hifigator
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,387
|
Post by hifigator on Jul 14, 2011 14:13:21 GMT -5
www.athlonsports.com/college-football/ranking-college-football-coaching-jobsWhat do you all think of these rankings? And while it's obviously subjective, if you had to try to rank the criteria, how would you do so? I would think that the short list would have to include compensation at the top of the list. After that it gets a bit dicey. Factors like "tradition," "recruiting base," "fan support," "facilities," "booster/financial support" are often mentioned. Most of those can be lumped into the larger category of "chances for success." I'm not sure that is true of the other factors weighing attractiveness of a position. Again, obviusly compensation will be at/near the top of the list. But if truth be told, then that has already factored in many of those variables. My question to you all then is how do you think you would personally weight the attractiveness of a potential position? In that light, then I would think these factors would weigh heavily: location (what's around or near) climate family atmosphere (how attractive is the non-football related) chance for long term success happiness I've been thinking about this awhile, and it comes up at least once near the beginning of each new football season. What think you all?
|
|
|
|
Post by HometownHoya on Jul 14, 2011 17:33:33 GMT -5
TOSU
oh wait
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,737
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Jul 14, 2011 19:01:10 GMT -5
Athlon has never gotten anything right.
|
|
theexorcist
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,506 
|
Post by theexorcist on Jul 15, 2011 7:46:58 GMT -5
The ranking of USC at #3 is borderline absurd. The one time USC got good was when they cheated constantly. Before then, they were average in the PAC-10.
Even worse is ND at #12. ND recruiting standards are tough, and there's a lot of luster off the Golden Dome. It's a high-profile job, but not a good one.
UCLA at #15? No one cares about the Bruins, and they haven't been really relevant for 20 years. A good job would, by law of averages, leak out for the occasional challenge.
Surprisingly underrated is Penn State. The Paterno stuff is big, but Paterno's been coasting for a while and Pennsylvania has loads of talent and two states - NY and NJ - nearby that have minimal college football tradition.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,737
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Jul 15, 2011 9:03:08 GMT -5
USC was average in the Pac-10 because of crappy coaching. They have Southern California and a great history and lots and lots of cash.
What jobs would be bigger, really, inherent in the job itself? You're not telling me Florida gets all those players without cheating, are you?
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on Jul 15, 2011 9:05:08 GMT -5
I'd say wherever Hope Solo chooses to coach soccer is the most attractive coaching position.
Wait. What? Nevermind...
|
|
|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Jul 15, 2011 11:04:43 GMT -5
|
|
hifigator
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,387
|
Post by hifigator on Jul 15, 2011 12:00:33 GMT -5
This is kind of where I was heading with this. The "attractiveness" of a given job has a number of qualities. And like I said, compensation is at/near the top. With that is going to be tied hand-in-hand a need to win. So all of the "elite" jobs are going to be high stress and high expectations. So what plays into making that success easier to comeby? Obviously, a pool of talent to choose from and and attractive destination for that talent. So yes, I do think that both USC and UCLA should be pretty high on the list. Additionally, like someone else mentioned, given their recent troubles, the expectations at USC are, at least temporarily, mitigated somewhat. I also think that could make UCLA, even a bit more attractive. If there is a good time for the Bruins to get rolling in the right direction, it might be now. Additionally, with Harbaugh leaving, the rise of the Cardinal should be relatively short lived. Further, while Oregon has had a lot of recent success, Kelly is in a lot of hot water. All in all, I think that UCLA would be a very attractive place for College football coach.
I also agree with those who think Notre Dame to be overrated. That has been the case for years now and is only getting to be more and more the case. Finally it is showing in the rankings. It wasn't too long ago that the head coach at Notre Dame would have been in the top two or three on every single list. I think people are finally accepting that there are a lot of issues for that position and that, even though there are some inherant benefits, they are more than offset by the obstacles for success in South Bend.
But if we can put the potential for elite-level success on the back burner for a minute, what are the other factors that would/should entice a coach to a particular program?
Well, if we can somewhat disregard the need for success, then it becomes much easier. Maybe a program like a South Florida would come to mind. There aren't the immediate pressures, due to the established "big 3" in Florida, Florida St. and Miami. But there is the same talent pool to draw from. They have the same attractiveness in climate and location. They are in a BCS conference, so the monetary potential is there and most would say that it easier to win the Big East than the SEC for example.
So without giving it too much thought, right now, I would think that UCLA and South Florida are two of the more attractive positions in college football.
|
|
RDF
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 8,835
|
Post by RDF on Jul 15, 2011 13:30:23 GMT -5
The ranking of USC at #3 is borderline absurd. The one time USC got good was when they cheated constantly. Before then, they were average in the PAC-10. Even worse is ND at #12. ND recruiting standards are tough, and there's a lot of luster off the Golden Dome. It's a high-profile job, but not a good one. UCLA at #15? No one cares about the Bruins, and they haven't been really relevant for 20 years. A good job would, by law of averages, leak out for the occasional challenge. Surprisingly underrated is Penn State. The Paterno stuff is big, but Paterno's been coasting for a while and Pennsylvania has loads of talent and two states - NY and NJ - nearby that have minimal college football tradition. You do realize that almost every program violates NCAA rules? GA Tech was placed on probation and they are a middle of road/average program. USC is attractive because of: money location--tons of athletes available to recruit tradition weather money conference--and it's a misconception by a lot of coaches who think it'll be "easier" then it is-cough Mike Stoops  money USC was putting a ton of players into NFL even with poorly coached teams. UCLA is put there for same reasons without a consistent FB tradition. That ended with Terry Donahue. But the other aspects still exist for them that they share with SC. |
|
