Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!
Inbox
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 2  Next >

College Football's Top 25 jobs per FoxSports

Avatar

Posted: 8/19/2014 9:02 AM

College Football's Top 25 jobs per FoxSports 


Link to article.  
  1. Florida
  2. Texas
  3. Georgia
  4. USC
  5. Bama
  6. tOSU
  7. LSU
  8. aTm
  9. Oregon
  10. Oklahoma
  11. Michigan
  12. FSU
  13. Tennessee
  14. Penn State
  15. Auburn
  16. UCLA
  17. Miami, FL
  18. Washington
  19. Wisconsin
  20. USCe
  21. Notre Dame
  22. Arkansas
  23. Nebraska
  24. Clemson
  25. UNC
My take:
  • USC should be #1 by a mile.  California has more recruits than Florida and the next best schools in California aren't anywhere close to FSU and Miami.  
  • Georgia is ranked too high.  They give great reasons on paper, but in reality they won a NC, with Herschel Walker, almost 40 years ago and they claim one other.  The problem is that there aren't enough recruits in Georgia to make up for the competition instate (GaTech) and in surrounding states (UF #1, FSU #12, TN #13, USCe #20, Clemson #24).  
  • Tennessee is too high on the list.  They have a fantastic history but their success always necessitated the use of out-of-state recruits.  The relative rise of schools located in surrounding states has made that much more difficult and Tennessee has suffered as a consequence.  
My Top 10 would be:
  1. USC - best combination of recruiting situation and resources/support anywhere.  If you look at Stewart Mandel's "Kings" on a map USC is the only one located West of a N-S line running roughly through Lincoln, Norman, and Austin.  That makes them the local "major" school for an enormous area that includes a lot of talent.  
  2. Texas - although the aTm move to the SEC could bring this into question if aTm starts routinely out-recruiting them.  
  3. Ohio State - I have the Buckeyes ahead of the Gators because the in-state competition from the Seminoles and Hurricanes is a lot more serious than anything Ohio State has to deal with.  Florida has more football talent than Ohio, but not enough to make up for the difference in level of competition.  
  4. Florida - They are the best supported school in the state of Florida and Florida does have a lot of recruits, just not as many as California and Texas.  
  5. Bama - They get the nod here because they are the historically best program in the South but if it were as easy as Saban makes it look they wouldn't have spent a decade-plus in the wilderness.  
  6. aTm - Being the SEC-SEC-SEC team in Texas could lift the Aggies over the Horns in time.  
  7. LSU - If a guy who eats grass and does as many crazy/nonsensical things as Les Miles can do this well at LSU then it has to be a pretty good job.  
  8. Oregon - Money is the reason they are this high, lack of local recruits and a strong fanbase are the reasons they are this low.  
  9. Michigan - I have my doubts due to recruiting issues and the general and continuing decline of the State and particularly Detroit but they still have the winningest record and largest stadium.  
  10. Oklahoma - The state of Oklahoma doesn't have anywhere near enough high-end talent to get the Sooners into the top-10, but Dallas is as close to Norman, OK as it is to either Austin, TX or College Station, TX.  That makes the Sooners the local "major" team for all of Oklahoma along with substantial portions of Texas, New Mexico, Colorado, Kansas, Missouri, and arguably Arkansas.  
HelmetHead.jpg image by dirham1GO BUCKS!!!

Last edited 8/19/2014 9:03 AM by medinabuckeye1

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/19/2014 9:12 AM

Re: College Football's Top 25 jobs per FoxSports 


On the topic, I'm very suspect of any list that puts Notre Dame so low...or that is so inconsistent with the all-time wins list in general. The order can be very different from the ATWL, but at least 7 or 8 of the all-time top 10 should probably be in the Best Jobs Top 10. One metric for the best jobs defines them as the ones where it's easiest to win because the age-old infrastructure and culture makes losing or mediocre-ing difficult. The all-time wins list is as fair of a window into that as anything. The counter-argument is about quality of living and how murderous expectations murderize that...but I've never seen college coaches with their pick of the litter choose that kind of quality of life over helmet status.

medinabuckeye1 wrote:
  1. Michigan - I have my doubts due to recruiting issues
Which recruiting issues are those?

Since Hoke arrived, Michigan has gone toe-to-toe with OSU in star-average (and I wouldn't be surprised if Michigan has not, for the kids with offers from both schools that ultimately picked M or OSU, won >50% of those).

