DD "IS" Recruiting!

#33
#33
Bottom line is that neither guy has proven he can win as a HC at any level. CLK's climb over the next few years won't be as steep as Dooley's... but history will write itself.
 
#41
#41
Who cares if Dooley talks or not. Do we really need a coach to make headlines everyday to assure ourselves that we are still an elite football program. Low confidence, anxiety, complaining, I think alot of our football fans are on the rag.
 
#42
#42
He's lost 20, in three years at Louisiana Tech, which gives people a good reason to be negative...

I've asked this question before, but never get an answer.

So, you wouldn't hire a coach that had 20 loses in 3 years?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#43
#43
Yeah, losing to Nevada and the rest of the WAC schools is a lot better than losing to NFL teams.

You do know that Boise St is also in the WAC?
Also included in those schedules were:
LSU, MS St, Auburn, Ole Miss, Kansas and Cal.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#44
#44
I've asked this question before, but never get an answer.

So, you wouldn't hire a coach that had 20 loses in 3 years?
Posted via VolNation Mobile

I wouldn't if his best season throughout his career was an 8-5 triumph in the Independence Bowl.
 
#45
#45
You are either winning or losing on any level, there is no better, there is no worse, losing is losing...period.

With that logic, there are a number of college coaches better than Belichick, or any other NFL coach, since they lose less games per season than he does.
How did you miss the "on any level" part? He's saying NFL coaches who lose to other NFL coaches equals college coaches losing to other college coaches. I don't see a college to NFL coaching comparison in that statement.
 
#46
#46
I wouldn't if his best season throughout his career was an 8-5 triumph in the Independence Bowl.

Check out those 20 losses. What do you think our record would have been against them? We lost to some of those teams too, and he was a La. Tec when he lost to them.
 
#47
#47
I've asked this question before, but never get an answer.

So, you wouldn't hire a coach that had 20 loses in 3 years?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Should a University on the traditional level of Tennessee hire a coach with 20 losses in three years? If I were the AD at Tennessee, even given the crappy hand dealt with the former coach leaving at the worst possible time, I would have made the coaches I really wanted tell me no about ten times sorta like bammer did when Saban said no to them initially. No reflection on Dooley (he may become the next Robert Neyland for all I know) but hiring a coach with the track record he has at Tennessee makes no sense. Dooley better produce relatively quickly because if he doesn't Hammy will be swept out with him.
 
#49
#49
Should a University on the traditional level of Tennessee hire a coach with 20 losses in three years? If I were the AD at Tennessee, even given the crappy hand dealt with the former coach leaving at the worst possible time, I would have made the coaches I really wanted tell me no about ten times sorta like bammer did when Saban said no to them initially. No reflection on Dooley (he may become the next Robert Neyland for all I know) but hiring a coach with the track record he has at Tennessee makes no sense. Dooley better produce relatively quickly because if he doesn't Hammy will be swept out with him.
i completely agree.
 
#50
#50
Check out those 20 losses. What do you think our record would have been against them? We lost to some of those teams too, and he was a La. Tec when he lost to them.

You're overlooking the fact that Dooley didn't really improve or turn that program around.

I'm on the 'wait and see' bandwagon, but I'm not so optimistic.
 

Advertisement



Back
Top