New rumor up
- Thread starter saddawg
- Start date
Uninspriring hire if it's Tommy Bowden although I would not necessarily be disappointed with the hire.
I would have no problem with Bowden. He kind of reminds me of Nutt. He won at Clemson every year, but the fan base wanted 10-11 wins per year
I mean yall lets be realistic. Yea, he's not my first choice, but then again I'd be more than happy with him and the 8 wins per season he'd most likely bring.
but he is a known commodity and he should be able to bring assistants who know how to recruit and coach. I just don't believe he has the energy to recruit like you have to at state. He'd have to work twice as hard to get kids who are not even as talented as what he got at Clemson. But he might be a decent 5 year caretaker to get us to consistent 6-8 wins. Then the next guy can try to improve on that.
D
Dawg725
Guest
Yea yall, just think about what we had with the walrus and then Bowden seems like a more than decent choice...once again he's not not my first choice but if he gets announced head coach I'll be happy. By the way a few weeks ago I was talking to a kid I met in the union and his father and family are very good friends with Tommy (they're from South Carolina)..anyways this was right after Tommy got fired and the kid said he had talked to Tommy after it happened. The kid said that while Tommy had good years at Clemson, Tommy was never allowed to recruit the players that Tommy wanted for his system because most of those players couldn't live up to the academic standards of clemson...(I realize Tommy got good players, I'm just sayin he could've done even better with more of the ones he wanted)..I informed the kid that academic standards here aren't exactly what they are at clemson so it would be easier for Tommy here as far as the academic aspect of recruiting. That led me to ask the kid if Tommy would consider coming here if Croom got fired..the kid got quiet like he didn't want to say too much and just responded with "uh maybe"......thats what happened take it as you will.
if we claim that we want to win 6 or 7 every year with an occasional 9 or 10 wins, he's about the safest bet we could make. Every other name on the list (outside of Peterson or Patterson) would be a 50/50 shot. IO don't think we can take that chance right now.
Plus, if he brings in a young stud coordinator, name him the HC in waiting in a few years ala Texas/FSU.
Plus, if he brings in a young stud coordinator, name him the HC in waiting in a few years ala Texas/FSU.
And uninspired.
Do we want a guy who took a team from a #9 preseason ranking to a 3-3 record (and 1-3 against I-A teams) and a pink slip, in addition to losing the team, and the respect of some of his players after making a change at QB? We need a guy that does more with less... not less with more. His interim replacement would be a better candidate than him.
Do we want a guy who took a team from a #9 preseason ranking to a 3-3 record (and 1-3 against I-A teams) and a pink slip, in addition to losing the team, and the respect of some of his players after making a change at QB? We need a guy that does more with less... not less with more. His interim replacement would be a better candidate than him.
yea his interim would be, except the charleston newspaper just announced that dabo will receive a contract for 4 years in the next few days.
that you think Les Miles is a great coach makes me question why anyone would listen to your opinion about who is a good coach. And did I miss Steve Spurrier's SEC title at South Carolina that you guaranteed? Do you look at anything other than the W-L record?
Your boy Rich Rodriguez had a lot to do with Tulane's success that year. Add to the fact that that was 10 years ago and almost nobody was running that sort of offense makes it even more of a moot point. He had tremendous resources and money at Clemson, and was favored to win the ACC at least 3 times that I can remember and fell flat on his face every time, this year being the final straw. He won, but he had talent to win more and bigger. Much like Fulmer. Less with more.
Why should we hire a guy who was just fired when there are tons of better options out there?
Your boy Rich Rodriguez had a lot to do with Tulane's success that year. Add to the fact that that was 10 years ago and almost nobody was running that sort of offense makes it even more of a moot point. He had tremendous resources and money at Clemson, and was favored to win the ACC at least 3 times that I can remember and fell flat on his face every time, this year being the final straw. He won, but he had talent to win more and bigger. Much like Fulmer. Less with more.
Why should we hire a guy who was just fired when there are tons of better options out there?
I can honestly say I have no faith in this rumor. I talked to my sources last night and it seems that a hire is a couple of weeks away. Now of course if were hiring Bowden it wouldnt take long. But talking to people "high up" I dont see this being remotely true.
