goDAWGSsicem
Active Member
exactly
UCLA at 38?
bwahahahahaaaa yeah right
So why can't UCLA land a decent coach?
exactly
UCLA at 38?
bwahahahahaaaa yeah right
Sure it does. Obviously a formula that uses coaching salary will favor the conference with the highest paid coaches, in this case the SEC. So again, more biased results.
IMO though, the best job pays the most. If Arkansas State paid me $5 mill, I would coach. Hell I would take 202K they pay their current coach.
So why can't UCLA land a decent coach?
Because UCLA has consistently shown they will not pay a coach top dollar nor will they spend money on the program to support said coach
In other words... not a top coaching job.
Petersen, Calhoun and who was the other person who turned UCLA down?
Not a top coaching job.
I'm still confused as to how recruiting fits into being a good head coaching job. Isn't it the coaching staffs job to do the recruiting? There are probably only 7-10 schools that land recruits on school name alone.
Being in an AQ conference definitely makes one job more desirable than another in a non-AQ conference. They are weighted as such. Additionally the Big 10, Big 12, SEC and PAC 12 are also in a tier above the Big East and ACC...obviously.
I can tell you that Clemson is severely underrated by this list just based on recruiting values alone.
I sent them an email asking "How do you quantify what conference a coach is in when developing your rankings for Best Head Coaching Jobs?"
This was the response:
So no concrete answer if you were looking for a "ranking" that a conference has in their "formula", but based on the response the B1G, B12, SEC, and P12 are above the ACC and BE which are above non-AQ's like the WAC and MWC.
I think mysfit is really a dude that knows he's such a huge bitch that it's easier to just present himself as a woman.
Coaching salary at Clemson brings it down some too.