And that's despite far lesser records on the field than OSU. There may not be a program in the country that more easily overachieves in football recruiting than Michigan.
I celebrate myself and sing myself 
And what I assume you shall assume 
For every atom belonging to me as good belongs to you. 
I loafe and invite my soul
I lean and loafe at my ease 
observing a spear of summer grass.
~Walt Whitman

Last edited 8/19/2014 9:26 AM by dudekd

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/19/2014 10:05 AM

Re: College Football's Top 25 jobs per FoxSports 


IMHO, ATWL is a good starting point, but it has to be adjusted from there.  Some schools got a much earlier start at being 'major' so they have an advantage there that does not reflect anything close to the current situation.  

In all-time wins:
  • Florida is #22 with 684
  • Minnesota is #29 with 660
  • Miami, FL is #46 with 590
  • USCe is #56 with 576
  • FSU is #78 with 510
Nobody would seriously argue that Minnesota is almost as good of a job as Florida  and a clearly better job than Miami, USCe, and FSU based on their number of total wins.  You have to adjust to reflect the current reality.  

Michigan's pre WWII wins are, IMHO, not any more relevant to this discussion than Minnesota's.  

Pre WWII wins (1869-1941):
  1. 349 - Michigan
  2. 323 - Notre Dame
  3. 308 - Navy
  4. 307 - Minnesota
  5. 304 - Vanderbilt
  6. 299 - Pitt
  7. 298 - Nebraska
  8. 296 - Army
  9. 288 - Texas
  10. 288 - Syracuse

WWII-present wins (1942-2013):
  1. 619 - Oklahoma
  2. 594 - Bama
  3. 587 - Texas
  4. 586 - Ohio State
  5. 578 - Penn State
  6. 567 - Nebraska
  7. 564 - USC
  8. 561 - Michigan
  9. 551 - Notre Dame
  10. 544 - Georgia

This is getting a lot closer to the FoxSports and my lists.  

Last 35 years wins (1978-2013):

  1. 352 - Nebraska
  2. 345 - Florida State
  3. 335 - Ohio State
  4. 327 - Oklahoma
  5. 324 - Bama
  6. 323 - Miami, FL
  7. 322 - BYU
  8. 315 - Michigan
  9. 313 - Penn State
  10. 312 - Florida
Comparing:  Team - FoxSports Rank - My Rank - Last 35 years Wins
  • Florida - 1 - 4 - 10
  • Texas - 2 - 2 - 14
  • Georgia - 3 - n/a - 12
  • USC - 4 - 1 - 13
  • Bama - 5 - 5 - 5
  • tOSU - 6 - 3 - 3
  • LSU - 7 - 7 - 20
  • aTm - 8 - 6 - 21
  • Oregon - 9 - 8 - 26
  • Oklahoma - 10 - 10 - 4
  • Michigan - 11 - 9 - 8
  • FSU - 12 - n/a - 2
  • Tennessee - 13 - n/a - 17
  • Penn State - 14 - n/a - 9
  • Auburn - 15 - n/a - 15
dudekd wrote: On the topic, I'm very suspect of any list that puts Notre Dame so low...or that is so inconsistent with the all-time wins list in general. The order can be very different from the ATWL, but at least 7 or 8 of the all-time top 10 should probably be in the Best Jobs Top 10. One metric for the best jobs defines them as the ones where it's easiest to win because the age-old infrastructure and culture makes losing or mediocre-ing difficult. The all-time wins list is as fair of a window into that as anything.

medinabuckeye1 wrote:
  1. Michigan - I have my doubts due to recruiting issues
Which recruiting issues are those?

Since Hoke arrived, Michigan has gone toe-to-toe with OSU in star-average (and I wouldn't be surprised if Michigan has not, for the kids with offers from both schools that ultimately picked M or OSU, won >50% of those).

And that's despite far lesser records on the field than OSU. There may not be a program in the country that more easily overachieves in football recruiting than Michigan.
You and I have had this debate before so you know my position but I'll restate it anyway:
  • IMHO, Michigan faces a challenging underlying recruiting situation because they cannot compete at the level they expect without a massive infusion of OOS talent.  There simply isn't enough talent in the State of Michigan to maintain a championship caliber program.  With the exception of the Toledo area (where Michigan is the closest "major" program), anytime you are seeking OOS talent you are up against not only the local school, but also all the other nationally recruiting programs.  This is a challenge that USC, Texas, Ohio State, Florida, Bama, aTm, and LSU do not have.  
HelmetHead.jpg image by dirham1GO BUCKS!!!

