- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Keeping O is the biggest risk of them all
Posted on 11/16/16 at 8:23 am
Posted on 11/16/16 at 8:23 am
I understand the emotions of wanting to keep O.
I understand people feeling "meh" about names like Fedora or Gundy.
That having been said, those two guys (and several others in that tier) are dramatically more proven as LONG TERM coaches. The major fallacy pro-O people have is equating interim success with year over year success.
O was given the chance to run his own program and failed spectacularly. He said all the right things about his time at Ole Miss and that's great but the LSU job is not one you roll the dice on a guy who has failed as a HC once already and has never done anything else other than be a great D-Line coach. I believe he would be better than 3-9 but can you really go from a 3-9 coach to a national championship contending coach in 10 years? I have my doubts if you could do it in even 100 years.
This is classic short termism on the part of LSU fans and pro-O supporters in the media. Coming in and shaking things up for a 6-8 week span is a completely different animal than maintaining a program for a half decade or a decade. Giving a failed head coach the keys to our program is a MASSIVE risk that some somehow justify as the "safe" pick. It really couldn't be any further from the truth.
I understand people feeling "meh" about names like Fedora or Gundy.
That having been said, those two guys (and several others in that tier) are dramatically more proven as LONG TERM coaches. The major fallacy pro-O people have is equating interim success with year over year success.
O was given the chance to run his own program and failed spectacularly. He said all the right things about his time at Ole Miss and that's great but the LSU job is not one you roll the dice on a guy who has failed as a HC once already and has never done anything else other than be a great D-Line coach. I believe he would be better than 3-9 but can you really go from a 3-9 coach to a national championship contending coach in 10 years? I have my doubts if you could do it in even 100 years.
This is classic short termism on the part of LSU fans and pro-O supporters in the media. Coming in and shaking things up for a 6-8 week span is a completely different animal than maintaining a program for a half decade or a decade. Giving a failed head coach the keys to our program is a MASSIVE risk that some somehow justify as the "safe" pick. It really couldn't be any further from the truth.
11
Posted on 11/16/16 at 8:25 am to Draconian Sanctions
You better duck the troops are going to be upset.
Posted on 11/16/16 at 8:26 am to Draconian Sanctions
thanks, needed to read that again
Posted on 11/16/16 at 8:26 am to houstontyga
All the boys south of I-10 about to jump in .
Posted on 11/16/16 at 8:30 am to sheek
Coach Orgeron is related to my Aunt and I don't want him. They both grew up in Golden Meadow
Posted on 11/16/16 at 8:32 am to Draconian Sanctions
Someone touched on it in one of the other threads, but he's the biggest risk to me simply because he needs elite coordinators on both sides to have the type of success LSU is expecting.
With Jimbo or Aranda, you trust one side of the ball is taken care of. Even if O is hiring great coordinators (which I believe guys would want to work for him), it's still so much exposure having to replace them every few years assuming guys get HC offers down the road. That in itself doesn't feel like a sustainable long term model, yet it's exactly what O would be relying upon.
With Jimbo or Aranda, you trust one side of the ball is taken care of. Even if O is hiring great coordinators (which I believe guys would want to work for him), it's still so much exposure having to replace them every few years assuming guys get HC offers down the road. That in itself doesn't feel like a sustainable long term model, yet it's exactly what O would be relying upon.
Posted on 11/16/16 at 8:38 am to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
Draconian Sanctions
While I dont agree with your first choice as HC (PJ Fleck) I wholeheartedly agree with what you said. Spot on! Have an upvote
Posted on 11/16/16 at 8:39 am to Draconian Sanctions
thanks for this new information. I had no idea.
FYI, if we end up with Coach O it will be because we lost our "targeted" guys. and there's a fair chance of that no matter what your reasoning is. contrary to popular belief many, many teams get turned down. doesn't matter who they are; bama got rejected, tejas got rejected, notre dame got rejected, Michigan, ohio state, etc, etc etc. there are lots of situations that make successful HC's want to stay where they are.
FYI, if we end up with Coach O it will be because we lost our "targeted" guys. and there's a fair chance of that no matter what your reasoning is. contrary to popular belief many, many teams get turned down. doesn't matter who they are; bama got rejected, tejas got rejected, notre dame got rejected, Michigan, ohio state, etc, etc etc. there are lots of situations that make successful HC's want to stay where they are.
Posted on 11/16/16 at 8:46 am to releauxded2469
quote:
While I dont agree with your first choice as HC (PJ Fleck)
I love PJ, but he would actually be my 3rd choice behind Jimbo and Herman
Posted on 11/16/16 at 8:48 am to Draconian Sanctions
O needs to just take a smaller job and work his way back. That's how these things work. People are so quick to bring up Dabo, but Dabo has no blemishes on his record. He's always been successful.
I don't understand why so many people can't grasp this. He failed miserably. He says he's different. Why can't he prove it for a few years at a smaller school? If he's a good coach, he'll succeed. Why would someone want to throw this guy the keys to the future of LSU?
And some who want him don't even want to show they're committed to him. "Give him a 1 or two year deal".
Obviously this has a hugely negative affect on recruiting, but it also shows that some of you aren't even truly committed to the guy. "Well what if he brings in this OC or that OC". That's not how ft head coaching hires work. Either you want to give him the job, or you don't. There's no in between.
I think Alleva saying O would get fair consideration has gone to some people's heads. "Fair consideration" does not mean "If you win some games, you have the job". It means exactly what it says. He'll be given "fair consideration". This is not a rent-to-own situation. He is being given fair consideration. But there are other people being considered as well.
I don't understand why so many people can't grasp this. He failed miserably. He says he's different. Why can't he prove it for a few years at a smaller school? If he's a good coach, he'll succeed. Why would someone want to throw this guy the keys to the future of LSU?
