Best coaches of the College Football Playoff era (so far)...

[4down20]

If you can put Riley and Smart in, why not Frost. In 2 years time they went from 0-12 to 13-0. I am not a mathematician, but that seems pretty damn good. I am not 1 to use "team X didn't want to be there", I let other people have that puss poor excuse

Because UCF didn't play a schedule that ranked in the top100.

The topic is "best coaches", not "who's done good considering".

 

[Across The Field]

I would bet Riley and Smart had a larger talent advantage over their schedule, than Scott had over his. So why do you think guys that inherited the core of their team did better job than Frost, when they had a larger talent advantage over their schedule than Frost? Hell, Kirby didn't win a game vs a more talented team.

I don't agree with that. The only team with real talent UCF faced was Auburn, and they barely beat them in a game that meant nothing to Auburn since they missed out on the CFP. Otherwise, UCF was more talented than every other team on their schedule, most of them by a very wide margin.

 

[Across The Field]

OU has won 10 games for 2-3 years. Is winning 11 that much more impressive?

Is that more impressive than watching a guy take a team from 0-12 to 13-0.

The way he did it is a lot more impressive. What's impressive about going unbeaten against UCF's schedule? They played the easiest first 13 games than everyone in the top 10 by a LANDSLIDE, then they get an Auburn team that couldn't give a shit. Whoopty do.

 

[Codaxx]

I don't agree with that. The only team with real talent UCF faced was Auburn, and they barely beat them in a game that meant nothing to Auburn since they missed out on the CFP. Otherwise, UCF was more talented than every other team on their schedule, most of them by a very wide margin.

It's comparable talent. Georgia and OU play very few games where they have less talent than the opposition. This is a thread about coaching and we are discussing 3 coaches that did not recruit or build their teams. So inherited talent vs competition is a big factor

 

[Codaxx]

The way he did it is a lot more impressive. What's impressive about going unbeaten against UCF's schedule? They played the easiest first 13 games than everyone in the top 10 by a LANDSLIDE, then they get an Auburn team that couldn't give a shit. Whoopty do.

How was OU more impressive. They had superior talent than 85% of the teams they played. You can't say that for UCF

 

[4down20]

It's comparable talent. Georgia and OU play very few games where they have less talent than the opposition. This is a thread about coaching and we are discussing 3 coaches that did not recruit or build their teams. So inherited talent vs competition is a big factor

So what?

 

[4down20]

How was OU more impressive. They had superior talent than 85% of the teams they played. You can't say that for UCF

Because they beat better teams.

 

[Codaxx]

Because UCF didn't play a schedule that ranked in the top100.

The topic is "best coaches", not "who's done good considering".

Why does a coach that inherited a poor team at A mid-major need to play a P5 schedule to prove he did a good job. It's not like his talent base was close to Georgia or OU

 

[Codaxx]

Because they beat better teams.

#1 I am not sure OU beat a better team than IF

#2 His wins were more impressive when you factor in the talent he took over compared to Riley

 

[4down20]

Why does a coach that inherited a poor team at A mid-major need to play a P5 schedule to prove he did a good job. It's not like his talent base was close to Georgia or OU

Because good coaches get good opportunities and bring in good recruits and then they make the most of those recruits.

I have nothing against Scott Frost, he did a good job and deserved to get a better job, but he's not that far up the ladder yet.

I'd say what Franklin did at Vanderbilt a few years ago was more impressive for example.

 

[4down20]

#1 I am not sure OU beat a better team than IF

#2 His wins were more impressive when you factor in the talent he took over compared to Riley

#1 OU beat Ohio St.

#2. But I see no reason to factor that in. Getting to the top teams is part of being the best coach. And if you do factor in, you have to also look at the talent he played against, which you seem to ignore. One of the easiest schedules in college football.

Call him one of the most promising coaches, say he has great potential and all that kind of stuff and I'm totally on board. But calling him one of the best coaches in college football over the past 4 years is total bullshit.

