Pruitt: "I didn't come here to win 6 games

[k-town_king]

p.s. All these fellas played 11 or 12 games (including bowls) in each of their first five seasons. I know they're too old for you, king, but they did have opportunities to win 9 or 10 early on:

Nick Saban. First five seasons in Power 5 went: 6-5-1, 6-6, 7-5, 6-6, 9-2.
Steve Spurrier. First five Power 5 seasons went: 5-6, 7-3-1, 8-4, 9-2, 10-2.
Bobby Bowden. First five Power 5 seasons went: 8-3, 7-4, 8-4, 6-5, 4-7.

Those are just three examples of truly outstanding head coaches who got slow starts in the Power 5. It's not uncommon. And so it is absolutely NO proof of anything if Pruitt doesn't win 9 or 10 games in his second season, as Dubb proposed.

He could still turn out to be another Saban, or Spurrier, or Bowden. And you'd fire each of them after two years because they didn't win 9?

But I would still like to hear from you about coaches who meet those four criteria, King. I'm really curious how many there are.

Saban, Spurrier, and Bowden all took over worse situations. Played less games.

I don't think you fire someone after two years unless they win 5 or less both years.

But in the last 20 years pretty much every coach who has been successful has been pretty good by year two. That is all I'm saying.

 

[butchna]

 

[VFL-82-JP]

Saban, Spurrier, and Bowden all took over worse situations. Played less games.

I don't think you fire someone after two years unless they win 5 or less both years.

But in the last 20 years pretty much every coach who has been successful has been pretty good by year two. That is all I'm saying.

Oh.

Okay.

If we're now down to "pretty good."

Sure, you gotta be pretty good by year 2 or you're never gonna be an elite coach. I guess I can agree with that. As long as "pretty good" doesn't include anything more than 6 wins. Because Nick Saban went 6-5-1 and 6-6 his first two seasons as a Power 5 head coach. So, pretty good, I guess.

I'm good with that.

I'm not sure Dubb has dropped to this level with us, though. He may still be demanding "9 wins by the 2nd season or bust, by Thor's Hammer!"

Hehe.


p.s. Steve Spurrier took over the Gators the year after a 7-5 season by his predecessor. That's not worse than what Jeremy Pruitt is inheriting, on the face of it (I don't know enough about old Gator rosters to know what his personnel looked like back then, for comparison).

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

Also note, that winning in year two does not guarantee a great coach either.

You obviously dont VN. Malzahan won big in year 1 so that made him a great coach. If Pruitt doesnt win big next year, I have a feeling there will be threads on here stating he is not the guy.

 

[VolEngineer]

I think you all are both right in your argument, but are arguing different things. One of you is talking about 2nd year as a power five coach in response to Pruitt, and the other is talking about successful coaches 2nd year at the school they were most successful at. He is referring to Dabos second year at clemson, sabans second at alabama and second at lsu, smarts second at georgia, Meyers second at Florida and first at Ohio State, etc. Both of you are correct in your respective arguments.

 

[VFL-82-JP]

I think you all are both right in your argument, but are arguing different things. One of you is talking about 2nd year as a power five coach in response to Pruitt, and the other is talking about successful coaches 2nd year at the school they were most successful at. He is referring to Dabos second year at clemson, sabans second at alabama and second at lsu, smarts second at georgia, Meyers second at Florida and first at Ohio State, etc. Both of you are correct in your respective arguments.

Yes.

But the opposing argument (Dubb's argument, now King's as well) gives many coaches a "free trial run" or two (or three). Like Saban at Mich St and LSU.

If Jeremy is going to win for us, he doesn't get any dry runs. He does it now.

And so maybe we don't demand that he get to 9 or 10 wins by year two...because if we demand that and he doesn't hit the mark, this argument would throw him out and start a new coaching search. When more patience might have revealed another Saban, Spurrier, or Bowden.

So sure, you're right, we're arguing a bit past each other. But only one of the two arguments has coherence in our current situation with CJP. We want him to win here. Not somewhere else, later. So let's give him a little time to get running.

It's that simple, really.

 

[VolEngineer]

Yes.

But the opposing argument (Dubb's argument, now King's as well) gives many coaches a "free trial run" or two (or three). Like Saban at Mich St and LSU.

If Jeremy is going to win for us, he doesn't get any dry runs. He does it now.

And so maybe we don't demand that he get to 9 or 10 wins by year two...because if we demand that and he doesn't hit the mark, this argument would throw him out and start a new coaching search. When more patience might have revealed another Saban, Spurrier, or Bowden.

So sure, you're right, we're arguing a bit past each other. But only one of the two arguments has coherence in our current situation with CJP. We want him to win here. Not somewhere else, later. So let's give him a little time to get running.

It's that simple, really.

I agree. We want him to be successful here and not use us as a stepping stone to a place he is successful at. Many of those coaches I mentioned did coach at another school or two before they got to the school they had the most success at. One thing I do think is valuable in many of these situations is experience coaching. Maybe having fulmer to help him might give him an advantage and give him tools to be successful here.

 

[cHiZzLeVOL]

Yes.

