[Husker] Rating the B12 Coaches

[j j]

I dont ever remember KU winning the BigXII North....When did they play in the BigXII championship game??? Not ever to my recollection....
 
 


--- On Fri, 4/3/09, Duane Feldman <dlfeldman at ameritech.net> wrote:

From: Duane Feldman <dlfeldman at ameritech.net>
Subject: [Husker] Rating the B12 Coaches
To: "jon johnston" <jon.johnston at gmail.com>, "Ken Oliver" <ksterling at mindspring.com>
Cc: "huskers" <husker at tssi.com>
Date: Friday, April 3, 2009, 11:26 AM

Some I get, others not so much.  OK, Stoops and Brown at the top, but Leach is
#3.  He as won at several schools and taken a school who had not been
successful in quite a while and made them consistently successful behind the big
2.

Next, why Mangino over Pinkel?  Both come from downtrodden programs, but
Pinkel has won 2-3 B12N titles and I don't believe Mangino has more than one
(I know I should look this one up but I think he got his only B12N title when
ISU folded in a game they should have won easily).

Probably the single biggest error on the entire list is Gundy at #11.  What is
with that????  Gundy has turned OSU into contenders who would have owned the
North had they the fortune to be located differently.  He belongs in the #4-6
range IMHO.

Briles over Pelini????  I can't imagine any logic that works here.  Sure
Briles turned Baylor into something other than a cakewalk of an opponent, but
they went 4-9 last year, maybe two games better than the year before.  Sure
Pelini had more talent than Baylor, but NU went 9-4, up four games from the
previous year when NU's D was a sieve that made Baylor's look tough.  I
think that Pelini will end up much higher on this list, but NU's 9-4
season, as huge an improvement as it was, is still among the five worst NU
seasons in the past 47 years.  Get to 11-3 this year and we'll talk about
whether he should be #3 or not.

I don't know what to make of Bill Snyder.  He took a terrible program and
turned it into one of the perennial contenders for BCS bowls, but then let it
fall off before retiring.  His personal choice for a replacement was terrible
and I doubt that he can turn the program around in the relatively short time he
has left.  The jury is out here, but this is the fourth of Dienhart's
placements I don't have an issue with (Stoops, Brown and Rhoades the
others).

Mike Sherman:  Does anyone think he exceeded expections?  Is it apparent that
he is making choices that will create a contender?  Is he proving to be a
recruiting genius?  No to all of the above.  He gets the #10 spot in my
book but only because Hawkins has been such a failure so far.  NU and A&M
started from similar situations, which team's season would you rather
have?  On Sherman's up side, his first year was better than Hawkins.'

I'm OK with Rhoades bringing up the rear due to lack of any measurables,
but Hawkins HAS to be next to last.  Hawkins continued a successful program at
Boise St. but in the Big 12, he has ALWAYS underperformed expectations.  He
doesn't even have ten total conference wins yet from a program that had
perennially been B12N contenders.  I could forgive 6-7 due to injuries if it
hadn't come on the heals of the disasterous 2007 season.  He had excuses
galore:  Implementing a new program in 2007, extensive injuries in 2008, but
you don't get to the top of the list by making excuses. 




________________________________
On Apr 1, 2009, at 3:54 PM, Ken Oliver wrote:

> Dienhart ranks the Big 12 coaches.
>
> http://collegefootball.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=930159
>
> .
>



_______________________________________________
husker site list
husker at tssi.com
http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/husker

_______________________________________________
husker site list
husker at tssi.com
http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/husker