Saban and Meyer when they were hired

#1
Ohio Vol

Ohio Vol

Inquisitor of Offense
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
3,057
Likes
128
#1
With all the talk about "who could go head-to-head against Saban and Urban Meyer", I figured I'd post a quick comparison of exactly what they did before coming to the SEC and their current schools.

SABAN
1990 -- Toledo (9-2, MAC champions)
1995 -- Michigan State (6-5-1)
1996 -- Michigan State (6-6)
1997 -- Michigan State (7-5)
1998 -- Michigan State (6-6)
1999 -- Michigan State (9-2)

Hired into the SEC after a career record of 43-26-1, with an 18-4 record in two of those seasons (25-22-1 outside of them).

2000 -- LSU (8-4)
2001 -- LSU (10-3, somehow SEC champions)
2002 -- LSU (8-5)
2003 -- LSU (12-1, national champions)
2004 -- LSU (9-3)

Goes to NFL, rehired into SEC in 2007
2007 -- Alabama (7-6, lost to UL-Monroe)

Now for Urban Meyer....
2001 -- Bowling Green (8-3)
2002 -- Bowling Green (9-3)
2003 -- Utah (10-2)
2004 -- Utah (12-0)

Hired into the SEC, and since then....
2005 -- Florida (9-3)
2006 -- Florida (13-1, national champions)
2007 -- Florida (9-4)

The most common complaints about every coach whose name has been mentioned in the UT search thus far are "They've never been in a conference like the SEC" or "their career record is no good". Well, it seems to me that neither one is a particularly valid point. Nick Saban's record prior to LSU was hardly stellar, and Urban Meyer was derided as a small-college coach who couldn't handle anything bigger than the Mountain West. And yet today we look at both as being the best in the conference and among the five best in the country.

Can anyone explain this? If UT is in as dire straits as so many on this board would have us believe, why on earth wouldn't a smaller college coach or a major one without a great record work?
 
#2
#2
This just goes to prove that most people on that most people on here dont know what they are talking about. Including myself. I think there is alot more to a coach than their overall record.
 
#3
#3
UM's been a winner everywhere he's been, sounds kind of like Kelly
 
#6
#6
Good thread. I would be happy with Butch Davis but of all the other names we keep hearing I think Brian Kelly is the best choice. I think this thread confirms that.
 
#7
#7
This is why we need Chris Petersen.

Here are some stats from his 2006 offense (national rankings):

2nd in scoring offense (39.69 points per game)
6th in rushing offense (214.15 yards per game)
6th in passing efficiency (161.46)
10th in total offense (420.62 yards per game)

Here are some stats from his 2007 offense (national rankings):

4th in scoring offense (42.38 points per game)
6th in passing efficiency (152.93)
12th in total offense (467.38 yards per game)
23rd in passing offense (282.46)
33rd in rushing offense (184.92)

Chris Petersen could be right for Tennessee for multiple reasons. The most important of them all has to be the sense of fresh air he’d bring to the program. We’ve seen a bit of a conservative game for some time here lately on Rocky Top, and to bring in Petersen would be anything but conservative. His coaching styles and plays have shown that he’s not your average coach.

Second, I think Petersen has a truly great grasp on offense and has shown that through his success and the multiple places he has been. He certainly has been anywhere that has not seen success and it can even be said that throughout his career he’s coached the position that can attribute to it all. So he’s certainly someone that could lead the Tennessee offense and once again it would be an offense that looks much different.
 
Last edited:
#8
#8
A top coach can win anywhere. But taking an unproven head coach from a small school or coordinator is risky. Saban and Meyer both coached at good schools (or pros) against good competition: Michigan State, LSU, Miami Dolphins (Saban), BG, Utah (Meyer)
 
#9
#9
I don't know that Petersen is qualified enough, but his numbers don't lie.
Still sold on Brian Kelly.
 
#10
#10
oklavol said:
Most people I read thought Meyer would be successful in the SEC.
Click to expand...

He was getting the same pub as Kelly. There were countless articles about "Can Meyer's system work in the SEC?" At best, it was split 50/50. In reality, there were probably more people saying no, it can't. He had serious questions when he was hired at UF.
 