Last edited 8/19/2014 10:09 AM by medinabuckeye1

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/19/2014 10:28 AM

Re: College Football's Top 25 jobs per FoxSports 



medinabuckeye1 wrote:

My take:
  • USC should be #1 by a mile.  California has more recruits than Florida and the next best schools in California aren't anywhere close to FSU and Miami.  
  • Georgia is ranked too high.  They give great reasons on paper, but in reality they won a NC, with Herschel Walker, almost 40 years ago and they claim one other.  The problem is that there aren't enough recruits in Georgia to make up for the competition instate (GaTech) and in surrounding states (UF #1, FSU #12, TN #13, USCe #20, Clemson #24).  
My Top 10 would be:
  1. USC - best combination of recruiting situation and resources/support anywhere.  If you look at Stewart Mandel's "Kings" on a map USC is the only one located West of a N-S line running roughly through Lincoln, Norman, and Austin.  That makes them the local "major" school for an enormous area that includes a lot of talent.  
  2. Texas - although the aTm move to the SEC could bring this into question if aTm starts routinely out-recruiting them.  
  3. Ohio State - I have the Buckeyes ahead of the Gators because the in-state competition from the Seminoles and Hurricanes is a lot more serious than anything Ohio State has to deal with.  Florida has more football talent than Ohio, but not enough to make up for the difference in level of competition.  
  4. Florida - They are the best supported school in the state of Florida and Florida does have a lot of recruits, just not as many as California and Texas.  
  5. Bama - They get the nod here because they are the historically best program in the South but if it were as easy as Saban makes it look they wouldn't have spent a decade-plus in the wilderness.  
  6. aTm - Being the SEC-SEC-SEC team in Texas could lift the Aggies over the Horns in time.  
  7. LSU - If a guy who eats grass and does as many crazy/nonsensical things as Les Miles can do this well at LSU then it has to be a pretty good job.  
  8. Oregon - Money is the reason they are this high, lack of local recruits and a strong fanbase are the reasons they are this low.  
  9. Michigan - I have my doubts due to recruiting issues and the general and continuing decline of the State and particularly Detroit but they still have the winningest record and largest stadium.  
  10. Oklahoma - The state of Oklahoma doesn't have anywhere near enough high-end talent to get the Sooners into the top-10, but Dallas is as close to Norman, OK as it is to either Austin, TX or College Station, TX.  That makes the Sooners the local "major" team for all of Oklahoma along with substantial portions of Texas, New Mexico, Colorado, Kansas, Missouri, and arguably Arkansas.  

I disagree with what I highlighted in red.  Florida has more recruits than California, and it has been steady that way for years.  See link, distribution of recruits 2008-2013 -  http://www.footballstudyhall.com/2013/9/11/4718442/college-football-state-texas-california-florida

In state competition may be high in Florida, but there are plenty of other schools poaching in California as well.  I would keep Florida at least in the top 3.

Regarding Georgia, they are #4 on that link in talent produced by state, ranking above even Ohio.  You're right in that they have a lot of surrounding competition, but I don't think Tech challenges them as much as you may think.  IMO, the Georgia job certainly needs to remain in the top 10. 

Side note on LSU - Louisiana is the highest per capita state producing talent, followed by Alabama.

If the state of New York would step it up it would greatly benefit the B1G and ACC, they are the most populous state that is conspicuously not producing talent.

Last edited 8/19/2014 10:29 AM by MisterBlack

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/19/2014 10:38 AM

Re: College Football's Top 25 jobs per FoxSports 



medinabuckeye1 wrote:
You and I have had this debate before so you know my position but I'll restate it anyway:
  • IMHO, Michigan faces a challenging underlying recruiting situation because they cannot compete at the level they expect without a massive infusion of OOS talent.  There simply isn't enough talent in the State of Michigan to maintain a championship caliber program.  With the exception of the Toledo area (where Michigan is the closest "major" program), anytime you are seeking OOS talent you are up against not only the local school, but also all the other nationally recruiting programs.  This is a challenge that USC, Texas, Ohio State, Florida, Bama, aTm, and LSU do not have.  
It's very true...in theory. That's the thing; nothing you said is illogical. It's very logical. But until it happens, it's just another thing we can conceive of happening without any evidence that it will. By analogy, not only are we afforded innocence until proven guilty in America, but--as a corollary--we're afforded not to be suspected until at least accused. Michigan football hasn't yet been accused of having difficulty recruiting.

Why might that be? Well you're right about the region. It isn't very talent rich (although Michigan seems to do as well as anyone in Illinois/Indiana/Ohio/Pennsylvania too). And, yes, Michigan recruits nationally more than most--probably both out of necessity and out of luxury. But, to get back to the question, these things haven't been a hampering yet: WHY? Well there are lots of football bluebloods, and while I think the coaches have always done a good job selling those points, that doesn't really set Michigan apart.

