- 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
re: Who was a more questionable hire Mike Archer, Curley Hallman, Gerry DiNardo or Ed Orgeron?
Posted on 2/11/18 at 7:14 pm to The First Cut
Posted on 2/11/18 at 7:14 pm to The First Cut
quote:Now see, this is a strong case. And LSU beat him in Tiger Stadium in one of those losses, on a goal line fumble.
DiNardo was the most controversial. He had 4 losing seasons at Vandy and lost his last game there 65-0.
I don't know though, even though you present a strong case...O seems like it beats out Dinardo in being a questionable hire. LSU now has the money, the facilities, the alumni support and fan interest, and is one of the big dogs of college football, unlike LSU after firing Hallman. No fricking excuse for making that hire.
This post was edited on 2/11/18 at 7:20 pm
2
Posted on 2/11/18 at 7:19 pm to RealityTiger
Orgeron had a sliver of fan support behind his hire; DiNardo had none. Fans warmed up after his 6-4-1 first year, but no one liked the hire at the time.
Posted on 2/11/18 at 7:22 pm to The First Cut
Yeah but the only “sliver” of the fan base who supported 0 were knuckle-dragging sidewalk fans from the swamp.
Posted on 2/11/18 at 7:23 pm to RealityTiger
quote:
unlike LSU after firing Hallman. No fricking excuse for making that hire.
Hallman had big wins over Bama and FSU, there were some expectations that he’d do something. Archer was a horrible recruiter and Hallman walked into a real bare cupboard. Hallman wasn’t a good coach, at all, but he left more talent than what he inherited.
Posted on 2/11/18 at 7:26 pm to Dave England
quote:
Yeah but the only “sliver” of the fan base who supported 0 were knuckle-dragging sidewalk fans from the swamp.
That was way more than the support for someone from the Bronx that didn’t know recruiting in the Deep South and that did nothing but lose at Vandy. Realize that O had more wins in his 8-game interim stint than DiNardo had in any full season at Vandy.
Posted on 2/11/18 at 7:37 pm to The First Cut
quote:I corrected it. That was the problem. We thought it was Hallman.
Favre had big wins over Bama and FSU
Posted on 2/11/18 at 9:11 pm to LSUFanMizeWay
Orgeron was a proven disastrous loser.
The others were mysteries as to whether they could win big consistently in the SEC.
None were good hires.
Orgeron was the worst by 42 country miles.
The others were mysteries as to whether they could win big consistently in the SEC.
None were good hires.
Orgeron was the worst by 42 country miles.
Posted on 2/11/18 at 9:14 pm to LSUFanMizeWay
Archer, bc Spurrier would have taken the position
Posted on 2/11/18 at 9:23 pm to timlan2057
quote:By virtue of all that came with the Miles firing, the fans are slowly fading back into apathy, etc. It was as important of a hire as any in the past (probably more important).
Orgeron was the worst by 42 country miles.
And like I said earlier...TAF has the money, LSU has the resources, the whole package is a premier package to whoever took the job. It was a fricking travesty that they promoted Ed O. without first going out and seeing who was out there beyond Fisher/Herman.
Posted on 2/11/18 at 11:19 pm to RealityTiger
HALLMAN WAS the worst in many ways...he couldn't coach and came to functions representing the university drunk out of his mind
He was a total embarrassment to the university and the state..
He was a total embarrassment to the university and the state..
Posted on 2/11/18 at 11:26 pm to tigers1956
He was but he left some players Dinardo could win with.
Archer really left that cupboard bare.
Archer really left that cupboard bare.
Posted on 2/12/18 at 7:19 am to prplhze2000
Dinardo holds the top spot. He was a total jerk.
Terrible hire. Dean went cheap. I was so disappointed.
Curley at the time looked like a good hire. Thanks to Farve.
Archer had the support of Arnsparger and players. Golden boy.
Ed still has a chance to prove most wrong. He has two more tries at Bama. I think if he goes 0-2 then he must go. Curly beat Bama and earned an extra year. But the writing was on the wall.
You’ll know when you have a winner. Everything starts to come together.
My favorites:
Saban
McClendon
Miles
Arnsparger
Stovall
Archer
Curley
Dinardo
Terrible hire. Dean went cheap. I was so disappointed.
Curley at the time looked like a good hire. Thanks to Farve.
Archer had the support of Arnsparger and players. Golden boy.
Ed still has a chance to prove most wrong. He has two more tries at Bama. I think if he goes 0-2 then he must go. Curly beat Bama and earned an extra year. But the writing was on the wall.
You’ll know when you have a winner. Everything starts to come together.
My favorites:
Saban
McClendon
Miles
Arnsparger
Stovall
Archer
Curley
Dinardo
Posted on 2/12/18 at 7:40 am to G&P
Dietzel did not hire McClendon.
In fact, McClendon was an LSU assistant coach when Dietzel was hired.
He gave Dietzel inside information on the selection committee and the Board of Supervisors. Dietzel, during his interview, had been briefed on what each Board Member did for a living and would make personal references to the Board Members.
McClendon gave Dietzel a description of each LSU football assistant, what position they coached and what their recruiting area was in the previous administration.
The board asked Dietzel to retain the Tinsley staff, which he did with one exception.
Will Walls, who applied for the job, was let go. Dietzel made no changes of the assistant coaches' recruiting or coaching responsibilities. They started spring practice two weeks after he was hired.
In fact, McClendon was an LSU assistant coach when Dietzel was hired.
He gave Dietzel inside information on the selection committee and the Board of Supervisors. Dietzel, during his interview, had been briefed on what each Board Member did for a living and would make personal references to the Board Members.
