re: Isn't 80% a low 'B' ?

quote:

---

ballscaster

---

as a matter of fact you are not even worthy of a response anymore with plenty others. You just keep dribbling all over yourself.

You don't have to score an A to be better than Miles.

In November of 2011, three SEC teams were ranked 1, 2, and 3 in the BCS. That's not a down year.

quote:

---

next thing is this guy will say he makes quadruple what i do, is more successful than me in business, is a better investor than us, yada, yada, yada. i like how he puts words in people's mouths.

Hmmn, why don't i see him on the money board then? Telling us of his successes?

---

oh and i almost forgot, i will also bet he has pumped way more money than us into this LSU program over the years as well.

If I see this correctly, what the 80% represents is possibly a win-loss record. If this is LM's "exam," then his year-to-year scores (W-L) would be cumulative and possibly show reliability and validity. However, Les Miles was not hired totally on a win-loss exam score, but on how well his job performance appeared to be. Every job has a task analysis, where someone interviews numerous people in the field (often called subject-matter experts, or SMEs). The analyst breaks down the tasks, clusters them, and organizes them into a master task list. Following is a training task list, then the tasks are placed into a hierarchy, with the terminal tasks at the top (in a Top-Down Hierarchy). The resulting tree is then articulated into learning objectives, and then test items are derived from the tasks. If a test is given to a group, and the scores are compared with each other, it is called a norm-referenced test. Sometimes these tests in colleges are based on the content and not on the task analysis. This is the type of test many fans use to compare their coach with another--and it is perhaps the one used for the 80%. However, another type of test--a criterion-referenced test--looks at each task and determines if it is mastered. There are a lot of tasks that are involved in coaching, and my question is 'Who grades the coach on the mastery of objectives like recruiting, staying out of moral turpitude, dealing fairly with players and rightly with the media, disciplining players, and a host of other things. In this respect, winning and losing is just of the things that makes a coach a good coach and master. I see a coach as more than just a person who only wins and loses at games, but in doing the job of a coach. Oh, perhaps if you are going to lump Les Miles or any other coach in a norm-referenced array, why can't we add politicians to the melee?

quote:

---

you would have no problem hiring Lane Kiffin, correct

---

Kiffin failed at USC, loaded with talent so no.

quote:

---

If I see this correctly, what the 80% represents is possibly a win-loss record. If this is LM's "exam," then his year-to-year scores (W-L) would be cumulative and possibly show reliability and validity. However, Les Miles was not hired totally on a win-loss exam score, but on how well his job performance appeared to be. Every job has a task analysis, where someone interviews numerous people in the field (often called subject-matter experts, or SMEs). The analyst breaks down the tasks, clusters them, and organizes them into a master task list. Following is a training task list, then the tasks are placed into a hierarchy, with the terminal tasks at the top (in a Top-Down Hierarchy). The resulting tree is then articulated into learning objectives, and then test items are derived from the tasks. If a test is given to a group, and the scores are compared with each other, it is called a norm-referenced test. Sometimes these tests in colleges are based on the content and not on the task analysis. This is the type of test many fans use to compare their coach with another--and it is perhaps the one used for the 80%. However, another type of test--a criterion-referenced test--looks at each task and determines if it is mastered. There are a lot of tasks that are involved in coaching, and my question is 'Who grades the coach on the mastery of objectives like recruiting, staying out of moral turpitude, dealing fairly with players and rightly with the media, disciplining players, and a host of other things. In this respect, winning and losing is just of the things that makes a coach a good coach and master. I see a coach as more than just a person who only wins and loses at games, but in doing the job of a coach. Oh, perhaps if you are going to lump Les Miles or any other coach in a norm-referenced array, why can't we add politicians to the melee?

---

I am not sure what all this means, but I will agree with you if it will help.

I'm still waiting for that list of higher graded coaches on your winning percentage based grading scale.

quote:

---

Lotta sidewalk fans doing everything they can to bash our school.

---

No one is bashing LSU man.

LSU over Miles, Saban, individual sports.

How can you not separate your arguments?

Is it that LSU alums should abandon LSU because they don't agree with the direction of the football program?

Is it anyone that criticizes the status quo is somehow unworthy of their disagreement?

Explain it to me.

Otherwise, I just think you are a knuckle dragger.

quote:

---

In November of 2011, three SEC teams were ranked 1, 2, and 3 in the BCS. That's not a down year.

---

That honestly was a product of how bad the other sides of the SEC were outside of those 3.

Arky had 2 wins against ranked teams, and thier best win in the regular season came against USCe that finished the season #20 and lost to the two other teams that finished ranked both by 24 points.

Their wins were equivalent to a Big XII schedule.