On the other hand, Michigan is also a much more highly world-ranked university than any of the other football blue bloods, and--even if we doubt the kids make use of it--I believe the coaches press that point exceptionally well upon the kids and their families until it makes Michigan stand apart. Moms and dads repeatedly seem to really, really like this part. This part often seems to tilt the New Jerseyans, Floridians, and Californians from "No to maybe" and from "Maybe to probably." Thus insulating Michigan from the deficits of its region more than anyone not named Notre Dame.

Is it a challenge? Sure. Is it a challenge Michigan has that the SEC and USC don't have? Yes. Is every challenge unovercomable or difficult-to-overcome? No. And it's often the case that with great stature even very high hurdles can be gone over using nothing but autopilot.
I celebrate myself and sing myself 
And what I assume you shall assume 
For every atom belonging to me as good belongs to you. 
I loafe and invite my soul
I lean and loafe at my ease 
observing a spear of summer grass.
~Walt Whitman

Last edited 8/19/2014 10:44 AM by dudekd

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/19/2014 10:40 AM

Re: College Football's Top 25 jobs per FoxSports 


By the way, your ATWL interpretation is persuasive.
I celebrate myself and sing myself 
And what I assume you shall assume 
For every atom belonging to me as good belongs to you. 
I loafe and invite my soul
I lean and loafe at my ease 
observing a spear of summer grass.
~Walt Whitman
Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/19/2014 10:54 AM

Re: College Football's Top 25 jobs per FoxSports 


If perchance I had my pick of all coaching jobs at the FBS level, I'd pick Stanford.

Other schools on my personal list would include Vandy, Duke, UNC, UVA, the Naval Academy, Northwestern, Washington, and Illinois.

It all depends on criteria, does it not?

I hate all over generalizations.

Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/19/2014 11:03 AM

Re: College Football's Top 25 jobs per FoxSports 



cincydawg4 wrote: If perchance I had my pick of all coaching jobs at the FBS level, I'd pick Stanford.

Other schools on my personal list would include Vandy, Duke, UNC, UVA, the Naval Academy, Northwestern, Washington, and Illinois.

It all depends on criteria, does it not?
Exactly my thought.
U-Rah-Rah   Wis-Con-Sin
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/19/2014 11:38 AM

Re: College Football's Top 25 jobs per FoxSports 



dudekd wrote:
medinabuckeye1 wrote:
You and I have had this debate before so you know my position but I'll restate it anyway:
  • IMHO, Michigan faces a challenging underlying recruiting situation because they cannot compete at the level they expect without a massive infusion of OOS talent.  There simply isn't enough talent in the State of Michigan to maintain a championship caliber program.  With the exception of the Toledo area (where Michigan is the closest "major" program), anytime you are seeking OOS talent you are up against not only the local school, but also all the other nationally recruiting programs.  This is a challenge that USC, Texas, Ohio State, Florida, Bama, aTm, and LSU do not have.  
It's very true...in theory. That's the thing; nothing you said is illogical. It's very logical. But until it happens, it's just another thing we can conceive of happening without any evidence that it will. By analogy, not only are we afforded innocence until proven guilty in America, but--as a corollary--we're afforded not to be suspected until at least accused. Michigan football hasn't yet been accused of having difficulty recruiting.

Why might that be? Well you're right about the region. It isn't very talent rich (although Michigan seems to do as well as anyone in Illinois/Indiana/Ohio/Pennsylvania too). And, yes, Michigan recruits nationally more than most--probably both out of necessity and out of luxury. But, to get back to the question, these things haven't been a hampering yet: WHY? Well there are lots of football bluebloods, and while I think the coaches have always done a good job selling those points, that doesn't really set Michigan apart.

On the other hand, Michigan is also a much more highly world-ranked university than any of the other football blue bloods, and--even if we doubt the kids make use of it--I believe the coaches press that point exceptionally well upon the kids and their families until it makes Michigan stand apart. Moms and dads repeatedly seem to really, really like this part. This part often seems to tilt the New Jerseyans, Floridians, and Californians from "No to maybe" and from "Maybe to probably." Thus insulating Michigan from the deficits of its region more than anyone not named Notre Dame.

Is it a challenge? Sure. Is it a challenge Michigan has that the SEC and USC don't have? Yes. Is every challenge unovercomable or difficult-to-overcome? No. And it's often the case that with great stature even very high hurdles can be gone over using nothing but autopilot.
Basically Michigan could one day turn into what Tennessee is now.

He fixes the cable?

