re: Athlon ranks every college football job from No. 1 to No. 125

quote:

---

26. Wisconsin

Pros: Wisconsin has been transformed into a football school over the past two decades. Badger faithful pack 80,321-seat Camp Randall Stadium each week and create one the best environments in the nation. Madison also is a great place to live.

Cons: The school’s local recruiting base isn’t strong; the state has not produced a national top-100 player in the past four seasons. Also, the Badgers have only been relevant on the national scene since the early 1990s. Wisconsin lacks the tradition of many of its Big Ten rivals.

Final Verdict: Barry Alvarez turned Wisconsin from a Big Ten afterthought to a significant player in college football. But the Badgers’ place as a top program is far from secure. Wisconsin, more than most of the other schools ranked in the top 25 on this list, needs the right coach in place to remain successful.

---

This @ 26 blows my mind. I thought at the very least... top 15

quote:

---

CFB was very different in the 70's, so that is not really relevant. The biggest reason for the underachieving before 2000 is LSU was not putting resources into the program. We hired bad coaches because our AD was running the Ath Dept on a shoe string budget. Once we started pouring resources into the program and hired a coach that could use the resources, we've been successful. As long as that continues, LSU will continue to win.

---

Still, I think it's fair to hold a 30 year dry spell against LSU to the extent that its not a top 5 job, but still top 10. We lack the cachet of Notre Dame, even though they are now looking at a possible 30 year national title dry spell.

quote:

---

Still, I think it's fair to hold a 30 year dry spell against LSU to the extent that its not a top 5 job, but still top 10.

---

The job and program rankings are not the same. Program ranks history and there LSU is top 10-12. As for the job, i view that as a generic type ranking. Sort of if head coaches had a draft of what job was best, I'd put LSU in the top 5-8. We have the ingredients to win at a high level, that we did not always hurts the all time ranking, but that shouldn't count against LSU in terms of how desirable the job is.

What's interesting is that they cite LSU's football history Pre-Saban (which is still quite historically successful) as a 'con', while not mentioning Florida's football history Pre-Spurrier, which for historical comparisons sake is fairly forgettable...

I find this rather hypocritical.