McClendon gave Dietzel a description of each LSU football assistant, what position they coached and what their recruiting area was in the previous administration.
The board asked Dietzel to retain the Tinsley staff, which he did with one exception.
Will Walls, who applied for the job, was let go. Dietzel made no changes of the assistant coaches' recruiting or coaching responsibilities. They started spring practice two weeks after he was hired.
Posted on 2/12/18 at 8:06 am to The First Cut
quote:
DiNardo was the controversial hire. Losing at Vanderbilt his entire time there
To put that in perspective he was there from 91-94 and went 5-6,4-7, 4-7, 5-6. The 2 years before he was hired Vandy was 1-10, 1-10 and after he left 2-9, 2-9. In 92 the SEC went to 8 conference games and we had 2 permanent opponents, Vandys were Ole Miss and Alabama. So with a tough schedule Vandy was better when he was hired and worse when he left. Compare that to coach O at Ole Miss where he won 10 games in 3 years at a school that won 10 games 2 years before he was hired and 9 the 2 years after he was fired.
Posted on 2/12/18 at 8:16 am to The First Cut
quote:
Orgeron had a sliver of fan support behind his hire; DiNardo had none. Fans warmed up after his 6-4-1 first year, but no one liked the hire at the time.
quote:
someone from the Bronx that didn’t know recruiting in the Deep Sout
I really don’t remember DiNardo being all that controversial. We had 6 straight losing seasons at that point. As for recruiting concerns one of his first press conferences he said he had to leave for Carencro to recruit which everyone knew was Kevin Faulk. When Faulk signed people where pretty happy
Posted on 2/12/18 at 8:35 am to H-Town Tiger
I find it comical that in a thread where the question is "who was the most questionable HIRE?" we have people taking about their records once they were coach to determine the answer.
Are you guys simple or something? What they did AFTER their hire has nothing at all to do with whether or not their actual HIRING was questionable...and this has been part of what many Orgeron defenders have been missing for over a year as many of us have continued to rail against his HIRING.
Even at the time, there were many solid reasons for the hiring of the three other coaches mentioned in the OP's question and Scoob has essentially nailed all of them earlier. Regardless of how their tenures turned out, each one of them had solid reasons for being either a solid hire or a worthwhile risk given the circumstances and the state of the LSU program at the time of their hiring. Only their actual tenures once hired, and being able to look back at other potential hires and how they ultimately turned out even remotely make them look bad...and that's simply intellectually dishonest given the question at hand.
There will NEVER be a good reason other than "every other coach in America with head coaching experience with a greater winning percentage than .500 turned us down AND all potential up and coming coordinators ALSO turned us down" that makes sense to have turned over the 2016 LSU Football program to Ed Orgeron and his career 10-25 head coaching record. Even if he turns a cross between Vince Lombardi and Nick Saban his HIRING will always be the worst we've ever had at LSU even if his ultimate win/loss record is spectacular. If he suceeds it wil not suddenly be the template all other Power 5 Programs use to hire their future coaches...look for abject failures and hire them anyway and hope for the best. Seriously...what's wrong with some of you?
** This is not a response to the poster I responded to...I just responded to the last post in the thread. FYI.
Are you guys simple or something? What they did AFTER their hire has nothing at all to do with whether or not their actual HIRING was questionable...and this has been part of what many Orgeron defenders have been missing for over a year as many of us have continued to rail against his HIRING.
Even at the time, there were many solid reasons for the hiring of the three other coaches mentioned in the OP's question and Scoob has essentially nailed all of them earlier. Regardless of how their tenures turned out, each one of them had solid reasons for being either a solid hire or a worthwhile risk given the circumstances and the state of the LSU program at the time of their hiring. Only their actual tenures once hired, and being able to look back at other potential hires and how they ultimately turned out even remotely make them look bad...and that's simply intellectually dishonest given the question at hand.
There will NEVER be a good reason other than "every other coach in America with head coaching experience with a greater winning percentage than .500 turned us down AND all potential up and coming coordinators ALSO turned us down" that makes sense to have turned over the 2016 LSU Football program to Ed Orgeron and his career 10-25 head coaching record. Even if he turns a cross between Vince Lombardi and Nick Saban his HIRING will always be the worst we've ever had at LSU even if his ultimate win/loss record is spectacular. If he suceeds it wil not suddenly be the template all other Power 5 Programs use to hire their future coaches...look for abject failures and hire them anyway and hope for the best. Seriously...what's wrong with some of you?
** This is not a response to the poster I responded to...I just responded to the last post in the thread. FYI.
Posted on 2/12/18 at 8:40 am to tigers1956
quote:
HALLMAN WAS the worst in many ways...he couldn't coach and came to functions representing the university drunk out of his mind He was a total embarrassment to the university and the state..
none of this was known at the time he was hired though.
which is the way i took the original question.
at the time Curley was hired, he looked like the right guy.
we now know that his QB at USM was one of the greatest ever and his coaching had squat to do with his success. but at the time, Favre wasn’t even a 1st round pick and Hallman was given most of the credit.
Posted on 2/12/18 at 8:52 am to LSUFanMizeWay
yes
Posted on 2/12/18 at 12:03 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:
As for recruiting concerns one of his first press conferences he said he had to leave for Carencro to recruit which everyone knew was Kevin Faulk.
Hallman already had Faulk committed, DiNardo went to Carencro to keep him.
Posted on 2/12/18 at 12:18 pm to beauchristopher
This board is full of kids who know absolutely nothing.
Page 7 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News