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/19/2014 12:11 PM

Re: College Football's Top 25 jobs per FoxSports 



OrangeAfroMan wrote:
dudekd wrote:
medinabuckeye1 wrote:
You and I have had this debate before so you know my position but I'll restate it anyway:
  • IMHO, Michigan faces a challenging underlying recruiting situation because they cannot compete at the level they expect without a massive infusion of OOS talent.  There simply isn't enough talent in the State of Michigan to maintain a championship caliber program.  With the exception of the Toledo area (where Michigan is the closest "major" program), anytime you are seeking OOS talent you are up against not only the local school, but also all the other nationally recruiting programs.  This is a challenge that USC, Texas, Ohio State, Florida, Bama, aTm, and LSU do not have.  
It's very true...in theory. That's the thing; nothing you said is illogical. It's very logical. But until it happens, it's just another thing we can conceive of happening without any evidence that it will. By analogy, not only are we afforded innocence until proven guilty in America, but--as a corollary--we're afforded not to be suspected until at least accused. Michigan football hasn't yet been accused of having difficulty recruiting.

Why might that be? Well you're right about the region. It isn't very talent rich (although Michigan seems to do as well as anyone in Illinois/Indiana/Ohio/Pennsylvania too). And, yes, Michigan recruits nationally more than most--probably both out of necessity and out of luxury. But, to get back to the question, these things haven't been a hampering yet: WHY? Well there are lots of football bluebloods, and while I think the coaches have always done a good job selling those points, that doesn't really set Michigan apart.

On the other hand, Michigan is also a much more highly world-ranked university than any of the other football blue bloods, and--even if we doubt the kids make use of it--I believe the coaches press that point exceptionally well upon the kids and their families until it makes Michigan stand apart. Moms and dads repeatedly seem to really, really like this part. This part often seems to tilt the New Jerseyans, Floridians, and Californians from "No to maybe" and from "Maybe to probably." Thus insulating Michigan from the deficits of its region more than anyone not named Notre Dame.

Is it a challenge? Sure. Is it a challenge Michigan has that the SEC and USC don't have? Yes. Is every challenge unovercomable or difficult-to-overcome? No. And it's often the case that with great stature even very high hurdles can be gone over using nothing but autopilot.
Basically Michigan could one day turn into what Tennessee is now.

Of course my entire post gets lost.  Basically this goes back to a thread a year ago, over/underachieving programs.  I argued UM was overachiving because they have none of the built in advatnages that other helmet schools have.  They are in a cold weather location, surrounded by subpar high school talent, in a state they share with another top 25 program, and 3 other FBS programs.  Basically Michigan is great, because Michigan has been great.  If Texas, or FLorida or USC fell off the face of the earth, you could reasonably expect them to rebuild their empires.  Michigan, less so.  So yes, Michigan runs on autopilot when thinkgs are going well, but because they don't have the other advantages, we are finding it might be a little harder to get back on the rails than other helnmet schools.

Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/19/2014 12:29 PM

Re: College Football's Top 25 jobs per FoxSports 



cincydawg4 wrote: If perchance I had my pick of all coaching jobs at the FBS level, I'd pick Stanford.

Other schools on my personal list would include Vandy, Duke, UNC, UVA, the Naval Academy, Northwestern, Washington, and Illinois.

It all depends on criteria, does it not?

University of Hawaii for me.  Easiest decision ever. biggrin
Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/19/2014 12:47 PM

Re: College Football's Top 25 jobs per FoxSports 



utee94 wrote:
cincydawg4 wrote: If perchance I had my pick of all coaching jobs at the FBS level, I'd pick Stanford.

Other schools on my personal list would include Vandy, Duke, UNC, UVA, the Naval Academy, Northwestern, Washington, and Illinois.

It all depends on criteria, does it not?

University of Hawaii for me.  Easiest decision ever. biggrin
Here's a man that really understands how to rate a job! cool
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/19/2014 12:54 PM

Re: College Football's Top 25 jobs per FoxSports 


any weight given to a top job by how quickly one would be fired?

doesn't seem to be a great job if you have an 8-win season and get canned

"Not the victory but the action; Not the goal but the game; In the deed the glory."

