re: one of the main reasons i like coach O and think he'll be a success at LSU

quote:

---

Its isnt and only someone with little cfb knowledge would say it us

---

Not true. The only ridiculous example you can give is because it isn't in the official records. MY QUESTION is: What does a permanent head coach do that an interim head not do? What does a permanent coach do on a daily basis? What does an interim coach do on a daily basis? What are the differences that cause an interim coach to not be running a program regardless of who chose to hire the assistants? Can you answer that? If not quit spewing stupid shite on the subject.

Let's use the business world as an example you MAY possibly be able to understand. Let's say you are hired as an office manager or a department manager by a corporation. A couple months later someone asks you what you do - you say "I run the XXX dept or run the office at XXX". The person busts out laughing and tells you that you don't run shite. You didn't hire any the employees in the dept., you weren't there when any of the corporate policies were adopted. You essentially just don't do shite.

quote:

---

Please explain how not running the offense, not running the defense, not choosing schemes, and not choosing the coordinators is runming a program.

---

You really don't know do you? I may have to go slam a couple dozen shots of Wild Turkey American Honey to be able to communicate with you on your level.

I've already pointed out that CEO did choose his coordinator at LSU so that is one ignorant and incorrect statement that you can stop regurgitating every post.

quote:

---

What does a permanent head coach do that an interim head not do?

---

Think of it as someone else did 90% of the work(I'll give O 10% since he was DL/RC), yet you get credit for the finished product.

quote:

---

There is zero proof of this. Not even a shred of evidence.

---

Rick, I think you're a great fan and appreciate your posts, particularly because you try to always back them up with facts. I'm usually on the same side of the argument as you. However, this whole assertion is a stretch. To say that there is not a shred of evidence that O has improved as a head coach is a bit of a troll. Sure, the jury is still out, and he may not live up to this job, but there's plenty of evidence that he has improved.

The mere fact that he admits he was not a very good coach at OM, that he knows a lot of the things that he did wrong, that he's learned from his mistakes, and in particular what he now does differently is an indicator. He's learned from the likes of Pete Carroll and uses many of his methods. He's changed the structure of practice, not wearing down the players every week. He's proven himself as a top notch recruiter every place that he has been, getting better at every stint.

Yes, his most recent records have been as "interim" coach. Still, those records are impressive. How often are mid-season firings followed by continued slides of the teams as opposed to dramatic turn arounds in fortunes, and that's even considering that teams are going to try to pick the interim that gives them the best chance going forward? The fact that someone is chosen as interim says a lot about what the people who have worked with him on a daily basis and know him very well think about him, as opposed to someone whom you think might be good and know from a couple of interviews.

I could go on with more examples, but this post is already turning into a tome. However, saying that these are not valid indicators and only his recored as an established coach matters is ridiculous. That's like saying a player's stats during the regular season, or his numbers at the combine are the only thing that matter when evaluating a player. Every data point matters when evaluating someone for their future potential at a job.

Every coaching hire is a roll of the dice. Although he showed potential, no one saw Saban coming from Michigan State turning out as good as he did. In hindsight, USC should have given O a chance rather than hiring Sarkisian, but they had trouble believing their lying eyes and couldn't get over his Ole Miss record as well. LSU had even more evidence to believe that O at least had the potential to be a good coach when they hired him. Does that mean he will bring LSU a championship? Certainly not, but for the fact man to say there is not a shred of evidence that O hasn't improved as a head coach is disingenuous.

I was skeptical when O was given the job, but objectively, except for the whole Kiffin/QB near screw up, I've agreed with almost everything he's done. Every coach makes some mistakes and has a few inexplicable losses like the UF game. I'm not completely sold on O yet, but I certainly think he's done enough to earn the benefit of the doubt until he actually proves otherwise.

TL/DR: Rick, you've earned your props, but you're off the mark on this one dude.

quote:

---

I'm not completely sold on O yet, but I certainly think he's done enough to earn the benefit of the doubt until he actually proves otherwise.

---

What has he done that any other coach wouldn't have done? He brought in a question mark at WR coach, and what should be a homerun at RB/RC. Any other coach with the LSU program's backing would've brought in just as good/better on paper coaches.

In fact, his plan sounds good in theory, but is ridiculous to anyone that knows football. Surround yourself with the best coordinators to hide your deficiencies? Cool. But you know what the best coordinators do? They get HC jobs. So we'll be installing a new offense or defense every other year, going 9-3 and saying next year is they year.

quote:

---

Wouldn't you think that if he was so improved since that terrible time for him, he would have at lease been able to get a DC job? O couldn't get the ULL job or any of the other countless jobs that have come open in the last tens at even minor schools. Truth be known, if Alleva hadn't hired him as head coach at LSU he would have been searching for another DL job

---

LSU was not the first major program to want to hire Coach O. Pat Haden is no longer at USC. I believe part of that is because he hired Sark instead of CEO. He was the only one - including players, alumni, media, staff - that didn't want to hire O.

I'll post a link to separate articles and comments when Coach O was not hired by Haden.

https://www.tigerdroppings.com/rant/display.aspx?sp=66521306&s=2&p=66514171#66521306

quote:

---

Ed Orgeron, USC’s interim football coach, had fans, alumni and players in his corner. But USC athletic director Pat Haden wasn’t impressed.

Lane Kiffin couldn’t win with the same players Orgeron won during an amazing run with the Trojans.

Haden will need to explain this one

Kessler, former USC Hesiman winner Marcus Allen and other alumni were on a futile campaign in backing Orgeron. Haden never was going to hire him

---

quote:

---

USC's hiring of Washington's Steve Sarkisian as its new head football coach seems to have had the exact opposite effect of the effect hirings are supposed to have.

To be fair, the glum mood seems not to come from any pre-existing feelings about Sarkisian, but rather the resignation of Ed Orgeron, the wildly popular interim coach

---

quote:

---

How hard will Sark's job be? Players openly crying after Orgeron's departure. #USC

---

quote:

---

Note: this is not including the semi-breakdown suffered by an LA Daily News reporter

---

quote:

---

As he was leaving Dan Weber asked Pat Haden "How's it going" and he responded, "I've had better days." #USC

THAT'S THE ATHLETIC DIRECTOR. THAT'S THE GUY WHO MADE THE HIRE.

---

The linked post has more quotes - mostly from players and links to the articles where the quotes came from.

Look at the talent differential. He was handed a team better than its record. He didn't win any games we wouldn't have won with Les running the show

I really think LSU under estimated Wisconsin last year, they turned out to be a better team than this board and the media projected.

quote:

---

LSU was not the first major program to want to hire Coach O.

---

Then why has he never, ever been even a D.C., let alone a head coach for a major program (minus his stint at Ole Miss, which we apparently aren't allowed to talk about)?

quote:

---

That's the same winning percentage that got Miles on the hot seat in 2015 and eventually fired

---

Winning percentage was not what got Les Miles fired. It was his unwillingness to change. It was him telling the AD he would allow the offense to open up and not doing it.