General Neyland vs Bear Byrant

[chargervol]

I scaled it so that Spurrier's numbers of titles and wins compared to Jones would be roughly equivalent to Bryant's compared to Neyland's. I wasn't trying to shortchange any particular coach with that hypothetical.

OK, I didn't check the math between the 2 and would not have even thought to. But I still say that Jones would have a very difficult time topping the win % without accumulating more titles in this age.

Here is my question. How is this working both ways??
Neyland was supposedly only better because he was seasoned and Bryant was young - so "Of course Neyland won" But now Spurrier is seasoned and Jones is young.

WTH am I missing here? As JP pointed out, there is only one way to judge anything in FB - on the field. Sorry, I really admire Bryant ( I honestly do)but I can only award first place based on actual competition between the two.

 

[chargervol]

I agree with that. It's also worth saying that if Jones turns UT completely around, it would be an even more significant sign of his coaching prowess than if he'd taken over a decent situation.

Spurrier gets praise not only for what he did at UF, but for dragging programs like Duke and USCe out of the cellar.

Spurrier deserves a national statue for making USCe relevant... I'm giving you a like for this one:good!:

 

[chargervol]

OK, have to finish later. Early day tomorrow but it was fun guys. With all bias admitted, Neyland!

 

[bamawriter]

OK, I didn't check the math between the 2 and would not have even thought to.

I didn't really do the math. It's rough at best.

But I still say that Jones would have a very difficult time topping the win % without accumulating more titles in this age.

Probably. The likelihood of the scenario isn't the point. But Mark Richt has done it, so it's not impossible.

Here is my question. How is this working both ways??
Neyland was supposedly only better because he was seasoned and Bryant was young - so "Of course Neyland won" But now Spurrier is seasoned and Jones is young.

Point taken.

WTH am I missing here? As JP pointed out, there is only one way to judge anything in FB - on the field. Sorry, I really admire Bryant ( I honestly do)but I can only award first place based on actual competition between the two.

So we're back to Dooley being ahead of Jones, at least with the information we have on hand. I'm not saying head-to-head shouldn't matter. But context means everything. Bryant had to deal with changes to the game that probably caused the General to spin in his grave, but Bryant won anyway.

 

[onevol74]

The last statement cannot be said with any certainty. Neyland's winning percentage dropped after the conference split because he no longer had the William and Marys of the world in conference. There's also no telling how he would have done in the two platoon system, which he fought against tooth-and-nail.

If this, if that! If the Bear had to coach five more years he might have been average just as he was in the late 60's. I prefer to look at the facts and not conjecture of what might have been.

As I said previously, the Genereal was called to service and
Had to come back and rebuild his team, and when did that happen? After the formation of the SEC. AS I said previously, if the General had been here for 27 consecutive years he would have avoided at least 2 rebuilding stages.

 

[bamawriter]

If this, if that! If the Bear had to coach five more years he might have been average just as he was in the late 60's. I prefer to look at the facts and not conjecture of what might have been.

As I said previously, the Genereal was called to service and
Had to come back and rebuild his team, and when did that happen? After the formation of the SEC. AS I said previously, if the General had been here for 27 consecutive years he would have avoided at least 2 rebuilding stages.

While I have nothing but admiration for Neyland's military service, every program had to be rebuilt following WW II. He was personally out longer than his contemporaries, but every program was gutted by the war. Heck, no one played a down in 1943.

 

[butchna]

While I have nothing but admiration for Neyland's military service, every program had to be rebuilt following WW II. He was personally out longer than his contemporaries, but every program was gutted by the war. Heck, no one played a down in 1943.

Missed his point...unless you're alleging Bryant also rebuilt Bama's program after WWII. Neyland had an obvious hurdle to overcome at Tennessee...Bryant didn't at Bama.

 

[bamawriter]

Missed his point...unless you're alleging Bryant also rebuilt Bama's program after WWII. Neyland had an obvious hurdle to overcome at Tennessee...Bryant didn't at Bama.

Neyland's hurdles were shared by every other team in the conference. He would have put up more wins during his service years, but he also would have put up losses. He wasn't overly handicapped compared to his peers.

But if we want to talk rebuilding, Neyland never had to deal with anything remotely close to what Bryant took over at Bama.

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

Neyland's hurdles were shared by every other team in the conference. He would have put up more wins during his service years, but he also would have put up losses. He wasn't overly handicapped compared to his peers.