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/19/2014 12:57 PM

Re: College Football's Top 25 jobs per FoxSports 


I think the university that's attached to the Michigan football program is good for roughly the same amount of easy recruiting each year as sunny weather and beaches are for other schools. Some rare examples have all of it and tradition, like USC. Unless you call Knoxville a warm weather location, Tennessee has none of it. If Michigan was merely an above-average school, the football program (1) may have never become great or (2) would have likely fallen off a long time ago. The "student-athlete" thing may no longer exist on our nation's campuses as we want it to, but the idea still THRIVES at mom's dinner table on recruiting visits.
I celebrate myself and sing myself 
And what I assume you shall assume 
For every atom belonging to me as good belongs to you. 
I loafe and invite my soul
I lean and loafe at my ease 
observing a spear of summer grass.
~Walt Whitman
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/19/2014 12:57 PM

Re: College Football's Top 25 jobs per FoxSports 


Another way to look at it is - which place will have the least amount of pressure, yet allow success and provide the greatest latitude to do what you want the way you want to? It will be interesting to see how Strong does at Texas. He's clearly an outsider but everything is there for him to succeed and he knows how to coach. Some places have a lot of recruits, but if you are coming in from the outside, every move you make is questioned and second guessed. I'd rather go someplace to have fun and build something.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/19/2014 1:12 PM

Re: College Football's Top 25 jobs per FoxSports 


Well, if Hawaii still has a program in the future.... that said, apparently last night's report of possibly dropping football was a quote taken out of context.

As for Michigan, there's no reason they can't be the best program in the Big Ten, again. The advantage Ohio State and Penn State have in recruiting bases is mitigated now with Michigan in their division, along with Rutgers and Maryland. For all the downsides of adding those schools, it will help Michigan recruit the Mid-Atlantic region.

However, I will concede Michigan will probably continue to lose out on more recruits outside the Midwest and Mid-Atlantic than it has in the past. You're already seeing this happen, but I think it's smart, because with all the major conferences having similarly strong TV exposure, the advantages that the Big Ten had in the past are neutralized so geography becomes more important, again.

Conversely, the Big Ten has become the premier basketball conference because it still has an advantage in TV exposure with all conference and many conference games nationally televised. The SEC Network will help them some like the Pac-12 Network has, but both of those aren't as broadly distributed, and fans in those leagues don't care as much about basketball, nor do they have as much (if any) advantage in local talent. Michigan exemplifies how this helped them get a great coach in Beilein, renovate Crisler, and build the practice complex, just as Nebraska and Iowa have, and other programs in the league to a lesser extent.

When your team is winning be ready to be tough, because winning can make you soft. On the other hand, when your team is losing, stick by them. Keep believing

Bo Schembechler
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/19/2014 1:58 PM

Re: College Football's Top 25 jobs per FoxSports 


I think we had a post a while ago about our dream coaching job.  Here are my requirements...

1.) AQ conference school
2.) Northern location - I'll take snow over extreme heat any day
3.) Top academics
4.) Since I'm taking out UM and MSU for homer reasons, I also don't want to coach against them, so the Big Ten is out
5.) Don't ask why, but I like the big state schools better

The list I came up with

Colorado
Virginia
Washington

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/19/2014 2:46 PM

Re: College Football's Top 25 jobs per FoxSports 



EastLansingAdam wrote: 

Colorado
Virginia
Washington
and you only need to win 50% of your games to stay off the hot seat

down side?  tough to recruit

"Not the victory but the action; Not the goal but the game; In the deed the glory."

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/19/2014 3:56 PM

Re: College Football's Top 25 jobs per FoxSports 



cincydawg4 wrote: It all depends on criteria, does it not?
Exactly. I'd probably pick Stanford too (had considered Berkeley but Stanford has several advantages in that comparison). But the very best coaches seem to have very similar criteria…and their criteria are nothing like ours.

They appear to have an internal algorithm whose most weighted variables are salary and ease to a national championship. So basically, the list medina showed for most wins in the last 50ish years.

As non-coaches, it's really not surprising that we incorporate creature comforts and "lack of pressure" into our equations that the best coaches--generally an ultra-focused, boundlessly-ambitious sect--don't even seem to compute.
I celebrate myself and sing myself 
And what I assume you shall assume 
For every atom belonging to me as good belongs to you. 
I loafe and invite my soul
I lean and loafe at my ease 
observing a spear of summer grass.
~Walt Whitman
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/19/2014 5:26 PM

Re: College Football's Top 25 jobs per FoxSports 



MisterBlack wrote:
I disagree with what I highlighted in red.  Florida has more recruits than California, and it has been steady that way for years.  See link, distribution of recruits 2008-2013 -  http://www.footballstudyhall.com/2013/9/11/4718442/college-football-state-texas-california-florida

In state competition may be high in Florida, but there are plenty of other schools poaching in California as well.  I would keep Florida at least in the top 3.

Regarding Georgia, they are #4 on that link in talent produced by state, ranking above even Ohio.  You're right in that they have a lot of surrounding competition, but I don't think Tech challenges them as much as you may think.  IMO, the Georgia job certainly needs to remain in the top 10. 

Side note on LSU - Louisiana is the highest per capita state producing talent, followed by Alabama.

