Volunteer_Kirby
Its not what you think...
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2006
- Messages
- 16,804
- Likes
- 12,843
They had the choice Kiffin who had done nothing or Patterson who at the time had only had 3, 11 win seasons out of his previous 4.
For some odd reason they chose Kiffin. They listened to a talker, instead of hiring a doer.
Patterson would have costed more than $2MM per year. Hammy didnt wanna go over $2MM a year. Kiffin would take slightly less than $2MM with a minimal buyout/Monte getting paid for a couple years until he retired.
For the price of 3,000 beers per home game this year, we could have had Patterson....
Patterson would have costed more than $2MM per year. Hammy didnt wanna go over $2MM a year. Kiffin would take slightly less than $2MM with a minimal buyout/Monte getting paid for a couple years until he retired.
For the price of 3,000 beers per home game this year, we could have had Patterson....
That's a great point. I would love that kind of improvementAnother note is Fulmer only had two losing seasons in 16 years. And after his first one, he made a 4 win improvement the following year. Recruiting for 2009 was high for him still and he would have made changes with or without a Lawson to not repeat the 2008 5-7 record in 2009
Even in his down seasons where we were bowl eligible, he still improved the following seasons in the W/L column.
Dooley is leaps and bounds worse than Butch as a coach. But I voted another year of Kiffin. He was a much better coach than anyone we've had since.
Really?
I thought even Doofy could coach circles around Butch. Doofy just didn’t understand you also needed talent and management.
Just my opinion.......doesn’t mean your wrong.
Dooley's incompetence is legendary. From shower training to recruiting no offensive linemen. Dooley had a better staff and still couldn't win anything. Butch was no great shakes but Dooley could coach 40 years and never have a 9 win team. Butch, as bad as he left things, still left things a little better than Dooley did.