And some who want him don't even want to show they're committed to him. "Give him a 1 or two year deal".
Obviously this has a hugely negative affect on recruiting, but it also shows that some of you aren't even truly committed to the guy. "Well what if he brings in this OC or that OC". That's not how ft head coaching hires work. Either you want to give him the job, or you don't. There's no in between. I think Alleva saying O would get fair consideration has gone to some people's heads. "Fair consideration" does not mean "If you win some games, you have the job". It means exactly what it says. He'll be given "fair consideration". This is not a rent-to-own situation. He is being given fair consideration. But there are other people being considered as well.
Posted on 11/16/16 at 8:50 am to lob1284
quote:
With Jimbo or Aranda, you trust one side of the ball is taken care of.
Currently, these are my top two for the exact reason you mentioned. I'm more inclined to picking the defensive guy if given the choice.
Posted on 11/16/16 at 9:04 am to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
I understand people feeling "meh" about names like Fedora or Gundy. That having been said, those two guys (and several others in that tier) are dramatically more proven as LONG TERM coaches. The major fallacy pro-O people have is equating interim success with year over year success.
This is Wrong. The worst Hire you can make is a guy that doesn't recruit. (Archer/Fedora) People think Curley and Dinardo were bad hires. They were for w's and L's, they were not for providing talent for the next guy to work with.
Brady Hoke wasn't a bad hire, harbaugh had players to turn the program around.
Fedora at southern miss was a bad hire. Two different coaches won a total of 1 game in two years after he left. Why? no players. Mike Archer was a bad hire, no players for Curley to work with. Mack brown in his later years was bad to keep because he left Texas with nothing to work with. Now, they are about to fire a coach in only three years because he had to rebuilt the talent. check how many players texas has had drafted the last four year.
So, Ogeron can be a bad hire for results. he will not be a bad hire for the life of the program. he will get players and if he doesn't work out, the next guy will have something to work with. Ask Houston Nutt.
Posted on 11/16/16 at 9:10 am to Draconian Sanctions
I stand corrected. For some reason I thought you were one of the big pushers of Fleck. My apologies
Posted on 11/16/16 at 9:12 am to dos crystal
quote:
So, Ogeron can be a bad hire for results. he will not be a bad hire for the life of the program. he will get players and if he doesn't work out, the next guy will have something to work with. Ask Houston Nutt.
Is this supposed to be a silver lining?
Posted on 11/16/16 at 9:14 am to releauxded2469
quote:
I stand corrected. For some reason I thought you were one of the big pushers of Fleck
I mean I am but I'm not Fleck or bust. Fisher's track record and Herman's QB prowess/mensa status/recruiting ties to Texas carry a lot of weight as well.
This post was edited on 11/16/16 at 9:15 am
Posted on 11/16/16 at 9:24 am to releauxded2469
quote:
Is this supposed to be a silver lining?
The title of the thread is O is the biggest "risk" of them all. I'm not pimping O, I'm just disagreeing he's the biggest risk. To me a guy like Fedora is.
Posted on 11/16/16 at 9:45 am to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
I understand the emotions of wanting to keep O. I understand people feeling "meh" about names like Fedora or Gundy. That having been said, those two guys (and several others in that tier) are dramatically more proven as LONG TERM coaches. The major fallacy pro-O people have is equating interim success with year over year success. O was given the chance to run his own program and failed spectacularly. He said all the right things about his time at Ole Miss and that's great but the LSU job is not one you roll the dice on a guy who has failed as a HC once already and has never done anything else other than be a great D-Line coach. I believe he would be better than 3-9 but can you really go from a 3-9 coach to a national championship contending coach in 10 years? I have my doubts if you could do it in even 100 years. This is classic short termism on the part of LSU fans and pro-O supporters in the media. Coming in and shaking things up for a 6-8 week span is a completely different animal than maintaining a program for a half decade or a decade. Giving a failed head coach the keys to our program is a MASSIVE risk that some somehow justify as the "safe" pick. It really couldn't be any further from the truth.
Brilliant post Braww! Seriously, best one on the subject yet. The pro O's need a lesson in deduction reasoning and objectivity. Geaux with the mind, not the heart on matters such as this.
Posted on 11/16/16 at 9:50 am to dos crystal
quote:
This is Wrong. The worst Hire you can make is a guy that doesn't recruit. (Archer/Fedora) People think Curley and Dinardo were bad hires. They were for w's and L's, they were not for providing talent for the next guy to work with. Brady Hoke wasn't a bad hire, harbaugh had players to turn the program around. Fedora at southern miss was a bad hire. Two different coaches won a total of 1 game in two years after he left. Why? no players. Mike Archer was a bad hire, no players for Curley to work with. Mack brown in his later years was bad to keep because he left Texas with nothing to work with. Now, they are about to fire a coach in only three years because he had to rebuilt the talent. check how many players texas has had drafted the last four year. So, Ogeron can be a bad hire for results. he will not be a bad hire for the life of the program. he will get players and if he doesn't work out, the next guy will have something to work with. Ask Houston Nutt.
We need fair balance of both xs and os and recruiting prowess. Jimbo would give us that. Can't say the same as O. Your last statement is the kind of thinking that got us Archer/Hallman/Dinardo and the 90's. That and going on the cheap for salaries. Now cheap is not a problem except for F. King. But from what has been going around he has been neutered. He tried to unfire Miles and was told to pound sand and to watch his back... per some birdies chirping in the bushes LOL!
Posted on 11/16/16 at 9:51 am to Draconian Sanctions
Amen. I know it's been discussed ad naseum but it needs to be reinforced following each win, esp to the O fanboys
Posted on 11/16/16 at 9:52 am to Draconian Sanctions
I just wonder what OC options would he even have?
Page 1 of 2
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News