#11
#11
Ohio Vol said:
With all the talk about "who could go head-to-head against Saban and Urban Meyer", I figured I'd post a quick comparison of exactly what they did before coming to the SEC and their current schools.

SABAN
1990 -- Toledo (9-2, MAC champions)
1995 -- Michigan State (6-5-1)
1996 -- Michigan State (6-6)
1997 -- Michigan State (7-5)
1998 -- Michigan State (6-6)
1999 -- Michigan State (9-2)

Hired into the SEC after a career record of 43-26-1, with an 18-4 record in two of those seasons (25-22-1 outside of them).

2000 -- LSU (8-4)
2001 -- LSU (10-3, somehow SEC champions)
2002 -- LSU (8-5)
2003 -- LSU (12-1, national champions)
2004 -- LSU (9-3)

Goes to NFL, rehired into SEC in 2007
2007 -- Alabama (7-6, lost to UL-Monroe)

Now for Urban Meyer....
2001 -- Bowling Green (8-3)
2002 -- Bowling Green (9-3)
2003 -- Utah (10-2)
2004 -- Utah (12-0)

Hired into the SEC, and since then....
2005 -- Florida (9-3)
2006 -- Florida (13-1, national champions)
2007 -- Florida (9-4)

The most common complaints about every coach whose name has been mentioned in the UT search thus far are "They've never been in a conference like the SEC" or "their career record is no good". Well, it seems to me that neither one is a particularly valid point. Nick Saban's record prior to LSU was hardly stellar, and Urban Meyer was derided as a small-college coach who couldn't handle anything bigger than the Mountain West. And yet today we look at both as being the best in the conference and among the five best in the country.

Can anyone explain this? If UT is in as dire straits as so many on this board would have us believe, why on earth wouldn't a smaller college coach or a major one without a great record work?
Click to expand...

The Big Ten back in the 90s was considered a top 2 conference. Some thought it was the best. So the fact he went in and was competitive with Michigan State was a very big deal. This post is like propaganda with changed perception of history. Meyer was so dominate he grabbed everyone's attention. In fact Meyer dominated recruiting as well for the conference he was in. Meyer has always stated and I have personally heard him say it many times. Recruiting is 80 percent of being a great college coach. Sorry to burst your bubble.
 
#12
#12
volfanbill said:
He was getting the same pub as Kelly. There were countless articles about "Can Meyer's system work in the SEC?" At best, it was split 50/50. In reality, there were probably more people saying no, it can't. He had serious questions when he was hired at UF.
Click to expand...

I was one that said his system would not work in the SEC. While he does not run the same system at Florida he ran at Utah, he has changed it and adapted enough to work in the SEC. That is the sign of a great coach and I for one was wrong. Even with the changes, it is his system and you can not argue with the success.
 
#13
#13
JMBIGORANGE said:
You do realize Peterson is coaching in the WAC.
Click to expand...

Yea!! which he wins with the same talent that the rest of the WAC gets. This guy gets 2 and 3 stars and progresses them into 4 and 5 stars. It's crazy how there is so many Petersen haters out there. He is a young coach that wins with lesser talent. And don't hand me that Dan Hawkins mess. When Hawkins took over the program, Petersen was OC. Hawkins went 53-11 at Boise State. He's 12-21 at Colorado. Petersen is 34-3. If it was all Hawkins, then why didn't that success follow him.
 
#16
#16
good post.

also to consider: stoops was "unproven" with no HC experience when hired by OK. OK is the winningest school in FBS since stoops started (83%) with 5 CCs and 1 NC.

miles was decidedly unremarkable at OK ST (28-21) and has not done too badly at LSU.
 
#17
#17
Tennman82 said:
Yea!! which he wins with the same talent that the rest of the WAC gets. This guy gets 2 and 3 stars and progresses them into 4 and 5 stars. It's crazy how there is so many Petersen haters out there. He is a young coach that wins with lesser talent. And don't hand me that Dan Hawkins mess. When Hawkins took over the program, Petersen was OC. Hawkins went 53-11 at Boise State. He's 12-21 at Colorado. Petersen is 34-3. If it was all Hawkins, then why didn't that success follow him.
Click to expand...

because the Colorado football team is in complete shambles?
 