But the opposing argument (Dubb's argument, now King's as well) gives many coaches a "free trial run" or two (or three). Like Saban at Mich St and LSU.

If Jeremy is going to win for us, he doesn't get any dry runs. He does it now.

And so maybe we don't demand that he get to 9 or 10 wins by year two...because if we demand that and he doesn't hit the mark, this argument would throw him out and start a new coaching search. When more patience might have revealed another Saban, Spurrier, or Bowden.

So sure, you're right, we're arguing a bit past each other. But only one of the two arguments has coherence in our current situation with CJP. We want him to win here. Not somewhere else, later. So let's give him a little time to get running.

It's that simple, really.

Whew JP on a tear... Get em JP get em! Also, stop bringing in so much research and valid points.... Making us all look bad.... Lol, I joke. Good info man much appreciated.

 

[VFL-82-JP]

Whew JP on a tear... Get em JP get em! Also, stop bringing in so much research and valid points.... Making us all look bad.... Lol, I joke. Good info man much appreciated.

Ha! Thanks, Chizzle. :hi:

 

[ddubb76]

Yes.

But the opposing argument (Dubb's argument, now King's as well) gives many coaches a "free trial run" or two (or three). Like Saban at Mich St and LSU.

If Jeremy is going to win for us, he doesn't get any dry runs. He does it now.

And so maybe we don't demand that he get to 9 or 10 wins by year two...because if we demand that and he doesn't hit the mark, this argument would throw him out and start a new coaching search. When more patience might have revealed another Saban, Spurrier, or Bowden.

So sure, you're right, we're arguing a bit past each other. But only one of the two arguments has coherence in our current situation with CJP. We want him to win here. Not somewhere else, later. So let's give him a little time to get running.

It's that simple, really.

I think all volunteer fans want him to be successful here. It's just a matter of excitement. He he comes here and wins by year two, my excitement for him will continue. If he flops, my excitement will drop. Year two is where I will keep my expectations. If you want to give yet another coach a few years that's your business. But after year two, if he is not competing for something other than losers wins, then I will not be as excited and neither will many others. Hence me saying that if he doesn't win 9 games by year three he will be on his way out. ( my origional point)

 

[ddubb76]

Ah, you want to restrict the conversation to coaches who didn't start their head coaching tenure until the 12-game season was inaugurated, in 2006.

Okay.

Name a few. Say three or four "elite" or "great" coaches who first became head coaches in 2006 or later.

Can't include Saban, he started in '94. Nor Urban Meyer, he was '01 (Power 5 starting '05). Can't include Stoops. None of the "old guys" you dismissed.

So who you gonna include in your data? What about guys who've only been coaches a year or two? Is it too early to call them "elite," "great"? How about Josh Heupel? Or Kirby Smart? Lincoln Riley? Sure, these fellas have had success, but are you sure yet it's time to call them elite? What if they turn out to be latter-day Gene Chiziks, or Larry Cokers? Or even closer to home, Bill Battles? Shouldn't we wait at least a handful of years to see if they can sustain excellence, before we brand them elite?

So there's the rub. Almost all the "elite" coaches started back when we had an 11-game regular season (or 10, for the real old ones like Neyland)...while most of the ones who started since '06 haven't had time to prove yet that they're elite.

Can you name even three or four guys who meet these criteria?

(a) started first head coaching gig after 2006.
(b) have coached at the Power 5 level.
(c) have at least (say) five seasons in Power 5, sustained excellence.
(d) won at least 9 games by their second season.

You called this tune. Now you get to play it.

I'll hang up and listen.

Wrong on all points of the conversation. Who is now changing the data points. The point of the 12 or 10 win schedule is win percentage given your original 8 wins needed. Further more my point was not that even. It is simple. I don't care if Pruitt becomes an excellent coach at any other school, just what he does here. Your inclusion of their entire coaching tenure does not matter. We are not looking to hire coaches to be great in 10 years. We should demand greatness and if Pruitt is it he will win in year 2 with us. If he needs more experience, then the fan base will not wait another 5-6 years waiting for him to possibly become that coach, no matter how much you may want us too.

 

[VFL-82-JP]

Dubb, I like debating this with you, man, but we're starting to go in circles. When that happens, we should just stop and agree to disagree.

It comes down to this, really. You're willing (eager, even) to cut bait on a coach after just two years, if he's not 'exciting' you. Even if, given more of a chance, he may turn into another Saban or Spurrier or Bowden. You'd rather move on.

I wouldn't. I'd rather give him more time so we can find out who he really is.

So...is that it? Do we shake hands, accept our differences, and call it a day? Maybe for the best. You think?

 

[ddubb76]

Dubb, I like debating this with you, man, but we're starting to go in circles. When that happens, we should just stop and agree to disagree.

It comes down to this, really. You're willing (eager, even) to cut bait on a coach after just two years, if he's not 'exciting' you. Even if, given more of a chance, he may turn into another Saban or Spurrier or Bowden. You'd rather move on.

I wouldn't. I'd rather give him more time so we can find out who he really is.

So...is that it? Do we shake hands, accept our differences, and call it a day? Maybe for the best. You think?

