Congrats on a great season!

[junior4949]

Franchione was once considered a great coach until he left the Mountain West. He didn't have much success in the SEC, and I believe he was fired when in the Big 12. Maybe this is why Patterson's never left TCU where he's smack dab in the middle of a recruiting hotbed and has the priviledge to play in a weak conference. I've always felt this is why Boise State's coach hasn't left considering how his old boss has performed once thrown into the big boy arena.

 

Franchione never coached in the Mountain West Conference. In his last season with TCU, they were still in the WAC. When Patterson took over TCU they went to C-USA for several years and then jumped to the Mountain West.

 

It's true that Franchione was unable to mimic the same success he had in the WAC versus his stints in the SEC and Big XII. Dan Hawkins is also another case when he left a peaking Boise St. program for a struggling Colorado program where he's been downright dismal.

 

However, Urban Meyer is an exception. He left Utah at its peak and went on to have continued success at Florida. It just goes to show that it's a case-by-case situation for some coaches.

 

 

I think there's quite a distinction. Ron Zook is a recruiting genious, but he isn't worth a lick as a coach. It's of no wonder that Meyer passed up his dream job (Notre Dumb) to go to Florida. Meyer inherited some of the best talent out there. I'd argue that Meyer would still even be employed had he chosen Notre Dumb. Franchione inherited a mess when he went to Alabama. I don't blame his coaching abilities for the Bama fiasco. However, Franchione's coaching is what cost him at A&M. Slocum was an old school coach who brought in players. He didn't have elite talent, but he got the best out of them. I don't think Franchione is a horrible coach, but I don't think he necessarily understood what it took at this level to win. When he was at TCU, he got some good/great players because he was in the middle of a recruiting hotbed. He didn't really even have to develop them much at all to compete in the conference they played. The same happened with Hawkins. Even though Barnett had some great success at CU, his last two recruiting classes were fairly poor due to the scandals. Hawkins didn't inherit much for talent. It also appears as though Hawkins really isn't that great at evaluating talent either because there were lesser schools that ran circles around them last year. Again, he was used to taking above average athletes and competing against weak opponents with lesser talent.

 

A lot of this reminds me of something that happened at the high school level almost 2 decades ago. A small school here in SW Nebraska was used to winning the state football championship nearly every year. Everyone thought they had a great coach who could win with any kind of talent. They won the state title in I believe 90' & 91' with a big LOSS on their record. They went down to play Atwood, KS who was coached by an ex NFL player. Atwood totally dominated them. They didn't just beat them on the scoreboard. They completely dominated them in every phase of the game. Those boys in KS were used to playing with the big boys. The team up here was not. I think this is what happens when big time D1 programs try to handpick coaches from lesser programs. In several of these cases, the coaches at the lesser programs are used to winning by simply having better athletes than the weak teams they play.

[Zammers]

I don't always believe that the number one talent on a coaching staff is the head coach. Franchione, was a fraud. He is a great recruiter and CEO-type, but when it comes to x's and o's he ran a gimmick offense (his daughter would kill me right now if she knew I posted this). Why do you think he's had such a difficult time getting back into coaching? Patterson was the wizard behind the curtain. I believe Petersen was also Hawkins wizard. Patterson was an unpolished, get in your face, x's and o's type of coach that didn't really appeal to the big time BCS programs. However, he's grown in the position and has become more polished. I don't think Patterson is necessarily the best recruiter, but he's surrounded himself with some young assistants could can recruit the pants off the state of Texas.

 

Patterson, for what its worth, has made it a point to go out and beat BCS teams every year. We've got quite a few "notches" too......OU, Clemson, etc. All on the road. (Oregon State in 2010 will be the next victim). So, the argument that we are playing against weak competition doesn't hold water since we've proven to beat the big boys out of conference. (This is in reference to the above posting about the NE high school team playing a KS team)

 

Colleges will make mistakes from time to time in their coaching choices. Obviously Charlie Weis is a good coach, but not at the college level. So sometimes it takes a little trial and error to get the right fit. Those that cultivate coaches from within the program tend to have the least amount of drop off.

[Zammers]

Also, Patterson has turned down numerous job opportunities at big BCS schools. Kansas St. (his alma mater), Tennessee, and few others. But like he says. "Quality of life has got to be worth something. I'm happy here. And I'm in Texas which isn't too bad for recruiting."

 

He's right too. Why on Earth would you want to go coach at say....Alabama.....only to have every booster crawling up in your business every day? Then when you win 10 games every other year, but don't win a national championship, you are out on the street. Constant beat down at some of these schools!!!

[HuskerMoon]

I have an easy solution to settle this heated debate and gauge who the better football man is.

 

Whoever wins a National Championship first gets the bragging rights on who the better coach is.

 

My money is on Bo.