 

[OregonDucks]

With this list an argument could be made Helfrich should be on there.

 

[Across The Field]

It's comparable talent. Georgia and OU play very few games where they have less talent than the opposition. This is a thread about coaching and we are discussing 3 coaches that did not recruit or build their teams. So inherited talent vs competition is a big factor

And I'd argue UCF played even fewer games in 2017 where that was the case. You gonna tell me USF and Memphis had more talent? Because those were the only "tough" teams they faced all season before Auburn.

 

[Across The Field]

How was OU more impressive. They had superior talent than 85% of the teams they played. You can't say that for UCF

Oh I absolutely can. They had more talent than 93% of the teams they faced. That 7% is Auburn.

What OU did as 7 point underdogs against Ohio State in Columbus was far, far more impressive than anything UCF did. It's not even close.

 

[kburjr]

Because UCF didn't play a schedule that ranked in the top100.

The topic is "best coaches", not "who's done good considering".

I thought the discussion was who was the best coach, not who coached the best team. I would Saban's move to put the freshman QB in is the one single greatest coaching move I have ever seen. However, as far as the season goes, going from preseason #1 to needing help to get on the playoffs does not indicate a great job of coaching.

 

[4down20]

I thought the discussion was who was the best coach, not who coached the best team. I would Saban's move to put the freshman QB in is the one single greatest coaching move I have ever seen. However, as far as the season goes, going from preseason #1 to needing help to get on the playoffs does not indicate a great job of coaching.

So because he's already built a crazy good team he's no longer doing a great job of coaching?

That's just window licking funny.

 

[7Samurai13]

Because good coaches get good opportunities and bring in good recruits and then they make the most of those recruits.

I have nothing against Scott Frost, he did a good job and deserved to get a better job, but he's not that far up the ladder yet.

I'd say what Franklin did at Vanderbilt a few years ago was more impressive for example.

What did Franklin do at Vandy? He went 2-6, 5-3, and 4-4 in a weak as shit division. He just ate up all the cupcakes and had one decent win in three years.

 

[Codaxx]

#1 OU beat Ohio St.

#2. But I see no reason to factor that in. Getting to the top teams is part of being the best coach. And if you do factor in, you have to also look at the talent he played against, which you seem to ignore. One of the easiest schedules in college football.

Call him one of the most promising coaches, say he has great potential and all that kind of stuff and I'm totally on board. But calling him one of the best coaches in college football over the past 4 years is total bullshit.

1. OSU and Auburn are comparable.

2. No it doesn't. Getting jobs can come down to how you interview. Sometimes people are happy where they coach. A guy like Snyder is a great coach, just because he didn't want to Coach at A blue blood doesn't take anything away from him. Bama has had plenty of terrible coaches. Sometimes coaching and teaching are the driving factors, not ease of winning a title to remain at A job

 

[Codaxx]

Oh I absolutely can. They had more talent than 93% of the teams they faced. That 7% is Auburn.

What OU did as 7 point underdogs against Ohio State in Columbus was far, far more impressive than anything UCF did. It's not even close.

Beating Auburn was more impressive to me. UCF came in with a 4 year recruiting average of 71st in the nation. Auburn came in with a 4 year rank of 8. That is a massive talent fap that requires coaching. OSU had more talent than OU in that sense, but the gap was nothing like that.

 

[Across The Field]

Beating Auburn was more impressive to me. UCF came in with a 4 year recruiting average of 71st in the nation. Auburn came in with a 4 year rank of 8. That is a massive talent fap that requires coaching. OSU had more talent than OU in that sense, but the gap was nothing like that.

Yes, and UCF barely won in a game that really held no meaning to Auburn. Call it an excuse, but I'm not an Auburn fan by any means and even I could see from watching that game that they simply weren't playing their best. It was just ugly. OU/OSU, meanwhile, was a primetime game with MAJOR playoff implications, and it was in Columbus at night. OU played an amazing game and won comfortably. That is significantly more impressive.