Agree. But I do enjoy an intelligent debate🤝

 

[VFL-82-JP]

Agree. But I do enjoy an intelligent debate🤝

Ditto. Thanks for this one. :hi:

 

[ReasonableUTfan]

Wrong on all points of the conversation. Who is now changing the data points. The point of the 12 or 10 win schedule is win percentage given your original 8 wins needed. Further more my point was not that even. It is simple. I don't care if Pruitt becomes an excellent coach at any other school, just what he does here. Your inclusion of their entire coaching tenure does not matter. We are not looking to hire coaches to be great in 10 years. We should demand greatness and if Pruitt is it he will win in year 2 with us. If he needs more experience, then the fan base will not wait another 5-6 years waiting for him to possibly become that coach, no matter how much you may want us too.

Dubb, You have completely missed the point sir. It's better to have your eyes open as well as your mind when reading posts here and not just one and not the other. Words to live by sir. Take it as you will,but JP was spot on!!!!!

 

[ddubb76]

Dubb, You have completely missed the point sir. It's better to have your eyes open as well as your mind when reading posts here and not just one and not the other. Words to live by sir. Take it as you will,but JP was spot on!!!!!

What did jp tag you in? Sure I'll bite. I was spot on and you are wrong

 

[VFL-82-JP]

Dubb, You have completely missed the point sir. It's better to have your eyes open as well as your mind when reading posts here and not just one and not the other. Words to live by sir. Take it as you will,but JP was spot on!!!!!

Heh, thanks Reasonable. :hi:

What does your avatar stand for? Looks like an Atlanta falcon over a capital H. I don't recognize it.

 

[ddubb76]

Dubb, You have completely missed the point sir. It's better to have your eyes open as well as your mind when reading posts here and not just one and not the other. Words to live by sir. Take it as you will,but JP was spot on!!!!!

I have been lurking this board long enough to probably be a moderator. I'm well aware how to read this board. Well enough to know that their will be "coach needs more time " people and "cut bait" people. I have also been a ut fan long enough to know, that if cjp doesn't win 9 games by year three then he will be searching for another job as he should be. At that point it will be evident that while he may become great, he will not be great at this school. If we go by your advanced thinking, then maybe we should have kept Dooley or butch as they just may have needed a little more time to become the next saban or neyland or fulmer

 

[Orangeredblooded]

You obviously dont VN. Malzahan won big in year 1 so that made him a great coach. If Pruitt doesnt win big next year, I have a feeling there will be threads on here stating he is not the guy.

Is he a “great coach” now?

 

[ddubb76]

We can debate second year records vs outcome all we want but here is the brass tax of it.

if he does not break 9 wins ( original point) by year three he will be looking for another job soon after. Today's world of college football where we recruit athletes and not necessarily college students dictates that your elite talent will pretty much play for two years. If you redshirt them, they will start for two and be able to declare. If you don't redshirt them, and they are a top draft prospect, they will take their jr year off to protect themselves for the draft. That precedent was recently set and will increase over the coming years. It takes excitement and energy to recruit. Both from the coaches and the fan base. Coaches can be energetic and excited all they want, but nobody likes to play in a half full stadium. Coach Pruitt is reeling in a good class due to him being unknown,but if he doesn't provide a competitive product, an excitement this year, he will lose the recruits. And while he may bring in a good class at the end of it, it will be a make or break class. Because then he will have to win year two or at least do some things that will bring excitement back in. If he goes 5-7 this year, 7-5 next and 8-4 year three most will think he is close to topping out. I won't be excited and neither will many other fans, seats will be empty or sold to rivals fans and he will be looking for a job.

So in summation, if it takes him 3 years to get to 9 wins he will be looking for a job

 

[OnlyGodForgives]

We can debate second year records vs outcome all we want but here is the brass tax of it.

if he does not break 9 wins ( original point) by year three he will be looking for another job soon after. Today's world of college football where we recruit athletes and not necessarily college students dictates that your elite talent will pretty much play for two years. If you redshirt them, they will start for two and be able to declare. If you don't redshirt them, and they are a top draft prospect, they will take their jr year off to protect themselves for the draft. That precedent was recently set and will increase over the coming years. It takes excitement and energy to recruit. Both from the coaches and the fan base. Coaches can be energetic and excited all they want, but nobody likes to play in a half full stadium. Coach Pruitt is reeling in a good class due to him being unknown,but if he doesn't provide a competitive product, an excitement this year, he will lose the recruits. And while he may bring in a good class at the end of it, it will be a make or break class. Because then he will have to win year two or at least do some things that will bring excitement back in. If he goes 5-7 this year, 7-5 next and 8-4 year three most will think he is close to topping out. I won't be excited and neither will many other fans, seats will be empty or sold to rivals fans and he will be looking for a job.

So in summation, if it takes him 3 years to get to 9 wins he will be looking for a job

I believe this should be the case at UT, but in fact would only be the case at one of the top 5 schools in the conference, and maybe only GA and Bama. If he is here 3 years and wins 9 in year 3, I don't think it will be UT that cuts bait. He will probably get more time if he wants it.