#19
#19
I also thought Urban Meyer would be a success, but I never thought it would happen that quickly.
 
#20
#20
I wonder if it's just this about Meyer. He either is as good as assumed, or everywhere he's coached he was just there a few seasons and the teams roster was full of players that were at peak or near peak. Meaning ...he's just lucky. Let him be lured to Notre Dame and that dismal roster and show me somethin, then I'll say all hail the conquering hero!
 
#21
#21
Ohio Vol said:
Can anyone explain this? If UT is in as dire straits as so many on this board would have us believe, why on earth wouldn't a smaller college coach or a major one without a great record work?
Click to expand...

People have a desire to have a coach that can make a big splash... they want a big named coach.
 
#22
#22
Taking an unproven coach: risky, but the only solution if a big time "proven" coach can't be found.
 
#23
#23
Jewbaccah said:
The Big Ten back in the 90s was considered a top 2 conference. Some thought it was the best. So the fact he went in and was competitive with Michigan State was a very big deal. This post is like propaganda with changed perception of history. Meyer was so dominate he grabbed everyone's attention. In fact Meyer dominated recruiting as well for the conference he was in. Meyer has always stated and I have personally heard him say it many times. Recruiting is 80 percent of being a great college coach. Sorry to burst your bubble.
Click to expand...

Hang on a sec.

What is now the Big MAC was in fact a top conference for part of the 1990s. The worst year of the conference was 1999, which also happened to be Michigan State's only year under Saban of better than 7 wins. Before that, he had a record that would make Ron Zook (at Florida) look like a big step up. The three years before Saban saw record of 5-6, 6-6, and 5-6. Going 6-6, 6-5-1, 6-6, and 7-5 in the next four years doesn't exactly strike me as an improvement. Consider too that Saban's MSU teams got thumped in their first three bowls (45-26 to LSU in 1995, 38-0 to Stanford in 1996, and 51-23 to Washington in 1997). The one win they had was 37-34 over the worst Florida team of Spurrier's tenure.

As for Meyer, he'd been a head coach for exactly four years and hadn't been at a school for longer than two. That's not enough time for his guys to come in and do much of anything. Meyer inherited Alex Smith, recruited Omar Jacobs to BGSU but never had him on the field (he redshirted in 2002), and he inherited Josh Harris. Meyer wasn't a complete unknown as a recruiter and coach, but he had yet to actually develop a recruit at his most vital position when Florida came knocking.
 
#24
#24
Ohio Vol said:
Meyer inherited Alex Smith, recruited Omar Jacobs to BGSU but never had him on the field (he redshirted in 2002), and he inherited Josh Harris.
Click to expand...

Kind of hard to believe Chris Leak is Meyer's least individually accomplished quarterback.

Looks like Harris bounced around a few NFL teams and is now out of football. Jacobs is in an indoor league. Leak is in the CFL.
 
Last edited:
#25
#25
tm3 said:
good post.

also to consider: stoops was "unproven" with no HC experience when hired by OK. OK is the winningest school in FBS since stoops started (83%) with 5 CCs and 1 NC.

miles was decidedly unremarkable at OK ST (28-21) and has not done too badly at LSU.
Click to expand...

Excellent point on Stoops.

Jimmy Johnson was hired to replace Howard Schnellenberger at Miami in spite of a 29-25-3 record at Oklahoma State, which was his only head coaching experience to that point.

Barry Switzer didn't have any head coaching experience when Chuck Fairbanks left to coach New England.

And so on.

If a guy can coach, it trumps recruiting. The most common complaint around here has been that Fulmer can recruit but can't develop anyone; it's been proven time and again that the vast majority of players don't have the natural instincts to be top-level players. They must be coached that way. If coaches all across the country who lack recruiting pedigree are winning games and those who get all kinds of recruits aren't winning, what's that say about which is more important?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top