If the state of New York would step it up it would greatly benefit the B1G and ACC, they are the most populous state that is conspicuously not producing talent.
I misspoke wrt to recruits from California and Florida.  I should have said "better" rather than "more".  Here is a link to NFL players by state.  Note that California has the most and it isn't close.  I did note in looking at this link that Florida is ahead of Texas.  However, Florida leads Texas 186-184 so that is basically a tie and I still argue that Florida has more/stronger instate and surrounding state competition than Texas.  

There are certainly schools poaching in California, but they aren't instate, neighboring state or nearby bluebloods like Clemson, Georgia, FSU, Miami, Auburn, and Bama.  Sorry, but Washington, Oregon, Stanford, UCLA, ASU, and BYU simply do not compare to that list.  

FWIW, I think that SC and Texas are BY FAR the two best jobs with the next group pretty much interchangeable.  

Georgia is also #4 on the NFL player list.  Maybe they should be in the top-10, but I can't support Fox's #3 ranking because if the job was really that good they'd have a LOT more wins and hardware.  They are "only" #10 in wins since the beginning of WWII and "only" #12 in wins in the last 35 years.  Honestly, I can't figure out why and maybe they are just a sleeping giant and the #1 job but for some reason they just haven't quite been THAT good.  

I have had that "per-capita" stat thrown at me before and frankly I think it is silly.  Look, if Wyoming had the most football talent per-capita they still wouldn't have much football talent.  The relevant figure is the absolute total.  Alabama and LSU have more talent per-capita than California, Florida, Texas, Georgia, and Ohio.  Great, they still don't have as much talent as those states because those top-5 states also rank #1, #4, #2, #9, and #7 respectively in population.  The point:
  • Alabama has the highest per-capita football talent but they are still only #11 on the NFL list because they don't have much population.  
  • New York has the third highest population but they are still only #17 on the NFL list because they don't have much talent per-capita.  
  • Per-capita football talent and population are only relevant to this discussion in the sense that you can multiply them to get total talent.  The figures for population and per-capita talent by themselves are meaningless.  

I agree on NY, see my comments above.  Illinois is almost as bad.  FWIW, states by population with # of NFL players rank:
  1. California, 1
  2. Texas, 3
  3. New York, 17
  4. Florida, 2
  5. Illinois, 14
  6. Pennsylvania, 8
  7. Ohio, 5
  8. Georgia, 4
  9. Michigan, 13
  10. North Carolina, 12
  11. New Jersey, 6
  12. Virginia, 10
  13. Washington, 21
  14. Massachusetts, 31/32
  15. Arizona, 22
  16. Indiana, 23
  17. Tennessee, 15
  18. Missouri, 19
  19. Maryland, 18
  20. Wisconsin, 20
  21. Minnesota, 33
  22. Colorado, 24/25
  23. Alabama, 11
  24. South Carolina, 9
  25. Louisiana, 7
HelmetHead.jpg image by dirham1GO BUCKS!!!
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/19/2014 5:48 PM

Re: College Football's Top 25 jobs per FoxSports 



dudekd wrote: By the way, your ATWL interpretation is persuasive.
Thank you.  

WRT your post above this, I think that academics play less of a part in these decisions than you do.  I think most of these kids intend to play football (like Cardale Jones)  Besides, I'm not sure what an expert in General Studies does for a living anywaydevil

It isn't unovercomable (I'm trusting you that that is a word) but it is an extra challenge that not all schools have to overcome.  

OrangeAfroMan wrote: 
Basically Michigan could one day turn into what Tennessee is now.
Exactly, and for almost exactly the same reasons.  


EastLansingAdam wrote: Of course my entire post gets lost.  Basically this goes back to a thread a year ago, over/underachieving programs.  I argued UM was overachiving because they have none of the built in advatnages that other helmet schools have.  They are in a cold weather location, surrounded by subpar high school talent, in a state they share with another top 25 program, and 3 other FBS programs.  Basically Michigan is great, because Michigan has been great.  If Texas, or FLorida or USC fell off the face of the earth, you could reasonably expect them to rebuild their empires.  Michigan, less so.  So yes, Michigan runs on autopilot when thinkgs are going well, but because they don't have the other advantages, we are finding it might be a little harder to get back on the rails than other helnmet schools.
At least for me, using Chrome, when the posts have disappeared lately, I have been able to hit "back" in the browser and get back to the post then try again.  

As far as your post, I agree and we were on the same side of this debate when we had that overunderachieving thread.  

