hired as the OC in late 2016 after Oregon went 4-8. Mario was promoted to head coach during the 2017 season when Taggart left for F$U.

And Taggart went 7-5. Helfrich went 4-8. Mario was “co-OC” which is a cute way to pay someone more money. Marcus Arroyo called plays.

 

[TheOriginalCane]

And Taggart went 7-5. Helfrich went 4-8. Mario was “co-OC” which is a cute way to pay someone more money. Marcus Arroyo called plays.

And Mario also began the process of bringing in the recruits necessary to turn things around. Which means that he didn't begin his first year as a head coach struggling to fill his first recruiting class, as many first-year head coaches do.

If you think that Mario didn't turn things around at Oregon because he spent a year as OC "not contributing" to the 3-win improvement, then that's up to you.

 

[Ironmanfootball]

And Mario also began the process of bringing in the recruits necessary to turn things around. Which means that he didn't begin his first year as a head coach struggling to fill his first recruiting class, as many first-year head coaches do.

If you think that Mario didn't turn things around at Oregon because he spent a year as OC "not contributing" to the 3-win improvement, then that's up to you.

That's not what I said, what was said and I counter is that Oregon was a rebuild with Phil Knight's money, a beautiful field house and IPF, huge fanbase, and 3 years removed from the natty with a future NFL starting QB already on the roster.

 

[TheOriginalCane]

That's not what I said, what was said and I counter is that Oregon was a rebuild with Phil Knight's money, a beautiful field house and IPF, huge fanbase, and 3 years removed from the natty with a future NFL starting QB already on the roster.

It was a roster and W-L rebuild. Now you are talking about facilities, which I never brought up.

Did F$U just fund a massive stadium renovation? Yes. And F$U is still a rebuild right now (or whenever they fire Prison Mike Norvell).

As for the "future NFL starting QB already on the roster", I'd point out that Justin Herbert was not a highly-ranked recruit and only played in the year before Taggart-Cristobal-Arroyo because Oregon went from Top 25 to a 2-3 record under the original starting QB (and then went 2-5 with Herbert as the starter).

At a certain point, we have to give Taggart-Cristobal-Arroyo credit for development and also for recruiting guys like Penei Sewell (which most definitely happened when Mario was the head coach). WHEN MARIO TOOK THE OC JOB (which became the HC job), Oregon was a W-L rebuild at 4-8. I'm not trying to get into "how much credit Mario gets for every detail", I'm talking about "when Mario took the job, he wasn't exactly walking into a 10 or 12 win expectation". So, the NCAA HoF rules should reflect that there are certain coaches who walk into adverse situations and turn things around, and these guys might not exactly win 60% of all their games.

Here's a blast from the past, please note a particular recruit rated higher than Justin Herbert at the time...

 

[BigDikDaddyFromCincinnati]

Am I crazy to think the win% qualifier isn’t necessary? In what scenario are they saying sorry coach but your 30% win% means you can’t enter. Why would that coach even be up for consideration?

There should be room for innovators, program builders, etc that are qualified to get in based on overall impact. Would someone even be considered an innovator if their “innovation” caused them to lose all the time? Kind of seems self explanatory.

I agree. Paul Johnson's win% is 59% at the FBS level, does FCS count for him?

I mean even Cristobal. I believe he has a long career ahead of him, but he currently stands at .551. If you just looked at FIU at face value, sub .400, you’d think it wasn’t a great tenure. But turning that program around made a huge impact. Winning multiple PAC12 championships at Oregon. Rebuilding Miami, going to national championship….I think eventually he’ll get over 59.5, but does it mean he’s a bad coach now because he rebuilt multiple programs?

Cristobal hasn’t won chit or innovated chit. Copying Saban’s 2012 program manual without the same results ≠ HOF levels of innovation.

I understand that. My point was his win% is lower because he’s taken on 3 rebuilds

Oregon and Miami ain’t exactly Texas Tech Wazzu and Miss St. The Cristobrew is some strong Kool-Aid

Not as strong as that hyperbolic chamber you’re living in.

 

[simplycanes]

@Andrew please look at the quoting. It’s gone back to how it worked 10 years ago.

The only thing of value accomplished by the entire exchange.

 

[simplycanes]

It was a roster and W-L rebuild. Now you are talking about facilities, which I never brought up.

Did F$U just fund a massive stadium renovation? Yes. And F$U is still a rebuild right now (or whenever they fire Prison Mike Norvell).

As for the "future NFL starting QB already on the roster", I'd point out that Justin Herbert was not a highly-ranked recruit and only played in the year before Taggart-Cristobal-Arroyo because Oregon went from Top 25 to a 2-3 record under the original starting QB (and then went 2-5 with Herbert as the starter).

At a certain point, we have to give Taggart-Cristobal-Arroyo credit for development and also for recruiting guys like Penei Sewell (which most definitely happened when Mario was the head coach). WHEN MARIO TOOK THE OC JOB (which became the HC job), Oregon was a W-L rebuild at 4-8. I'm not trying to get into "how much credit Mario gets for every detail", I'm talking about "when Mario took the job, he wasn't exactly walking into a 10 or 12 win expectation". So, the NCAA HoF rules should reflect that there are certain coaches who walk into adverse situations and turn things around, and these guys might not exactly win 60% of all their games.

Here's a blast from the past, please note a particular recruit rated higher than Justin Herbert at the time...


View attachment 363841

Wow, look how young Cam McCormick is there.

 

[Ironmanfootball]

So, the NCAA HoF rules should reflect that there are certain coaches who walk into adverse situations and turn things around, and these guys might not exactly win 60% of all their games.

As HC, he walked into a program with a winning record and every advantage afforded to it. I think he's done a great job at Miami in creating that infrastructure that made Oregon an easy job. So kudos to him. But Miami also had a winning record the year before he took over.