But if we want to talk rebuilding, Neyland never had to deal with anything remotely close to what Bryant took over at Bama.

Neyland was busy in the Pacific. Where were all of the other SEC HCs hanging out during those years?

Neyland took over a team that was owned by Vanderbilt.

 

[Volosaurus rex]

While I have nothing but admiration for Neyland's military service, every program had to be rebuilt following WW II. He was personally out longer than his contemporaries, but every program was gutted by the war. Heck, no one played a down in 1943.

No and no. Army and Notre Dame were two programs that certainly did not miss a beat during or immediately after the war. Army obviously had the pick of the proverbial litter for much of World War II, but their record was 7-2-1 in 1943, 9-0-0 in both 1944 and ’45, and 9-0-1 in 1946 (Army Historical Scores). Notre Dame was 9-1-0 in 1943, 8-2-0 in 1944, 7-2-1 in 1945, 8-0-1 in 1946, 9-0-0 in 1947 and 9-0-1 in 1948 (Notre Dame Historical Scores). So much for the premise that “no one played a down in 1943.”

As for your premise that Neyland may have struggled with the advent of platoon football, pardon me if I place greater credence in the opinion of Neyland’s colleague, friend and rival at Alabama, Wallace Wade, on the matter: “First, he’s a very brilliant man. . . . His teams were always well-trained, well-conditioned. . . . One of the things that I used to misjudge, I used to think he was lucky, but I began to realize after time that luck turns sometime but it never did with him because he trained his players to take advantage of opportunities. . . . He’d win [today], because he’s that kind of man. He’d have his team well-drilled, in the first place he would do a good recruiting job. . . . He would have his team adapted to the game of football as it is played today. He’d win today, just like he always did.” Wade’s remarks are interspersed throughout this narrative but fast-forward to the 3:25 and, then, 17:22 marks of: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBWJgoBZTeM.

If that isn’t sufficient praise, some fellow by the name of Knute Rockne once described Neyland as “football’s greatest coach” (National Football Foundation > Programs > College Football Hall of Fame > SearchDetail). Your inability to give Neyland his proper due would be positively repugnant, except for the fact that it is so utterly laughable . . . and predictable.

 

[butchna]

Neyland's hurdles were shared by every other team in the conference. He would have put up more wins during his service years, but he also would have put up losses. He wasn't overly handicapped compared to his peers.

But if we want to talk rebuilding, Neyland never had to deal with anything remotely close to what Bryant took over at Bama.

Bull...only word that fits that homerific point. Pray tell what were the hardships in Tuscaloosa...other than his predecessor sucking to high heaven? And what did the Bear endure that equates to participating in a global conflict? Reestablishing Bama's recruiting pipeline to Arkansas? And you keep belaboring. "EVERYBODY had to deal with the aftermath of WWII"...for the purposes of this Neyland v Bryant debate? ONE didn't! :wink2:

 

[Boca Vol]

. . . . He’d win [today], because he’s that kind of man. He’d have his team well-drilled, in the first place he would do a good recruiting job. . . .

So, do you think he'd prefer Adidas or Nike?

 

[bamawriter]

Neyland was busy in the Pacific. Where were all of the other SEC HCs hanging out during those years?

Neyland took over a team that was owned by Vanderbilt.

Most teams were owned by Vandy in the 20s.

Bryant took over a team that had won 4 games in three years. He replaced a coach that was dumb enough to bench Bart Starr during his senior year in favor of a "youth movement".

 

[bamawriter]

If that isn’t sufficient praise, some fellow by the name of Knute Rockne once described Neyland as “football’s greatest coach” (National Football Foundation > Programs > College Football Hall of Fame > SearchDetail). Your inability to give Neyland his proper due would be positively repugnant, except for the fact that it is so utterly laughable . . . and predictable.

That is high praise from a legend in the game. But who knows what Rockne's opinion might have been had he not died in 1931?

 

[VFL-82-JP]

Most teams were owned by Vandy in the 20s.

Bryant took over a team that had won 4 games in three years. He replaced a coach that was dumb enough to bench Bart Starr during his senior year in favor of a "youth movement".

Wow, that's really hard. You are right, sir, that is far tougher than fighting facism in Europe or imperial expansionism in the Pacific theater. Thanks for straightening us all out on that.