NorthernOhioBuckeye wrote: 
utee94 wrote: 
University of Hawaii for me.  Easiest decision ever. biggrin
Here's a man that really understands how to rate a job! cool
I read this in "John Madden voice" while picturing NOB circling utee on a telestrator.
HelmetHead.jpg image by dirham1GO BUCKS!!!
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/19/2014 8:44 PM

Re: College Football's Top 25 jobs per FoxSports 



EastLansingAdam wrote:
OrangeAfroMan wrote:
Basically Michigan could one day turn into what Tennessee is now.

Of course my entire post gets lost.  Basically this goes back to a thread a year ago, over/underachieving programs.  I argued UM was overachiving because they have none of the built in advatnages that other helmet schools have.  They are in a cold weather location, surrounded by subpar high school talent, in a state they share with another top 25 program, and 3 other FBS programs.  Basically Michigan is great, because Michigan has been great.  If Texas, or FLorida or USC fell off the face of the earth, you could reasonably expect them to rebuild their empires.  Michigan, less so.  So yes, Michigan runs on autopilot when thinkgs are going well, but because they don't have the other advantages, we are finding it might be a little harder to get back on the rails than other helnmet schools.
Ummmm, I'm agreeing with you.....the same reasons make an obvious parallel.....yeah....
Tennessee has sucked for 7 years.  They're surrounded by premier programs, have little in-state talent, and have only history on their side.

He fixes the cable?

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/19/2014 10:16 PM

Re: College Football's Top 25 jobs per FoxSports 


I literally meant my post was lost. As UN I posted it, and it wasn't there so I retyped an abbreviated version.

Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/20/2014 9:49 AM

Re: College Football's Top 25 jobs per FoxSports 


Michigan State not on the list, ridiculous.

The 4 biggest factors for a football program.

$tadium $ize.
Tradition.
Athletic Director.
Money.

If you have either of the first two a great AD will make sure you have enough money to get who and what you want.  

In the Big Ten no one has a better advantage at AD than Wisconsin and Michigan State.
Ohio, OhioWe'll win the game or know the reason why!And when we win the game, we'll buy a keg of booze!And we'll drink to old Ohio,'Til we wobble in our shoes!Ohio, OhioWe'll win the game or know the reason why! 1907-tbdbitl. Some thingss never change.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/20/2014 12:13 PM

Re: College Football's Top 25 jobs per FoxSports 


I think the two biggest factors are:

1.  The head coach, and
2.  How it is to recruit at your location.

Recruiting is almost the essential thing, though some are exceptions.

I hate all over generalizations.

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/20/2014 2:12 PM

Re: College Football's Top 25 jobs per FoxSports 


AD and coach are in the same boat, for this exercise
$$$/pressure, same deal - money comes from tradition (OKSU notwithstanding), and pressure comes from recent tradition
stadium size = tradition, more or less, as it would have grown with your program success (again, for the most part)
recrutiing = location + exposure

He fixes the cable?

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/20/2014 2:13 PM

Re: College Football's Top 25 jobs per FoxSports 


Regarding the schools in their Top 15, if you factor in the pressure of the job at such places....and the unrealistic, incredibly zealot-like fan bases, not too mention alumni tampering with recruiting/players (looking at you SEC schools)....I think all those jobs would be last on my list.


Would rather go somewhere like Wisconsin, Arizona State, Virginia, Colorado or, yes, IOWA.  cool

Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/20/2014 3:09 PM

Re: College Football's Top 25 jobs per FoxSports 



medinabuckeye1 wrote:
 
I misspoke wrt to recruits from California and Florida.  I should have said "better" rather than "more".  Here is a link to NFL players by state.  Note that California has the most and it isn't close.  I did note in looking at this link that Florida is ahead of Texas.  However, Florida leads Texas 186-184 so that is basically a tie and I still argue that Florida has more/stronger instate and surrounding state competition than Texas.  

California having the most players is a function of state size and little else. It's 45 percent bigger than Texas, double the size of Florida. I'd argue those other two states have a "richer" level of talent, as culture sends more kids into playing and more resources seem to be dumped into football.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/20/2014 4:32 PM

Re: College Football's Top 25 jobs per FoxSports 


Yeah, I was thinking of the "% of population that considers themselves college football fans" posts on another thread. California has a ton of people....and a ton of that ton doesn't give a damn about football.

He fixes the cable?

Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/20/2014 6:33 PM

Re: College Football's Top 25 jobs per FoxSports 



OrangeAfroMan wrote: Yeah, I was thinking of the "% of population that considers themselves college football fans" posts on another thread. California has a ton of people....and a ton of that ton doesn't give a damn about football.
New York says howdy.

I hate all over generalizations.

Reply | Quote
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 2  Next >