We could easily do a lot worse and realistically, probably not a whole lot better. He'd be a "safe" pick, which might be just what we need right now. If we take a gamble and lose, we'll be looking at well over a decade of absolutely horrible football.
What the hell does that mean? We should be happier with a coach who gets the best out of the poor talent he recruits than a coach who recruits great talent and wins only 65% of his games? The bottom line is, Tommy Bowden is 90-49 in his career no matter how he got there. There's probably no way he could do quite that well at MSU, but I'm betting he could easily get us on the plus side of .500. And that would be a big big plus compared to where we've been the past 8 years.MSUCostanza said:
It means we should want a coach who maximizes whatever talent he has. Bowden did not do that at Clemson. He recruited well, as evidenced by Clemson's numerous high preseason rankings and being favorites to win the ACC or at least their division several times. Once they were on campus, he took 10-win talent and won 8. We need a guy who can take 8-win talent and win 10.
We can do much much better than Tommy Bowden. I want a guy who has won big with limited resources, along the lines of Patterson. We have limited resources. Not a guy who won, but could've and should've won bigger with tons of resources at his disposal.
Not to mention the guy was fired 6 weeks ago. Of my top 10 choices, he'd be 11th. I'd be very disappointed if that's the route we take.
We can do much much better than Tommy Bowden. I want a guy who has won big with limited resources, along the lines of Patterson. We have limited resources. Not a guy who won, but could've and should've won bigger with tons of resources at his disposal.
Not to mention the guy was fired 6 weeks ago. Of my top 10 choices, he'd be 11th. I'd be very disappointed if that's the route we take.
I'm really afraid that he would bring Jeff Bowden in as the OC. THAT would be bad.
Other than that minor fear, I think he would be OK. He has proven that he can win at the D-I level consitently, and if you can go undefeated at Tulane in any era, that's pretty impressive.
He may not be what we're looking for though. I think we're all looking for someone energetic and exciting to come in. So, I don't know if he's the "best fit" for MSU right now.
Other than that minor fear, I think he would be OK. He has proven that he can win at the D-I level consitently, and if you can go undefeated at Tulane in any era, that's pretty impressive.
He may not be what we're looking for though. I think we're all looking for someone energetic and exciting to come in. So, I don't know if he's the "best fit" for MSU right now.
16-16 in the Big 12. Just getting that out there.
Now that Saban's players are gone, let's see how long Miles is employed. Not long, I'll wager.
Now that Saban's players are gone, let's see how long Miles is employed. Not long, I'll wager.
He's the winningest coach in LSU history? He's not even close to that, unless you are referring to winning percentage. And since he was living off Saban's players, let's see how that win percentage looks in about 2 years.
He is guaranteed to bring Jeff with him, he was hated by the fanbase and alumni at clemson, he consistently underachieved with the program, and he is 54 years old.
That being said anything is better than what we just went through, but I dont want Bowden.
That being said anything is better than what we just went through, but I dont want Bowden.
You still haven't explained why a coach who maximizes lesser talent is better than a coach who gets better talent in the first place. The ONLY thing that matters is the bottom line. Wins and losses. And we would be damn lucky to hire a coach with Bowden's wins and losses at a BCS school. Again, I do think we can do better. But I'd take a 90-49 proven winner any day of the week.
You still haven't explained why you want a coach who consistently underachieved. He won 90 games, but had the goods to win more. You're ok with that? Because I'm not. We can do better.
You are completely twisting my point about the more with less. I'm not saying we have to settle for a guy that can't recruit. Nice attempt at a leap, though. What I'm saying is we need a guy who is a consistent overachiever. Not a guy who had all the money, tools, resources and support you could want, and underperformed to the point he was fired. Bowden should've won 2-3 ACC titles in that weak-*** conference.
You are completely twisting my point about the more with less. I'm not saying we have to settle for a guy that can't recruit. Nice attempt at a leap, though. What I'm saying is we need a guy who is a consistent overachiever. Not a guy who had all the money, tools, resources and support you could want, and underperformed to the point he was fired. Bowden should've won 2-3 ACC titles in that weak-*** conference.