 

[VFL-82-JP]

...some fellow by the name of Knute Rockne once described Neyland as “football’s greatest coach” (National Football Foundation > Programs > College Football Hall of Fame > SearchDetail)....

That is high praise from a legend in the game. But who knows what Rockne's opinion might have been had he not died in 1931?

"Football's greatest coach." Being called that by perhaps the greatest of your peers at the time, that carries great weight. And hey! I think Knute gave the General that title in his first seven years as a head coach. Those are important years, those first seven years, don't you think?

Errm, was Paul Bryant ever called football's greatest coach," by any of the greats of his time? Woody Hayes, maybe, or, Tom Osborne? Bo Schembeckler? Anybody?

All we know for certain is that Paul Bryant lost five games to Football's Greatest Coach in his first seven years, and never could find a way to beat the man. That's where the proof is in football, on the field.

 

[bamawriter]

Wow, that's really hard. You are right, sir, that is far tougher than fighting facism in Europe or imperial expansionism in the Pacific theater. Thanks for straightening us all out on that.

Right, because I said anything close to that...

Don't quote my posts if you aren't going to respond to their contents.

 

[VFL-82-JP]

Right, because I said anything close to that...

Don't quote my posts if you aren't going to respond to their contents.

Context. It's all about context. You made the statement I quoted in the context of others pointing out the challenges of General Neyland's service to our country in war. If you didn't want the comparison made, you shouldn't have talked about Bear's hardships at that point of the conversation.

So you see? I responded directly to the contents of your post, in the context of the ongoing conversation.

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

Most teams were owned by Vandy in the 20s.

Bryant took over a team that had won 4 games in three years. He replaced a coach that was dumb enough to bench Bart Starr during his senior year in favor of a "youth movement".

So if the coach before Bryant is playing his young guys instead of the better veterans he is sacrificing wins for player development. That means the cupboard wasn't bare when Bear took over.

 

[bamawriter]

Context. It's all about context. You made the statement I quoted in the context of others pointing out the challenges of General Neyland's service to our country in war. If you didn't want the comparison made, you shouldn't have talked about Bear's hardships at that point of the conversation.

So you see? I responded directly to the contents of your post, in the context of the ongoing conversation.

Try reading again. If you are still confused, keep reading over and ovef until you are no longer stupid.

 

[VFL-82-JP]

Try reading again. If you are still confused, keep reading over and ovef until you are no longer stupid.

Heh, Bamawriter, I'm sure you're a good guy and a decent human being, and I'm just having fun going back and forth with you on this topic. But it seems it's starting to get to you a little. So probably just best to back away from the thread for a little while, let things cool off. We don't want this to degenerate into name-calling or anything, I'm sure you'd agree.

They're both great past coaches, we can leave it at that if going further might be problematic.

 

[bamawriter]

So if the coach before Bryant is playing his young guys instead of the better veterans he is sacrificing wins for player development. That means the cupboard wasn't bare when Bear took over.

The freshmen who played in Year One of Whitworth's youth movement won two games and were shut out in half their games in Year Three. There would be no Year Four.

 

[bamawriter]

Heh, Bamawriter, I'm sure you're a good guy and a decent human being, and I'm just having fun going back and forth with you on this topic. But it seems it's starting to get to you a little. So probably just best to back away from the thread for a little while, let things cool off. We don't want this to degenerate into name-calling or anything, I'm sure you'd agree.

They're both great past coaches, we can leave it at that if going further might be problematic.

Peace pipe?

Don't attribute nonsense (and rather awful nonsense at that) to me and I'm cool. I will correct you if you're going to do that, and I'd expect you to do the same if the roles were reversed.

 

[VFL-82-JP]

Don't attribute nonsense (and rather awful nonsense at that) to me and I'm cool. I will correct you if you're going to do that, and I'd expect you to do the same if the roles were reversed.

You know that those who are losing a debate and don't see any way to salvage it are usually the ones who lash out in anger and resort to name-calling, right? It's a sure sign a person believes they've lost.

I think you know my point wasn't nonsense at all, but have no good response to it.

It's okay, we don't have to keep going. Lets just leave it at both coaches being awesome in their time...and when their times overlapped, the General was the better coach.

 

[butchna]

Right, because I said anything close to that...

Don't quote my posts if you aren't going to respond to their contents.

Fought through the tears, thinking of Bryant having to take over a team that was badly coached. :cray: Why didn't Clint Eastwood ever do a movie on this?